Fred Luthans 12th Edition Organizational Behavior An Evidence-Based Approach Organizational Behavior An Evidence-Based Approach Twelfth Edition Fred Luthans George Holmes Distinguished Professor of Management, University of Nebraska ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR: An Evidence-Based Approach Published by McGraw-Hill/Irwin, a business unit of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1221 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY, 10020. Copyright © 2011, 2008, 2005, 2002, 1998, 1995, 1992, 1989, 1985, 1981, 1977, 1973 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written consent of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., including, but not limited to, in any network or other electronic storage or transmission, or broadcast for distance learning. Some ancillaries, including electronic and print components, may not be available to customers outside the United States. This book is printed on acid-free paper. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 WDQ/WDQ 1 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 ISBN: 978-0-07-353035-2 MHID: 0-07-353035-2 Vice president and editor-in-chief: Brent Gordon Publisher: Paul Ducham Director of development: Ann Torbert Managing development editor: Laura Hurst Spell Editorial coordinator: Jane Beck Vice president and director of marketing: Robin J. Zwettler Associate marketing manager: Jaime Halteman Vice president of editing, design and production: Sesha Bolisetty Senior project manager: Harvey Yep Senior production supervisor: Debra R. Sylvester Design coordinator: Joanne Mennemeier Media project manager: Suresh Babu, Hurix Systems Pvt. Ltd. Cover design: Joanne Mennemeier Cover image: Digital Vision Typeface: 10.5/12 Times Roman Compositor: Glyph International Printer: Worldcolor Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Luthans, Fred. Organizational behavior : an evidence-based approach / Fred Luthans.—12th ed. p. cm. Includes index. ISBN-13: 978-0-07-353035-2 (alk. paper) ISBN-10: 0-07-353035-2 (alk. paper) 1. Organizational behavior. I. Title. HD58.7.L88 2011 658.4—dc22 2009041522 www.mhhe.com For Kay, Kristin, Brett, Kyle, and Paige About the Author Fred Luthans is the George Holmes Distinguished Professor of Management at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln. He received his B.A., M.B.A., and Ph.D. from the University of Iowa where he received the distinguished alumni award in 2002, and did postdoctoral work at Columbia University. While serving as a Captain in the U.S. Army, he taught at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. He has been at the University of Nebraska since 1967, his entire academic career, and won the distinguished teaching award in 1986, the excellence in graduate education award in 2000, and in 2008 the highest award in the system for outstanding research. In 2003, he received an honorary doctorate from DePaul University. A prolific writer, he has published a number of major books and about 200 articles in applied and academic journals. His book Organizational Behavior Modification, coauthored with Robert Kreitner, won the American Society of Personnel Administration award for outstanding contribution to human resource management, and another book entitled Real Managers is the result of a four-year research study that observed managers in their natural settings. International Management, coauthored with the late Richard Hodgetts and Jonathon Doh, also published by McGraw-Hill, is in its seventh edition. He also has two recent books, The High Impact Leader (with Bruce Avolio, McGraw-Hill, 2006) and Psychological Capital (with Carolyn Youssef and Bruce Avolio, Oxford, 2007). The co-editor-in-chief of the Journal of World Business, Professor Luthans is also the editor for Organizational Dynamics and Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies. He has been very active in the Academy of Management over the years and was elected a fellow in 1981. He is a former president of the National Academy in 1986 and, in 1997, received the Academy’s distinguished educator award. In 2000 he became an inaugural member of the Academy’s Hall of Fame for being one of the “Top Five” all-time published authors in the prestigious Academy journals. Also active in the Decision Sciences Institute (DSI), he was elected a fellow in 1987. Professor Luthans has a very extensive research program at the University of Nebraska. Most recently, he has developed positive organizational behavior, or POB (outlined in 2002 articles in the Academy of Management Executive and Journal of Organizational Behavior), and is conducting research on positive psychological capital and, with close colleague Bruce Avolio, authentic leadership. He has been a visiting scholar at a number of universities in the United States and has lectured at universities and conducted workshops for managers in many countries around the world. In recent years, he has been actively involved in Germany, China, Thailand, Singapore, Russia, Albania, and Macedonia. In addition, he has been on the executive committee of the annual Pan Pacific Conference since its beginning in 1984 and in 1995 was elected a fellow. This international research and experience is reflected in his approach to the field of organizational behavior. In addition, he is an active consultant and trainer to both private(such as Walmart and Ameritas Life Insurance, Inc.) and public-sector organizations. Since 1998 he has been a senior research scientist with the Gallup Organization. He is an avid golfer and University of Nebraska sports fan. He and Kay, his wife of 47 years, have four grown children and so far six adorable grandchildren. iv Preface Here is the twelfth edition. As I indicated in the last edition, I am still in what positive psychologists call “flow.” I am so engrossed and passionate about my field of organizational behavior that time just flies. As I have said before, I take considerable pride in the sustainability of this text. It took me four years to write the first edition, and then about a year to do each subsequent edition. Because of the rapidly expanding body of knowledge in organizational behavior, these revised editions through the years have become increasingly challenging. However, I am still—actually even more than ever—in flow in trying to keep this first mainline organizational behavior text totally up-to-date with the very latest and relevant theory building, basic and applied research, and best-practice applications. I decided with this edition to give special recognition of this scientific foundation by adding the subtitle—An Evidence-Based Approach. As is now emphasized in the introductory chapter, the time has come to help narrow the theory/research—effective application/practice gap. This has been my mission from the beginning of this text and my now over 20-year editorship of the journal Organizational Dynamics. As “hard evidence” for this theory/research base for this text, I can say unequivocally that no other organizational behavior text has close to the number of footnote references. For example, whereas a few texts may have up to 40 or even 50 references for some chapters, the chapters of this text average more than twice that amount. This latest edition continues the tradition by incorporating recent breakthrough research to provide and add to the evidence on the theories and techniques presented throughout. Before getting into the specific additions of this new edition, I would like to again point out the distinguishing features that no other organizational behavior textbook can claim: 1. I am convinced at this stage of development of the field of OB, we need a comprehensive theoretical framework to structure our introductory textbooks. Instead of a potpourri of chapters and topics, and maybe using an inductive (or should it be deductive?) sequencing, there is now the opportunity to have a sound conceptual framework to present our now credible (evidence-based) body of knowledge. I use the widely recognized, very comprehensive social cognitive theory to structure this text. I present the background and theory building of this framework in the introductory chapter and also provide a specific model (Figure 1.5) that fits in all 14 chapters. Importantly, the logic of this conceptual framework requires two chapters not found in other texts and the rearrangement and combination of several others. For example, in the organizational context part there is Chapter 4, “Reward Systems,” and in the cognitive processes part, Chapter 7, “Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital,” that no other text contains. 2. Besides having the only comprehensive theoretical framework for an introductory OB text, a second unique feature is one or more OB Principles at the end of each chapter. Importantly, these principles are derived from meta-analytic research findings. The reason for including meta-analytically derived principles is that the field of organizational behavior has matured to the point where there are not just isolated studies but a stream of research on a number of topics that now need to be systematically (quantitatively) summarized for students and practitioners. For example, Alex Stajkovic and I have completed a meta-analysis of the studies with which I have been most closely associated over the past 35 years, focusing on the positive effect that organizational behavior modification (O.B. Mod.) has on task performance. (This analysis is published v vi Preface in the Academy of Management Journal; a follow-up research study conducted in the largest credit card processing company in the world is in a subsequent issue of AMJ; another meta-analysis of all behavioral management studies with emphasis on the different types of interventions was published in Personnel Psychology; and most recently nonfinancial rewards were found to be as impactful on unit performance outcomes and employee retention over time as were financial rewards, published in the Journal of Applied Psychology with Suzanne Peterson). In addition, Alex and I published in Psychological Bulletin a meta-analysis (114 studies, 21,616 subjects) that found a very strong positive relationship between self-efficacy and task-related performance. These provide end-of-chapter evidence-based OB Principles. 3. A third unique feature is an “Evidence-Based Consulting Practices” summary to open up each major part of the text. Specifically, in addition to my long academic appointment at the University of Nebraska, since 1998 I have been a senior research scientist with the Gallup Organization. Mostly known for the famous Gallup Poll, this world-class firm also has a widely known management consulting practice. About half of the “Fortune 50” are among Gallup’s recent clients. With my input, Tim Hodges, executive director of Gallup University, drew from Gallup’s tremendous survey research-base consisting of thousands of organizations and millions of people over the years. We provide Gallup’s evidence-based practices relevant to each major part of the text. 4. The fourth unique feature reflects my continuing basic research program over the years. Chapter 7 contains my most recent work on what I have termed “Positive Organizational Behavior” and “Psychological Capital” (or PsyCap). To meet the inclusion criteria (positive; theory and research based; valid measures; open to development; and manage for performance improvement), for the first time the topics of optimism, hope, happiness/subjective well-being, resiliency, emotional intelligence, self-efficacy, and the overall core construct of psychological capital have been given chapter status. Because of my involvement in the emerging Positive Psychology movement through Gallup and my research on PsyCap and authentic leadership with colleagues in the University of Nebraska’s Leadership Institute, I feel the time has come to incorporate this positive approach into the mainstream organizational behavior field. Besides these truly significant four unique features, there are a number of specific revisions and additions to this edition. These include: 1. The new subtitle “An Evidence-Based Approach” reaffirms the importance of the research foundation to the text. A new major section has been added to Chapter 1 that explains why this evidence-based focus is so critical and what it entails. 2. Because communication, decision making, and perception continue to be important to organizational behavior, in this edition there is a new Chapter 8, “Communication and Decision Making” and perception is added to Chapter 5, “Personality, Perception, and Employee Attitudes.” 3. To make room for the new chapter, the separate chapter on job design and goal setting is now incorporated into Chapter 6, “Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications.” 4. Besides updating the evidence-base and providing new real-world examples in each chapter, breakthroughs on important new topics such as the following are included: • Contextual impact of the recent financial crisis and stock market crash on organizational behavior Preface vii • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Collins’ “Good to Great” expectations Managing the global workforce Global mindset Diversity management skills Glass ceiling outside the United States Corporate social responsibility (CSR) Ethics of downsizing “Hollow” organization design Modular organization design Organization culture in an economic crisis Incentive/rewards analysis of the financial crisis Costs of obesity Neuroscience explanations Health-Relationships-Work (H-R-W) well-being model Intentional component of psychological capital (PsyCap) Background on PsyCap Performance impact and research summary of PsyCap PsyCap development model and research summary Evidence-based happiness Broaden and Build Theory of positivity Use of Facebook Gen X and Gen Y Stress from 24/7 technology and job loss threat Stress levels around the world Bullying problem “Slacker teammate” problem Followership Positive and authentic leadership research Just as real-world management can no longer afford to evolve slowly, neither can the academic side of the field. With the uncertain, very turbulent environment most organizations face today, drastically new ideas, approaches, and techniques as represented above are needed both in the practice of management and in the way we study and apply the field of organizational behavior. This revision mirrors these needed changes. Social Cognitive Conceptual Framework. The book contains 14 chapters in four major parts. Social cognitive theory explains organizational behavior in terms of both environmental, contextual events and internal cognitive factors, as well as the dynamics and outcomes of the organizational behavior itself. Thus, Part One provides the evidence-based and organizational context for the study and application of organizational behavior. The introductory chapter provides the environmental perspective, historical background, methodology, theoretical framework, and specific social cognitive model for the field of organizational behavior in general and specifically for this text. This is followed by an overall environmental context chapter: viii Preface Chapter 2, “Environmental Context: Globalization, Diversity, and Ethics (with major sections on globalization, diversity, and a major ending section on the impact of ethics on “bottom-line” outcomes). After this broad environmental context is laid out in Chapter 2, there are two chapters for the organizational context of the social cognitive framework: Chapter 3, “Organizational Context: Design and Culture” (with special emphasis given to the learning organization and horizontal, hollow, modular, network, and virtual designs; best-practice cultures; and a major section on the culture clashes from mergers and acquisitions) and Chapter 4, “Organizational Context: Reward Systems” (a unique chapter with special emphasis given to money as a reward, effectiveness of pay, forms of “new pay,” recognition systems, and benefits). The second part of the text recognizes the well-known micro-oriented cognitive processes of the social cognitive framework plus unique topics such as the following: Chapter 5, “Personality, Perception, and Employee Attitudes” (with unique major sections on the role of heredity and the brain and emphasis given to “Big Five” personality traits, the Myers-Briggs personality indicator, the perceptual process, and organizational citizenship behavior); Chapter 6, “Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications” (with major sections on extrinsic versus intrinsic motives, procedural justice, attribution theory, job design and goal setting); and Chapter 7, the most unique chapter, not only for this text, but any other, on “Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital.” In addition to the focus on the unique POB psychological states of efficacy, optimism, hope, resiliency, and overall psychological capital, there are also major sections on emotion, multiple intelligences, and general mental abilities. Parts Three and Four are concerned with the dynamics and behavior management and leadership dimensions of organizational behavior in the social cognitive framework. Part Three contains, in addition to widely recognized topics, the following four chapters: Chapter 8, “Communication and Decision Making” with particular emphasis given to nonverbal and interpersonal communication and behavioral dimensions, styles, and techniques of decision making. Chapter 9, “Stress and Conflict” (with material on stress and conflict from advanced technology and globalization, burnout, and work-family initiatives); Chapter 10, “Power and Politics” (with material on empowerment, trust, resource dependency, and the dynamics of power and politics in the new environment); and Chapter 11, “Groups and Teams” (with material on the punctuated equilibrium model of groups, group/team effectiveness, role conflict and ambiguity, social loafing, crossfunctional teams, virtual teams, and cultural/global issues with the use of teams). The final Part Four gives an applied emphasis to the text. It focuses on how to manage and lead for high performance. These applied organizational behavior chapters include the following: Chapter 12, “Behavioral Performance Management” (with material on the role of social cognition, critical analysis of reinforcement theory, pay for performance, social Preface ix recognition, and the latest research on contingencies with type of organization and interventions for O.B. Mod. effectiveness). Chapter 13, “Effective Leadership Processes” (with major sections on the historical studies, traditional and modern theories of leadership and the new “authentic leadership” being developed at the University of Nebraska’s Leadership Institute, and leadership across cultures and the GLOBE project). Chapter 14, “Great Leaders: An Evidence-Based Approach” (with major sections on leading in the new environment, leadership styles, including the new positive, authentic style, the activities and skills of leadership, and leadership development programs). Pedagogical Features. Besides the many unique features already described, there are also several strong pedagogical features that have characterized the text over the years. To reflect and reinforce the applications orientation of the text, highlighted, currently relevant, boxed real-world OB in Action examples appear in each chapter. In this twelfth edition there are many new real-world examples drawn from BusinessWeek articles. In addition to these application boxes, the text also features experiential exercises at the end of each part. The exercises get participants involved in solving simulated problems or experiencing firsthand organizational behavior issues. Also there are end-of-chapter Internet exercises to get students involved in online relevant resources and vehicles for discussion and critique. Besides the usual end-of-chapter short organizational behavior discussion cases, there is also at least one Real Case at the end of each chapter. These cases are drawn from recent real-world events (excerpted from current BusinessWeek articles) and are intended to enhance the relevancy and application of the theories and research results presented in the chapter. These end-of-chapter real cases serve as both examples and discussion vehicles. It is suggested that students read them even if they are not discussed directly in class. The intent is that they can serve as supplemental readings as well as discussion cases. This edition also contains learning objectives at the start of each chapter. These objectives should help students better focus and prepare for what follows in the chapter. Finally, the chapters have the usual end-of-chapter summaries and review and discussion questions. Intended Audience. Despite the four unique features and very extensive updating (having anywhere from 5–30 or more new references per chapter) throughout, the purpose and intended audience of the book remain the same. As in the earlier editions, this edition is aimed at those who wish to take a totally up-to-date, evidence-based approach to organizational behavior and management. It does not assume the reader’s prior knowledge of either management or the behavioral sciences. Thus, the book can be used effectively in the first or only course in either four-year or two-year colleges. It is aimed primarily at the required organizational behavior course, at the undergraduate level or in the M.B.A. program. I would like to especially acknowledge and thank colleagues in countries around the world who have used previous editions of the book and point out that the continued international perspective and coverage should make this new edition relevant and attractive. Finally, the book should be helpful to practicing managers who want to understand and more effectively manage their most important assets—their human resources. x Preface Acknowledgments. Every author owes a great deal to others, and I am no exception. First and foremost, I would like to acknowledge the help on this as well as many other writing projects over the years that I received from my deceased friend and colleague, Professor Richard M. Hodgetts of Florida International University. Next, I would like to acknowledge the total support and standards of excellence provided by my friend and longtime department chairman, Sang M. Lee and my former colleague now at the University of Washington, Bruce Avolio. Special thanks goes to Cathy Watson from the Management Department staff who has been very helpful to me over the years. I can never forget the education, encouragement, and scholarly values I received from Professors Henry H. Albers and the deceased Max S. Wortman when starting out in my academic career. Over the years, I have been very lucky to have been associated with excellent doctoral students. I would like to thank them all for teaching me as much as I have taught them. In particular, I would like to thank Don Baack, Steve Farner, and Suzanne Peterson who have helped on previous editions. I am also very grateful to those professors who used the previous editions of the book and gave me valuable feedback for making this revision. The reviewers for this edition are Charles B. Daniels, Old Dominion University; Laura Finnerty Paul, Skidmore College; and James Harbin, Texas A&M University–Texarkana. Finally, as always, I am deeply appreciative and dedicate Organizational Behavior, twelfth edition, to my wife and now grown children and their families, who have provided me with a loving, supportive relationship and climate needed to complete this and other projects over the years. Contents in Brief PART ONE PART THREE Environmental and Organizational Context 1 Dynamics of Organizational Behavior 245 1 Introduction to Organizational Behavior: An Evidence-Based Approach 5 2 Environmental Context: Globalization, Diversity, and Ethics 31 3 Organizational Context: Design and Culture 57 4 Organizational Context: Reward Systems 88 PART TWO Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior 123 8 Communication and Decision Making 247 9 Stress and Conflict 277 10 Power and Politics 312 11 Groups and Teams 339 PART FOUR Managing and Leading for High Performance 373 12 Behavioral Performance Management 378 13 Effective Leadership Processes 413 14 Great Leaders: An Evidence-Based Approach 445 5 Personality, Perception, and Employee Attitudes 125 6 Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications 156 Footnote References and Supplemental Readings 482 7 Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital 199 References for Application Boxes and Real Cases 548 INDEX 551 xi Contents About the Author iv Preface v PART ONE ENVIRONMENTAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT 1 Evidence-Based Consulting Practices 1 Chapter 1 Introduction to Organizational Behavior: An Evidence-Based Approach 5 Learning Objectives 5 The Challenges Facing Management 6 Undergoing a Paradigm Shift 8 A New Perspective for Management 10 Evidence-Based Management 12 Historical Background: The Hawthorne Studies 13 The Illumination Studies: A Serendipitous Discovery 13 Subsequent Phases of the Hawthorne Studies 14 Implications of the Hawthorne Studies 15 Research Methodology to Determine Valid Evidence 16 The Overall Scientific Perspective 16 Starting with Theory 17 The Use of Research Designs 18 The Validity of Studies 19 Defining Organizational Behavior 20 Theoretical Foundation for Organizational Behavior 20 Cognitive Framework 20 Behavioristic Framework 21 Social Cognitive Framework 22 The Conceptual Framework for the Text 25 Summary 25 Ending with Meta-Analytic Research Findings 26 Questions for Discussion and Review 27 Internet Exercise: Nonjobs or Telecommuting 27 Real Case: The Big Squeeze on Workers 28 Organizational Behavior Case: How Is This Stuff Going to Help Me? 29 Organizational Behavior Case: Too Nice to People 29 xii Organizational Behavior Case: Conceptual Model: Dream or Reality? 30 Chapter 2 Environmental Context: Globalization, Diversity, and Ethics 31 Learning Objectives 31 Globalization 31 Diversity in the Workplace 34 Reasons for the Emergence of Diversity 35 Developing the Multicultural Organization 38 Individual Approaches to Managing Diversity 39 Organizational Approaches to Managing Diversity 41 Ethics and Ethical Behavior in Organizations 46 The Impact of Ethics on “Bottom-Line” Outcomes 47 Summary 49 Ending with Meta-Analytic Research Findings 50 Questions for Discussion and Review 52 Internet Exercise: Ethical Issues in the Workplace 52 Organizational Behavior Case: How Far-Reaching Are Globalization and Technology? 52 Organizational Behavior Case: I Want Out 53 Real Case: Not Treating Everyone the Same 53 Organizational Behavior Case: Changing with the Times 54 Real Case: The Ethics of Downsizing 55 Chapter 3 Organizational Context: Design and Culture 57 Learning Objectives 57 The Organizational Theory Foundation 58 Historical Roots 58 Modern Theoretical Foundation 58 What Is Meant by a Learning Organization? 59 Organizational Behavior in the Learning Organization 60 Learning Organizations in Action 61 Modern Organization Designs 63 Horizontal Organizations 64 Contemporary Designs: Hollow and Modular 65 Network Designs 66 The Virtual Organization 68 Contents xiii The Organizational Culture Context 71 Definition and Characteristics Uniformity of Culture 73 71 Exercise: Work-Related Organizational Behavior: Implications for the Course 118 Exercise: Organizations 119 Creating and Maintaining a Culture 74 How Organizational Cultures Start 75 Maintaining Cultures through Steps of Socialization 76 Changing Organizational Culture 79 Summary 83 Ending with Meta-Analytic Research Findings 84 Questions for Discussion and Review 84 Internet Exercise: The Structure and Culture of Organizations 85 Real Case: Web-Based Organizations 85 Organizational Behavior Case: The Outdated Structure 86 Organizational Behavior Case: Keeping Things the Same 86 Organizational Behavior Case: Out with the Old, In with the New 87 Chapter 4 Organizational Context: Reward Systems 88 Learning Objectives 88 Pay: The Dominant Organizational Reward 90 The Theoretical Background on Money as a Reward 90 Research on the Effectiveness of Pay 92 Traditional Methods of Administering Pay 93 Pay for Performance 95 New Pay Techniques 99 Recognition as an Organizational Reward 100 Recognition versus Money 100 Examples of Effective Formal Recognition Systems 102 Benefits as Organizational Rewards 106 Traditionally Offered Benefits 106 Newer Types of Benefits 108 Summary 111 Ending with Meta-Analytic Research Findings 112 Questions for Discussion and Review 113 Internet Exercise: Rewards in the Workplace 114 Real Case: CEOs Get Fewer Perks 114 Real Case: Rewarding Teamwork in the Plains 115 Real Case: Different Strokes for Different Folks 116 Organizational Behavior Case: Huge Benefits, Little Understanding or Use 117 Experiential Exercises for Part One 118 Exercise: Synthesis of Student and Instructor Needs 118 PART TWO COGNITIVE PROCESSES OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR 123 Evidence-Based Consulting Practices 123 Chapter 5 Personality, Perception, and Employee Attitudes 125 Learning Objectives 125 The Meaning of Personality 125 The Role of Heredity and the Brain 126 Self-Esteem 128 Person-Situation Interaction 129 The Socialization Process 129 The “Big Five” Personality Traits 132 Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) 134 The Perception Process 135 Sensation versus Perception 136 Subprocesses of Perception 137 Social Perception 138 Characteristics of Perceiver and Perceived 138 Stereotyping 139 The Halo Effect 139 Work-Related Attitudes: PA/NA 140 Employee Attitudes 141 What Is Meant by Job Satisfaction? 141 Influences on Job Satisfaction 142 Outcomes of Job Satisfaction 144 Organizational Commitment 146 The Meaning of Organizational Commitment 147 The Outcomes of Organizational Commitment 148 Guidelines to Enhance Organizational Commitment 148 Organizational Citizenship Behaviors (OCBs) 149 Summary 150 Ending with Meta-Analytic Research Findings 151 Questions for Discussion and Review 152 Internet Exercise: Assessing Your Personality 153 Real Case: It’s All a Matter of Personality 153 Organizational Behavior Case: Same Accident, Different Perceptions 154 Organizational Behavior Case: Ken Leaves the Company 155 xiv Contents Chapter 6 Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications 156 Chapter 7 Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital 199 Learning Objectives 156 The Basic Motivation Process 157 Learning Objectives 199 Positive Psychology 200 Self-Efficacy/Confidence 202 Primary Motives 157 Secondary Motives 158 Intrinsic versus Extrinsic Motives 160 Work-Motivation Theories 161 Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs: An Important Historical Contribution 162 Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory of Motivation 165 The Porter-Lawler Expectancy Theory of Work Motivation 167 Equity Theory of Work Motivation 169 The Relationship between Equity Theory and Organizational Justice 172 Attribution Theory 173 Other Work Motivation Theories: Control and Agency 177 Motivational Application through Job Design 178 Job Rotation 179 Job Enlargement 179 Job Enrichment 179 The Job Characteristics Approach to Task Design 180 Practical Guidelines for Redesigning Jobs 182 Motivational Application through Goal Setting 183 Theoretical Understanding of Goal Setting 183 Research Evidence on the Impact of Goal Setting 184 Other Performance Management Application Techniques Associated with Goal Setting 187 Impact on the Psychological Contract 189 Summary 189 Ending with Meta-Analytic Research Findings 190 Questions for Discussion and Review 192 Internet Exercises: What Types of Jobs Motivate You? 193 Internet Exercise: What Is the Motivation Potential of Jobs at Southwest Airlines? 193 Real Case: At UPS Managers Learn to Empathize with Their Employees 194 Real Case: Making It a Nice Place to Work 195 Organizational Behavior Case: What Do They Want? 196 Organizational Behavior Case: Tom, Dick, and Harry 196 Organizational Behavior Case: The Rubber Chicken Award 197 Organizational Behavior Case: Specific Goals for Human Service 197 The Theoretical Background and Meaning of Efficacy 202 The Process and Impact of Self-Efficacy 204 Sources of Efficacy 206 Implications for Efficacy in the Workplace and POB 209 Optimism 212 The Dimensions of Optimism 212 Optimism in the Workplace 214 Hope 217 Resiliency 218 Psychological Capital (PsyCap) 219 Background and Research on PsyCap PsyCap Development 221 220 Other Positive Constructs 222 Happiness or Subjective Well-Being (SWB) 222 The Background on SWB 224 Emotional Intelligence (EI) 225 The Role of Intelligence 229 Emotional Intelligence 231 Summary 234 Ending with Meta-Analytic Research Findings 236 Questions for Discussion and Review 236 Internet Exercise: What Is Your IQ and EQ? 237 Real Case: High Tech—High Fear 238 Organizational Behavior Case: People Problems at HEI 238 Experiential Exercises for Part Two 240 Exercise: Self-Perception and Development of the Self-Concept 240 Exercise: Job Design Survey 240 Exercise: Motivation Questionnaire 242 PART THREE DYNAMICS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR 245 Evidence-Based Consulting Practices 245 Chapter 8 Communication and Decision Making 247 Learning Objectives 247 Contents xv Background of the Role of Communication 248 The Definition of Communication 249 Nonverbal Communication 250 Body Language and Paralanguage 250 Improving Nonverbal Effectiveness 252 Interpersonal Communication 252 Importance of How to Talk to Others 254 The Importance of Feedback 254 Other Important Variables in Interpersonal Communication 256 Interactive Communication in Organizations 256 The Extent and Implications of Interactive Communication 257 The Purposes and Methods of Interactive Communication 257 The Decision-Making Process 259 Behavioral Decision Making 260 Decision Rationality 260 Decision-Making Styles 262 Participative Decision-Making Techniques 264 Creativity and Group Decision Making 265 The Process of Creativity 265 Psychological Definition and Analysis of Creativity 267 Creativity Techniques for Management Decision Making 268 Group Decision Making 269 Summary 270 Ending with Meta-Analytic Research Findings 271 Questions for Discussion and Review 272 Internet Exercise: Communication in the Workplace 272 Internet Exercise: Decision Making in Organizations 273 Real Case: Online Communication to Share Knowledge 273 Organizational Behavior Case: Doing My Own Thing 274 Organizational Behavior Case: Bad Brakes 274 Real Case: Putting a Human Face on Rational Decisions 275 Organizational Behavior Case: Harry Smart—Or Is He? 276 Chapter 9 Stress and Conflict 277 Learning Objectives 277 The Emergence of Stress 277 Contemporary Environment Demands 277 What Stress Is, and Is Not 278 What about Burnout? 279 The Causes of Stress 280 Extraorganizational Stressors 281 Organizational Stressors 282 Group Stressors 282 Individual Stressors: The Role of Dispositions 284 Intraindividual Conflict 288 Conflict Due to Frustration 288 Goal Conflict 290 Role Conflict and Ambiguity 290 Interactive Conflict 292 Interpersonal Conflict 292 Intergroup Behavior and Conflict 293 The Effects of Stress and Intraindividual Conflict 294 Physical Problems Due to Stress and Conflict 295 Psychological Problems Due to Stress and Conflict 295 Behavioral Problems Due to Stress and Conflict 296 Coping Strategies for Stress and Conflict 297 Individual Coping Strategies 298 Organizational Coping Strategies 300 Negotiation Skills: Going Beyond Conflict Management 302 Traditional Negotiation Approaches 302 Contemporary Negotiation Skills 304 Summary 305 Ending with Meta-Analytic Research Findings 306 Questions for Discussion and Review 307 Internet Exercise: Managing Stress in Organizations 308 Real Case: When Workers Just Can’t Cope 308 Real Case: Round-the-Clock Stress 309 Organizational Behavior Case: Sorry, No Seats Are Left; Have a Nice Flight 310 Organizational Behavior Case: A Gnawing Stomachache 311 Organizational Behavior Case: Drinking Up the Paycheck 311 Chapter 10 Power and Politics 312 Learning Objectives 312 The Meaning of Power 313 The Distinctions among Power, Authority, and Influence 313 The Classifications of Power 314 Contingency Approaches to Power 318 The Special Case of Empowerment 322 The Complexity of Empowerment 323 Putting Empowerment into Action 324 xvi Contents Political Implications of Power 326 A Political Perspective of Power in Organizations 327 Specific Political Strategies for Power Acquisition 330 A Final Word on Power and Politics 333 Summary 334 Ending with Meta-Analytic Research Findings 335 Questions for Discussion and Review 336 Internet Exercise: The Uses and Abuses of Power 336 Real Case: Fighting Back 337 Organizational Behavior Case: Throwing Away a Golden Opportunity 337 Experiential Exercises for Part Three 365 Exercise: Groups and Conflict Resolution 365 Exercise: NASA Moon Survival Task 367 Exercise: TGIF (Thank God It’s Friday!) 368 Exercise: Power and Politics 371 PART FOUR MANAGING AND LEADING FOR HIGH PERFORMANCE 373 Evidence-Based Consulting Practices 373 Chapter 11 Groups and Teams 339 Chapter 12 Behavioral Performance Management 378 Learning Objectives 339 The Nature of Groups 339 Learning Objectives 378 Learning Theory Background 379 The Meaning of a Group and Group Dynamics 340 The Dynamics of Group Formation 340 Types of Groups 343 Implications from Research on Group and Team Dynamics 345 Group/Team Effectiveness 346 The Dynamics of Informal Groups 347 Norms and Roles in Informal Groups 347 The Informal Organization 348 The Dysfunctions of Groups and Teams 350 Norm Violation and Role Ambiguity/Conflict 350 The Groupthink, Conformity Problem 350 Risky Shift Phenomenon 351 Dysfunctions in Perspective 351 Social Loafing 352 Work Teams 352 The Nature of a Team 353 Cross-Functional Teams 354 Virtual Teams 355 Self-Managed Teams 356 How to Make Teams More Effective 356 Summary 360 Ending with Meta-Analytic Research Findings 361 Questions for Discussion and Review 361 Internet Exercise: Work Environment in Team-Based Organizations 362 Real Case: There Are Teams, and There Are Teams 362 Organizational Behavior Case: The Schoolboy Rookie 363 Organizational Behavior Case: The Blue-Ribbon Committee 364 Behavioristic Theories 379 Cognitive Theories 381 Social Learning and Social Cognitive Theory 382 Principles of Learning: Reinforcement and Punishment 384 Laws of Behavior 384 Critique of Reinforcement Theory 384 Reinforcement as Used in Behavioral Management 386 Positive and Negative Reinforcers 386 The Use of Punishment 387 The Role of Organizational Reward Systems 389 Analysis of Money as a Reinforcer 390 Nonfinancial Rewards 391 Behavioral Performance Management, or O.B. Mod. 394 Step 1: Identification of Performance Behaviors 398 Step 2: Measurement of the Behavior 399 Step 3: Functional Analysis of the Behavior 399 Step 4: Development of an Intervention Strategy 400 Step 5: Evaluation to Ensure Performance Improvement 403 Application of Behavioral Management 404 Manufacturing versus Service Applications 405 Summary 406 Ending with Meta-Analytic Research Findings 406 Questions for Discussion and Review 408 Internet Exercise: Applying Behavior Management Principles to Athletic Performance 408 Real Case: The Elite Circle of $1 CEOs 408 Organizational Behavior Case: Contrasting Styles 410 Organizational Behavior Case: Volunteers Can’t Be Punished 410 Contents xvii Organizational Behavior Case: Up the Piece Rate 411 Organizational Behavior Case: A Tardiness Problem 411 Chapter 13 Effective Leadership Processes 413 Learning Objectives 413 What is Leadership? 413 The Historically Important Studies on Leadership 415 The Iowa Leadership Studies 416 The Ohio State Leadership Studies 416 The Early Michigan Leadership Studies 418 Traditional Theories of Leadership 418 Trait Theories of Leadership 419 From Traits to States and Skills Development 420 Group and Exchange Theories of Leadership 421 Contingency Theory of Leadership 423 Path-Goal Leadership Theory 426 Modern Theoretical Processes of Leadership 428 Charismatic Leadership Theories 428 Transformational Leadership Theory 430 Substitutes for Leadership 431 Authentic Leadership 433 Leadership across Cultures 434 Project GLOBE and the Future of International Leadership Studies 436 Summary 439 Ending with Meta-Analytic Research Findings 440 Questions for Discussion and Review 441 Internet Exercise: Leading in Times of Crisis 442 Real Case: No Organization Chart and an 80-BlankPages Policy Manual 442 Real Case: The Seven Secrets of Inspiring Leaders 443 Chapter 14 Great Leaders: An Evidence-Based Approach 445 Learning Objectives 445 Leadership in the New Environment 446 Leadership Styles 448 Style Implications of the Classic Studies and the Modern Theories 449 Classic Styles 451 Leadership Styles in Perspective 452 An Evidence-Based Positive, Authentic Leadership Style 454 The Roles and Activities of Leadership 455 Leader/Manager Roles 455 Activities of Successful and Effective Leaders: The Real Managers Study 457 Leadership Skills 463 What Skills Do Leaders Need? 463 Traditional Leadership Development Programs 466 Contemporary Leadership Development Approaches 468 Other Indirect Techniques for Developing Leadership Effectiveness 469 Summary 471 Ending with Meta-Analytic Research Findings 472 Questions for Discussion and Review 472 Internet Exercise: Leaders as Coaches 473 Real Case: Jeanne P. Jackson: A Retailing Leader 473 Real Case: For Leaders, Ignorance Isn’t Bliss 474 Organizational Behavior Case: The Puppet 475 Experiential Exercises for Part Four 476 Exercise: Role Playing and O.B. Mod. 476 Exercise: Leadership Questionnaire 477 Exercise: Paper Plane Corporation 480 Footnote References and Supplemental Readings 482 References for Application Boxes and Real Cases 548 Index 551 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context 1. 2. 3. 4. Introduction to Organizational Behavior: An Evidence-Based Approach Environmental Context: Globalization, Diversity, and Ethics Organizational Context: Design and Culture Organizational Context: Reward Systems 5 31 57 88 EVIDENCE-BASED CONSULTING PRACTICES A major component of the evidence-based theme of this text and the link to practice are these part openers from the world-famous Gallup Organization. Gallup draws from its internationally recognized survey science and cadre of internal and external researchers (e.g., the author of this text and a Nobel Prize winner in behavioral economics are Gallup Senior Scientists), publishes its findings in the top academic journals such as Journal of Applied Psychology, and provides this evidenced-based perspective and representative practices for each text part. Gallup is the recognized world leader in the measurement and analysis of human attitudes, opinions, and behavior, building on over three-quarters of a century of success. Gallup employs many of the world’s leading scientists in management, economics, psychology, and sociology. Gallup performance management systems help organizations maximize employee productivity and increase customer engagement through measurement tools, management solutions, and strategic advisory services. Gallup’s 2000 professionals deliver services on-site at client organizations, through the Web, at Gallup University’s campuses, and in 40 offices around the world. Gallup has subsidiary operations in 20 countries, covering 75 percent of the world’s GNP. Gallup clients include top-performing organizations such as Toyota, Marriott, Wal-Mart, Wells Fargo, and Best Buy. The details and depth of Gallup’s consulting practices can be found in the bestselling books such as First, Break All the Rules (Simon & Schuster, 1999) Now, Discover Your Strengths (The Free Press, 2001), How Full Is Your Bucket (Gallup Press, 2 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context 2004), and Strength Finder 2.0 (Gallup Press, 2007), which recently passed the million copies sold mark. These books are all authored by Gallup scientists and practice leaders. All the part opening Gallup practices for this text are written by Tim Hodges, Executive Director of the Gallup University, with some input by former Gallup Senior Analyst Dr. Dennis Hatfield and this author. The following gives an introductory overview of the Gallup evidenced-based approach, and the other openers are more directly concerned with the theme of the respective part. AN INTRODUCTION TO THE GALLUP EVIDENCE-BASED APPROACH: THE GALLUP PATH According to numerous think tanks, recent global competition caused corporate executives to pose one common, all-consuming question: What is the role of human nature in driving business outcomes? As described in Coffman and Gonzalez-Molina’s Follow This Path, the Gallup Organization sorted through unprecedented bits of economic information and data from customers and employees to develop The Gallup Path™ management theory, answering the question concerning the role of human nature in driving business outcomes. The Gallup Path™ serves as Gallup’s premier management consulting model. At the model’s core is the theory that within every organization, every employee, at all levels, contributes to some degree to sales growth, profitability, and ultimately, share price. The path serves as the first management theory to track the connectedness of managers to employees, employees to customers, and customers to real financial outcomes. The “steps” along The Gallup Path™ progress from (1) individual’s identification of strengths to (2) finding the right fit to (3) great management to (4) engaged employees to (5) engaged customers to (6) sustainable business growth to (7) real profit increase to (8) stock increase. Just as The Gallup Poll reports the will of global citizens, The Gallup Path™ reports the will of customers and employees around the world through Gallup’s HumanSigma™ metrics. GALLUP’S GREAT PLACE TO WORK One of Gallup’s core practices involves the measurement and development of employee engagement, leading to the creation of “great places to work.” As described in Buckingham and Coffman’s First, Break All the Rules, Gallup consultants use the Q12® to provide a measure of the extent to which individuals are rightly placed and rightly managed, creating the great place to work. These Q12® questions are: (1) Do I know what is expected of me at work? (2) Do I have the materials and equipment I need to do my work right? (3) At work, do I have the opportunity to do what I do best every day? (4) In the last seven days have I received recognition or praise for good work? (5) Does my supervisor, or someone at work, seem to care about me as a person? (6) Is there someone at work who encourages Part One Environmental and Organizational Context 3 my development? (7) At work, do my opinions seem to count? (8) Does the mission/purpose of my company make me feel like my work is important? (9) Are my coworkers committed to doing quality work? (10) Do I have a best friend at work? (11) In the last six months, have I talked with someone about my progress? (12) At work, have I had opportunities to learn and grow? (See Buckingham & Coffman, 1999, p. 28. These questions are the results of Gallup research, and as such they are proprietary. They cannot be reprinted or reproduced in any manner without the written consent of the Gallup Organization. Copyright © 1993–1998 The Gallup Organization, Washington, DC. All rights reserved). A recent issue of the Journal of Applied Psychology published a meta-analysis of 7,939 business units in 36 companies examining the relationship between employee engagement and work-related outcomes of customer satisfaction, profit, productivity, turnover, and safety (Harter, Schmidt, & Hayes, 2002). Generalizable relationships of substantial practical value were found for all outcome measures, providing research evidence of the connection between an employee’s level of engagement and the level of quality of his or her performance. Related published workplace studies (e.g., Schmidt & Rader, Personnel Psychology, 1999) have also illustrated the validity of the right fit and management of talent in predicting supervisory ratings of job performance, sales volumes, production records, and absenteeism. GALLUP’S APPROACH TO STRENGTHS-BASED DEVELOPMENT For decades following World War II, the science of psychology focused almost completely on what is wrong with people. Bucking this trend of negativity, Gallup scientists analyzed more than 30 years of research on what is right about people. This in-depth study of over two million individuals led to the creation of the StrengthsFinder, Gallup’s Web-based talent assessment tool and psychology’s first taxonomy of strengths. For his leadership in the development of the StrengthsFinder and for his thought leadership that changed the entire field of psychology, in 2003 Gallup’s former chairman and chief scientist, Dr. Donald O. Clifton, was officially named the “Father of Strengths Psychology” and “Grandfather of Positive Psychology” by the American Psychological Association. The StrengthsFinder serves as the starting point for self-discovery in all of Gallup’s strengths-based development programs. After an individual has completed the assessment, a list of developmental suggestions is customized to the individual’s top five themes of talent—called Signature Themes. Over the past several years, StrengthsFinder has been used in the development of millions of individuals across hundreds of roles including manager, salesperson, teacher, student, leader, pastor, nurse, and many more. StrengthsFinder is available in more than a dozen languages. Role-specific strengths-based developmental information is available through the following Gallup books (each including a personal ID number allowing the reader to complete the StrengthsFinder): Now, Discover Your Strengths (Buckingham & Clifton, 2001); StrengthsQuest (Clifton & Anderson, 2002); Discover Your Sales Strengths (Smith & Rutigliano, 2003); Living Your Strengths (Winseman, Clifton, & Liesveld, 2003); and StrengthsFinder 2.0 (Rath, 2007). 4 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context EXAMPLES OF CLIENT SUCCESS: GALLUP’S EVIDENCED-BASED PRACTICES IN ACTION An important aspect of Gallup’s evidence-based approach is measuring the value of client engagements, known as Business Impact Analysis. The following examples of recent client success illustrate the impact of Gallup’s research in action. 1. A national clothing retailer was experiencing declining business. The retailer brought Gallup in to create an integrated performance management system designed to provide each store manager with the tools to optimize employee and customer engagement. The client engagement consisted of several administrations of employee and customer engagement, followed by in-depth analysis, executive consulting, and manager training. Gallup’s Business Impact Analysis uncovered a trend where employee and customer engagement significantly influenced each store’s financial performance. In fact, the group of stores with toplevel performance on employee and customer engagement metrics realized a significant net benefit to the organization of approximately $114.8 million in sales, $47.6 million in margins, and $34.7 million in operating profit when compared to the group of stores with lower employee and customer engagement metrics. 2. Gallup’s extensive work in the health care sector has also led to valuable results for clients. For example, a relationship with one of the largest for-profit hospital networks created value for many years. Since the inception of an ongoing, systemwide program to improve employee engagement, more than 26,000 employees of this hospital network have moved from being “not engaged” (neither positive nor negative about their work environment) or “actively disengaged” (fundamentally disconnected from their work) to being engaged, or emotionally invested, in their jobs. According to the client’s estimates, these engaged employees represent over $46 million in reduced absenteeism costs alone. Further, over a recent three-year period, systemwide employee engagement levels closely reflect steady, incremental increases in the client’s stock price. Positive multimillion dollar relationships between employee engagement and reduced malpractice claims, earnings per admission, patient loyalty, and decreased nurse turnover have also been realized over the course of this successful client partnership. 3. One of the largest banks in North America entered into a partnership with Gallup to improve sales performance in three call centers. Gallup consultants studied the call center structure and business strategy, reviewed job performance criteria, and studied the best performers in each role to identify the talents that contributed to their success. Gallup developed and implemented hiring systems for customer service representatives and inbound sales representatives. Not only did employees hired through the Gallup system deliver a higher sales success rate, high-scoring new hires substantially outperformed their lower-scoring counterparts in revenues, sales, call handling time, and loan accuracy. Many more examples of successful client partnerships, as well as actionable management insights and perspectives from Gallup experts, are available in the monthly online newsletter, the Gallup Management Journal (http://www.gallupjournal.com). Chapter One Introduction to Organizational Behavior: An EvidenceBased Approach Learning Objectives • Provide an overview of the major challenges and the paradigm shift facing management now and in the future. • Outline an evidence-based approach to organizational behavior. • Summarize the Hawthorne studies as the starting point of the study of organizational behavior. • Explain the methodology that is used to accumulate knowledge and facilitate understanding of organizational behavior. • Relate the various theoretical frameworks that serve as a foundation for the study of organizational behavior. • Present the social cognitive model of organizational behavior that serves as the conceptual framework for the text. Every era laments about daunting challenges. However, even previous generations would probably agree that effectively managing today’s organizations is very difficult. Ask anyone today—management professors, practitioners, or students—what the major challenges are in today’s environment, and the answer will be fairly consistent: A turbulent economy and dangerous geopolitics preoccupy everyone’s concerns. However, at the organization level, understanding global competition and diversity, and trying to solve ethical problems and dilemmas come to the fore. These are unquestionably major issues facing contempory organizations and are given major attention in this text. However, the basic premise and assumptions of the field of organizational behavior in general, and of this text in particular, are that managing the people—the human resources of an organization—have been, are, and will continue to be, the major challenge and critical competitive advantage. Globalization, diversity, and ethics serve as very important environmental or contextual dimensions for organizational behavior. However, as Sam Walton, the founder of Wal-Mart and richest person in the world when he died, declared to this author over lunch a number of years ago when asked what the answer was to successful organizations—“People are the 5 6 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context key!” The technology can be purchased and copied; it levels the playing field. The people, on the other hand, cannot be copied. Although it may be possible to clone human bodies, their ideas, personalities, motivation, and organization cultural values cannot be copied. The human resources of an organization and how they are managed represent the competitive advantage of today’s and tomorrow’s organizations. A recent study of over three hundred companies for over 20 years provides evidence for this statement. The researchers found that management of human resources through extensive training and techniques such as empowerment resulted in performance benefits, but operational initiatives such as total quality management or advanced manufacturing technology did not.1 At first employees were considered a cost, then human resources, and now are becoming widely recognized as “human capital”2 (what you know—education, experience, skills). Recent research indicates that investing in this human capital results in desired performance outcomes such as increased productivity and customer satisfaction.3 Even going beyond human capital are more recently recognized “social capital”4 (who you know—networks, connections, friends) and “positive psychological capital”5 (who you are—confidence, hope, optimism, resiliency) and (who you are in terms of confidence, hope, optimism, resiliency, and, more importantly, who you can become, i.e., one’s possible authentic self). Although Chapter 7 will be specifically devoted to positive organizational behavior in general and psychological capital in particular, let it be simply noted here that there is growing research evidence that employees’ psychological capital is positively related to their performance and desired attitudes.6 As the ultimate “techie” Bill Gates astutely observed: “The inventory, the value of my company, walks out the door every evening.” Interestingly, whereas the technology dramatically changes, sometimes monthly or even weekly, the human side of enterprise has not changed and will not change that fast. As noted by well-known international management scholar Geert Hofstede, “Because management is always about people, its essence is dealing with human nature. Since human nature seems to have been extremely stable over recorded history, the essence of management has been and will be equally stable over time.”7 The nature of work and the workplace itself,8 the traditional employment contract,9 and the composition of the workforce10 are all dramatically changing and given attention in this text. Yet, the overriding purpose of the first edition, now 38 years ago, of trying to better understand and effectively manage human behavior in organizations remains the essence of this twelfth edition. This introductory chapter gives the perspective, background, methodology, and evidencebased approach to the field. After a brief discussion of the current environmental challenges and the paradigm shift facing management and why an evidence-based approach is needed, the historical background is touched on. Particular attention is given to the famous Hawthorne studies, which are generally recognized to be the beginning of the systematic study and understanding of organizational behavior. Next, an overview of the methodology used in the scientific study of organizational behavior is given. The chapter concludes by defining exactly what is involved in organizational behavior and by providing a conceptual model for the rest of the text. THE CHALLENGES FACING MANAGEMENT The academic field of organizational behavior has been around for about a half century. However, as the accompanying OB in Action: Some Things Never Really Change clearly indicates, problems facing managers of human organizations have been around since the beginning of civilization. This case, with but a few word modifications, is taken from the Old (not New) Testament of the Bible (Exodus 18:13–27), recognized by the Jewish, Christian, OB in Action: Some Things Never Really Change A powerful, charismatic leader is having problems. A well-known consultant is called in to help. The consultant notices that the leader tries to handle all problems and conflicts of his people himself. People queue up before his office; because he is overwhelmed, he cannot handle all the business. So the consultant has a private talk with the leader and tells him to structure his organization by delegating authority, empowering subordinates to handle the workload. These subordinates should be selected not only on their leadership abilities, but also on their character: They should be truthful, not driven by material gain. The new structure should resolve all daily issues at the lowest possible level; only the big and difficult issues should be brought before the leader. He should focus on strategy—on dealing with the higher authority, on establishing new approaches and teaching these to the people, on showing them the way to go and the work to be done. The case states that the leader listens to the consultant and carries out the reorganization, which is a success, and the consultant returns home. and Islam religions. The case took place over 3,000 years ago, the charismatic leader was Moses (when he led his people from Egypt to Palestine), the well-known consultant was Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, and the higher authority was God. Embedded in the case are many topics covered in this text—for example, charismatic leadership, management of conflict, empowerment, management of change, and nonfinancial incentives. Although the problems with human organizations and the solutions over the ages have not really changed that much, the emphasis and surrounding environmental context certainly have changed. For example, in the 1980s to the mid-1990s managers were preoccupied with restructuring their organizations to improve productivity and meet the competitive challenges in the international marketplace and quality expectations of customers. Although the resulting “lean and mean” organizations offered some short-run benefits in terms of lowered costs and improved productivity, instead of making significant changes to meet the changing environment, most organizations continued with more of the same. For example, one analysis of Fortune 500 firms between 1995 and 2005 found the most prominent initiatives were restructuring (downsizing), cost reduction programs, globalizing supply chains, creating shared services and Six Sigma (almost perfect) quality programs.11 During this era, top management compensation was primarily tied to stock options (covered in Chapter 4) and thus the firm’s stock price, which in turn led to highrisk mergers, acquisitions, and a highly regulated, winner-take-all environment.12 For example, the head of nearly century-old investment house Merrill Lynch bet his firm— and ultimately lost—on the subprime financial market and outsized leverage and then took a whopping $160 million severance package on the way out the door.13 This type of behavior, and of course many other social, economic, and geopolitical factors, led to the financial crisis and stock market crash starting at the end of 2008. Although most of the focus has been on financial markets, government intervention through the so-called bailouts, and massive unemployment, the impact on those not laid off, the remaining employees, human resources of organizations, has been slighted. As an expert on the psychology of the corporate environment recently noted, “after years of downsizing, outsourcing, and a cavalier corporate attitude that treats employees as costs rather than assets, most of today’s workers have concluded that the company no longer values them. So they, in turn, no longer feel engaged in their work or committed to the company.”14 This turmoil has certainly left employees hurt and fearful, and feeling very vulnerable. There is also powerful evidence from the Gallup World Poll (a representative sample of the population of over 100 countries) that by far the single most dominant thought and primary driver of almost everyone, in every corner of the plant, is, “I want a good job.”15 As the 7 8 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context head of Gallup, Jim Clifton, concluded on the basis of this evidence, “Work is crucial to every adult human because work holds within it the soul of the relationship of one citizen to one government and one country.”16 In other words, even though recent history has been tough not only on the economy but also on organizations and employees, the burning desire for a good job still prevails among all people. In the tradition of an effective strategy of turning threats into opportunities, such an environment as the world has experienced in recent times may ironically be the ideal time to meet the challenges facing the management of human resources. As in the words of popular leadership author (Good to Great) Jim Collins, “A crisis is a terrible thing to waste.”17 The time has come to not only recognize and appreciate the importance of human resources, but also to use recent history as a catalyst for paradigmic change in the way we understand and manage human resources. This process starts with understanding what is meant by a paradigm shift, not just keeping up with incremental change, but a new way of thinking about and managing human resources in today’s dramatically changed workplace. UNDERGOING A PARADIGM SHIFT The term paradigm comes from the Greek paradeigma, which translates as “model, pattern, or example.” First introduced years ago by the philosophy of science historian Thomas Kuhn,18 the term paradigm is now used to mean a broad model, a framework, a way of thinking, or a scheme for understanding reality.19 In the words of popular futurist Joel Barker, a paradigm simply establishes the rules (written or unwritten), defines the boundaries, and tells one how to behave within the boundaries to be successful.20 The impact of globalization, diversity, and ethics given detailed attention in the next chapter, a turbulent, very problematic economy,21 and a workforce described as a “blend of traditionally trained baby boomers, in-your-face Gen Xers, people with inadequate literacy skills from disadvantaged areas, and techies raised on computers,”22 has led to a paradigm shift. For example, James Brian Quinn offers the “intelligent enterprise” as new paradigm. He believes that “the organization of enterprises and effective strategies will depend more on development and deployment of intellectual resources than on the management of physical assets.”23 These human and intellectual resources have moved into the new paradigm, and as indicated by the interview with Jim Collins in the accompanying OB in Action: Good to Great Expectations, with a new set of challenges and required ways of thinking. In other words, for today’s and tomorrow’s organizations and management, there are new rules with different boundaries requiring new and different behavior inside the boundaries for organizations and management to be successful. Paradigm shifts have invalidated advantages of certain firms (e.g., consider the well-known problems of almost all auto, financial, and retail firms in recent years) and created new opportunities for others (e.g., Google and Costco). Those who study paradigm shifts, such as the shift that took place in the basic sciences from deterministic, mechanistic Cartesian-Newtonian to Einstein’s relativity and quantum physics, note that “real controversy takes place, often involving substantial restructuring of the entire scientific community under conditions of great uncertainty.”24 Commonly called the “paradigm effect,” a situation arises in which those in the existing paradigm may not even see the changes that are occurring, let alone reason and draw logical inferences and perceptions about the changes. This effect helps explain why there is considerable resistance to change and why it is very difficult to move from the old management paradigm to the new. There is discontinuous change in the shift to the new paradigm. As one observer of the needed new paradigm organization noted: OB in Action: Good to Great Expectations For Jim Collins, the Stanford Graduate School of Business lecturer-turned-management thinker, “the workplace” is a pleasant office suite set amid the Rocky Mountains in Boulder, Colo. Managing generational tension amounts to shepherding a team of smart, curious students who help him with the research projects that have led to blockbuster books like Built to Last and Good to Great. And dealing with difficult bosses means stepping outside to do some rock climbing in the mountain air if he gets frustrated with himself. But the author of Good to Great, the world’s bestselling guide to taking companies to the next level, still has plenty of insights for those of us stuck in gray-walled cubicles where the “scenic view” is often the parking lot of a drab corporate campus. Management Editor Jena McGregor asked Collins to translate some of his popular concepts to today’s workplace. Here are edited excerpts of that conversation: One of the big concepts in your book is “first who,” or that the most important thing is getting the right people “on the bus.” But for cubicle dwellers who can’t trade in their boss or their co-workers, what should they think about doing? The idea of a personal board of directors came to me when I was in my 20s. I drew a little conference table on a sheet of paper with seven chairs around it and wrote names on them of people I admired. I pasted it above my computer and would look up and in my mind poll the personal board when I was wrestling with tough questions. If I was really stuck, I might talk to some of them. It’s sort of like a group of tribal elders that you create for yourself. How many of the leaders running the companies in Good to Great had any kind of work-life balance? Is it possible to run a great company and also have a great life? The bad news is, about half the CEOs didn’t really seem to have a life. They defined a great life as building a great company. A lot of people who do extraordinary things are not balanced. I’m not even convinced that the idea makes sense [since] there’s a certain neurotic obsession with doing exceptional things. But here’s the good news: It was only about half. So I draw the conclusion that it’s a choice. But haven’t BlackBerrys and globalization made such choices nearly impossible? The imperative is to manage our time, not our work. This is why the whole question of balance and finishing our work is insane. There are only 24 hours in a day, so what difference does it really make if you work 10 hours or 14, given that there are a thousand potential hours of work? The real question is the incredible rigor of what goes into the hours you allocate. As I look at the most effective people we’ve studied, a “stop-doing” list or not-to-do list is more important than a to-do list, because the to-do list is infinite. For every big, annual priority you put on the to-do list, you need a corresponding item on the stop-doing list. It’s like an accounting balance. You’ve got to admit, though, that technology has made it harder today. I don’t think it’s obviously harder today at all. Technology helps, not hurts, as long as you have the discipline to turn these things off. You don’t report to your BlackBerry. What we know about people who are really effective is that they think. The key is to build pockets of quietude into your schedule—times when you have an appointment with yourself and it’s protected. I have on my calendar “white space” days. I set them six months in advance, and everyone around me can see them. It’s not that I’m not working, but absolutely nothing can be scheduled on a white space day. You talk in Good to Great about leaders needing to confront brutal facts. But organizations loaded with bureaucracy are the exact places where truth doesn’t rise to the top. What do the best managers do to break down that bureaucracy? How do you create a climate in which the truth is heard? The first thing is to increase your questions-to-statements ratio. Have someone track it and see if you can double it in the next year. The leaders in our studies asked lots of questions. They were Socratic. By asking questions, they got the brutal facts, as well as lots of insights and ideas. What can people who aren’t in leadership positions do to better navigate bureaucracies? I think about how the leaders we studied handled this before they were in charge. If you look at [former Gillette CEO] Colman Mockler or Ken Iverson before he became CEO of Nucor, what did they do? They were focused on what they could control. That is Job One. But they were also really good at figuring out the three to four people in the organization who really mattered and became very good at presenting to them evidence and arguments that were persuasive. If you produce exceptional work, your ability for influence is very high. Most people, even in bureaucracies, (continued) 9 10 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context (continued) are hard-working, well-intentioned people trying to do good things. If you ever wake up and say the majority of people here aren’t that, then for sure it’s time to jump. You manage a team of student researchers. Any secrets you’ve discovered to managing Generation Y? I don’t understand this generational tension thing other than that I think the tension is great. You should find a way to have young people in your face all the time. Wrestle with it. Revel in it. Learn from them. My view is, we ought to get those people into positions of leadership as fast as we can. The depth of change required demands that those charged with charting a passage through hurricane-like seas do more than run up a new set of sails. What is involved equates to a quantum shift in, not just learning, but how we learn; not just doing things differently, but questioning whether we should be doing many of the things we currently believe in, at all; not just in drawing together more information but in questioning how we know what it is (we think) we know.25 This text on organizational behavior has the goal of helping today’s and tomorrow’s managers make the transition to the new paradigm. Some of the new paradigm characteristics include Chapter 2’s coverage of globalization, diversity, and ethics; Chapter 3 on the organizational context of design and culture; and Chapter 4 on reward systems. The new paradigm sets the stage for the study, understanding, and application of the timetested micro cognitive processes (Chapters 5–7), dynamics (Chapters 8–11), and the final part on managing and leading for high performance (Chapters 12–14). However, before getting directly into the rest of the text, we must know why management needs a new perspective to help meet the environmental challenges and the shift to the new paradigm. We must gain an appreciation of the historical background, methodology, and theoretical frameworks that serve as the basis of this text’s perspective and model for organizational behavior. A NEW PERSPECTIVE FOR MANAGEMENT How is management going to meet the environmental challenges and paradigm shift outlined above? Management is generally considered to have three major dimensions— technical, conceptual, and human. The technical dimension consists of the manager’s functional expertise in accounting or engineering or marketing and increasingly in information technology. There seems little question that today’s managers are competent in their functional specialization. Overall, however, although managers are certainly more aware and becoming competent in their functional/technical component, few today would question that, at least in the past, most practicing managers either slighted the conceptual and human dimensions of their jobs or made some overly simplistic assumptions. Following the assumptions that pioneering management scholar Douglas McGregor labeled many years ago as Theory X, most managers thought, and many still think, that their employees were basically lazy, that they were interested only in money, and that if you could make them happy, they would be high performers. When such Theory X assumptions were accepted, the human problems facing management were relatively clear-cut and easy to solve. All management had to do was devise monetary incentive plans, ensure job security, and provide good working conditions; morale would then be high, and good performance would result. It was as simple as one, two, three. Human relations experts, industrial/ Chapter 1 Introduction to Organizational Behavior: An Evidence-Based Approach 11 organizational psychologists, and industrial engineers supported this approach, and human resource managers implemented it. Unfortunately, this approach no longer works with the current environmental demands under the new paradigm. Although good pay, job security, and working conditions are necessary, it is now evident that such a simplistic approach falls far short of providing a meaningful solution to the complex challenges facing today’s human resource management. For example, a recent report in The Economist in reference to McGregor’s Theories X and Y include that “companies are coming to realize that knowledge workers, who have been identified as the creators of future wealth, thrive only under Theory Y. Theory X is becoming extinct.”26 The major fault with the traditional approach is that it overlooks and oversimplifies far too many aspects of the problem. Human behavior at work is much more complicated and diverse than is suggested by the economic-security–working-conditions approach. The new perspective assumes that employees are extremely complex and that there is a need for theoretical understanding backed by rigorous empirical research before applications can be made for managing people effectively. In the academic world, transition has now been completed. The traditional human relations approach no longer has a dominant role in business and applied psychology education. Few people would question that the organizational behavior approach, with its accompanying body of knowledge and applications, dominates the behavioral approach to management education now and will do so in the foreseeable future. Unfortunately, still only a minority of practicing managers and their organization cultures really buy into, fully implement, and then stick with this research-based organizational behavior approach to management practice. Stanford professor Jeff Pfeffer has summarized the status of the organizational behavior approach to real-world management as a “one-eighth” situation.27 By one-eighth he means that roughly half of today’s managers really believe and buy into the importance of the human side of enterprise and that the people are truly the competitive advantage of their organizations. Taken a step further, however, only about half of those who believe really do something about it. Thus, he says that only about one-fourth are fully implementing the high performance work practices (HPWPs) that flow from organizational behavior theory and research—such as pay for performance, self-managed teams, 360 degree (multisource) feedback systems, behavioral management, and investing in psychological capital. Most organizations have tried one or a few of the approaches and techniques emphasized in the chapters of this text, but only about a fourth fully implement the whole approach. So now that we are down to one-fourth, where does the one-eighth come from? Well, Pfeffer estimates that only about one-half of the one-fourth who implement the approach stick with it over time. Thus, only about one-eighth (1⁄2 ⫻ 1⁄2 ⫻ 1⁄2 ⫽ 1⁄8) of today’s organizations believe it, do it, and stick with it (the “3 Its”). The so-called oneeighth organizations have as their organizational cultural values the importance of human capital and the techniques in place to carry it out over time. Importantly, as Pfeffer well documents in his book Human Equation, these one-eighth organizations are world class, the best in the world—such as General Electric, Southwest Airlines, Google, Gallup, and SAS (the software development firm). Today there is ample accumulated research findings and documented practices of the best firms to prove the value of the human factor. Pfeffer and Sutton felt compelled to try to explain why most managers today know this importance and how to implement the approach to improve organizational performance, but still are not doing it (i.e., The Knowing-Doing Gap).28 They identify five sources that seem to prevent the majority of managers from effective implementation and sustainability: (1) hollow talk, (2) debilitating fear, (3) destructive internal competition, (4) poorly designed and complex measurement systems, and (5) mindless reliance on precedent. They are convinced that if these obstacles (i.e., resistance to 12 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context change) can be overcome, then “Competitive advantage comes from being able to do something others don’t do. When most companies are stuck talking about what should be done, those that get down to business and actually do will emerge as star performers.”29 This new perspective is now called evidence-based management or simply EBM and, as indicated by the subtitle, is the approach taken by this text. EVIDENCE-BASED MANAGEMENT Although the academic study and research of management in general and organizational behavior in particular is thriving (e.g., membership in the academic professional association Academy of Management has doubled in the past 10 years), there is growing concern that the divide, the gap, between theory/research and practice seems to be widening. As noted in the introductory comments of a special issue of the Academy of Management Journal, devoted to the problem, “It is hardly news that many organizations do not implement practices that research has shown to be positively associated with employee productivity and firm financial performance,” and this “gap between science and practice is so persistent and pervasive that some have despaired of its ever being narrowed.”30 The problem largely comes from the fact that when it comes to people, everyone is an expert. However, management academics add to the gap by too often concentrating only on the creation of knowledge by rigorous scientific methods and pay too little attention on the translation and diffusion of research findings to practice.31 Both management consultants and journalists (and popular book authors) also contribute to the problem. Too often consultants tend to conduct “in house” (not peer-reviewed scientific process) research and depend only on narrow personal or client experience, and the journalists tell interesting stories and make interpretations based on some facts, but also depend too much on limited anecdotes and personal experience.32 Obviously, the bridge to help close the theory/research-practice gap must be built from both sides, practice and academic. Traditionally, practitioners have neither had the time nor the desire to read and translate rigorous academic research and academics have not had the time, desire, nor talent to write (translate the research) for practitioners.33 In other words, practitioners must take on more of a “Practitioner-Scientist” role and academics must assume a more “Scientist-Practitioner” role. This movement to not only recognize, but also do something about what Pfeffer and Sutton called the “Knowing-Doing Gap,” is the recently emerging movement toward evidence-based management (EBM). Drawing from how professions such as education and especially medicine have handled this similar gap problem, Denise Rousseau in her recent presidential speech to the Academy of Management called for the field to take an evidence-based approach. She defined evidence-based management or EBM as “translating principles based on best evidence into organizational practices. Through evidence-based management, practicing managers develop into experts who make organizational decisions informed by social science and organizational research—part of the zeitgeist moving professional decisions away from personal preference and unsystematic experience toward those based on the best available scientific evidence.”34 The historical roots for this EBM can be traced back to one of the founding fathers of social psychology, Kurt Lewin, who astutely observed many years ago that there is nothing so practical as a good theory and “No action without research, no research without action.”35 Following this sage advice, advocates of EBM stress the need to refocus management education based on valid theory and research, translated for effective practice. Chapter 1 Introduction to Organizational Behavior: An Evidence-Based Approach 13 As indicated, this text from the beginning and through subsequent editions has been known for and prided itself on the theory and research foundation for everything presented. Whereas other texts typically have no theoretical framework and relatively few research citations per chapter, this text has a theoretical model to tie all the chapters together (presented at the end of this chapter) and a great number (in some cases over two hundred) of research citations in each chapter. In other words, this text takes an EBM approach to contribute to the reader/student to become a Practitioner-Scientist. The starting point in this journey of closing the science-practice gap and becoming a Practitioner-Scientist is to have an understanding and appreciation of history and research methods. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: THE HAWTHORNE STUDIES Most of today’s organizational behavior texts have dropped any reference to history. Yet, the position taken in this evidence-based approach is that history always has important lessons to teach, and as was recently brought out again, “It is an interesting phenomenon that that which is touted as fundamentally ‘new management practice’ is essentially the readapting of existing ‘old management truths.’”36 There is no question that the early practicing management pioneers, such as Henri Fayol, Henry Ford, Alfred P. Sloan, and even the scientific managers at the end of the nineteenth century such as Frederick W. Taylor, recognized the behavioral side of management. However, they did not emphasize the human dimension; they let it play only a minor role in comparison with the roles of hierarchical structure, specialization, and the management functions of planning and controlling. An example would be the well-known Nobel Prize–winning French engineer turned executive Henri Fayol. About the time of World War I Fayol headed up what was at that time the largest coalmining firm in Europe. Writing the generally considered first book about management, he emphasized that the purpose of the organization was to get the work done in specialized, machinelike functions. He did not emphasize that the organization is made up of people; it is not a machine. Yet, perhaps the most widely recognized management expert in modern times, Peter Drucker, stated, “The organization is, above all, social. It is people.”37 There were varied and complex reasons for the emergence of the importance of the organization as a social entity, but it is the famous Hawthorne studies that provide historical roots for the notion of a social organization made up of people and mark the generally recognized starting point for the academic field of organizational behavior. The Illumination Studies: A Serendipitous Discovery In 1924, the studies started at the huge Hawthorne Works of the Western Electric Company outside of Chicago. The initial illumination studies attempted to examine the relationship between light intensity on the shop floor of manual work sites and employee productivity. A test group and a control group were used. The test group in an early phase showed no increase or decrease in output in proportion to the increase or decrease of illumination. The control group with unchanged illumination increased output by the same amount overall as the test group. Subsequent phases brought the level of light down to moonlight intensity; the workers could barely see what they were doing, but productivity increased. The results were baffling to the researchers. Obviously, some variables in the experiment were not being held constant or under control. Something besides the level of illumination was causing the change in productivity. This something, of course, was the complex human variable. 14 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context It is fortunate that the illumination experiments did not end up in the wastebasket. Those responsible for the Hawthorne studies had enough foresight and spirit of scientific inquiry to accept the challenge of looking beneath the surface of the apparent failure of the experiments. In a way, the results of the illumination experiments were a serendipitous discovery, which, in research, is an accidental discovery. The classic example of serendipity is the breakthrough for penicillin that occurred when Sir Alexander Fleming accidentally discovered green mold on the side of a test tube. That the green mold was not washed down the drain and that the results of the illumination experiments were not thrown into the trash can be credited to the researchers’ not being blinded by the unusual or seemingly worthless results of their experimentation. The serendipitous results of the illumination experiments provided the impetus for the further study of human behavior in the workplace. Subsequent Phases of the Hawthorne Studies The illumination studies were followed by a study in the relay room, where operators assembled relay switches. This phase of the study tried to test specific variables, such as length of workday, rest breaks, and method of payment. The results were basically the same as those of the illumination studies: each test period yielded higher productivity than the previous one. Even when the workers were subjected to the original conditions of the experiment, productivity increased. The conclusion was that the independent variables (rest pauses and so forth) were not by themselves causing the change in the dependent variable (output). As in the illumination experiments, something was still not being controlled that was causing the change in the dependent variable (output). Still another phase was the bank wiring room study. As in the preceding relay room experiments, the bank wirers were placed in a separate test room. The researchers were reluctant to segregate the bank wiring group because they recognized that this would alter the realistic factory environment they were attempting to simulate. However, for practical reasons, the research team decided to use a separate room. Unlike the relay room experiments, the bank wiring room study involved no experimental changes once the study had started. Instead, an observer and an interviewer gathered objective data for study. Of particular interest was the fact that the department’s regular supervisors were used in the bank wiring room. Just as in the department out on the factory floor, these supervisors’ main function was to maintain order and control. The results of the bank wiring room study were essentially opposite to those of the relay room experiments. In the bank wiring room there were not the continual increases in productivity that occurred in the relay room. Rather, output was actually restricted by the bank wirers. By scientific management analysis—for example, time and motion study—the industrial engineers had arrived at a standard of 7,312 terminal connections per day. This represented 21⁄2 equipments (banks). The workers had a different brand of rationality. They decided that 2 equipments was a “proper” day’s work. Thus, 21⁄2 equipments represented the management norm for production, but 2 equipments was the informal group norm and the actual output. The researchers determined that the informal group norm of 2 equipments represented restriction of output rather than a lack of ability to produce at the company standard of 21⁄2 equipments. Of particular interest from a group dynamics standpoint were the social pressures used to gain compliance with the group norms. The incentive system dictated that the more a worker produced, the more money the worker would earn. Also, the best producers would be laid off last, and thus they could be more secure by producing more. Yet, in the face of this management rationale, almost all the workers restricted output. Chapter 1 Introduction to Organizational Behavior: An Evidence-Based Approach 15 Social ostracism, ridicule, and name-calling were the major sanctions used by the group to enforce this restriction. In some instances, actual physical pressure in the form of a game called “binging” was applied. In the game, a worker would be hit as hard as possible, with the privilege of returning one “bing,” or hit. Forcing rate-busters to play the game became an effective sanction. These group pressures had a tremendous impact on all the workers. Social ostracism was more effective in gaining compliance with the informal group norm than money and security were in attaining the scientifically derived management norm. Implications of the Hawthorne Studies Despite some obvious philosophical,38 theoretical,39 and methodological limitations by today’s standards of research (which will be covered next), the Hawthorne studies did provide some interesting insights that contributed to a better understanding of human behavior in organizations.40 For instance, one interesting aspect of the Hawthorne studies is the contrasting results obtained in the relay room and the bank wiring room. In the relay room, production continually increased throughout the test period, and the relay assemblers were very positive. The opposite was true in the bank wiring room; blatant restriction of output was practiced by disgruntled workers. Why the difference in these two phases of the studies? One clue to the answer to this question may be traced to the results of a questionnaire administered to the subjects in the relay room. The original intent of the questions was to determine the health and habits of the workers. Their answers were generally inconclusive except that all the operators indicated they felt “better” in the relay test room. A follow-up questionnaire then asked about specific items in the test room situation. In discussions of the Hawthorne studies, the follow-up questionnaire results, in their entirety, usually are not mentioned. Most discussions cite the subjects’ unanimous preference for working in the test room instead of the regular department. Often overlooked, however, are the workers’ explanations for their choice. In order of preference, the workers gave the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Small group Type of supervision Earnings Novelty of the situation Interest in the experiment Attention received in the test room41 It is important to note that novelty, interest, and attention were relegated to the fourth, fifth, and sixth positions. These last three areas usually are associated with the famous “Hawthorne effect.” Many social scientists imply that the increases in the relay room productivity can be attributed solely to the fact that the participants in the study were given special attention and that they were enjoying a novel, interesting experience. This is labeled the Hawthorne effect and is, of course, a real problem with all human experimental subjects. But to say that all the results of the relay room experiments were due to such an effect on the subjects seems to ignore the important impact of the small group, the type of supervision, and earnings. All these variables (that is, experimental design, group dynamics, styles of leadership and supervision, and rewards), and much more, separate the old human relations movement and an evidence-based approach to the field of organizational behavior. So do the refinement and fine-tuning of the research methodology used to accumulate meaningful evidence about organizational behavior. 16 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context RESEARCH METHODOLOGY TO DETERMINE VALID EVIDENCE An evidence-based approach to organizational behavior depends on rigorous research methodology. Accumulating valid evidence of why people behave the way they do is a very delicate and complex process. In fact, the problems are so great that many scholars, chiefly from the physical and engineering sciences, argue that there can be no precise science of behavior. They maintain that humans cannot be treated like chemical or physical elements; they cannot be effectively controlled or manipulated. For example, the critics state that, under easily controllable conditions, 2 parts hydrogen to 1 part oxygen will always result in water and that no analogous situation exists in human behavior. Human variables such as motives, bias, expectations, learning, perception, values, and even a Hawthorne effect on the part of both subject and investigator confound the controls that are attempted. For these reasons, behavioral scientists in general and organizational behavior researchers in particular are often on the defensive and must be very careful to comply with accepted methods of science.42 The Overall Scientific Perspective Behavioral scientists in general and organizational behavior researchers in particular strive to attain the following hallmarks of any science: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The overall purposes are understanding/explanation, prediction, and control. The definitions are precise and operational. The measures are reliable and valid. The methods are systematic. The results are cumulative. Figure 1.1 summarizes the relationship between the practical behavioral problems and unanswered questions facing today’s managers, research methodology, and the existing body of valid evidence. When a question arises or a problem evolves, the first place to turn for an answer is the existing body of valid evidence. It is possible that the question can be answered immediately or the problem solved without going any further. Unfortunately, the answer is not always found in the body of valid evidence and must be discovered through appropriate research methodology. Although behavioral science in general compared to the physical and biological sciences is relatively young, and the field of organizational behavior is even younger—its FIGURE 1.1 Simple Relationships Among Problems, Methodology, and Valid Evidence. BODY OF VALID EVIDENCE Research methodology Problems and questions about organizational behavior Chapter 1 Introduction to Organizational Behavior: An Evidence-Based Approach 17 direct origins really go back only to the early 1970s—there is now enough accumulated valid evidence that organizational behavior principles can be provided for the effective management of human behavior in organizations. As explained in the preface, this is the only text that presents evidence-based principles of organizational behavior at the end of each chapter. Interestingly, it is the research technique of meta-analysis providing the quantitative synthesis and testing of all available studies that permits confidently stating these evidence-based principles. As Williams points out, meta-analysis “shows what works and the conditions under which management techniques may work better or worse in the ‘real world.’ Meta-analysis is based on the simple idea that if one study shows that a management technique doesn’t work and another study shows that it does, an average of those results is probably the best estimate of how well that management practice works (or doesn’t work).”43 Although there are now enough research studies in organizational behavior to have this evidence-based text, it is also recognized that many questions and problems in organizational behavior cannot yet be answered or solved directly by existing evidence or, as the accompanying OB in Action: Forget Going with Your Gut points out, certainly not just common sense. A working knowledge of research methodology becomes especially important to practitioner-scientists, both as knowledgeable and critical consumers of the rapidly expanding literature reporting the results of organizational behavior research and as practitioner-scientists who are capable of applying appropriate research methods to solve difficult problems in the workplace. Starting with Theory Although theory is often devalued as being unrealistic and overly complicated by practitioners, as noted earlier Lewin may have been right when he declared there is nothing as practical as a good theory. As the editors of the Journal of Applied Psychology recently reminded, “Theory tells us why something occurs, not simply what occurs.”44 Yet students and practitioners of organizational behavior are usually “turned off ” by all the theories that pervade the field. The reason for all the theories, of course, is the still relative newness of the field and the complexity and multidimensionality of the variables involved.45 The purpose of any theory, including those found in organizational behavior, is to explain and predict the phenomenon in question; theories allow the researcher to deduce logical propositions or hypotheses that can be tested by acceptable research designs. However, as Don Hambrick points out, “A theory, by its very nature, is a simplification of reality. When we develop or test theories, we inevitably exclude an array of factors that might potentially affect the phenomena under examination.”46 Thus, theories are ever changing on the basis of the empirical results. In other words, theory and research go hand in hand in evidencebased management. After pleading for more and stronger theory in organizational behavior, Sutton and Staw have pointed out that references, data, lists of variables or constructs, diagrams, and hypotheses are not theory. Instead, they note that theory is the answer to queries of why. Theory is about the connections among phenomena, a story about why acts, events, structure, and thoughts occur. Theory emphasizes the nature of causal relationships, identifying what comes first as well as the timing of such events. Strong theory, in our view, delves into the underlying processes so as to understand the systematic reasons for a particular occurrence or non-occurrence.47 Such theorizing is not easy. “Theorizing takes scientists on mental journeys between the world of observed events, such as falling apples, and the imagined world of hypothetical concepts, such as gravity. Bridging gaps between concrete experience and abstract OB in Action: Forget Going with Your Gut For the average patient, the fact that “evidence-based medicine” is now one of the hottest forces in health care might seem pretty absurd. After all, isn’t all medicine based on hard facts? Actually, no. To make decisions, many physicians rely on clinical experience, conventional wisdom passed down through training, and sometimes, outdated research. The evidence-based medicine movement, which has been gaining traction in hospitals and among insurers in recent years, calls for better integration of the most current, most carefully designed research into everyday medicine. The practice of business management could use a similar movement, argue Jeffrey Pfeffer, a professor of organizational behavior at Stanford University’s Graduate School of Business, and Robert I. Sutton, a professor of management and engineering at Stanford. In their densely researched book, Hard Facts, Dangerous Half-Truths & Total Nonsense: Profiting from EvidenceBased Management, the authors fret that managers’ fondness for casual benchmarking (“GE does it? We should too!”), past practices, and pet ideologies may hold serious harm for their organizations. At a time when intuition is on the ascent, thanks in part to Malcolm Gladwell and his best-selling Blink, Hard Facts is a useful reminder that the gut is often trumped by the facts. The book’s deconstruction of some of the most widely applied management truisms and fads is thought-provoking but will leave some managers, especially those in metrics-driven cultures, unsatisfied. The authors are at their best when dispelling the copycat tactics managers use for evaluating and rewarding talent. Take forced ranking, for instance. Popularized by General Electric Co. under Jack Welch, the process requires managers to divide employees into the top 20%, middle 70%, and bottom 10% of performers, often culling the lowest group. Practiced by as many as one-third of companies today, the authors say the approach has many flaws. A 2004 survey of more than 200 human-resource managers found that even though more than half of them used forced ranking, they felt it resulted in lower productivity, skepticism, reduced collaboration, and impaired morale. Breaking up teams by automatically firing the bottom 10% of workers can even be dangerous: Citing a National Transportation Safety Board study, the authors note that 73% of commercial airline pilots’ serious mistakes happen on crews’ first day together. Pfeffer and Sutton also make a persuasive case against paying widely divergent rewards to high and low performers, a popular practice in talent management today. Many studies show that tying pay to performance can drive good results when individuals are working solo. But the same can’t be said for the collaborative, interconnected teams that now make up most companies. The authors cite a 2005 study that surveyed senior management groups at 67 publicly traded firms. Those with greater gaps between the best- and worst-paid executives also had weaker financial performance. Managers who implement wide pay differences in heavily team-based groups, argue Pfeffer and Sutton, forget that people get a lot of fulfillment from their social bonds at work, and creating such distinctions often diminishes trust. concepts presents a challenge.”48 As Sumantra Ghoshal noted, “Our theories and ideas have done much to strengthen the management practices that we are all now so loudly condemning.”49 There is also the danger that theories can become self-fulfilling without empirical verification. As recently noted by Ferraro, Pfeffer, and Sutton, “Theories can ‘win’ in the marketplace for ideas, independent of their empirical validity, to the extent their assumptions and language become taken for granted and normatively valued, therefore creating conditions that make them come ‘true’.”50 However, as Karl Weick, perhaps the most widely recognized theorist in organizational behavior, notes: a good theory explains, predicts, and delights.51 The Use of Research Designs Research design is at the very heart of scientific methodology and evidence-based management; it can be used to answer practical questions or to test theoretical propositions/ hypotheses. The three designs most often used in organizational behavior research today are the experiment, the case, and the survey. All three have played important roles in the development of EBM. The experimental design is borrowed largely from psychology, 18 Chapter 1 Introduction to Organizational Behavior: An Evidence-Based Approach 19 where it is used extensively; the case and survey designs have traditionally played a bigger role in sociology. All three designs can be used effectively for researching organizational behavior. A primary aim of any research design is to establish a cause-and-effect relationship. The experimental design offers the best possibility of accomplishing this goal. All other factors being equal, most organizational behavior researchers prefer this method of testing hypotheses. Simply defined, an experiment involves the manipulation of independent variables to measure their effect on, or the change in, dependent variables, while everything else is held constant or controlled. If possible, an experimental group and a control group are randomly assigned so that the participants are equivalent. The experimental group receives the input of the independent variables (the intervention), and the control group does not. Any measured change in the dependent variable in the experimental group can be attributed to the independent variable, assuming that no change has occurred in any other variable and that no change has occurred in the control group. The controls employed are the key to the successful use of the experimental design. If all intervening variables are held constant or equal, the researcher can conclude with a high degree of confidence that the independent variable caused the change in the dependent variable. The Validity of Studies The value of any evidence is dependent on its validity. In particular, research results must have both internal validity and external validity in order to make a meaningful contribution to evidence-based management. A study has internal validity if there are no plausible alternative explanations of the reported results other than those reported. The threats to internal validity include uncontrolled intervening events that occur between the time the preexperiment measurement is taken and the time the postexperiment measurement is taken or does A cause B, or does B cause A, a problem with correlational studies. The threats to internal validity can be overcome with careful design of the study. However, this is not always true of external validity, which is concerned with the generalizability of the results obtained. In order for a study to have external validity, the results must be applicable to a wide range of people and situations. Field studies tend to have better external validity than laboratory studies because at least the study takes place in a real setting. In general, the best strategy is to use a number of different designs or mixed methods (including qualitative research) to answer the same question. The weaknesses of the various designs can offset one another and the problem of common method variance (the results are due to the design, rather than the variables under study) can be overcome. Normally, the research would start with a laboratory study to isolate and manipulate the variable or variables in question. This would be followed by an attempt to verify the findings in a field setting. This progression from the laboratory to the field may lead to the soundest conclusions. However, free observation in the real setting should probably precede laboratory investigations of organizational behavior problems or questions. Specifically, in recent years qualitative methods are being suggested as a starting point or supplement, if not an alternative, to quantitatively based and statistically analyzed methods of researching organizational behavior. Van Maanen explains that this qualitative approach “seeks to describe, decode, translate, and otherwise come to terms with the meaning, not the frequency, of certain more or less naturally occurring phenomena in the social world.”52 Multiple designs and multiple measures have the best chance for valid, meaningful research contributing to an evidence-based approach to organizational behavior. 20 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context FIGURE 1.2 The Relationship of Organizational Behavior to Other Closely Related Disciplines. THEORETICAL OT (Organization theory) OB (Organizational behavior) APPLIED OD (Organization development) HRM (Human resource management) MACRO MICRO DEFINING ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR With a rich historical background such as the Hawthorne studies and using an accepted scientific methodology as briefly outlined above, the field of organizational behavior is now an accepted academic discipline. As with any other relatively new academic endeavor, however, there have been some rough spots and sidetracks along the way. Besides the healthy academic controversies over theoretical approach or research findings, perhaps the biggest problem that organizational behavior had to overcome was an identity crisis. Early on, the field of organizational behavior had to answer questions such as: Is it an attempt to replace all management with behavioral science concepts and techniques? How, if at all, does it differ from traditional applied or industrial psychology? Fortunately, these questions have now been answered to the satisfaction of most management academicians, behavioral scientists, and management practitioners. Figure 1.2 shows in very general terms the relationships between and emphases of organizational behavior (OB) and the related disciplines of organization theory (OT), organization development (OD), and human resource management (HRM). As shown, OB tends to be more theoretically oriented and at the micro level of analysis. Specifically, OB draws from many theoretical frameworks of the behavioral sciences that are focused on understanding and explaining individual and group behavior in organizations. As with other sciences, OB accumulates evidence and tests theories by accepted scientific methods of research. In summary, organizational behavior can be defıned as the understanding, prediction, and management of human behavior in organizations. THEORETICAL FOUNDATION FOR ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR Although organizational behavior is extremely complex and includes many inputs and dimensions, the cognitive, behavioristic, and social cognitive theories can be used to develop an overall framework for an evidence-based approach. After the major theories are briefly summarized, the last section of the chapter presents a model that is used to conceptually link and structure the rest of the text. Cognitive Framework The cognitive approach to human behavior has many sources of input. The micro-oriented chapters in the next part provide some of this background. For now, however, it can be said simply that the cognitive approach gives people much more “credit” than the other Chapter 1 Introduction to Organizational Behavior: An Evidence-Based Approach 21 approaches. The cognitive approach emphasizes the positive and freewill aspects of human behavior and uses concepts such as expectancy, demand, and intention. Cognition, which is the basic unit of the cognitive framework, can be simply defined as the act of knowing an item of information. Under this framework, cognitions precede behavior and constitute input into the person’s thinking, perception, problem solving, and information processing. Concepts such as cognitive maps can be used as pictures or visual aids in comprehending a person’s “understanding of particular, and selective, elements of the thoughts (rather than thinking) of an individual, group or organization.”53 The classic work of Edward Tolman can be used to represent the cognitive theoretical approach. Although Tolman believed behavior to be the appropriate unit of analysis, he felt that behavior is purposive, that it is directed toward a goal. In his laboratory experiments, he found that animals learned to expect that certain events would follow one another. For example, animals learned to behave as if they expected food when a certain cue appeared. Thus, Tolman believed that learning consists of the expectancy that a particular event will lead to a particular consequence. This cognitive concept of expectancy implies that the organism is thinking about, or is conscious or aware of, the goal. Thus, Tolman and others espousing the cognitive approach felt that behavior is best explained by these cognitions. Contemporary psychologists carefully point out that a cognitive concept such as expectancy does not reflect a guess about what is going on in the mind; it is a term that describes behavior. In other words, the cognitive and behavioristic theories are not as opposite as they appear on the surface and sometimes are made out to be—for example, Tolman considered himself a behaviorist. Yet, despite some conceptual similarities, there has been a controversy throughout the years in the behavioral sciences on the relative contributions of the cognitive versus the behavioristic framework. As often happens in other academic fields, debate has gone back and forth through the years.54 Because of the recent advances from both theory development and research findings, there has been what some have termed a “cognitive explosion” in the field of psychology. For example, an analysis of articles published in the major psychology journals found by far the greatest emphasis is on the cognitive school over the behavioral school starting in the 1970s.55 Applied to the field of organizational behavior, a cognitive approach has traditionally dominated units of analysis such as personality, perception, and attitudes (Chapter 5), motivation and goal setting (Chapter 6), and positive constructs such as psychological capital (Chapter 7). Recently, there has been renewed interest in the role that cognitions can play in organizational behavior in terms of advancement in both theory and research on social cognition. This social cognitive process can be a unifying theoretical framework for both cognition and behaviorism. However, before getting into the specifics of social cognitive theory, which serves as the conceptual framework for this text, it is necessary to have an understanding of the behavioristic approach as well. Behavioristic Framework Chapter 12 discusses in detail the behavioristic theory in psychology and its application to organizational behavior. Its historical roots can be traced to the work of Ivan Pavlov and John B. Watson. These pioneering behaviorists stressed the importance of dealing with observable behaviors instead of the elusive mind that had preoccupied earlier psychologists. They used classical conditioning experiments to formulate the stimulusresponse (S-R) explanation of human behavior. Both Pavlov and Watson felt that behavior could be best understood in terms of S-R. A stimulus elicits a response. They 22 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context concentrated mainly on the impact of the stimulus and felt that learning occurred when the S-R connection was made. Modern behaviorism marks its beginnings with the work of B. F. Skinner. Deceased for a number of years, Skinner is widely recognized for his contributions to psychology. For example, a recent study drawing from publication citations and a large survey of psychologists ranked Skinner as the most influential psychologist of the twentieth century.56 He felt that the early behaviorists helped explain respondent behaviors (those behaviors elicited by stimuli) but not the more complex operant behaviors. In other words, the S-R approach helped explain physical reflexes; for example, when stuck by a pin (S), the person will flinch (R), or when tapped below the kneecap (S), the person will extend the lower leg (R). On the other hand, Skinner found through his operant conditioning experiments that the consequences of a response could better explain most behaviors than eliciting stimuli could. He emphasized the importance of the response-stimulus (R-S) relationship. The organism has to operate on the environment (thus the term operant conditioning) in order to receive the desirable consequence. The preceding stimulus does not cause the behavior in operant conditioning; it serves as a cue to emit the behavior. For Skinner and the behaviorists, behavior is a function of its contingent environmental consequences. Both classical and operant conditioning and the important role of reinforcing consequences are given detailed attention in Chapter 12. For now, however, it is important to understand that the behavioristic approach is environmentally based. It posits that cognitive processes such as thinking, expectancies, and perception may exist but are not needed to predict and control or manage behavior. However, as in the case of the cognitive approach, which also includes behavioristic concepts, some modern behaviorists feel that cognitive variables can be behaviorized.57 However, the social cognitive theory that has emerged in recent years incorporating both cognitive and behavioristic concepts and principles may be the most unifying and comprehensive foundation for an evidence-based approach to organizational behavior. Social Cognitive Framework The cognitive approach has been accused of being mentalistic, and the behavioristic approach has been accused of being deterministic. Cognitive theorists argue that the S-R model, and to a lesser degree the R-S model, is much too mechanistic an explanation of human behavior. A strict S-R interpretation of behavior seems justifiably open to the criticism of being too mechanistic, but because of the scientific approach that has been meticulously employed by behaviorists, the operant model in particular has made a significant contribution to the study and meaning of human behavior58 and in turn an evidence-based approach to organizational behavior. The same can be said of the cognitive approach. Much research has been done to verify its importance as an explanation of human behavior in general and organizational behavior in particular. Instead of polarization and unconstructive criticism between the two approaches, it now seems time to recognize that each can make an important contribution to the understanding, prediction, and control of organizational behavior. The social cognitive approach tries to integrate the contributions of both approaches and serves as the foundation for an evidence-based approach to organizational behavior. About 30 years ago we (Davis and Luthans) proposed a social learning approach to organizational behavior,59 and over 25 years ago we (Luthans and Kreitner) suggested a social learning approach to organizational behavior modification (O.B. Mod.).60 Based on the work of Albert Bandura61 and our own theory building and application to Chapter 1 Introduction to Organizational Behavior: An Evidence-Based Approach 23 FIGURE 1.3 ORGANIZATIONAL PARTICIPANTS A Social Learning Approach to Organizational Behavior. Cognitive representations of reality help guide organizational behavior ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR Participants control their own behavior to the extent that they rely on cognitive supports and manage relevant environmental cues and consequences Much of complex behavior is acquired by directly observing and imitating others in the surrounding environment ORGANIZATIONAL ENVIRONMENT organizational behavior, social learning theory provided the conceptual framework for the 3rd to 8th editions of this text. Social learning takes the position that behavior can best be explained in terms of a continuous reciprocal interaction among cognitive, behavioral, and environmental determinants. The person and the environmental situation do not function as independent units but, in conjunction with the behavior itself, reciprocally interact to determine behavior. Bandura explains that “it is largely through their actions that people produce the environmental conditions that affect their behavior in a reciprocal fashion. The experiences generated by behavior also partly determine what a person becomes and can do, which, in turn, affects subsequent behavior.”62 The triangular model shown in Figure 1.3 takes this social learning work of Bandura and translates it into relevant units of analysis and variables in organizational behavior. Bandura has taken his social learning and developed it into the more comprehensive social cognitive theory (SCT),63 and we (Stajkovic and Luthans) in turn have translated this SCT into the theoretical foundation for organizational behavior.64 SCT is much more comprehensive than the cognitive or behavioristic pproaches by themselves and its predecessor, social learning theory. Specifically, SCT recognizes the importance of behaviorism’s contingent environmental consequences, but also includes cognitive processes of selfregulation. “The social part acknowledges the social origins of much of human thought and action (what individuals learn by being part of a society), whereas the cognitive portion recognizes the influential contribution of thought processes to human motivation, attitudes, and action.”65 Similar to the social learning model in Figure 1.3, SCT explains organizational behavior in terms of the bidirectional, reciprocal causation among the organizational participants (e.g., unique personality characteristics such as conscientiousness), the organizational environment (e.g., the perceived consequences such as contingent recognition from the supervisor or pay for increased productivity), and the organizational behavior itself (e.g., previous successful or unsuccessful sales approaches with customers). In other words, like social learning, in an SCT theoretical framework, organizational participants are at the same time both products (as in the behaviorism approach) and producers (as in the cognitive approach) of their personality, respective environments, and behaviors. Bandura goes beyond social learning with SCT by explaining the nature of the bidirectional reciprocal influences through the five basic human capabilities summarized in Figure 1.4. 24 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context FIGURE 1.4 The Basic Human Capabilities According to Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory (SCT). Source: Alexander D. Stajkovic and Fred Luthans, “Social Cognitive Theory and Self-Efficacy: Going beyond Traditional Motivational and Behavioral Approaches,” Organizational Dynamics, Spring 1998, p. 65. Symbolizing Employees process visual experiences (customer named Applegate) into cognitive models (apple) that then serve as guides for future actions (remembering his name easily). Forethought Observational Employees plan their actions (what I am going to do), anticipate the consequences (what I am going to get for it), and determine the level of desired performance (what my performance goal is). Employees learn by observing the performance of referent (peers or supervisors) and credible others (high performers), and the consequences they receive for their actions (what they get for it). Self-regulatory Employees selfcontrol their actions by setting internal standards (aspired level of performance) and by evaluating the discrepancy between the standard and the performance (where do I stand?) in order to improve it. Self-reflective Employees reflect back on their actions (how did I do?) and perceptually determine how strongly they believe they can successfully accomplish the task in the future given the context (0 – 100% certainty). FIGURE 1.5 A Conceptual Model for the Study of Organizational Behavior: An Evidence-Based Approach. Environmental Context 2. Globalization, Diversity, & Ethics Organizational Context 3. Design & Culture 4. Reward System Dynamics Social Cognitive Theory ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR 8. Communication & Decision Making 9. Stress & Conflict 10. Power & Politics 11. Groups & Teams Cognitive Processes 5. Personality, Perception, & Attitudes 6. Motivational Processes and Application 7. Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital Managing & Leading for High Performance 12. Behavioral Management 13. Leadership Processes 14. Great Leaders Chapter 1 Introduction to Organizational Behavior: An Evidence-Based Approach 25 THE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE TEXT The conceptual model used to structure this text is shown in Figure 1.5. As indicated, social cognitive theory is the foundation and consists of the reciprocal interaction among the environmental and organizational context (Part One, Chapters 2–4); cognitive processes (Part Two, Chapters 5–7); and, importantly, the organizational behavior itself, which produces and is a product of the environmental/organizational context and the cognitive processes. At a more macro level are graphic depiction of the dynamics (not necessarily the outcomes) of organizational behavior (Part Three, Chapters 8–10). Finally, at an applied level is the graphic representation of the role that managing and leading for high performance (Part Four, Chapters 11–14) play in the conceptual framework for organizational behavior. Obviously, this conceptual framework gives only a bare-bones sketch of organizational behavior rather than a full-blown explanation. Nevertheless, it can serve as a point of departure for how this text is organized. It helps explain why particular chapters are covered and how they relate to one another. As the chapters unfold, some of the fine points will become clearer and some of the seemingly simplistic, unsupported statements will begin to make more sense. Figure 1.5 serves merely as the welcoming mat to the study of the exciting, but still developing, field of organizational behavior. Summary This chapter first gives a brief overview of the significant challenges currently facing management. Besides the new workplace, environmental changes such as globalization and recognition and management of diversity and ethics represent a paradigm shift. This shift is characterized by new rules, new boundaries, and, importantly, new thinking and behaviors that are essential for organizations and managers to be successful or even survive. This new paradigm facing management requires a new perspective and not only an appreciation of the human, behavioral side of management but also apply the greatly expanding research findings for more effective practice. After first identifying the existing knowing-doing gap, the evidence-based approach used by this text over the years and the new call for evidencebased management (EBM) is summarized. The historical roots start this evidence-based approach to organizational behavior. The beginnings are usually attributed to the famous Hawthorne studies, which had several phases (illumination, relay, bank wiring studies) and often-overlooked implications for modern management. Whereas the Hawthorne studies are often unfairly dismissed because of methodological flaws, today’s organizational behavior field is characterized by rigorous scientific methodology. Both theory development and research designs are given considerable attention. Specifically, the attempt is made to eliminate or minimize the threats to internal validity through carefully designed experiments. Field studies are used over laboratory studies whenever possible in order to have more external (generalizable) validity. Because organizational behavior is a relatively new field, it must be precisely defined: the understanding, prediction, and management of human behavior in organizations. It is also important to see how OB (micro, theoretical) relates to other closely related disciplines such as organization theory or OT (macro, theoretical), organizational development or OD (macro, applied), and human resource management or HRM (micro, applied). Finally, it is important to provide a theoretical foundation to develop a specific model that can be used as a conceptual framework for this text. The cognitive, the behavioristic, and the more integrative social cognitive theories are used for such a foundation. The cognitive model gives the human being more “credit” and assumes that behavior is purposive and goal oriented. 26 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context Cognitive processes such as expectancy and perception help explain behavior. The behavioristic approach deals with observable behavior and the environmental contingencies of the behavior. Classical behaviorism explained behavior in terms of S-R, whereas more modern behaviorism gives increased emphasis to contingent consequences, or R-S. The social cognitive approach emphasizes that the person, the environment, and the behavior itself are in constant interaction with one another and reciprocally determine one another. This social cognitive approach incorporates both cognitive and behavioristic elements and is used as the theoretical foundation for the organizational behavior model used as the conceptual framework to structure this evidence-based text. Ending with Meta-Analytic Research Findings OB PRINCIPLE FOR EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE Because a growing number of important concepts and techniques have a stream of research findings, meta-analysis can be conducted on them. The meta-analysis results provide the basis for organizational behavior (OB) principles for effective evidence-based practice. Meta-Analysis Results: The end of each chapter will report the result of usually one but in some cases two or three representative meta-analyses. The stated principles, relevant to each chapter, are based on these meta-analytic findings. A results section will report the number of studies and participants and the meta-analytic average effect statistic d. Importantly, to make these metaanalytic results as user friendly as possible, the d effect size is transformed using Grissom’s (see source below) table to a percentage “probability of superior outcome of one treatment over another.” Besides this percentage probability evidence to support the “OB Principle,” this section will also briefly discuss any moderating contingencies that were found and give the full citation of the meta-analysis in a source line like that below from Grissom’s conversion of d to probability of success. Conclusion: Each chapter’s Ending with Meta-Analytic Research Findings is patterned after this presentation: statement of OB Principle for Evidence-Based Practice, Meta-Analysis Results, and Conclusion. The purpose of the conclusion is to tie the principle back to the chapter topic and make some final comments. The contribution of meta-analysis at this stage of development of the organizational behavior field is that it is able to draw overall, sound evidencebased conclusions (i.e., state principles) from a large number of studies (often over 100) and usually thousands of subjects. Instead of just choosing one study here or there to support (or not support) a statement, meta-analysis provides a quantitative summary of individual studies across an entire body of research evidence on a given concept (e.g., conscientiousness or self-efficacy) or technique (e.g., job characteristics model or organizational behavior modification). Many of the meta-analyses conducted to date on relevant topics in this text are included as being representative, but as research continues to accumulate, many more metaanalytically derived OB principles exist and will be forthcoming. Sources: Robert J. Grissom, “Probability of the Superior Outcome of One Treatment over Another,” Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 79, No. 2, 1994, pp. 314–316. For those wanting more information on meta-analysis, see: L. V. Hedges and I. Olkin, Statistical Methods for Meta Analysis, Academic Press, Chapter 1 Introduction to Organizational Behavior: An Evidence-Based Approach 27 San Diego, 1985 and J. E. Hunter and F. L. Schmidt, Methods of Meta-Analysis, Sage, Beverly Hills, Calif., 1995. For a critical analysis and limitations of meta-analysis, see: P. Bobko and E. F. Stone-Romero, “Meta-Analysis May Be Another Useful Tool, but It Is Not a Panacea,” in G. R. Ferris (Ed.), Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, Vol. 16, JAI Press, Stamford, Conn., 1998, 359–397. Finally, to gain insight into teaching organizational behavior through such a principles approach, see: Edwin A. Locke, “The Epistemological Side of Teaching Management: Teaching through Principles,” Academy of Management Learning and Education, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2002, pp. 195–205. Questions for Discussion and Review 1. What are some of the major challenges facing today’s and tomorrow’s organizations and management? Briefly describe these developments. 2. What is a paradigm? How will the paradigm shift affect management? What are the implications of this paradigm shift for organizational behavior? 3. Why do you think there is a “knowing-doing” gap and how can evidence-based management help close it? 4. Why do you feel the Hawthorne studies made such an important historical contribution to the study of organizational behavior? 5. Why are theory development and rigorous scientific methodology important to the field of organizational behavior? What role does validity play in the design of research studies? 6. How does organizational behavior relate to, or differ from, organizational development? Organization theory? Human resource management? 7. In your own words, identify and summarize the various theoretical frameworks for understanding organizational behavior. How does the social cognitive approach differ from the cognitive approach? How does the social cognitive approach differ from the behavioristic approach? 8. Explain the model for organizational behavior that is used in this text. Internet Exercise: Nonjobs or Telecommuting This chapter sets the tone for the new paradigm environment. One dimension of this environment has been the dramatic increase in the number of nonjob or “telecommuters,” those that work from home or at least outside the organization. Inexpensive computers, the changing nature of jobs, and workers’ demands for a more flexible schedule have all contributed to this trend. Go to http://www.tjobs.com/ and look at the jobs that they offer specifically designed around telecommuting. In fact, Putnam Investments has a page dedicated to jobs available at home. Visit their site at http://www.putnaminv.com/. Then, click on “career opportunities.” You may also want to visit the International Telework Association Council’s (ITAC) site at www.workingfromhome.com. You will find many current articles on telecommuting at http://www.harveynash.com/usa/. Browse through these sites, and consider the following questions. 1. Would you consider a job that kept you at home for a significant part of the workweek? What would be the advantages of this? Disadvantages? 2. As a manager, consider the challenges of managing those who work at home or virtually out of the organization. What are your challenges? Consider, for example, how to monitor performance, motivate workers, and help them manage workplace problems. 3. Do you think the trend toward telecommuting will increase or decrease in the coming years? What impact will this have on some of the major topics in this text? Be as specific as you can by looking at the table of contents and Figure 1.5. 28 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context Real Case: The Big Squeeze on Workers On his recent family vacation in Arizona, Peter Spina spent much of his time camped out under a palm tree while his kids splashed around in the Scottsdale Princess Hotel’s luxurious pool. Spina wasn’t lounging. He was working—hammering out deals on his cell phone in a mad dash to break new accounts at Vulcan Ventures Inc., where he’s publisher of The Sporting News. Spina says the downturn has forced him to work even longer hours than he did during the boom—about 15% more. Ditto for his sales force. Whereas once he had lots of bonus money to throw around, he now tries to make up for the tough slog by bringing popsicles to the office on hot days. The added hustling is one reason his team has racked up revenue gains of 46% this year in an abysmal ad market. “They’re working longer and harder,” says Spina. Much has been made of the recent upsurge in productivity. Although recessions usually bring slides in this efficiency measure, technology has made the economy more productive than ever before. But tell that to white-collar workers, and you’re likely to hear that the gains have come on their backs. Rather than bring relief, layoff survivors say, the downturn has only socked it to them more. They complain about managing the orphaned workloads of downsized colleagues, scouring new avenues for business, and fighting for high-profile posts so if the ax falls, it won’t hit them. “What we’re discovering is that in this early stage of recovery, not only are companies making people work harder, but, believe me, some people want to,” says J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. senior economist James E. Glassman. “They’re trying to protect their job security.” That gripping desperation is easy for companies to use in their favor. Mike Hewitt, director of client services at consulting firm Aquent, says he and his staff have been bending over backwards to meet with clients who don’t have any work for them so the company can get a jump on future business and be ready to roll when the rebound kicks in. But it’s not just fear that’s motivating today’s workplace. A number of other structural changes are also helping bosses to extract maximum productivity from their ranks. From the increased use of temps, to the reclassification of hourly workers into salaried employees ineligible for overtime pay, to the rise in variable pay that puts part of workers’ paychecks at risk, companies are now able to get more out of less. It’s hard to say just how much more, given the state of statistical record-keeping. The Bureau of Labor Statistics says overall weekly hours worked have dropped—in part due to manufacturers slashing hours. But economists say it’s impossible to draw an accurate picture from the BLS data. They note that the data is flawed because it often builds in an assumption that all levels of employees work 35 hours a week—managers and hourly staff alike. To which many economists reply: Come on. Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co. chief economist Stephen Roach, for example, believes the BLS numbers understate the number of hours worked, therefore overstating productivity. Still, whatever the numbers say, there’s no doubt that right now employees feel they have little choice but to accept the grueling loads. Despite some evidence of a rebound, the job market in many quarters is still weak. Job cuts are no longer a last resort in hard times but an ongoing tool for matching supply with demand. This is one reason some economists predict a replay, at least initially, of the early-1990s jobless recovery. Rather than scoop up more permanent hires at the first whiff of demand, economists say CEOs are likely to be leery, especially with economic data so mixed. Many have bad memories of boom-time hiring binges in which they took on mediocre people just to fill slots and then wound up having to pay weeks of costly severance. Instead, economists say CEOs are likely to focus first on extracting even more from their existing ranks until demand reaches a breaking point. The big question now, asks Mary Hammershock, vice-president for human resources for Silicon Valley’s Blue Martini Software, is “how much longer can you get people to do this when the upside has gone away?” Already, companies are looking first to bring in contract workers that they can quickly tap and zap without paying any benefits or severance. In fact, the temps have been the fastest growing sector of employment. And they aren’t accounted for as regular employees. This helps companies that use a lot of them, like Cisco Systems Inc., to drive up revenue per employee. The growing use of the just-in-time workforce is not the only means by which companies are priming the productivity pump. Workers complain that many employers are taking advantage of outdated labor laws by misclassifying them as salaried-exempt so they can skirt overtime pay. Already, Wal-Mart Stores, Taco Bell, Chapter 1 Introduction to Organizational Behavior: An Evidence-Based Approach 29 Starbucks, and U-Haul, among others, have been slapped with class actions. In the case of General Dynamics Corp., this resulted in a $100 million award that is now on appeal. At Farmer’s Insurance, employees got $90 million. Some employers are so worried about the issue that they are now doing wage-and-hour audits. Another potential productivity enhancer: incentive pay, which enables bosses to motivate people to work harder during tough times to make up for lost wages. General Electric Co. will soon start factoring customer performance into employee pay, putting an even greater chunk of compensation at risk. Under this system, if a customer’s business suffers, so does the GE employee’s paycheck. Yet even as they push existing employees, companies also have to think about what’s down the road—the likely return of tight labor markets and a replay of the 1990s’ battle for talent. Demographers and labor experts note that the recession merely masked the deep skills shortages lurking within the labor force. “It will be even worse than it was in 2000,” predicts Texas Instruments Inc. Chairman, CEO, and President Tom Engibous. Like many CEOs, Engibous faces the tough job of balancing the need to juice profits right now with the longer term goal of cultivating his choice employees. That’s why he has launched a “re-recruiting initiative” at TI, asking workers what they need—days off, new assignments, a different boss—to keep them satisfied right now. For companies that squeeze too hard, it probably already is too late. 1. Do you agree or disagree with the feeling of many downsizing survivors that increased productivity “comes on their backs”? What does this mean and how does this have implications for managing these employees? 2. What impact can employing temporary, just-in-time workers have for employers? For existing full-time employees? For the temporary workers? 3. On balance, on the basis of this case, do you believe the challenges facing the management of human resources will be easier or more difficult in the near future? Why? Organizational Behavior Case: How Is This Stuff Going to Help Me? Jane Arnold wants to be a manager. She enjoyed her accounting, finance, and marketing courses. Each of these provided her with some clear-cut answers. Now the professor in her organizational behavior course is telling her that there are really very few clear-cut answers when it comes to managing people. The professor has discussed some of the emerging challenges and the historical background and ways that behavioral science concepts play a big role in the course. Jane is very perplexed. She came to school to get answers on how to be an effective manager, but this course surely doesn’t seem to be heading in that direction. 1. How would you relieve Jane’s anxiety? How is a course in organizational behavior going to make her a better manager? What implications does an evidence-based approach have? 2. Why did the professor start off with a brief overview of emerging challenges? 3. How does a course in organizational behavior differ from courses in fields such as accounting, finance, or marketing? Organizational Behavior Case: Too Nice to People John has just graduated from the College of Business Administration at State University and has joined his family’s small business, which employs 25 semiskilled workers. During the first week on the job, his grandfather called him in and said: “John, I’ve had a chance to observe you working with our employees for the past two months and, although I hate to, I feel I must say something. You are just too nice to people. I know they taught you that human behavior stuff at the university, but it just doesn’t work here. I remember when we discussed the Hawthorne 30 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context studies when I was in school and everybody at the university seemed excited about them, but believe me, there is more to managing people than just being nice to them.” 1. How would you react to your grandfather’s comments if you were John? 2. Do you think John’s grandfather understood and interpreted the Hawthorne studies correctly? 3. What phases of management do you think John’s grandfather has gone through in this family business? Do you think he understands the significance of recent trends in the environment and how the new paradigm will affect his business? 4. How would you explain to your grandfather the new perspective that is needed and how the study of an evidence-based approach to organizational behavior will help the business be successful in the new paradigm? Organizational Behavior Case: Conceptual Model: Dream or Reality? Hank James has been section head for the accounting group at Yake Company for 14 years. His boss, Mary Stein, feels that Hank is about ready to be moved up to the corporate finance staff, but it is company policy to send people like Hank to the University Executive Development Program before such a promotion is made. Hank has enrolled in the program; one of the first parts deals with organizational behavior. Hank felt that after 14 years of managing people, this would be a snap. However, during the discussion on organizational behavior, the professor made some comments that really bothered Hank. The professor said: Most managers know their functional specialty but do a lousy job of managing their people. One of the problems is that just because managers have a lot of experience with people, they think they are experts. The fact is that behavioral scientists are just beginning to understand human behavior. In addition, to effectively manage people, we also have to somehow be able to better predict and control organizational behavior. Some models are now developed and research is accumulating that we hope will help the manager better understand, predict, and manage organizational behavior. Hank is upset by the fact that his professor apparently discounts the value of experience in managing people, and he cannot see how a conceptual framework that some professor dreamed up and some esoteric research can help him manage people better. 1. Do you think Hank is justified in his concerns after hearing the professor? What role can experience play in managing people? 2. What is the purpose of conceptual frameworks such as those presented in this chapter? How would you weigh the relative value of studying theories and research findings versus “school-of-hard-knocks” experience for the effective management of people? 3. Using the conceptual framework presented in the chapter, how would you explain to Hank that this could help him better manage people in his organization? Chapter Two Environmental Context: Globalization, Diversity, and Ethics Learning Objectives • Discuss the impact of globalization as an environmental context for organizational behavior. • Identify what is meant by diversity and how it has become an important dynamic in the field of management and organizational behavior. • Examine diversity in today’s organizations and the individual and organizational approaches to effectively manage diversity. • Discuss the meaning of ethics and the major factors of ethical behavior. • Describe major areas of ethical concern, including “bottom-line” impact and some of the steps that can be taken to effectively address the major ethical concerns. Today’s environmental context for organizational behavior is markedly different from that of the past. As pointed out in the opening chapter, globalization, diversity, and ethics have forced management of all types of organizations to totally rethink their approach to both operations and human resources. Because of the paradigm shift, organizations are now more responsive to both their external and internal environments. This chapter examines globalization, diversity, and ethics as the environmental context for today’s organizational behavior. GLOBALIZATION Most scholars and practicing managers would agree that a, if not the, major environmental context impacting organizational behavior is globalization. The advances made in information technology and in air travel have truly made the world a smaller place. This has led to a borderless “flat” world described by Thomas Friedman.1 The best-selling author and widely recognized commentator feels we have now entered the third phase of globalization. The first, from about 1492–1800, was characterized by countries globalizing. The second (1800–2000) was companies globalizing. And the third, since the turn of the new century, mainly fueled by information technology available to everyone in the world, groups and 31 32 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context individuals. As Friedman declares, “In Globalization 1.0 there was a ticket agent. In Globalization 2.0 the e-ticket replaced the ticket agent. In Globalization 3.0 you are your own ticket agent.”2 The implications of this globalization for organizational behavior are profound and direct.3 As the head of Brunswick Corporation declared, “Financial resources are not the problem. We have the money, products, and position to be a dominant global player. What we lack are the human resources. We just don’t have enough people with needed global leadership capabilities.”4 GE’s Jack Welch, arguably the best-known corporate leader in modern times, stated before leaving GE: “The Jack Welch of the future cannot be like me. I spent my entire career in the United States. The next head of General Electric will be somebody who spent time in Bombay, in Hong Kong, in Buenos Aires. We have to send our best and brightest overseas and make sure they have the training that will allow them to be the global leaders who will make GE flourish in the future.”5 The accompanying OB in Action: Managing the Global Workforce indicates that the new globalization context has changed the way global, transnational leaders strategize, organize, and manage. Although there is a trend toward similar clothes, entertainment, and material possessions, and even general recognition that English is the international business language, there are still important differences in the ways in which people think and behave around the world.6 In other words, cultures around the world impact the organizational behavior of managers and employees quite differently. For example, a recent study found that cultural differences (by country, race/ethnicity, and religion) affected the attitudes and behaviors of managers toward profit and other related business concerns.7 In understanding and applying organizational behavior concepts in other countries around the world, one must be aware of the similarities and differences. For example, a research study conducted by Welsh, Luthans, and Sommer found that U.S.-based extrinsic rewards and behavioral management approaches significantly improved the productivity of workers in a Russian factory, but a participative technique did not.8 A follow-up critique concluded: What this study shows is that there are both potential benefits and problems associated with transporting U.S.-based human resource management theories and techniques to other cultures. On the one hand, the findings confirmed that the use of valued extrinsic rewards and improved behavioral management techniques may have a considerable impact on productivity among Russian workers in ways that are similar to American workers. On the other hand, participation had a counterproductive effect on Russian workers’ performance.9 Another example would be that in some countries managers prefer to use—and may be more effective with—an autocratic leadership style rather than the typical U.S. manager’s leadership style. Germany is a visible example. Typical U.S. managers who are transferred to Germany may find their leadership style to be too participative. German subordinates may expect them to make more decisions and to consult with them less. Research on obedience to authority found that a higher percentage of Germans were obedient than were their U.S. counterparts.10 Similarly, a U.S. manager in Japan who decides to set up a performance-based incentive system that gives a weekly bonus to the best worker in each work group may be making a mistake. Japanese workers do not like to be singled out for individual attention and go against the group’s norms and values. Perhaps this impact of similarities and differences across cultures was best stated by the cofounder of Honda Motor, T. Fujisawa, when he stated: “Japanese and American management is 95 percent the same, and differs in all important aspects.”11 The global context is now an accepted reality, but its impact on the study and application of organizational behavior will increase into the future. The problem is that the OB in Action: Managing the Global Workforce The war for talent never ends. Middle managers in China? Good luck finding them, let alone keeping them. Assembly line workers in Central Europe? They’re welleducated and hardworking: Trouble is, every company wants them. The cubicle warriors of Bangalore? They get the job done—if they stick around. For corporations, managing this widely scattered, talented, restive, multicultural workforce has never been harder. This Special Report, written to coincide with the 2008 World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, brings readers to the front lines of the struggle. It delves into IBM’s effort to reinvent the way it gets tasks done around the world, follows a Nokia manager as he recruits a workforce from scratch in Transylvania, meets a restless generation of IT workers in India, and hears from the corporate road warriors who never, ever stop traveling. These and other stories make a simple but powerful point: The old way of managing across borders is fading fast. In the first half of the twentieth century, the globalization of business was based on the British colonial model. Headquarters, functions, and capital were in one place, with managers dispatched to run regional operations like colonies. In the second half of the 1900s, companies adopted the multinational model, replicating their home country operations in other places where they did business. Country units rarely dealt with other divisions in other markets. Today, global corporations are transforming themselves into “transnationals,” moving work to the places with the talent to handle the job and the time to do it at the right cost. The threat of a U.S. recession only makes such efforts at lowering expenses and grabbing the best talent even more urgent. William J. Amelio, the CEO of Lenovo, the world’s third-largest computer maker, calls his global workforce strategy “worldsourcing.” Lenovo has executive offices in five cities worldwide and organizes its workforce around hubs of expertise, such as hardware designers in Japan and marketers in India. “You operate as if there’s just one time zone,” Amelio says. “And you’re always on.” If anything, companies are devising new strategies to reach global scale faster. To retain workers in China, for example, PepsiCo’s snacks unit funneled nearly 300 extra people into its talent assessment program last year and promoted three times as many managers as it did in 2006. In mid-2007 storage equipment maker EMC started a global innovation network for research and development workers at six labs around the globe. EMC set up a wiki Web site for scientists and engineers to develop technologies and product concepts together. Moving people across borders and ensuring that workers’ visas and permits are compliant with local immigration rules are also vital to the tasks of globalization. Deloitte principal Robin I. Lissak has a client, a CEO of a large multinational, who was told he could quintuple his business in Dubai if he quickly moved 2,000 workers there from India. But like half of the companies in Deloitte’s 2007 Global Mobility Survey, the CEO simply wasn’t set up to do it. “You’re not just moving people from the U.S. to the rest of the world anymore,” says Lissak. “You’re sending people from all continents to all continents.” The companies that play this global, mobile game best will emerge the winners. increasingly frequent intercultural encounters cannot be solved by just simple guidelines (e.g., when dealing with Spaniards, be aware that they tend to be late, or when the Japanese say “yes” they may mean “no”). Nardon and Steers recently summarized some of the reasons for the complexity of cross-cultural management: 1. People are influenced by multiple cultures—national, regional, organizational, functional, and professional. 2. Even though people are from the same country, they still have different beliefs, values, and behaviors. 3. Counterparts from other cultures are becoming savvy in how to deal with foreigners and thus may not be typical of their own culture. 4. Because of the complexity of culture, simplistic categorizations may initially be helpful, but turn out to be poor predictors of behavior.12 Because of this complexity and the fact that managers today often deal with several cultures at a time in their current role, they must have ready access to cross-cultural training 33 34 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context tools,13 but more importantly, develop learning skills that will on-the-spot compensate for cultural knowledge gaps.14 In other words, today’s organizational leaders must develop and use a “global mindset.” Although there are many meanings, a conference dedicated to global mindset derived the following comprehensive definition: “a set of individual attributes that enable an individual to influence individuals, groups, and organizations from diverse social/cultural/ institutional systems.”15 Those with such a global mindset are able to view and evaluate a cultural event or interaction through a broad array of potential categories and quickly recognize nuances (e.g., nonverbals) that differentiate cultural groups. An example would be an encounter with a smiling business person from Thailand: To an outsider, such Thai smiles are not readily transparent. However, an outsider with a global mindset would have the wherewithal to develop strategies to such nuances, demonstrating a keen awareness and understanding of cultural differences, and know how to act accordingly. Once encoded into the individual’s global mindset, this information could be readily accessed when dealing with different cultural groups in which nonverbal expressions carry greater weight when interpreting how people are thinking, feeling, and ultimately behaving. 16 Such global mindset development is needed for effectively dealing with the complex cultural context facing the study and application of organizational behavior. DIVERSITY IN THE WORKPLACE Similar to globalization, diversity and social issues have had a dramatic effect on the study and application of management and organizational behavior. In the past, diversity was treated primarily as a legal issue; that is, for well over 45 years it has been directly against the law to discriminate against anyone, on any basis. Now organizations are beginning to realize that diversity is not just something to deal with, but instead a reality to build on to make a stronger, more competitive enterprise. As noted in a recent report on needed strategic initiatives to succeed in the new global economy, “Diversity must be recognized and nurtured as the organization’s greatest asset, and the ability to attract and work with diverse talent must be seen as a critical competitive advantage.”17 In other words, the contemporary environmental context of diversity is no longer simply a “tack on” or afterthought in the study of organizational behavior; it plays a central role in today’s environmental context. Although surveys indicate that a vast majority of organizations believe that workplace diversity is important and virtually all value diversity management skills and strategies to achieve diversity initiatives, they still are not sure of the meaning or domain of diversity.18 The trend, however, is clear: “Diversity means much more than ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation. New and evolving diverse populations include a full range of ages, as well as career and geographic experiences.”19 As the head of the huge Society of Human Resource Management (SHRM) diversity initiatives recently noted, “Organizational diversity initiatives should not simply focus on getting people of color and women in the door, but embracing an inclusive culture to maintain these employees.”20 SHRM has identified outcomes such as the following for effective diversity management: 1. Creating a work environment or culture that allows everyone to contribute all that they can to the organization. 2. Leveraging differences and similarities in the workforce for the strategic advantage of the organization; and 3. Enhancing the ability of people from different backgrounds to work effectively together.21 Chapter 2 Environmental Context: Globalization, Diversity, and Ethics 35 FIGURE 2.1 Changing Workforce Demographics (age, gender, ethnicity, and education) Major Reasons for Increasing Diversity. The Recognition and Desire for Diverse Viewpoints Legislation and Lawsuits Increasing Diversity in Today‘s Organizations Competitive Pressures Rapidly Growing Increase in International Business Reasons for the Emergence of Diversity As shown in Figure 2.1, a major reason for the emergence of diversity as an important reality is changing demographics. Older workers, women, minorities, and those with more education are now entering the workforce. The composition of today’s and tomorrow’s workforce is and will be much different from that of the past. For example, USA Today calculates a Diversity Index (based on population racial and ethnic probabilities) that shows now about 1 out of 2 people randomly selected in the United States are racially or ethnically different, up from 1 out of 3 in 1980. In addition, the U.S. Department of Labor estimates that the majority of new workers entering the workforce will be women or minorities. At the more micro level, assuming talent and ability are equally distributed throughout the population and that everyone has an equal opportunity, there should be diversity in every level of an organization. Unfortunately, such an assumption is not yet valid because diversity has not to date noticeably reached the top levels of most organizations. There is still only a handful of women who have broken through the “glass ceiling” of large corporations to become CEO, and only a small minority of Fortune 500 board directors or corporate offıcers are women.22 In addition, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics indicates that women on average continue to trail men in terms of pay for the same types of jobs.23 However, prospects for the future may be better because women now make up more than half of all college students, about half of all medical and law students, account for over a third of MBA (Master of Business Administration) degree-holders, and now make up about half of middle managers.24 Also, outside of business organizations, about a quarter of university presidents are women (including currently half of the Ivy League schools) and they are well-represented in senior management levels in health care and NGOs (nongovernmental organizations such as the United Way).25 As shown in the accompanying OB in Action: Cracks in a Particularly Thick Glass Ceiling, the glass ceiling may be worse in other countries, especially in Asia. Yet, U.S. women executives also are facing a particularly thick glass ceiling when it comes to receiving desirable foreign assignments and experience.26 In the global economy, not being able to obtain such international experience may be a major obstacle (i.e., contribute to the glass ceiling) in reaching upper management. OB in Action: Cracks in a Particularly Thick Glass Ceiling South Koreans are a bit conflicted about career women. Gender wasn’t much of an issue in the selection of a female astronaut to fly on the country’s first space mission. But when women are seeking workaday corporate jobs, some South Korean men still resist change. Outer space is one thing, but a woman in the next cubicle is something else. For years, most educated women in South Korea who wanted to work could follow but one career path, which began and ended with teaching. The situation started to change after the 1998 Asian financial crisis. Thousands of men lost their jobs or took salary cuts, and their wives had to pick up the slack by starting businesses in their homes or seeking part-time work. A couple of years later, the government banned gender discrimination in the workplace and required businesses with more than 500 employees to set up child care facilities. It also created a Gender Equality Ministry. These days the government hires thousands of women (42 percent of its new employees last year), many for senior positions in the judiciary, international trade administration, and foreign service. Startups and foreign companies also employ (and promote) increasing numbers of Korean women. ONE OF THE GUYS But at the top 400 companies, many of which are familyrun conglomerates, it’s hard for women to reach the upper ranks. In all, about 8 percent of working women hold managerial positions. In the United States nearly 51 percent do. “We have a long way to go,” says Cho Jin Woo, director of the Gender Equality Ministry. South Koreans are grappling with traditional attitudes about women, a hierarchical business culture, and the need to open up the workplace to compete globally. A senior manager at SK Holdings, which controls the giant mobile phone carrier SK Telecom, says he avoids hiring women because he believes they lack tenacity. When deadlines are tight, he says, “you need people prepared to put in long hours at the office.” Park Myung Soon, a 39-year-old woman who is in charge of business development at the carrier, says, “Many men are preoccupied with the notion that women are a different species.” To get ahead, Park says she had to achieve 120 percent of what her male colleagues did—as well as play basketball and drink with them after work. “Luckily, I like sports, and I like to drink,” she says. When Choi Dong Hee joined SK’s research arm in 2005, she was the only woman there and had no major assignment until she created one. After conducting a year-long study, Choi, 30, proposed changing the company’s policy to allow subscribers to use any wireless portal. Her managers ignored her. She persisted. Finally, they agreed to let her brief the division head, who agreed to let her make her case to the company chairman. Choi worked on the presentation for three weeks straight, sometimes alone in the office overnight (to her boss’s horror). In the end, the company did adopt the open policy she advocated. Now her managers are quick to say that women’s perspectives can help SK better serve its customers. Sonia Kim, who is in charge of TV marketing at Samsung Electronics, says her male colleagues rarely argue with the boss, even if they think he’s wrong. Kim, though, persuaded her manager to let her develop a promotional campaign rather than rely on an ad agency she thought had lost its creative edge. Kim also says some of the men used to overturn decisions made during the day while out drinking after hours. Since she and other women at Samsung complained, Kim says, the practice has mostly stopped. Although challenges facing women in the workplace receive relatively more attention in the media, the problems facing people of color, an aging workforce, and others fighting for equal opportunities and inclusion remain significant. As indicated, legislation going as far back as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibited discrimination in employment on any basis. The full effects of that landmark law and other more recent legislation, such as the following, are still being determined. 1. Age Discrimination Act of 1978. This law at first increased the mandatory retirement age from 65 to 70 and then was later amended to eliminate an upper age limit altogether. 2. Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978. This law gives full equal opportunity protection to pregnant employees. 3. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. This law prohibits discrimination against those essentially qualified individuals challenged by a disability and requires organizations to reasonably accommodate them. 36 Chapter 2 Environmental Context: Globalization, Diversity, and Ethics 37 4. Civil Rights Act of 1991. This law refined the 1964 act and the reinstated burden of proof falls on employers to eliminate discrimination and ensure equal opportunity in employment to employees. It also allows punitive and compensatory damages through jury trials. 5. Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993. This law allows employees to take up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave for family or medical reasons each year. These laws, along with lawsuits and the threat of lawsuits, have put teeth into diversity. Individuals and groups that have found themselves excluded from organizations or managerial positions can bring and have brought lawsuits in an effort to overcome discriminatory barriers and ensure themselves equal opportunity in employment. For example, successful lawsuits with resulting multimillion dollar penalties have in recent years been brought against many well-known firms. Still another reason for the emergence of the importance of diversity to organizations is the realization that diversity can help them meet the competitive pressures they currently face. Firms that aggressively try to hire and promote women and minorities are going to end up with a more talented and capable workforce than those that do not take such a proactive, affırmative action approach. For example, a large study by the American Management Association found that the more accurately the senior team of a company represents the demographics of its market, the more likely it is that the company will design products, market services, and create ad campaigns that score a hit.27 Moreover, companies that gain a reputation for “celebrating diversity” are more likely to attract the best employees regardless of age, gender, or ethnicity. The most talented and qualified people will feel that opportunities are better with these firms than with others. In other words, diversity can provide an organization with competitive advantage.28 For example, one study examined the relationships among racial diversity, business strategy, and firm performance in the banking industry.29 It was found that racial diversity interacted with business strategy in determining company performance as measured in three different ways: productivity, return on equity, and market performance. This study concluded that the results demonstrated that diversity not only adds value but, in the proper context, also contributes to a firm’s competitive advantage. Such research findings are not limited to U.S. firms. For example, a recent study found that the percentage of women on the boards of Spanish firms was positively related to their value.30 Stimulated by competitive pressures, organizations now recognize and strive to obtain diverse viewpoints in their decision-making processes and teams. Recent academic research points out the complex linkage between work group diversity and work group functioning,31 but there is also growing practical evidence that diversity leads to innovation and often breakthrough competitive advantages. For example, women working for Reebok pointed out that there was no good shoe available for aerobics. The firm took this advice and began marketing aerobic shoes, which became very profitable and served as a breakthrough for Reebok in the very competitive athletic shoe industry. Another example occurred at the giant chemical firm DuPont, which used input from African American employees to develop and successfully market agricultural products for small farmers in the South. A final major reason for the emerging challenge of diversity is that more and more organizations are entering the international arena. A natural by-product of going international is increased diversity, in this case cultural diversity. If domestic organizations have and promote diversity, then, as they expand globally, they will be accustomed to working with people who have different cultures, customs, social norms, and mores. For example, a multicultural team at DuPont is given credit for gaining the firm about $45 million in new business worldwide. Among other things, this diverse team recommended an array of new colors for countertops that was very appealing to overseas customers. 38 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context The international arena is not a threatening place for diverse firms, a fact that is particularly important because of the major role that international operations and sales will play in the growth, and even survival, of companies in the global economy. The percentage of overall revenues from international operations and sales continues to increase dramatically. The advantage of multinational companies that have and value cultural diversity becomes abundantly clear in this global environment discussed in the previous section. Developing the Multicultural Organization The foundation and point of departure for creating and effectively managing diversity is the development of a truly multicultural organization.32 A multicultural organization has been described as one that: 1. Reflects the contributions and interests of diverse cultural and social groups in its mission, operations, and product or service 2. Acts on a commitment to eradicate social oppression in all forms within the organization 3. Includes the members of diverse cultural and social groups as full participants, especially in decisions that shape the organization 4. Follows through on broader external social responsibilities, including support of other institutional efforts to eliminate all forms of social oppression33 Several stages have been identified in leading up to such a multicultural organization:34 1. Exclusionary organization. This type of organization is the furthest from a multicultural organization. It is devoted to maintaining the dominance of one group over all others on factors such as age, education, gender, or race. This organization is characterized by exclusionary hiring practices and other forms of discrimination. Even though such organizations are directly violating laws, they unfortunately still exist. 2. Club organization. This organization is characterized by the maintenance of privileges by those who traditionally have held power. These organizations may technically get around the laws by hiring and promoting women and minorities, but only those who are deemed to have the “right” credentials and perspectives. For example, a recent analysis noted that such organizations do not practice “overt discrimination of forty years ago but, rather, subtler forms that can arise from seemingly rational behavior and can operate at an institutional level” and end up hiring “people just like us.”35 3. Compliance organization. This type of organization is committed to removing some of the discriminatory practices that are inherent in the exclusionary and club organizations. For example, women and minorities are hired and promoted to give the impression of openness and fair play. However, the strategy is more of meeting the letter of the laws, not the spirit. For example, only tokenism is carried out; the basic exclusionary or club culture of the organization remains entrenched. For instance, a research study found de facto segregation in a bank.36 White and African American employees were assigned to supervisors of the same race in numbers that could not be attributed to mere statistical chance. Although the bank may not have done this deliberately, the fact remains that there was simply compliance going on, not the development of a true multicultural organization. 4. Redefining organization. This advanced stage organization is characterized by an examination of all activities for the purpose of evaluating their impact on all employees’ opportunity to both participate in and contribute to their own and the firm’s growth and success. Redefining the organization goes beyond being just proactively antiracist and antisexist. This approach questions the core cultural values of the organization as manifested in the mission, structure, technology, psychosocial dynamics, and products and Chapter 2 Environmental Context: Globalization, Diversity, and Ethics 39 services. The redefining organization not only deals with but recognizes the value of a diverse workforce; it engages in visionary planning and problem solving to tap the strength of the diversity. This approach involves both developing and implementing policies and practices that distribute power among all diverse groups in the organization. 5. Multicultural organization. The true multicultural organization is characterized by core cultural values and an ongoing commitment to eliminate social oppression and promote dignity and respect for everyone throughout the organization. All members of diverse cultural and social groups are involved in the decisions that shape the mission, structure, technology, psychosocial dynamics, and products and services of the organization. The true multicultural organization as defined is the stated ideal of an increasing number of organizations, although most are still in transition to this fifth stage. If carefully studied and objectively analyzed, most of today’s organizations would still be best described by one of the other preceding forms discussed. A high-profile exception would be a generally recognized multicultural firm such as Microsoft. It has a Diversity Department and Diversity Advisory Council that is charged with upholding the vision of “maximizing the company’s performance through understanding and valuing differences.” As the Microsoft Diversity Director declared: We need to stress that all human cultures have common needs, a common sense of humanity. But there are differences, too. How in the world do you please a customer, for example, if you don’t know what he or she values? That’s what culture is all about, that’s what differences are all about. Diversity assumes not only that people are different—we know that—but that their difference is value-added. If you know how to harness that difference, you’ll be more competitive as a corporation than those firms that don’t, whether in the domestic marketplace, and certainly in the global marketplace.37 Moving toward and building a truly multicultural organization, as Microsoft has done, is perhaps the most important, but there are also some individual- and organization-level steps and techniques that can be used to effectively manage diversity. Unfortunately, to date, most of these diversity programs have fallen short of their objectives. For example, one study by the New York–based research organization Catalyst asked African American women if diversity programs were effective in addressing subtle racism. A large majority (64 percent) said that they were not, and only 12 percent said that they had benefited from these programs to a great or very great extent.38 The following sections provide some individual and organizational approaches that may help make managing diversity more effective. Individual Approaches to Managing Diversity Individual approaches to managing diversity typically take two interdependent paths: learning and empathy. The first is based on acquiring real or simulated experience; the second is based on the ability to understand feelings and emotions. Learning Many managers are often unprepared to deal with diversity; because of their inexperience they are unsure of how to respond. Even those who think they are knowledgeable may actually need, but not seek, diversity training. For example, one recent study revealed an interesting counterintuitive finding. Those with low competence in the diversity domain were unaware of their deficiency and therefore were not motivated to participate in diversity training, while those who were relatively competent expressed more interest in additional diversity training and the opportunity to attend a voluntary session.39 In other words, those who may not think they need to learn about diversity must work especially hard to learn and experience as much as they can about developing appropriate behavior. 40 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context At the heart of this learning process is communication. Managers must openly communicate one-on-one, regardless of age, gender, ethnicity, sexual preference, religion, or those challenged with a disability, in order to determine how best to understand and interact with them. In this way managers can learn more about a diverse group’s personal values and how the individuals like to be treated. Managers can also begin to develop a personal style that works well with each member of a diverse group. For example, to their amazement, many managers have learned that people who are challenged with a disability do not want special treatment. They want to be treated like everyone else, asking only for equal opportunities in employment. Many managers are unaware of their biased treatment of these employees. For example, after a review of the research literature in this area, the following conclusion was drawn: It should be noted that several of these studies have found that the physically challenged workers were more intelligent, motivated, better qualified, and had higher educational levels than their nonphysically challenged counterparts. While these findings may help account for the superior performance of those physically challenged, they may also reflect hidden biases whereby a physically challenged person must be overqualified for a specific job. In addition, they may reflect hesitancy to promote physically challenged individuals: the physically challenged may stay in entry-level jobs whereas similarly qualified nonphysically challenged individuals would be rapidly promoted.40 In this learning process, managers can also encourage diverse employees to give them candid feedback regarding how they are being treated. In this way, when the manager does something that an employee does not feel is proper, the manager quickly learns this and can adjust his or her behavior. This form of feedback is particularly important in helping organizations gain insights to effectively manage diversity. Empathy Closely linked to the individual learning strategy is empathy, the ability to put oneself in another’s place and see things from that person’s point of view. Empathy is particularly important in managing diversity because members of diverse groups often feel that only they can truly understand the challenges or problems they are facing. For example, many women are discriminated against or harassed at work because of their gender, and, despite surface efforts to discourage these problems, discrimination and a negative climate for women have become institutionalized through male-dominated management. Discrimination and harassment may become the way things are done. A recent meta-analysis of 62 studies of gender differences in harassment perceptions found that women perceive a broader range of social-sexual behaviors as harassing. In particular, women were most different from men on perceptions involving a hostile work environment, derogatory attitudes toward women, dating pressure, or physical sexual contact, but women and men were closer on their perceptions of sexual propositions or sexual coercion.41 These problems have sometimes resulted in sex bias or sexual harassment suits against organizations, and in recent years, the courts have favorably ruled on these charges.42 Empathy is an important way to deal with more subtle problems because it helps the manager understand the diverse employee’s point of view. For example, many women in business offıces say that they are willing to get coffee for their male counterparts or bosses if they are on their way to the coffee room, but, importantly, they feel that they should be given similar treatment and have coffee brought to them on the same basis. Similarly, many managers try very hard to promote minorities into management positions and to give them work-related experiences that can help their careers. At the same time, however, these managers need to empathize with the fact that some minority members may be ambivalent or Chapter 2 Environmental Context: Globalization, Diversity, and Ethics 41 have mixed emotions about being promoted. They may like advancement in terms of pay and prestige, but at the same time they may be concerned about receiving special treatment, failing, or not living up to everyone’s expectations. By learning how to empathize with these feelings and by offering encouragement, guidance, and after-the-fact backup support, the manager can play an important individual role in more effectively managing diversity. Organizational Approaches to Managing Diversity Organizational approaches to managing diversity include a variety of techniques. Some of the most common involve testing, training, mentoring, and programs designed to help personnel effectively balance their work and family lives. The following sections examine each of these techniques. Testing A problem that organizations have encountered with the use of tests for selection and evaluation is that they may be culturally biased. As a result, women and minorities may be able to do the job for which they are being tested even though their test scores indicate that they should be rejected as candidates. Most tests traditionally used in selection and evaluation are not suited or valid for a diverse workforce. As a result, in recent years a great deal of attention has been focused on developing tests that are indeed valid for selecting and evaluating diverse employees.43 One way to make tests more valid for diverse employees is to use job-specfic tests rather than general aptitude or knowledge tests. For example, a company hiring word processing personnel may give applicants a timed test designed to measure their speed and accuracy. The applicant’s age, gender, and ethnic background are not screening criteria. This approach differs sharply from using traditional tests that commonly measure general knowledge or intelligence (as defined by the test). People from different cultures (foreign or domestic) often did poorly on the traditional tests because they were culturally biased toward individuals who had been raised in a white, middle-class neighborhood. Older applicants may also do poorly on such culturally biased tests. Job-specific tests help prevent diversity bias by focusing on the work to be done. Besides being culturally unbiased, tests used in effectively managing diversity should be able to identify whether the applicant has the necessary skills for doing the job. The word processing example above is a good illustration because it measures the specific skills, not the subjective personal characteristics, required for the work. In some cases carefully conducted interviews or role playing can be used because this is the only effective way of identifying whether the person has the necessary skills. For example, a person applying for a customer service job would need to understand the relevant language of customers and be able to communicate well. The customer service job would also require someone who listens carefully, maintains his or her composure, and is able to solve problems quickly and effıciently. Carefully constructed and conducted interviews could be useful in helping identify whether the applicant speaks well, can communicate ideas, and has the necessary personal style for dealing effectively with customers. Role-playing exercises could be useful in helping identify the applicant’s ability to focus on problems and solve them to the satisfaction of the customer. Also, the applicant could be given a case or exercise in a group setting to assess interpersonal skills. The point is that multiple measures and multiple trained raters would yield the most valid assessment of needed complex skills. If pencil-and-paper or online tests are used, then to help ensure that they are not biased, scientific norming could be used. This is a process that ensures the tests are equivalent across cultures. As a result, all test questions have the same meaning regardless of the person’s cultural background. 42 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context Training Surveys indicate that the majority of U.S. companies have diversity training and have moved into the mainstream from the traditional role of merely equal employment opportunity compliant.44 A comprehensive research study found those firms that adopted diversity training tended to have the following profile: (1) large size, (2) positive top-management beliefs about diversity, (3) high strategic priority of diversity relative to other competing objectives, (4) presence of a diversity manager, and (5) existence of a large number of other diversity supportive policies.45 There are two ways in which this training can play a key role in managing diversity. One way is by offering training to diverse groups. Members from a diverse group can be trained for an entry-level skill or how to more effectively do their existing or future job. The other approach is to provide training to managers and other employees who work with diverse employees. In recent years a number of approaches have been used in providing such diversity training. Most diversity training programs get the participants directly involved. An example is provided by Florida International University’s Center for Management Development (CMD). This center provides diversity training for employers in South Florida, a geographic area where Latinos and African Americans constitute a significant percentage of the population. One of CMD’s programs involves putting trainees into groups based on ethnic origin. Then each group is asked to describe the others and to listen to the way its own group is described. The purpose of this exercise is to gain insights into the way one ethnic group is perceived by another ethnic group. Each group is also asked to describe the diffıculties it has in working with other ethnic groups and to identify the reasons for these problems. At the end of the training, both managers and employees relate that they have a better understanding of their personal biases and the ways in which they can improve their interaction with members of the other groups. Sometimes training games are used to help participants focus on cultural issues such as how to interact with personnel from other cultures. Here is an example: In Hispanic families, which one of the following values is probably most important? a. Achievement b. Money c. Being on time d. Respect for elders The correct answer is “d.” As participants play the game, they gain an understanding of the values and beliefs of other cultures and learn how better to interact with a diverse workforce. In many cases these diversity-related games are used as supplements to other forms of training. For example, they are often employed as icebreakers to get diversity training sessions started or to maintain participant interest during a long program. Research has found that the major key to the success of diversity training is top-management support for diversity; also important are mandatory attendance for all managers, long-term evaluation of training results, managerial rewards for increasing diversity, and a broadly inclusionary definition of diversity in the organization.46 However, it must be remembered that awareness training is valuable to shift perceptions, but may not lead to behavioral change.47 Allstate and other firms learned that the training must be linked to business outcomes in order to produce actual behavioral change.48 A major problem of training in general, and diversity training in particular, is the transfer problem. Those going through the diversity training may see the value and gain some relevant knowledge, but then do not transfer this training back to the job. A major reason for this transfer problem is a lack of confidence or self-effıcacy (i.e., the trainees do not believe that they can successfully carry out the diversity training objectives back on the job Chapter 2 Environmental Context: Globalization, Diversity, and Ethics 43 in their specific environment). A recent field experiment by Combs and Luthans was designed to increase trainees’ diversity self-effıcacy. The results were that the training intervention significantly increased the trainees’ (N = 276 in 3 organizations) measured diversity self-effıcacy. More importantly, there was a strong positive relationship between the trained participants diversity self-effıcacy and the number and diffıculty of their stated intentions for initiating diversity goals in their specific environments of insurance and manufacturing firms and a government agency.49 Chapter 7 will get into the self-effıcacy psychological state in detail, but it is these types of organizational behavior concepts that are needed to improve important application areas such as diversity training. Mentoring A mentor is a trusted counselor, coach, or advisor who provides advice and assistance. In recent years, many organizations have begun assigning mentors to women and minorities. The purpose of the mentor program is to help support members of a diverse group in their jobs, socialize them in the cultural values of the organization, and pragmatically help their chances for development and advancement. There are a number of specific benefits that mentors can provide to those they assist, including the following: 1. Identify the skills, interests, and aspirations the person has 2. Provide instruction in specific skills and knowledge critical to successful job performance 3. Help in understanding the unwritten rules of the organization and how to avoid saying or doing the wrong things 4. Answer questions and provide important insights 5. Offer emotional support 6. Serve as a role model 7. Create an environment in which mistakes can be made without losing self-confidence50 A number of organizations now require their managers to serve as mentors, but besides the above types of benefits, there may also be a downside. One problem is that mentors may become overly protective and encase those they mentor into a “glass bubble” by shunting them into jobs with adequate pay and professional challenges, but eliminate all chance of further advancement.51 Some guidelines for establishing an effective mentoring program typically involves several steps. First, top-management support is secured for the program. Then mentors and their protégés are carefully chosen. The mentor, who provides the advice and guidance, is paired with an individual who is very likely to profit from the experience. Research on the networking strategies of minorities has implications for this step. It seems that highly successful, fast-track minorities are well connected to both minority and white informal circles, whereas their unsuccessful counterparts have very few, if any, network ties with other minorities.52 In other words, this study would indicate that the effective mentor would be one who would be able to get the protégé involved in both the majority and the minority inner circles. Sometimes the advice has been to avoid association with other minorities, but this research would indicate the contrary. The third step in an effective mentoring program would be to give both mentors and protégés an orientation. The mentors are taught how to conduct themselves, and the protégés are given guidance on the types of questions and issues that they should raise with their mentor so that they can gain the greatest value from the experience. Fourth, throughout the mentoring period, which typically lasts one year or less, mentor and protégé individually and together meet with the support staff of the program to see how well things are going. Fifth, and finally, at the end of the mentoring cycle, overall impressions and recommendations are 44 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context solicited from both mentors and protégés regarding how the process can be improved in the future. This information is then used in helping the next round of mentors do a more effective job. Work/Family Programs In the typical family today, both the mother and the father have jobs and work-family issues have recently received considerable attention in research and practice. Initially the needs of the dual-career family were met through alternative work schedules, which allow the parents flexibility in balancing their home and work demands. The most common alternative work schedule arrangements are flextime, the compressed workweek, job sharing, and telecommuting, but there are also some newer programs that help balance work and family. Flextime allows employees greater autonomy by permitting them to choose their daily starting and ending times within a given time period called a bandwidth, as shown in Figure 2.2. For example, consider the case of two parents who are both employed at a company that has a bandwidth of 7 A.M. to 7 P.M. Everyone working for the firm must put in his or her eight hours during this time period. For example, the father may go to work at 7 A.M. and work until 3 P.M., at which time he leaves and picks up the children from school. The mother, meanwhile, drops the children at school at 8:45 A.M. and works from 9:30 A.M. to 5:30 P.M. Thus both parents are able to adjust their work and home schedules to fit within the bandwidth. Many companies are using this concept and similar ones to help their employees meet both organizational and personal demands. Recent U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data indicate that over a quarter of working women with children under 18 work flexible schedules.53 Prominent examples are that about three-fourths of the workforce of both Hewlett-Packard and IBM use flexible work arrangements. Another alternative work arrangement is the compressed workweek. This arrangement, which has been widely used in Europe, compresses the workweek into fewer days. For example, while the typical workweek is 40 hours spread over five days, a compressed workweek could be four 10-hour days. For those working a 35-hour week, the time could be compressed into three days of approximately 12 hours each. These arrangements give employees more time with their families, although their full impact on productivity, profitability, and employee satisfaction is still to be determined. Job sharing is the splitting of a full-time position between two people, each of whom works part-time. This arrangement is more common in professional positions in banking, insurance, and teaching. A husband and wife, or any two people, could share the job 50-50 or in any other combination. For example, parents who want to return to work on a parttime basis only have found job sharing to be an attractive employment alternative.54 Compared to decade ago, on average, working mothers increasingly indicate that part-time work over full-time or not working at all would be ideal for them.55 FIGURE 2.2 A Flextime Framework. Flexible starting time 7 A.M. Core period 10 A.M. 3 P.M. Bandwidth Flexible ending time 7 P.M. Chapter 2 Environmental Context: Globalization, Diversity, and Ethics 45 Still another alternative work schedule that is gaining in popularity is telecommuting. Currently about a third of organizations allow employees to work from home or off site on a regular basis.56 For example, over 9,000 Hewlett-Packard employees work entirely from home. This entails receiving and sending work between home and the offıce and is currently being used to supplement the typical work arrangement. For instance, employees may come into the offıce on Monday and Tuesday, work out of their homes on Wednesday and Thursday via telecommuting, and come in again on Friday. By varying the on-site assignments of the personnel, companies are able to reduce the number of people who are in the building at any one time, thus cutting down on the amount of floor space and parking spots they need to rent. Increasingly employees have no offıce and work from home on a permanent basis. Besides alternative work schedules, very innovative family-friendly programs are starting to emerge. When large numbers of women began entering the workforce a number of years ago, organizations were ill prepared for the resulting conflict that both women and men had between their work and family responsibilities. Research shows that conflict goes both ways with dysfunctional outcomes. Specifically, for both men and women, work-tofamily conflict was found to be linked to job dissatisfaction, turnover intentions, and stress, while family-to-work conflict resulted in stress and absenteeism.57 However, there is additional research evidence indicating that multiple roles provide benefits (e.g., practice at multitasking, relevant experience) for the managerial role at work and those who are committed to multiple roles (i.e., doing it all) may have higher life satisfaction, self-esteem, and self-acceptance.58 Today there are programs to help solve the reality of dual-career families and working parents. Table 2.1 provides a broad sampling of these work/family programs.59 Of course, TABLE 2.1 Innovative Work/Family Programs Child care or elder care benefits Adoption benefits Leave/time-off policies Convenience benefits Life-cycle accounts Health promotion benefits Education assistance benefits Housing assistance Group purchase programs Casual day program These may include child care facilities at the work site and transportation of aging parents to a senior citizens center. These include leave policies and reimbursement for legal fees, medical expenses, agency or placement fees, temporary foster care, and/or travel expenses. These may include free time off for no reason or prior notice and paybacks for unused days off. This refers to on-site services such as dry cleaning, ATM machines, postal services, and video rentals. These are savings accounts designed to pay for specific life events, such as a college education. Often employers will match employee contributions. These include such things as fitness centers, health screenings, flu shots, and stress-management clinics. Examples include tutoring programs, tuition reimbursement, and scholarships. This refers to such items as relocation assistance, seminars, and preferred mortgage arrangements. These include legal and financial planning assistance, discounts with local merchants, group auto and home owners insurance, and fleet arrangements for auto purchases. This would be dress-down days to have everyone relaxed in an on-the-job family atmosphere. 46 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context not all organizations are using these programs, but an increasing number are, and a few well-known firms such as the following have even more unique programs.60 1. PepsiCo has a “concierge service” (similar to hotels) that helps employees with errands or tasks that need to be done during the workday (e.g., getting an oil change, lining up a baby-sitter, or contracting for house repairs). 2. Eastman Kodak has a “humor room” where employees can read light, funny materials or engage in activities to take their minds off a stressful day. 3. Ben & Jerry’s has a “Joy Gang” charged with creating happiness in the workplace. This group plans birthday and anniversary celebrations and creates other joyful events. Research by Thomas and Ganster found work/family programs decrease family conflict, job dissatisfaction, and stress-related problems,61 but it is diffıcult to empirically demonstrate the direct positive impact that these programs have on performance outcomes. However, one comprehensive research study did find a strong link between work/family programs and the use of high-commitment work systems containing employee involvement/ participation and total quality initiatives.62 ETHICS AND ETHICAL BEHAVIOR IN ORGANIZATIONS Ethics involves moral issues and choices and deals with right and wrong behavior. Although ethics was given at least surface attention through the years, starting with the now infamous Enron debacle that ended in bankruptcy in 2001, soon followed by other highprofile cases such as high-ranking executives arrested and charged with “looting” their companies, public accounting firms being found guilty of obstruction, and celebrity entrepreneurs such as Martha Stewart sent to prison for illegal business practices, and then the financial crisis at the end of 2008 that revealed many questionable, if not illegal practices, ethics has taken center stage. In this post-Enron, corporate ethics meltdown era, the study of ethics becomes critical to business education in general and organizational behavior in particular.63 As the dean of Northwestern’s Kellogg School of Management declared, “We are facing new realities, and for that we need a new body of knowledge.”64 For starters, it is now realized that not only individuals and groups but also a number of relevant factors from the cultural, organizational, and external environment determine ethical behavior. Cultural influences on ethical behavior come from family, friends, neighbors, education, religion, and the media. Organizational influences come from ethical codes, role models, policies and practices, and reward and punishment systems. The external forces having an impact on ethical behavior include political, legal, economic, and international developments. These factors often work interdependently in shaping the ethical behavior of individuals and groups in organizations. For example, minimum wage jobs may lock people into an economic existence that prevents them from bettering their lives. Is it ethical to pay people only a minimum wage? Or what about Nike initially denying charges of sweatshop labor conditions in its overseas factories, then trying to justify its low wages on the basis of different living standards? What about unsafe products or the tobacco chief executive offıcers denying the addictive properties of nicotine? Or consider the facts that many obese workers and those with certain types of appearance (e.g., tattoos/piercings, facial hair or manner of dress) report that they are discriminated against in the workplace.65 Also, what about the research study that found applicants judged to be relatively less attractive were at a distinct disadvantage in decisions involving suitability for hiring and probable organizational progression?66 Is it ethical to treat these workers differently, given that very limited legal protection is afforded to them and thus they have no recourse? Chapter 2 Environmental Context: Globalization, Diversity, and Ethics 47 These questions help illustrate the problems and controversies in determining what ethical behavior is, and why good people sometimes do unethical things.67 Moreover, as Rosabeth Kanter recently observed, the often cited Enron debacle resulted from a number of factors besides the unethical behavior of the leaders. She notes that there was also a tendency during boom years in the economy not to examine success too closely; managerial hubris—confidence turning into over-confidence when Enron turned from oil and gas leasing to other financial transactions; managers being egged on by Wall Street and the business press that wanted heroes in a growth story, which produced a tendency to hide any weakness or mistake, and assuming that one could make up for any mistakes later with growth. And at least one good theory was involved in the Enron case: innovation—which requires breaking some “rules” in the sense of departing from tradition.68 Besides these other factors leading to ethical problems in organizations, many people would argue that they are highly ethical in their own personal dealings. However, empirical evidence has found that such people are often viewed as unlikable by their peers in the organization.69 Simply put, there is peer pressure on many people to be less ethical. Additionally, what one person or group finds unethical may be viewed differently by another individual or group.70 For example, a study investigated attitudes toward unauthorized copying of software among both business executives and business faculty members. It was found that the faculty members did not view this to be as big an ethical problem as did the executives.71 These examples all help illustrate the elusiveness and contingent nature of determining guidelines for ethical behavior. Besides the obvious ethical concerns relating to the protection of the environment (the so-called green or sustainability issues),72 the use of bribes, price fixing, “creative” accounting, and other illegal activities now legislated by the Sarbanes-Oxley (S-Ox) Act—and responding by drawing up and disseminating an ethical code which the vast majority of large firms now have—only in recent years has it been recognized that ethics needs theory-building and basic research in the study of organizational behavior.73 In addition, with the arrival of the global economy, ethics has broadened out to become a major concern for international management.74 Taking an organizational behavior perspective, Stajkovic and Luthans have proposed a social cognitive model (see Chapter 1) of ethics across cultures.75 This model uses national cultures as the social foundation for institutional (ethics legislation), organizational (codes of ethics), and personal (values and self-regulatory mechanisms) factors that interact to influence the perception of ethical standards and actual ethical behavior across cultures. The Impact of Ethics on “Bottom-Line” Outcomes Besides the morality issues surrounding ethics in the workplace,76 there is increasing evidence that ethics programs and being ethical pays off for organizations. Although in the past the linkage between corporate social performance and bottom-line results has been vague or dependent on faith and anecdotal evidence, the cost of illegal, unethical practices is now clearly documented, and recent research studies find a statistically significant relationship. For example, one study compared 67 Fortune 500 firms that were convicted of acts such as antitrust violations, product liabilities, and acts of discrimination with 188 firms in the same time period that were not. The results indicated that the convicted firms had significantly lower returns on assets and returns on sales.77 OB in Action: After Enron: The Ideal Corporation Every summer for the past 10 years, Jack Stack has been going to Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Sloan School of Management to speak with young chief executives about the ideals and values of the engine manufacturing company he helped to make a management paragon. In the late 1980s, Stack’s Springfield ReManufacturing Corp. emerged as a model for how management and labor could successfully work together in a culture of trust and ownership. Thousands of managers flocked to his company to hear his ideas while others gathered to hear him during his annual trek to MIT for its Birthing of Giants program for new CEOs. But as the dot-com era took hold in the late 1990s, Stack saw a change in the attitudes of the business leaders who showed up at MIT. They seemed far more ambitious for themselves than for their companies. They were building organizations to flip, not to last. They were more interested in the value of their stockholdings than the profits of their companies. They told him his ideas for tapping into the enthusiasm, intelligence, and creativity of working people were antiquated. And they said he was out of touch. Stack says that even he began to think of himself as a dinosaur. “So many young CEOs were mesmerized by getting a $1 million or $2 million pop, selling out, and then getting out of town,” he says. “They forgot that business is all about values.” Suddenly, leaders like Stack—people who take concepts like ethics and fairness seriously—are back in vogue in a big way. In the post-Enron, post-bubble world, there’s a yearning for corporate values that reach higher than the size of the chief executive’s paycheck or even the latest stock price. Trust, integrity, and fairness do matter, and they are crucial to the bottom line. The corporate leaders and entrepreneurs who somehow forgot that are now paying the price in a downward market roiled by a loss of investor confidence. “The chasm that separates individuals and organizations is marked by frustration, mistrust, disappointment, and even rage,” says Shoshana Zuboff, a Harvard Business School professor and co-author of a book called The Support Economy. The realization that many companies played fast and loose with accounting rules and ethical standards in the 1990s is leading to a reevaluation of corporate goals and purpose. Zuboff and many other business observers are optimistic that the abuses now dominating the headlines may result in healthy changes in the post-Enron modern corporation. What’s emerging is a new model of the ideal corporation. Business leaders say corporations will likely become far more transparent—not only for investors, but also for employees, customers, and suppliers. The singleminded focus on “shareholder value,” which measured performance on the sole basis of stock price, will diminish. 48 Instead, companies will elevate the interests of employees, customers, and their communities. Executive pay, which clearly soared out of control in the past two decades, is already undergoing a reassessment and will likely fall back in an effort to create a sense of fairness. And corporate cultures will change in a way that puts greater emphasis on integrity and trust. In the anything-goes 1990s, too many companies allowed performance to be disconnected from meaningful corporate values. “A lot of companies simply looked at performance in assessing their leaders,” says Larry Johnston, CEO of Albertson’s Inc., the food retailer. “There have to be two dimensions to leadership: performance and values. You can’t have one without the other.” This and other changes will be driven less by the threat of government intervention and more by the stigma of being branded an unethical enterprise. That’s why the government’s newfound zeal to indict individuals and even companies carries such power, regardless of how the cases are resolved. “Social sanctions may eclipse the law in imposing penalties for misconduct and mischief,” says Richard T. Pascale, a management authority and author of Surfing the Edge of Chaos. “The corporation of the future has to think about this new development as an increasingly formidable factor to be reckoned with.” That’s a change from the 1990s, when pressure from Wall Street and the dot-com mania led to much of the corporate excess. During those years, when Stack found his ideas decidedly out of favor, he stuck with the “openbook management” culture that had made him something of a celebrity years earlier. By sharing all of the company’s financials with all employees and giving them an ownership stake in the company, Stack had built a level of mutual trust and respect unusual in business. If there’s one change that nearly everyone foresees today, it’s a move to make the corporation far more transparent. That’s obvious when it comes to investors, who are demanding truth in the numbers and clarity in disclosure. But it’s also important for employees if they’re to have a true sense of ownership in their company’s affairs. At Stack’s company, there are weekly huddles with workers and managers, prominent scorecards on factory walls charting work progress, and ongoing emphasis by managers on building a company and not just a product. Workers undergo training so they can understand the numbers on a balance sheet and an income statement. Corporate cultures, which in many cases veered out of control in the 1990s by emphasizing profit at any cost, are also in for an overhaul. More than anything else, those beliefs and attitudes are set by the top execs. The values they espouse, the incentives they put in place, and their own behavior provide the cues for the rest of the organization. Chapter 2 Environmental Context: Globalization, Diversity, and Ethics 49 Other studies have found a strong link between a company’s ethical commitment and its market value added (MVA)78 and the investment in social programs and the firm’s financial outcomes.79 The social programs involved community and employee relations, product characteristics, diversity, and especially an ethical organizational culture.80 Some firms with widely recognized reputations for having an ethical culture include Ben & Jerry’s (ice cream), Johnson & Johnson’s (health care), Levi Strauss (clothing), and Newman’s Own (food). For example, Johnson & Johnsons “credo,” authored by the son of the founder, spells out the firm’s first responsibility is to customers, second to employees, third to the community and environment, and then fourth to the shareholders. As a current VP at J&J explains, “When we operate according to these principles, the stockholders should realize a fair return. What that means is that the credo is not a brake on our success; it’s the engine of our success.”81 In terms of research, one study focusing on the environment found a strong positive relationship between having preventative, proactive programs (e.g., pollution control and/or reduction of hazardous waste) and bottom-line profitability gains.82 This accumulating evidence on the value of ethical practices is leading to the development of theory, research, and measurement of corporate social responsibility (CSR) or performance (CSP).83 Although there are various definitions of CSR, “most share the theme of engaging in economically sustainable business activities that go beyond legal requirements to protect the well-being of employees, communities, and the environment.”84 For example, besides the currently popular efforts on the part of companies to reduce carbon emissions to help sustain the planet, there are also less publicized CSR programs such as Burger King’s perspective and policies with regard to animal rights (e.g., the use of cage-free chicken products). In practice there are newly created ethics offıcer positions, and control systems are being suggested to monitor ethical behaviors.85 As the accompanying OB in Action: After Enron: The Ideal Corporation indicates, there are some ideal organizations, such as the Springfield ReManufacturing Corporation, that are based on trust, total transparency (i.e., the famous “open-book management” pioneered at ReManufacturing), and mutual respect leading to ethical organizational cultures. On the other hand, there are also simple guidelines for employees to follow in doing the authentic,86 right thing in ethical gray areas. Here is an “ethics quick test” when employees are faced with such a dilemma: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Is the action legal? Is it right? Who will be affected? Does it fit the company’s values? How would I feel afterwards? How would it look in the newspaper? Will it reflect poorly on the company?87 Besides the moral issues and ethics program’s guidelines and organizational cultural climate, in the framework of this chapter on the environmental context for today’s organizations, ethics also has an impact on the way employees are treated and how they perform their jobs. In other words, like globalization and diversity, ethics can affect the well-being of employees and their performance. Summary This chapter examines the environmental context in terms of globalization, diversity, and ethics. The new “flat-world” international context in which organizational behavior operates has become an increasingly important environmental context. Few would question that 50 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context there is now globalization and that cultural differences must be recognized in the study and understanding of organizational behavior. Two other major environmental realities facing modern organizations are diversity and ethics. There are a number of reasons for the rise of diversity in organizations, including the increasing number of women, minorities, and older employees in the workforce and legislative rulings that now require organizations to ensure equal opportunity to women, minorities, older employees, and those challenged by a disability. There are individual and organizational approaches to managing diversity. Approaches at the individual level include learning and empathy; at the organizational level, testing, training, mentoring, and the use of alternative work schedules and work/family programs can be implemented. Ethics is involved with moral issues and choices and deals with right and wrong behavior. A number of cultural (family, friends, neighbors, education, religion, and the media), organizational (ethical codes, role models, policies and practices, and reward and punishment systems), and external forces (political, legal, economic, and international developments) help determine ethical behavior. These influences, acting interdependently, serve to help identify and shape ethical behavior in today’s organizations. There is increasing evidence of the positive impact that ethical behavior and corporate social responsibility programs have on “bottom-line” performance. Ending with Meta-Analytic Research Findings OB PRINCIPLE FOR EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE Women and men currently differ in their perceptions of ethical business practices. Meta-Analysis Results: [66 samples; 20,000 participants; d = .22] On average, there is a 56 percent probability that women will perceive higher ethical standards than men in evaluating business practices. Results of a moderator analysis revealed that gender differences are smaller for samples of nonstudents than students. Moreover, gender differences in ethical perceptions also decline with age and work experience. Those who are older or who have considerable work experience display smaller gender differences in ethical perceptions. Conclusion: As women have become established in the workforce, not only is the workplace more diverse, but also ethical perceptions are changing. In particular, the ethical climate has emerged as an important managerial and societal concern. How this ethical climate is perceived by organizational participants, both male and female, can become important to decision making and business practices. A growing body of evidence suggests that gender plays a role in perceptions of ethical climate. As the chapter points out, diverse input from society at large is affecting the cultural values of today’s organizations. Thus, through early socialization, stereotypes associated with social role norms or actual organizational experiences, men and women may develop or bring diverse interests, traits, and values into the workplace. This learning and development may lead to differences in ethical perceptions regarding issues such as pay equity, bribery, and sexual harassment. However, over time as Chapter 2 Environmental Context: Globalization, Diversity, and Ethics 51 more men and women work together and assimilate into both the changing norms and cultures of both the overall society and organizations concerning working women, the current differences in ethical perceptions will undoubtedly decrease. Source: Adapted from George R. Franke, Deborah F. Crown, and Deborah F. Spake, “Gender Differences in Ethical Perceptions of Business Practices,” Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 82, No., 1, 1997, pp. 920–934. OB PRINCIPLE FOR EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE Employee integrity tests can predict unethical and deviant workplace behaviors and performance. Meta-Analysis Results: [305 studies; 349,623 participants; d = .84 for overt tests; d = .43 for personality tests; and d = .75 when tests are related to performance] On average, there is a 72 percent probability that job applicants who score well on overt integrity tests will participate in less unethical and/or deviant behaviors than those who score poorly. Moreover, on average, there is a 62 percent probability that job applicants who score well on personality-based integrity tests will participate in less unethical and/or deviant behaviors than those who score poorly. Finally, not only does the use of integrity tests help predict unethical and/or deviant behavior, but they can also help organizations predict better performers. On average, there is a 70 percent probability that employees who score well on integrity tests will outperform those who score poorly. Further analysis indicates the measurement method is a moderator. That is, measures of deviant behavior can be divided into external and self-report (admission) criteria. External criteria involve actual records of rule-breaking incidents, disciplinary actions, dismissals for theft, etc. Self-report criteria include all admissions of theft, past illegal activities, and counterproductive behaviors. Interestingly, the validity of selfreport measures was higher than that for external criteria—perhaps because not all thieves are caught or illegal activities detected. Conclusion: Because unethical and deviant behavior not only can impact the well-being of employees, but also can have a detrimental effect on individual and organizational performance, the study of ethics has been receiving increased attention in organizational behavior. One way for organizations to screen out potentially unethical individuals is to give job applicants some form of overt or personality-based integrity/honesty test. These tests are commonly used to predict employee participation in illegal activity (e.g., theft), unethical behavior, excessive absences, drug abuse, or workplace violence. Over the past decade, the evidence for integrity test predictive validities has been strong. Overt integrity tests are designed to directly assess attitudes regarding dishonest behaviors. Examples are asking test takers questions such as the following: “Should a person be fired if caught stealing $5?” Personality-based integrity tests are designed to predict deviant behaviors at work by using personality measures such as reliability, conscientiousness, adjustment, trustworthiness, and sociability. The meta-analysis of research studies of both overt and personality integrity tests can help organizations reduce unethical and/or deviant employee behavior as well as help them predict better performers. Source: Adapted from Deniz S. Ones, Chockalingman Viswesvaran, and Frank L. Schmidt, “Comprehensive Meta-Analysis of Integrity Test Validities: Findings and Implications for Personnel Selection and Theories of Job Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology Monograph, Vol., 78, No., 4, 1993, pp. 679–703. 52 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context Questions for Discussion and Review 1. What is meant by and what are some examples of globalization? 2. What are some of the major reasons why diversity has become such an important dimension of today’s organizations? 3. How can diversity be effectively managed? Offer suggestions at both the individual and organizational levels. 4. What is meant by ethics, and what types of factors influence ethical behavior? 5. What is meant by corporate social responsibility? How can and does it affect the “bottom-line” of today’s organizations? Internet Exercise: Ethical Issues in the Workplace Ethical issues are very much at the forefront of organizational behavior in today’s environment. One controversial issue concerns monitoring employees. Technology has now made it easy and inexpensive for employers to closely monitor the behaviors of employees. Visit the Web site http://www.legalethics.com for information on ethics and laws relevant to the current workplace. It may be helpful for you to test your knowledge and understanding of the ethical climate by going to httl://www.mhhe.com/business/ management/buildyourmanagementskills/ethics/exercise.html. Then, going from these, search to see if you can come up with other perspectives on employee monitoring as an ethical issue. 1. Do you believe employers should be allowed to electronically monitor workers? Would you like to be monitored in this fashion? 2. Summarize the different perspectives that you found on the Internet. Be specific as to where you found this information. 3. Discuss other ethical issues that surfaced when looking at the suggested Web sites or others that you found. Organizational Behavior Case: How Far-Reaching Are Globalization and Technology? Bob is the owner and operator of a medium-sized grocery store that has been in his family for more than 30 years. Currently his business is flourishing, primarily because it has an established customer base in a busy part of town. Also, Bob is a good manager. He considers himself to be highly knowledgeable about his business, having continuously adapted to the changing times. For example, he recently expanded his business by putting in a full-service deli. His philosophy is that by continuously providing customers with new products and services, he will always have a satisfied customer base to rely on. At a management seminar he attended last year, the hot topic was globalization and the impact of technology on going global. He has also been bombarded by the many television ads and mailers regarding the opportunities available in international markets. For the most part, Bob doesn’t think that globalization is an issue with his business, as he doesn’t even intend to expand outside the city. Furthermore, he feels that the Internet has no applications in his branch of the retail industry and would simply be a waste of time. 1. Is Bob correct in his assessment of how globalization will impact his business? 2. Can you think of any global applications that Bob could profit from? 3. How could Bob’s business be negatively impacted by both technology and globalization if he does not keep on top of these developments? Chapter 2 Environmental Context: Globalization, Diversity, and Ethics 53 Organizational Behavior Case: I Want Out When the Budder Mining Equipment company decided to set up a branch offıce in Peru, top management felt that there were two basic avenues the company could travel. One was to export its machinery and have an agent in that country be responsible for the selling. The other was to set up an on-site operation and be directly responsible for the sales effort. After giving the matter a great deal of thought, management decided to assign one of their own people to this overseas market. The person who was chosen, Frank Knight, had expressed an interest in the assignment, but had no experience in South America. He was selected because of his selling skills and was given a week to clear out his desk and be on location. When Frank arrived, he was met at the airport by Pablo Gutierrez, the local who was hired to run the offıce and break Frank in. Pablo had rented an apartment and car for Frank and taken care of all the chores associated with getting him settled. Frank was very impressed. Thanks to Pablo, he could devote all his efforts to the business challenges that lay ahead. After about six months, the vice president for marketing received a call from Frank. In a tired voice Frank indicated that even though sales were okay, he couldn’t take it anymore. He wanted to come home. If nothing could be worked out within the next three months, Frank made it clear that he would resign. When his boss pressed him regarding the problems he was having, here is what Frank reported: Doing business over here is a nightmare. Everyone comes to work late and leaves early. They also take a two-hour rest period during the afternoon. All the offıces close down during this afternoon break. So even if I wanted to conduct some business during this period, there would be no customers around anyway. Also, no one works very hard, and they seem to assume no responsibility whatsoever. There seems to be no support for the work ethic among the people. Even Pablo, who looked like he was going to turn out great, has proved to be as lazy as the rest of them. Sales are 5 percent over forecasted but a good 30 percent lower than they could be if everyone here would just work a little harder. If I stay here any longer, I’m afraid I’ll start becoming like these people. I want out, while I still can. 1. In Frank’s view, how important is the work ethic? How is this view causing him problems? 2. Why do the people not work as hard as Frank does? What is the problem? 3. What mistake is Frank making that is undoubtedly causing him problems in managing the branch offıce? Real Case: Not Treating Everyone the Same As recently as the 1980s, managers in some of the most productive organizations in the country used to pride themselves on treating all their employees equally. This typically meant holding the line on rules and regulations so that everyone conformed to the same set of guidelines. Moreover, when people were evaluated, they were typically assessed on the basis of their performance in the workplace. In recent years there has been a dramatic change in management’s thinking. Instead of treating everyone the same, some organizations are now trying to meet the specific needs of employees. What is done for one individual employee may not be done for another. Additionally, instead of evaluating all employees on how well they work in the workplace, attention is being focused on how much “value added” people contribute, regardless of how many hours they are physically at the workplace. This new philosophy is also spilling over into the way alternative work arrangements are being handled. An example is Aetna Life & Casualty, where workers are given the option of reducing their workweek or compressing the time into fewer days. Under this arrangement, a parent who wants to spend more time at home with the children can opt to cut working hours from 40 down to 30 per week or put in four 10-hour days and have a long weekend with the kids. In either case, these personal decisions do not negatively affect the employee’s opportunities for promotion. Why is the company so willing to accommodate the personal desires of the workers? One of the main reasons is that 54 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context Aetna was losing hundreds of talented people every year and felt that the cost to the company was too great. Something had to be done to keep these people on the payroll. As a result, today approximately 2,000 of Aetna’s 44,000 employees work part-time, share a job, work at home, or are on a compressed workweek arrangement. The company estimates that it saves approximately $1 million annually by not having to train new workers. Moreover, the company reported that in one recent year 88 percent of those employees who took family leave returned to work. An added benefit of this program is the fact that Aetna’s reputation as a good place to work has been strengthened. The Families and Work Institute recently named Aetna one of the top four “family-friendly” companies. Duke Power & Light is another good example of how companies are changing their approach to managing employees. Realizing that child care is a growing need among many employees, because in most households both parents now work, the company joined forces with other employers to build a child care center. The firm has also changed its work schedule assignments. In the past, many employees reported that they hated working swing shifts: days one week, evenings the next, and then nights. So the firm created 22 work schedules and now lets employees bid on them annually, based on seniority. Some of these shifts are the traditional five-day week of eight-hour days. Others, however, are compressed workweek alternatives, including four 10-hour days and three 12-hour days. At the same time, the company has been turning more authority over to the personnel and has driven up its employee-to-manager ratio from 12 to 1 to 20 to 1. As a result, the company now has an attrition rate that is over three times lower than the industry average, and most of this attrition is a result of people’s transferring to other jobs in the utility. As one manager put it, “We needed to recognize that people have lives.” On the basis of results, it is obvious that the new arrangement is a win-win situation for both the workers and the firm. 1. How is the new management philosophy described in this case different from that of the old, traditional philosophy? Identify and describe the differences. 2. In what way are alternative work schedules proving helpful to managing diversity? 3. Do you think these new programs are likely to continue or will they taper off? Why? Organizational Behavior Case: Changing with the Times Jerry is director of marketing for a large toy company. Presently, his team of executives consists entirely of white males. The company says it is committed to diversity and equal opportunity. In a private conversation with Robert, the company president, about the makeup of top-level management in the marketing department, Jerry admitted that he tends to promote people who are like him. Jerry stated, “It just seems like when a promotion opportunity exists in our department, the perfect person for the job happens to be a white male. Am I supposed to actively seek women and minorities, even if I don’t feel that they are the best person for the job? After all, we aren’t violating the law, are we?” Robert responded, “So far the performance in your department has been good, and as far as I know, we are not violating any discrimination laws. Your management team seems to work well together, and we don’t want to do anything to upset that, especially considering the big marketing plans we have for this coming fiscal year.” The big marketing plans Robert is referring to have to do with capturing a sizable share of the overseas market. The company thinks that a large niche exists in various countries around the world—and who better to fill that niche than an organization that has proved it can make top-quality toys at a competitive price? Now the marketing team has the task of determining which countries to target, which existing toys will sell, and which new toys need to be developed. 1. Do Jerry and Robert understand what “management of diversity” means? How would you advise them? 2. Considering the marketing plans, how could they benefit from a more diverse management team? Be specific. Chapter 2 Environmental Context: Globalization, Diversity, and Ethics 55 Real Case: The Ethics of Downsizing Downsizing refers to a company’s decision to reduce its workforce for reasons other than poor performance, criminal conduct, or unethical behavior on the part of those being let go. The word is a euphemism meant to soften the blow as much for the company as it is for the soon-to-be eliminated. There is nothing wrong with making a diffıcult task easier to bear. In fact, there are good ethical reasons for doing so, as we’ll soon see. Still, there is no getting around the fact that downsizing is a type of layoff, with all that this implies. The ethical manager will keep in mind what is really going on when he or she is charged with letting good people go. DOING IT THE RIGHT WAY WHY DOWNSIZING IS AN ETHICAL ISSUE Respecting others means honoring their wishes and values, and it is reasonable to assume that most people would prefer to have troubling news delivered in private. This means in your offıce, with the door closed. I’ve heard of managers who broke the bad news at the employee’s cubicle within earshot of everyone in the vicinity. Again, one would think that this would be a matter of common sense and common decency, but apparently neither is all that common. Anytime we’re faced with a decision that can affect the rights or well-being of others, we’re looking at an ethical issue. No matter how strong the justifications for reducing the workforce are or seem to be, laying off loyal and productive employees is an upsetting experience for all concerned, and those on the receiving end face not just financial but psychological injury. How so? For many of us, the workplace isn’t just a place for work; it’s where we develop and maintain some of the most important relationships we have. During the week, we spend more time with coworkers than with our families, and for better or worse, work is how many of us define ourselves and give meaning to our lives. Getting laid off compromises all of these things, so managers should think of downsizing as a deep and painful trauma for those being let go, and not as a mere setback or reversal of fortune. Yes, downsizing has legal implications, and it is understandable that companies want to minimize their liability when they downsize. Yes, there are economic matters to consider, which makes downsizing a management issue, too. But at its core, downsizing is an ethical issue, and the good manager is concerned not just with protecting the company’s financial and legal interests but also with honoring the dignity and integrity of the human beings who work on the front lines and who are the lifeblood of the organization. 1. Do It in Person. This seems the obvious thing to do, but I’m surprised by the number of reports I’ve heard about employees who were downsized on the phone or by e-mail. Managers who use this method claim it makes the whole thing easier to deal with. Yes, but for whom? Certainly not for the employee being let go. As uncomfortable as it is to end someone’s employment, the right thing to do is to have a private conversation with him or her in person. The ethical principle of respect for others requires nothing less. 2. Do It Privately. 3. Give the Person Your Full Attention. Interrupting the conversation to take phone calls, check your BlackBerry, or engage in other distractions isn’t just rude, it tells the other person that the matter at hand isn’t all that important to you. That’s yet another violation of the principle of respect. The impulse to turn your attention to less troubling matters is understandable, but along with the privileges of being a manager come responsibilities, and downsizing with integrity is one of the most important obligations you have. 4. Be Honest, but Not Brutally So. Must you always tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes, if you’re giving sworn testimony in a court of law, but beyond the courtroom the duty to tell the truth is constrained by the duty to minimize harm. In practical terms, this means being forthright with the employee but also choosing with the care the words, tone of voice, and demeanor you use. Compassion—literally, “suffering with” someone—honors the dignity of your employee and speaks to the better part of your nature. 56 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context We can’t always make things better, but we shouldn’t make things worse. 5. Don’t Rush. A shock takes time to absorb. Imagine that your physician says you have a serious illness. Wouldn’t you expect him or her to allow the news sink in, rather than to summarily dismiss you and call for the next patient? Being let go isn’t as serious as getting a diagnosis of cancer or heart disease, but it is still a major, life-changing event. You owe your employee the space to absorb the information, and you may have to explain more than once what is happening and why. You would demand nothing less if it were happening to you, and you would be right to do so. 1. Do you agree that downsizing is an ethical issue? 2. Do you agree with the five guidelines for downsizing ethically? Would you add any others? 3. What if you do not agree with the reason for the downsizing? Ethically, how would you respond? Would you be willing to resign? Chapter Three Organizational Context: Design and Culture Learning Objectives • Explain the organizational theory foundation for design and culture. • Present contemporary horizontal, hollow, modular, network, and virtual designs of organizations. • Define organizational culture and its characteristics. • Relate how an organizational culture is created. • Describe how an organizational culture is maintained. • Explain some ways of changing organizational culture. This chapter moves from the external environments to the organizational context for organizational behavior. Specifically, this chapter is concerned with organization design and culture. Organization structure represents the skeletal framework for organizational behavior. As the discussion of the conceptual framework in Chapter 1 points out, the organization design and culture are dominant environmental factors that interact with the personal cognitions and the behavior. The first part of the chapter presents the organization from the viewpoint of theory and design. As Chapter 2 points out, globalization has had a dramatic impact on organization structures. Theories, designs, and networks have emerged to meet the contemporary situation. For example, well-known companies, such as General Electric, have eliminated vertical structures and adopted horizontal designs. The new environment has forever changed organization design and interorganizational relationships. The modern approach to organization theory and design consists of very flexible networks and recognizes the interaction of technology and people. For example, one organization theorist has noted: “Organization structure is more than boxes on a chart; it is a pattern of interactions and coordination that links the technology, tasks, and human components of the organization to ensure that the organization accomplishes its purposes.”1 There is also a renewed recognition for the role that structure (or lack of structure) plays in innovation, change, and learning in today’s and future organizations. The remainder of the chapter is concerned with the cultural context that the organization provides for organizational behavior. After first defining what is meant by organizational culture, the discussion turns to the different types, how they are changing, and how they can be changed to meet the challenges of the new external environment and organization designs. 57 58 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context THE ORGANIZATIONAL THEORY FOUNDATION Some organization theorists argue that the classical hierarchical, bureaucratic theory of organizations was mistranslated and really was not meant to be an ideal type of structure. Instead, the hierarchical bureaucracy from the beginning emphasized the need to adapt to environmental change. However, until the late 1970s organizations were largely selfcontained and a vertical chain of command with high degrees of control (i.e., a bureaucratic structure) sufficed. After a brief overview of the historical roots, the more recent theories that expand upon and are more sophisticated than the classic bureaucratic theory are summarized. These serve as a point of departure and foundation for the contemporary organization designs. Historical Roots The real break with classical thinking on organizational structure is generally recognized to be the work of Chester Barnard. In his significant book The Functions of the Executive, he defined a formal organization as a system of consciously coordinated activities of two or more persons.2 It is interesting to note that in this often-cited definition, the words system and persons are given major emphasis. People, not boxes on an organization chart, make up a formal organization. Barnard was critical of the existing classical organization theory because it was too descriptive and superficial. He was especially dissatisfied with the classical bureaucratic view that authority should come from the top down. Barnard, using a more analytical approach, took an opposite viewpoint. He maintained that authority really should come from the bottom up, rather than the top-down bureaucratic approach. Besides authority, Barnard stressed the cooperative aspects of organizations. This concern reflects the importance that he attached to the human element in organization structure and analysis. It was Barnard’s contention that the existence of a cooperative system is contingent on the human participants’ ability to communicate and their willingness to serve and strive toward a common purpose. Under such a premise, the human being plays the most important role in the creation and perpetuation of formal organizations. Modern Theoretical Foundation From this auspicious historical beginning from Barnard, modern organization theory has evolved in several directions. The first major development in organization theory was to view the organization as a system made up of interacting parts. The open-systems concept especially, which stresses the input of the external environment, has had a tremendous impact on modern organization theory. This development was followed by an analysis of organizations in terms of their ability to process information in order to reduce the uncertainty in managerial decision making. The next development in organization theory is the contingency approach. The premise of the contingency approach is that there is no single best way to organize. The organizational design must be fitted to the existing environmental conditions. One of the modern theoretical approaches is a natural selection—or ecological—view of organizations. This organizational ecology theory challenges the contingency approach. Whereas the contingency approach suggests that organizations change through internal transformation and adaptation, the ecological approach says that it is more a process of the “survival of the fittest”; there is a process of organizational selection and replacement. Finally are information processing and organizational learning. These most recent approaches to organization theory are based largely on systems theory and emphasize the importance of generative over adaptive learning in fast-changing external environments such as is covered in Chapter 2 on globalization. All these organization theories serve as Chapter 3 Organizational Context: Design and Culture 59 a foundation for the remaining discussion of the organizational context for organizational behavior. The learning organization represents contemporary organization theory and is compatible with and is relevant to the new paradigm environment facing today’s organizations. What Is Meant by a Learning Organization? The organization portrayed as a learning system is certainly not new.3 In fact, at the turn of the last century Frederick W. Taylor’s learnings on scientific management were said to be transferable to workers to make the organization more efficient. However, the beginning of today’s use of the term learning organization is usually attributed to the seminal work of Chris Argyris and his colleagues, who made the distinction between first-order, or “singleloop,” and second-order, or dentero or “double-loop,” learning.4 The differences between these two types of learning applied to organizations can be summarized as follows: 1. Single-loop learning involves improving the organization’s capacity to achieve known objectives. It is associated with routine and behavioral learning. Under single-loop, the organization is learning without significant change in its basic assumptions. 2. Double-loop learning reevaluates the nature of the organization’s objectives and the values and beliefs surrounding them. This type of learning involves changing the organization’s culture. Importantly, double-loop consists of the organization’s learning how to learn.5 The other theorist most closely associated with learning organizations, Peter Senge and his colleagues, then proceeded to portray this type of organization from a systems theory perspective and made the important distinction between adaptive and generative learning.6 The simpler adaptive learning is only the first stage of the learning organization, adapting to environmental changes. In recent years, many banks, insurance firms, and old-line manufacturing companies made many adaptive changes such as implementing total quality management (or TQM), benchmarking (comparing with best practices), Six Sigma (a goal of virtually no defects in any process) programs, and customer service initiatives. However, despite the popularity and general success of these efforts to adapt to changing customer expectations for quality and service, organizations have still struggled with their basic assumptions, cultural values, and structure. They have not gone beyond mere adaptive learning.7 The more important generative learning was needed. Generative learning involves creativity and innovation, going beyond just adapting to change to being ahead of and anticipating change.8 The generative process leads to a total reframing of an organization’s experiences and learning from that process. For example, the largest car dealer, AutoNation, totally reframed and showed generative learning from the nightmare customers typically experience in trying to buy a used auto. This firm anticipated customer needs by proactively addressing key issues such as a no-haggling sales process, providing a warranty on used cars, and being able to buy from any one of hundreds of car lots. With the theoretical foundation largely provided by Argyris (double-loop learning) and Senge (generative learning), we conducted a comprehensive review to identify the major characteristics of learning organizations.9 Figure 3.1 shows the three major dimensions or characteristics of learning organizations that emerged out of the considerable literature. The presence of tension—Senge calls it “creative tension”—serves as a catalyst or motivational need to learn. As shown in Figure 3.1, this tension stems from the gap between the organization’s vision (which is hopefully always being adjusted upward) and reality and suggests the learning organization’s continually questioning and challenging the status quo. The systems characteristic of learning organizations recognizes the shared vision of employees throughout the whole organization and the openness to new ideas and the 60 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context FIGURE 3.1 Presence of Tension • Gap between vision and reality • Questioning/inquiry • Challenging status quo • Critical reflection Characteristics of Learning Organizations. LEARNING ORGANIZATION Systems Thinking • Shared vision • Holistic thinking • Openness Culture Facilitating Learning • Suggestions • Teamwork • Empowerment • Empathy external environment. The third major characteristic shown in Figure 3.1 is an organizational culture conducive to learning. The culture of the organization places a high value on the process of learning and goes beyond mere lip service by setting mechanisms in place for suggestions, teams, empowerment, and, most subtly but importantly, empathy. This empathy is reflected by the genuine concern for and interest in employee suggestions and innovations that can be operationalized through reward systems. Organizational Behavior in the Learning Organization Taken to a more individual employee, organizational behavior level, the adaptive learning organization would be associated with employees’ reacting to environmental changes with routine, standard responses that often result in only short-run solutions. In contrast, generative learning, with its emphasis on continuous experimentation and feedback, would directly affect the way personnel go about defining and solving problems. Employees in generative learning organizations are taught how to examine the effect of their decisions and to change their behaviors as needed. A good example occurred at Children’s Hospital and Clinic of Minnesota. They learned to institute a new policy of “blameless reporting” that replaced threatening terms such as “errors” and “investigations” with less emotional terms such as “accidents” and “analysis.” As described by Garvin, Edmondson, and Gino, “The result was that people started to collaborate throughout the organization to talk about and change behaviors, policies, and systems that put patients at risk. Over time, these learning activities yielded measurable reductions in preventable deaths and illnesses at the institution.”10 Learning organizations are also characterized by human-oriented cultural values such as these: (1) everyone can be a source of useful ideas, so personnel should be given access to any information that can be of value to them; (2) the people closest to the problem usually have the best ideas regarding how to solve it, so empowerment should be promoted throughout the structure; (3) learning flows up and down, so managers as well as employees can benefit from it; (4) new ideas are important and should be encouraged and rewarded; and (5) mistakes should be viewed as learning opportunities.11 The last point of Chapter 3 Organizational Context: Design and Culture 61 learning from failures is an especially important cultural value for people in the learning organization. Learning Organizations in Action There are a number of ways that the learning organization can be operationalized into the actual practice of management. For example, managers must be receptive to new ideas and overcome the desire to closely control operations. Many organizations tend to do things the way they have done them in the past. Learning organizations break this mold and teach their people to look at things differently. For example, several years ago British Petroleum (BP) was bogged down in their bureaucratic structure and control procedures, accumulated a huge debt, and had some of the highest costs in the industry. Then a new CEO took over, sold off the firm’s unrelated business, and implemented a corporate strategy mostly based on speed and rapid learning. BP was redesigned as follows: Functional and divisional walls that inhibited cooperation, resource sharing, and internal debate were leveled to promote forward thinking, the learning of new managerial competencies, and the adoption of risk taking behaviors. Most importantly, a rejuvenated senior management team began cultivating a new culture that emphasized knowledge sharing, open communications, team-building, and breakthrough thinking throughout the firm.12 By the turn of the century, BP had a learning-driven culture in place, the old bureaucratic boundaries were down, everyone in the firm shared knowledge with everyone else, and BP became the lowest-cost producer in the oil industry. As was done at BP, the move toward a learning organization entails breaking out of the highly controlled, layered hierarchy that is characteristic of bureaucratic structures. The accompanying OB in Action: Breaking Out of the Box gives a number of real-world managers’ examples of problems with bureaucracies and how to think outside the box and bust out of them. In other words, the beginning point in establishing a learning organization is to recognize that bureaucracies have too often become an end to themselves instead of supporting the vision and goals that require adapting to the changing environment and learning how to do that. Besides breaking out of bureaucracies, another way to operationalize the learning process in organizations is to develop systemic thinking among managers. This involves the ability to see connections among issues, events, and data as a whole rather than a series of unconnected parts. Learning organizations teach their people to identify the source of conflict they may have with other personnel, units, and departments and to negotiate and make astute trade-offs both skillfully and quickly. Managers must also learn, especially, how to encourage their people to redirect their energies toward the substance of disagreements rather than toward personality clashes or political infighting. For example, in most successful firms today, interfunctional teams, increasingly at a distance (virtually), work on projects, thus removing the artificial barriers between functional areas and between line and staff. For example, at Mars Drinks, the top management team is structured globally, with both regional general managers and functional heads. Even the president is not only on this team, but also multiple other teams depending on, in his words, “what the issue of the day is and whether I have particular expertise in those areas.”13 A research study confirms the important impact that team learning can have on organizational learning.14 Another practice of learning organizations is to develop creativity among personnel. Creativity is the ability to formulate unique approaches to problem solving and decision making. In generative learning organizations, creativity is most widely acknowledged as a requisite skill and ability. Two critical dimensions of creativity, which promote and help 62 Part One OB in Action: Environmental and Organizational Context Breaking Out of the Box Anyone who has worked in the corporate world, held a government job—or lived in Europe—knows well how bureaucracy can drive even those of sound mind to distraction. All too often it stifles good ideas, slows progress, and frustrates employees. A recent survey ranked “Negotiating a Stultifying Bureaucracy” third among most pressing workplace problems. “You can’t even get a light bulb changed without putting in a work order,” says Wayde Alford, a cost estimator at a major defense contractor near Jacksonville, Florida. Alford says he cuts through red tape by cozying up to colleagues and requesting favors. Otherwise, a task as simple as changing that bulb can take two months to accomplish. Maybe it’s not that bad in your organization. But just in case, here’s a sampling of other suggestions for bureaucracy-busting: Bill Fox, managing partner, VanguardComm, New Brunswick, New Jersey. It’s been said that successful corporate survivors are “system beaters.” Just like in judo, where you use your opponent’s momentum against them, in bureaucracies if you learn the system you can use it against the bureaucrats. For example, very often bureaucratic requirements are more about form than substance. So as long as you fill out the proper paperwork, dot the i’s, and cross the t’s, you can get what you want approved; your request complied with the bureaucrats’ system and that’s their primary concern. Arthur “Buck” Nimz, certified Defense Dept. enterprise architect and principal research specialist, MS2, Lockheed Martin, Moorestown, New Jersey. Foster an environment of innovation that reaches out beyond your org chart and tries to capture the intellectual diversity of others in your company who have different perspectives on the business and the market. Legendary GE CEO Jack Welch called this “boundaryless thinking,” which is a mindset that transcends bureaucracy and creates a behavioral culture of innovation. Marshall Potts, managing director, Jasper International, Nottingham, England. Bureaucracies don’t tolerate deviation from set ways of doing things. In an increasingly competitive world, this inflexibility is a major stumbling block. One way leaders could address this is to find someone to explain to their organization’s senior team what sustains the bureaucracy, what it costs them, what the competition is doing differently, and finally, the impact of resisting change. John Sheeran, Bateau Bay, Australia. Keep a very low hierarchy and give all levels of staff a vested interest in the success of the company . . . Also, keep the family of staff involved. Chris Bylander, CEO, International American Group, St. Louis and Stockholm. We delegate responsibility whenever possible. Employees, no matter what rank, come to understand “bureaucracy” as something else—namely corporate governance—when they voluntarily interact with it on a get-the-job-done basis. Daniel S. Mulhall, educational consultant, Laurel, Maryland. The challenge is to control and manage bureaucracy so that it serves the corporate body, not controls it. Bureaucracy itself should be reviewed and evaluated on a regular basis so that harmful pieces are rejected and helpful pieces kept and reinforced. George Peterson, vice-president for international relations, SolBridge International School of Business, Daejeon, South Korea. Work to eliminate bureaucracy: Make a nonbureaucratic environment part of the corporate policy statement; have an efficient process to get input from employees on bureaucracy problem areas; eliminate the problems identified. Brian Behler, Lomita, California. Transparency with regular communication is the only solution. There are huge differences in the amount of bureaucracy at various companies today. A supervisor who doesn’t engage and communicate will lose his best and brightest to a more nimble company. Cecil Sunder, Level 3 Communications, Broomfield, Colorado. Map processes and executives will soon realize where the bottlenecks are. Because of SarbOx and other mandates it is a necessary evil to have some kind of bureaucracy, but it should not stagnate the work. unleash creativity, are personal flexibility and a willingness to take risks. As a result, many learning organizations now teach their people how to review their current work habits and change behaviors that limit their thinking. Whereas typical organizations focus on new ways to use old thinking, learning organizations focus on getting employees to break their operating habits and think “outside the box” (see the OB in Action: Breaking Out of the Box). Creativity also includes the willingness to accept failure. A 62 Chapter 3 Organizational Context: Design and Culture 63 TABLE 3.1 Senge’s Summary of Traditional versus Learning Organizations Source: Adapted from Peter M. Senge, “Transforming the Practice of Management,” Human Resource Development Quarterly, Spring 1993, p. 9. Function Traditional Organizations Learning Organizations Determination of overall direction Vision is provided by top management. Formulation and implementation of ideas Nature of organizational thinking Top management decides what is to be done, and the rest of the organization acts on these ideas. Each person is responsible for his or her own job responsibilities, and the focus is on developing individual competence. Conflicts are resolved through the use of power and hierarchical influence. There is a shared vision that can emerge from many places, but top management is responsible for ensuring that this vision exists and is nurtured. Formulation and implementation of ideas take place at all levels of the organization. Conflict resolution Leadership and motivation The role of the leader is to establish the organization’s vision, provide rewards and punishments as appropriate, and maintain overall control of employee activities. Personnel understand their own jobs as well as the way in which their own work interrelates with and influences that of other personnel. Conflicts are resolved through the use of collaborative learning and the integration of diverse viewpoints of personnel throughout the organization. The role of the leader is to build a shared vision, empower the personnel, inspire commitment, and encourage effective decision making throughout the enterprise through the use of empowerment and charismatic leadership. well-known story at IBM tells of the worried manager going to a meeting with his boss after his project had failed. Getting right to the point, the trembling manager blurted out, “I suppose you’re going to have to fire me.” But his boss quickly replied, “Why would I do that, we’ve just invested $6 million in your education.” In other words, learning organizations such as IBM treat failure as a learning opportunity, and also the way it is treated creates a climate for future creativity. Managers encourage risk-taking, creative behavior by providing a supportive environment. A cultural value or slogan such as “ready, fire, aim” depicts such an environment. Well-known learning organization theorist and consultant Peter Senge summarizes the differences between learning organizations and traditional organizations in Table 3.1. These differences help illustrate why learning organizations are gaining in importance and why an increasing number of enterprises are now working to develop a generative learning environment. They realize the benefits that can result. There is also empirical research evidence suggesting a positive association between the learning organization concept and firms’ financial performance.15 The classical organization theories are still depended upon in today’s organizations, but organizational learning goes a necessary step further to the understanding of effective organizations in the new paradigm environment. MODERN ORGANIZATION DESIGNS Along with organization theorists, many practicing managers are becoming disenchanted with traditional ways of designing their organizations. Up until a decade or so ago, most managers attempted only timid modifications of classical bureaucratic structures16 and balked at daring experimentation and innovation. However, with changing environmental 64 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context demands, managers overcame this resistance to making drastic organizational changes. They realized that the simple solutions offered by the classical theories were no longer adequate in the new paradigm environment.17 In particular, the needs for flexibility, adaptability to change, creativity, innovation, knowledge, as well as the ability to overcome environmental uncertainty, are among the biggest challenges facing a growing number of organizations. The response was first to move away from the self-contained, control-oriented, vertical hierarchical bureaucratic structures to horizontal designs (and thinking). Horizontal Organizations Horizontal designs are at the other end of the continuum from the traditional vertical, hierarchical structures. In a comprehensive analysis of the recent evolution of organizational design, Anand and Daft noted that “the horizontal organization advocates the dispensing of internal boundaries that are an impediment to effective business performance. If the traditional structure can be likened to a pyramid, the metaphor that best applies to the horizontal organization is a pizza—flat, but packed with all the necessary ingredients.”18 The modern environment covered in the last chapter has stimulated the change to horizontal designs that better facilitate cooperation, teamwork, and a customer rather than a functional orientation. Frank Ostroff, a McKinsey & Company consultant, along with colleague Douglas Smith, is given credit for developing some of the following guiding principles that define horizontal organization design.19 1. Organization revolves around the process, not the task. Instead of creating a structure around the traditional functions, the organization is built around its three to five core processes. Each process has an “owner” and specific performance goals. 2. The hierarchy is flattened. To reduce levels of supervision, fragmented tasks are combined, work that fails to add value is eliminated, and activities within each process are cut to the minimum. 3. Teams are used to manage everything. Self-managed teams are the building blocks of the organization. The teams have a common purpose and are held accountable for measuring performance goals. 4. Customers drive performance. Customer satisfaction, not profits or stock appreciation, is the primary driver and measure of performance. 5. Team performance is rewarded. The reward systems are geared toward team results, not just individual performance. Employees are rewarded for multiple skill development rather than just specialized expertise. 6. Supplier and customer contact is maximized. Employees are brought into direct, regular contact with suppliers and customers. Where relevant, supplier and customer representatives may be brought in as full working members of in-house teams. 7. All employees need to be fully informed and trained. Employees should be provided all data, not just sanitized information on a “need to know” basis. However, they also need to be trained how to analyze and use the data to make effective decisions. Today, this horizontal structure is used by a number of organizations. For example, most large firms today (e.g., the auto firms, Xerox, Lexmark Printers, Eastman Kodak) use it for new product development. Another example would be AT&T units doing budgets based not on functions but on processes, such as the maintenance of a worldwide telecommunications network. Importantly, AT&T is also rewarding its people based on customer evaluations of the teams performing these processes. General Electric has also scrapped the vertical structure that was in place in its lighting business and replaced the design with a horizontal structure characterized by over 100 different processes and programs. In particular, to cut Chapter 3 Organizational Context: Design and Culture 65 out bureaucracy and solve organizational problems that cut across functions and levels, GE implemented its famous “Work Out” (as in get the work out and work out any problems to get it done) described as follows: Large groups of employees and managers—from different organizational levels and functions—come together to address issues that they identify or that senior management has raised as concerns. In small teams, people challenge prevailing assumptions about “the way we have always done things” and come up with recommendations for dramatic improvements in organizational processes.20 The Government Electronics group at Motorola has redesigned its supply-chain management organization so that it is now a process structure geared toward serving external customers. These horizontal designs are more relevant to today’s environmental needs for flexibility, speed, and cooperation. However, there may also be potential problems such as feelings of neglect and “turf battles” for those individuals and departments not included in the horizontal process flow and the advantages of technical expertise gained under the functional specializations may be diluted or sacrificed. A book on The Horizontal Organization suggests guiding principles such as the following to make horizontal designs as effective as possible. 1. Make teams, not individuals, the cornerstone of the organizational design and performance. 2. Decrease hierarchy by eliminating non-value-added work and by giving team members the authority to make decisions directly related to their activities within the process flow. 3. Emphasize multiple competencies and train people to handle issues and work in crossfunctional areas. 4. Measure for end-of-process performance objectives, as well as customer satisfaction, employee satisfaction, and financial contribution. 5. Build a corporate culture of openness, cooperation, and collaboration, a culture that focuses on continuous performance improvement and values employee empowerment, responsibility, and well-being.21 Contemporary Designs: Hollow and Modular Around the turn of the new century, especially with the advent of advanced information technology (i.e., the Internet and mobile/cell phones) and globalization (especially the emerging economies of China and India with their low-cost, skilled workforce), new organization designs emerged. Whereas the horizontal designs broke down the former bureaucratic hierarchical and functional specialization boundaries within an organization, the twenty-first century designs have extended and broken the boundaries of the organization itself. Specifically, in order to compete in the global economy, far-thinking management recognized and then embraced the fact that they needed to outsource selected tasks, functions, and processes. For example, much of manufacturing on all levels and industries was outsourced to China and other developing countries, while information processing and customer service was outsourced to India and a few other countries. This movement of entire processes outside the organization left what has been termed the “Hollow Organization” design22 and when just parts of the product or service are outsourced, it’s called the “Modular Organization” design.23 Initially, organizations involved in labor intensive manufacturing of toys, apparel, shoes (e.g., Nike and Reebok) moved to hollow designs that outsourced the entire process of making of their products and left them to focus on product design and marketing. Then in recent years manufacturing of all kinds has moved outside the United States and also 66 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context financial, accounting, and even medical service processes have left hollow organizations. Anand and Daft summarized the advantages of this design in terms of cost savings, tapping into best sources of specialization and technology, supplier competition and technology, and flexibility, but also the disadvantages of loss of in-house skills and innovation, reduced control over supply and quality, and even the threat of being entirely supplanted by suppliers.24 With an economic downturn such as the United States has experienced in recent times and rising wages abroad, there could be a movement toward what could be called “onshoring,” bringing outsourced jobs back to the United States. For example, DESA Heating Products had outsourced hundreds of jobs to China but is now bringing those jobs back to its Kentucky factory based on quality and transportation costs and service.25 As indicated, the modular designs are also based on outsourcing, but instead of the entire process being taken offshore, as in hollow designs (e.g., manufacturing, logistics, or customer service), the modular design consists of “decomposable product chunks provided by internal and external subcontractors.”26 For example, Bombardier’s business jet design consists of a dozen chunks provided by both internal (cockpit, center, and fuselage) and external subcontractors from around the world (e.g., Australia, Taiwan, Japan, Austria, and Canada) as well as the United States (e.g., General Electric for the engine and the avionics from Rockwell Collins). Industries that commonly use modular designs include auto, bicycle, consumer electronics, appliances, power tools, and computing products and software. Anand and Daft summarize the advantages of modular designs in terms of cost, speed of response to market changes, and innovation through recombination of modules in different ways.27 This flexibility advantage, however, is counterbalanced by problems with interfacing the modules and laggards in the supply chain affecting the whole system. An example of these advantages and disadvantages would be the auto firms Nissan and DaimlerChrysler. Nissan’s modular design is known for being very efficient because parts such as the frame, dashboard, and seats are made by subcontractors and then shipped to the Nissan plant for assembly. DaimlerChrysler, also using a modular design in producing its two-seater Smart Car, had trouble because the various subcontracted parts failed to properly snap into place. The resulting extensive debugging was very costly to DaimlerChrysler and embarrassingly delayed the launch of its hyped-up innovative car. Network Designs The commonality found in the horizontal, hollow, and modular organization designs is that they all provide an alternative to the traditional bureaucratic model in terms of both perspective and actual structure. All three of these contemporary designs are sometimes subsumed under the single term “Network Designs” because of the boundaryless conditions created by advanced information technology and globalization. As Rosalie Tung observed: The advent of the Internet (one of the world’s biggest networks), quantum advances in other means and modes of telecommunications, and continued globalization of the world economy have changed all that—it is now possible to form networks that link phenomenal numbers of people, organizations, and systems in disparate corners of the world at an alarming rate and speed. For example, some popular Web sites receive as many as 5 million hits a day, thus making instantaneous access to information and exchange of ideas among peoples from different geographic locations possible. In a similar vein, people from far corners of the world now regularly work together in virtual teams on various types of projects.28 Network organizations have been discussed in the academic literature for a number of years. For example, organization theorists Miles and Snow identified what they call the dynamic network.29 This involves a unique combination of strategy, structure, and management processes. They more recently have described the network organization as follows: Chapter 3 Organizational Context: Design and Culture 67 “Delayered, highly flexible, and controlled by market mechanisms rather than administrative procedures, firms with this new structure arrayed themselves on an industry value chain according to their core competencies, obtaining complementary resources through strategic alliances and outsourcing.”30 There is also research showing the impact that structure and information technology can have on network behavior and outcomes.31 With the advent of teams, outsourcing and, especially, alliances (two or more firms building a close collaborative relationship), network designs are being increasingly used by practicing organizations. Tapscott and Caston note that such networked organizations are “based on cooperative, multidisciplinary teams and businesses networked together across the enterprise. Rather than a rigid structure, it is a modular organizational architecture in which business teams operate as a network of what we call client and server functions.”32 Table 3.2 compares the various dimensions and characteristics of the traditional, hierarchical organization with the network organization. Although the network design cannot readily be drawn, as can the classical hierarchical and horizontal structures, Figure 3.2 is an attempt to at least show the concept. Miles and colleagues identified three types of radical redesign of organizations:33 1. Greenfield redesign. As the term implies, this means starting from just a piece of green field or from a clean slate, breaking completely from the classical structure and establishing a totally different design. Examples include such highly successful firms as Google and Southwest Airlines. For example, when Southwest Airlines started under the unique leadership of Herb Kelleher, the firm made a complete break from the traditional airline industry. The now retired Kelleher was described as having enormous intellectual capabilities, a love for people, a playful spirit, and a commanding personality; he once arm-wrestled an opponent in an advertising slogan dispute rather than going to court.34 Southwest created an organization that “flies in the face of bureaucracy: it stays lean, thinks small, keeps it simple—and more.”35 The successor to Kelleher, Jim Parker, noted the cross-functional nature of jobs at Southwest is more perceptual than real: “People should not be doing other people’s job but they need to understand all of those other jobs; they need to understand how their job fits into the overall performance of the vision and how the other jobs do as well.”36 TABLE 3.2 Tapscott and Caston Summary of Traditional Hierarchical versus the Network Organizations Source: Don Tapscott and Art Caston, Paradigm Shift, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1993, p. 11. Used with permission of McGraw-Hill. Dimension/Characteristic Traditional Organization Network Organization Structure Scope Resource focus State Personnel focus Key drivers Direction Basis of action Individual motivation Learning Basis for compensation Relationships Employee attitude Dominant requirements Hierarchical Internal/closed Capital Static, stable Managers Reward and punishment Management commands Control Satisfy superiors Specific skills Position in hierarchy Competitive (my turf) Detachment (it’s a job) Sound management Networked External/open Human, information Dynamic, changing Professionals Commitment Self-management Empowerment to act Achieve team goals Broader competencies Accomplishment, competence level Cooperative (our challenge) Identification (it’s my company) Leadership 68 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context FIGURE 3.2 Miles and Snow Summary of Hierarchical versus Network Organizations Source: Raymond E. Miles and Charles C. Snow, “The New Network Firm: A Spherical Structure Built on a Human Investment Philosophy,” Organizational Dynamics, Spring 1995, p. 6. Used with permission of the publisher © 1995, American Management Association, New York. All rights reserved. Rather than the old inflexible hierarchical pyramid, network organizations demand a flexible, spherical structure that can rotate competent, self-managing teams and other resources around a common knowledge base. Such teams, capable of quick action on the firm’s behalf both externally and internally, provide a distinct competitive advantage. 2. Rediscovery redesign. This is a more usual type of redesign, whereby established companies such as General Electric return to a previously successful design by eliminating unproductive structural additions and modifications. For example, several U.S. electronics firms such as Texas Instruments have reverted to some highly formalized, bureaucratic procedures in their product development process.37 3. Network design. Firms such as Harley-Davidson are not just redesigning in the “Greenfield” sense or rediscovering and extending their past. Instead, they are undergoing efforts to disaggregate and partner. In the network approach, the firm concentrates on where it can add the greatest value in the supply chain, and it outsources to upstream and/or downstream partners who can do a better job. This network of the firm and its upstream and downstream partners can be optimally effective and flexible. Another network approach is to require internal units of the firm to interact at market prices—buy and sell to each other at prices equal to those that can be obtained by outsourcing partners. This “insourcing” approach to the internal network organization can be found in global firms such as the well-known Swiss conglomerate Asea Brown Boveri (ABB). In addition, globalization challenges these multinational corporations to make sure they account for cultural differences (see OB in Action: One Size Doesn’t Fit All). The Virtual Organization Besides the more specific horizontal, hollow, and modular contemporary designs, another more all-encompassing design besides the network organization is the so-called virtual organization. This term virtual organization has emerged not so much because it describes something distinct from network organizations but because the term itself represents the new environment and the partnering, alliances, and outsourcing arrangements found in an increasing number of global companies. Anand and Daft note that “collaboration or joint ventures with competitors usually takes the form of a virtual organization—a company outside a company created to specifically respond to an exceptional market opportunity that is often temporary.”38 Interestingly, the word virtual as used here comes not from the popular virtual reality but from virtual memory, which has been used to describe a way of making a computer’s memory capacity appear to be greater than it really is but does require a strong information technology platform. OB in Action: One Size Doesn’t Fit All There are some things in the world that seem to be the same regardless of geographic location. Whether a pilot is flying into Kennedy International in New York or Heathrow in the U.K., one would assume the procedures for taking off and landing to be identical. The truth is, however, cultural differences may violate such assumptions. For example, most countries of the world have indeed agreed that English should be the universal language when pilots from anywhere are talking to air traffic controllers. On the other hand, French unions have encouraged their pilots to continue talking in French when landing at Charles de Gaulle airport. These culturally generated differences are not restricted to the airline industry. Many multinational companies are finding that it is extremely difficult to take a product that sells well in the home country and achieve equal success in a foreign market. The customs, culture, and behaviors of people in these markets are often quite different from those in the home country. For example, when Office Depot and Office Max entered the Japanese market, they were convinced that their wide variety of products, convenient store layout, and low prices would help them attain a significant market share. They were wrong. One of their major Japanese competitors realized something that the big American multinationals did not—small business firms account for a significant percentage of the office supply market, and these firms were anxious to get the same big discounts on their purchases as did large firms. So the Japanese company created a catalogue business that was geared specifically to small firms. In these companies clerks did much of the purchasing of business equipment, and they were happy to be able to look through a catalog and place orders from their desk rather than traveling to the store. Although chagrined by their efforts to compete effectively with their smaller Japanese rival, Office Depot and Office Max believed that they would be able to capture a large percentage of the remaining market—the walk-in customer. Again, they were foiled by their Japanese competitors. Unlike American customers, Japanese buyers do not mind shopping at small stores where the merchandise is crammed together. As a result, Office Depot and Office Max built large stores with wide aisles and ended up paying twice as much as their smaller competitors for rent and personnel salaries and were eventually forced to admit defeat. Their experience is not unique. When Bob’s Big Boy, the Michigan-based restaurant minichain, opened a series of units in Thailand, management was surprised to learn that local customers really did not care for the firm’s hamburgers. Local customers would rather buy a sweet satay, noodle bowl, or grilled squid from a street vendor at onefifth the cost. In fact, the owner of the Thai franchise system did not start making money until he began closely studying the potential customers who were walking past his restaurants. He then realized that these potential customers fell into two broad categories: European tourists and young Thai people. This resulted in his changing the menu of his restaurants. For German customers he began offering specialties such as spatzle, beef, and chocolate cake. For local Thais there were country-style specialties such as fried rice and pork omelets. The owner also added sugar and chile powder to Big Boy’s burgers to better match Thai taste buds. Commenting on his eventual success, the adaptable owner recently noted, “We thought we were bringing American food to the masses. But now we’re bringing Thai and European food to the tourists. It’s strange, but you know what? It’s working.” And the reason is that the owner realizes market offerings have to be tailored to local demand. One size does not fit all. Different from traditional mergers and acquisitions, the partners in the virtual organization share costs, skills, and access to international markets. Each partner contributes to the virtual organization what it is best at—its core capabilities. Briefly summarized, here are some of the key attributes of the virtual organization: 1. Technology. Informational networks will help far-flung companies and entrepreneurs link up and work together from start to finish. The partnerships will be based on electronic contracts to keep the lawyers away and speed the linkups. 2. Opportunism. Partnerships will be less permanent, less formal, and more opportunistic. Companies will band together to meet all specific market opportunities and, more often than not, fall apart once the need evaporates. 69 70 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context 3. No borders. This new organizational model redefines the traditional boundaries of the company. More cooperation among competitors, suppliers, and customers makes it harder to determine where one company ends and another begins. 4. Trust. These relationships make companies far more reliant on each other and require far more trust than ever before. They share a sense of “codestiny,” meaning that the fate of each partner is dependent on the other. 5. Excellence. Because each partner brings its “core competence” to the effort, it may be possible to create a “best-of-everything” organization. Every function and process could be world class—something that no single company could achieve.39 Importantly, virtual organizations can help competitiveness in the global economy. The alliances and partnerships with other organizations can extend worldwide, the spatial and temporal interdependence easily transcend boundaries, and the flexibility allows easy reassignment and reallocation to take quick advantage of shifting opportunities in global markets.40 To avoid disintegration and attain effective needed focus, the lead virtual organization must have a shared vision, a strong brand, and, most important, a high-trust culture.41 For instance, competitors P&G and Clorox recently collaborated in forming a new generation of plastic wrap called GLAD Press’n Seal in order to effectively compete with market leader Saran. Other examples of firms that have formed virtual collaborations include Harley-Davidson and ABB—and also, on a smaller scale, firms such as Clark Equipment, a manufacturer of forklifts and other industrial equipment; Semco, a Brazilian firm producing pumps, valves, and other industrial products; Sweden’s Skandia Insurance Group (with 91,000 partners worldwide); and the Australian firm Technical and Computer Graphics (TCG). In the information technology industry, Sun Microsystems views itself as an intellectual holding company that designs computers and does all other functions (product ordering, manufacturing, distribution, marketing, and customer service) through contractual arrangements with partners located throughout the world, and Intel uses virtual teams with members from Ireland, Israel, England, France, and Asia working on a wide variety of projects. As with the network organization, it is not really possible to show a virtual organization, but Figure 3.3 FIGURE 3.3 Miles and Snow’s Example of a Virtual Organization: Technical and Computer Graphics (TCG), an Australian-Based Multinational Firm. Source: Raymond E. Miles and Charles C. Snow, “The New Network Firm: A Spherical Structure Built on a Human Investment Philosophy,” Organizational Dynamics, Spring 1995, p. 8. Used with permission of the publisher © 1995, American Management Association, New York. All rights reserved. A typical TCG firm of 5–10 professionals A TCG Project Leader An Internal Alliance Principal Customer (e.g., Telecom Australia) An External Alliance Joint Venture Partner (e.g., Toshiba) Chapter 3 Organizational Context: Design and Culture 71 depicts graphically how TCG would look as a virtual organization. Because networks and virtual organizations both represent such radically different ways to structure firms, there are many challenges ahead, especially on the human side of these contemporary structural forms. THE ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE CONTEXT Going from Chapter 2’s discussion of the globalization context to more of a micro cultural impact on organizational behavior is organizational culture. The remainder of the chapter defines organizational culture and examines the types and ways to change and manage organizational culture. Definition and Characteristics When people join an organization, they bring with them the values and beliefs they have been taught. Quite often, however, these values and beliefs are insufficient for helping the individual succeed in the organization. The person needs to learn how the particular enterprise does things. A good example is the U.S. Marine Corps. During boot camp, drill instructors teach recruits the “Marine way.” The training attempts to psychologically strip down the new recruits and then restructure their way of thinking and their values. They are taught to think and act like Marines. Anyone who has been in the Marines or knows someone who has will verify that the Corps generally accomplishes its objective. In a less-dramatic way, today’s organizations do the same thing. For example, UPS is known for having a militarylike corporate culture. However, as an outside observer who embedded himself (i.e., riding “shotgun” next to drivers and aiding with deliveries during the Christmas rush) noted: “Although the job is highly regimented, it includes enough independence for workers to be energized by the daily challenge of getting all the packages out and importantly, when there were problems, drivers, not technology, were the best at solving them.”42 The same is true in more complex organizations where a key challenge is to instill and sustain a corporatewide culture that encourages knowledge sharing. As the partner in charge of Ernst & Young’s knowledge-based business solution practice notes, “If you’re going to have a rich knowledge-sharing culture, that can’t just be a veneer on top of the business operation. You have to have people who can make sense out of it and apply it.”43 Edgar Schein, who is probably most closely associated with the study of organizational culture, defines it as a pattern of basic assumptions—invented, discovered, or developed by a given group as it learns to cope with its problems of external adaptation and internal integration—that has worked well enough to be considered valuable and, therefore, to be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think, and feel in relation to those problems.44 More recently, Joanne Martin emphasizes the differing perspectives of cultures in organizations. She notes: As individuals come into contact with organizations, they come into contact with dress norms, stories people tell about what goes on, the organization’s formal rules and procedures, its formal codes of behavior, rituals, tasks, pay systems, jargon, and jokes only understood by insiders, and so on. These elements are some of the manifestations of organizational culture.45 However, she adds that there is another perspective of culture as well: When cultural members interpret the meanings of these manifestations, their perceptions, memories, beliefs, experiences, and values will vary, so interpretations will differ—even of 72 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context the same phenomenon. The patterns or configurations of these interpretations, and the ways they are enacted, constitute culture.46 In other words, organizational culture is quite complex. Although there are a number of problems and disagreements associated with the conceptualization of organizational culture, most definitions, including the preceding, recognize the importance of shared norms and values that guide organizational participants’ behavior. In fact, there is research evidence that not only are these cultural values taught to newcomers, but newcomers seek out and want to learn about their organization’s culture.47 Organizational culture has a number of important characteristics. Some of the most readily agreed upon are the following: 1. Observed behavioral regularities. When organizational participants interact with one another, they use common language, terminology, and rituals related to deference and demeanor. 2. Norms. Standards of behavior exist, including guidelines on how much work to do, which in many organizations come down to “Do not do too much; do not do too little.” 3. Dominant values. There are major values that the organization advocates and expects the participants to share. Typical examples are high product quality, low absenteeism, and high efficiency. 4. Philosophy. There are policies that set forth the organization’s beliefs about how employees and/or customers are to be treated. 5. Rules. There are strict guidelines related to getting along in the organization. Newcomers must learn those “ropes” in order to be accepted as full-fledged members of the group. 6. Organizational climate. This is an overall “feeling” that is conveyed by the physical layout, the way participants interact, and the way members of the organization conduct themselves with customers or other outsiders. Each of these characteristics has controversies surrounding it and varying degrees of research support. For example, there is controversy in the academic literature over the similarities and differences between organizational culture and organizational climate.48 However, there is empirical support for some of the characteristics, such as the important role that physical layout plays in organizational culture. Here is a real-world illustration: Nike Inc. serves as an excellent example of a company that successfully revealed its corporate culture through corporate design. Set on 74 sprawling acres amid the pine groves of Beaverton, Oregon, the Nike World campus exudes the energy, youth and vitality that have become synonymous with Nike’s products. The campus is almost a monument to Nike’s corporate values: the production of quality goods and, of course, fitness. Included in the sevenbuilding campus is an athletic club with a track, weight rooms, aerobic studios, tennis, racquetball and squash courts, and a basketball court.49 The six characteristics of culture are not intended to be all-inclusive. For example, a study examined why companies were rated as most and least admired. Statistical analysis was conducted that compared the findings from a subjective opinion survey of reputation with what one might expect perceptions to be if they are based solely on financial performance. The financial measures that correlated most closely with the opinion of a firm’s “reputation” over a decade ago were, in order, 10-year annual return to shareholders, profits as a percent of assets, total profits, and stock market value.50 As the head of Coca-Cola, one of the most admired companies for many years, declared at that time: “I get paid to make the owners of Coca-Cola Co. increasingly wealthy with each passing day. Chapter 3 Organizational Context: Design and Culture 73 Everything else is just fluff.”51 Obviously, bottom-line financial performance remains important, but a more recent analysis of Fortune’s admired companies found the most highly correlated attribute of those that scored in the top three of their industry was the “attraction and retention of top talent,” and a major way these top firms do this is to take their culture and values seriously.52 For example, currently admired firms such as the software firm SAS, Southwest Airlines, and Google attract and retain their best people because they give a lot of attention and care to their legendary cultures and values. As a recent analysis of how Toyota’s culture led it to become the top automaker concluded, the curiosity and spirit of Toyota people, as much as anything, has determined its success.53 In his final days, the former CEO of KPMG recognized the importance of a compassionate culture and urged his staff to “get the most out of each moment and day—for the firm’s benefit and the individual’s.”54 These cultures and values also drive business results and make them successful.55 Uniformity of Culture A common misconception is that an organization has a uniform culture. However, at least as anthropology uses the concept, it is probably more accurate to treat organizations “as if ” they had a uniform culture. “All organizations ‘have’ culture in the sense that they are embedded in specific societal cultures and are part of them.”56 According to this view, an organizational culture is a common perception held by the organization’s members. Everyone in the organization would have to share this perception. However, all may not do so to the same degree. As a result, there can be a dominant culture as well as subcultures throughout a typical organization. A dominant culture is a set of core values shared by a majority of the organization’s members. For example, most employees at Southwest Airlines seem to subscribe to such values as hard work, company loyalty, and the need for customer service. Southwest employees take to heart cultural values such as: irreverence is okay; it’s okay to be yourself; have fun at work; take the competition seriously, but not yourself; and do whatever it takes for the customer.57 Table 3.3 summarizes the FUNdamentals that are the core of the Southwest cultural values that are taught to the 25,000 associates who go through its corporate University for People every year. Those who work for Disney are: in the show, not on the job; wearing costumes, not uniforms; on stage or backstage, not at positions or workstations; cast members, not employees. When Disney cast members are presented with the riddle: “Ford makes cars, Sony makes TVs, Microsoft makes software, what does Disney make?”—all respond, “Disney makes people happy!”58 These values create a dominant culture in these organizations that helps guide the day-to-day behavior of employees. There is also evidence that these dominant cultures can have a positive impact on desirable outcomes such as successfully conducting mergers and acquisitions (e.g., when Dow AgroSciences purchased Cargil Hybris Seeds),59 supporting product-innovation processes,60 and helping firms cope with rapid economic and technological change.61 Important, but often overlooked, are the subcultures in an organization. A subculture is a set of values shared by a minority, usually a small minority, of the organization’s members. Subcultures typically are a result of problems or experiences that are shared by members of a department or unit. For example, even though GE has one of the most dominant overall corporate cultures of being boundaryless between the highly diversified divisions (e.g., ranging from power generation to media, plastics, financial services, aircraft engines, locomotives, medical equipment, and lighting and appliances), each also has a distinctive subculture. GE Capital has a distinctive culture compared to the high-tech manufacturing cultures of aircraft engines and gas turbines.62 74 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context TABLE 3.3 Southwest Airlines’ Core Cultural Values Source: Adapted from Anne Bruce, “Southwest: Back to the FUNdamentals,” HR Focus, March 1997, p. 11. Hire for attitudes, Train for skill. Do it Better, Faster, Cheaper. Deliver positively outrageous customer service (POS) to both internal and external customers! Walk a mile in someone else’s shoes. Take accountability and ownership. Celebrate and let your hair down. Celebrate your mistakes as well as your triumphs. Keep the corporate culture alive and well. The company deliberately looks for applicants with a positive attitude who will promote fun in the workplace and have the desire to “color outside the lines.” Cost control is a personal responsibility for employees at Southwest and is incorporated into all training programs. The Southwest philosophy? Put your employees first and they will take care of the customers. For example, a pilot works with ramp agents for a full day; a reservationist works in the University for People; a customer service agent helps the skycaps. And President Herb Kelleher frequently passes out peanuts and serves drinks on flights. He even helps the baggage handlers load and unload on holidays. A great value is placed on taking initiative, thinking for yourself, even if that means going against something in the policy manual. For instance, employees have been known to take stranded passengers back to their own homes in emergencies. Chili cook-offs, lavish Halloween productions, and Christmas parties in July are all tools for motivating people. When people have fun on the job, their productivity and performance improve. Turning failures into personal growth is part of celebrating mistakes, a philosophy that encourages trying new ideas without the fear of repercussions. Members of the culture committee visit regularly at stations all across the country, infusing the corporate culture, reiterating the company’s history, and motivating employees to maintain the spirit that made the airline great. Subcultures can weaken and undermine an organization if they are in conflict with the dominant culture and/or the overall objectives. Successful firms, however, find that this is not always the case.63 Most subcultures are formed to help the members of a particular group deal with the specific day-to-day problems with which they are confronted. The members may also support many, if not all, of the core values of the dominant culture. In the case of GE, the success of the company is their “social architecture,” which pulls the subcultures all together. As former president Jack Welch stated, “GE is greater than the sum of its parts because of the intellectual capacity that is generated in the businesses and the sharing that goes on of that learning and the rapid action on that learning.”64 CREATING AND MAINTAINING A CULTURE Some organizational cultures may be the direct, or at least indirect, result of actions taken by the founders. However, this is not always the case. Sometimes founders create weak cultures, and if the organization is to survive, a new top manager must be installed who will sow the seeds for the necessary strong culture. Thomas Watson, Sr. of IBM is a good example. Chapter 3 Organizational Context: Design and Culture 75 When he took over the CTR Corporation, it was a small firm manufacturing computing, tabulating, and recording equipment. Through his dominant personality and the changes he made at the firm, Watson created a culture that propelled IBM to be one of the biggest and best companies in the world. However, IBM’s problems in the early 1990s when the computer market shifted from mainframes to PCs also were largely attributed to its outdated culture. After Watson and his son, the leaders of IBM made some minor changes and modifications that had little impact and eventually left the company in bad shape. However, in recent years IBM, under the leadership of Louis Gerstner, launched into a bold new strategy that changed IBM from top to bottom. Mr. Gerstner became convinced that “all the cost-cutting in the world will be unable to save IBM unless it upends the way it does business.”65 This cultural change at IBM led to an outstanding turnaround that included getting out of the sale of computers. IBM is an example of an organization wherein a culture must be changed because the environment changes and the previous core cultural values are not in step with those needed for survival. The following sections take a close look at how organizational cultures get started, maintained, and changed. How Organizational Cultures Start Although organizational cultures can develop in a number of different ways, the process usually involves some version of the following steps: 1. A single person (founder) has an idea for a new enterprise. 2. The founder brings in one or more other key people and creates a core group that shares a common vision with the founder. That is, all in this core group believe that the idea is a good one, is workable, is worth running some risks for, and is worth the investment of time, money, and energy that will be required. 3. The founding core group begins to act in concert to create an organization by raising funds, obtaining patents, incorporating, locating space, building, and so on. 4. At this point, others are brought into the organization, and a common history begins to be built.66 Most of today’s successful corporate giants in all industries basically followed these steps. Two well-known representative examples are McDonald’s and Wal-Mart. • McDonald’s. Ray Kroc worked for many years as a salesperson for a food supplier (Lily Tulip Cup). He learned how retail food operations were conducted. He also had an entrepreneurial streak and began a sideline business with a partner. They sold multimixers, machines that were capable of mixing up to six frozen shakes at a time. One day Kroc received a large order for multimixers from the McDonald brothers. The order intrigued Kroc, and he decided to look in on the operation the next time he was in their area. When he did, Kroc became convinced that the McDonald’s fast-food concept would sweep the nation. He bought the rights to franchise McDonald’s units and eventually bought out the brothers. At the same time, he built the franchise on four basic concepts: quality, cleanliness, service, and price. In order to ensure that each unit offers the customer the best product at the best price, franchisees are required to attend McDonald University, where they are taught how to manage their business. Here they learn the McDonald cultural values and the proper way to run the franchise. This training ensures that franchisees all over the world are operating their units in the same way. Kroc died many years ago, but the culture he left behind is still very much alive in McDonald’s franchises across the globe. In fact, new employees receive videotaped messages from the late Mr. Kroc. Some of the more interesting of his pronouncements that reflect and carry on his values are his thoughts on cleanliness: “If you’ve got time to lean, you’ve 76 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context got time to clean.” About the competition he says: “If they are drowning to death, I would put a hose in their mouth.” And on expanding he declares: “When you’re green, you grow; when you’re ripe, you rot.” So even though he has not been involved in the business for many years, his legacy lives on. Even his office at corporate headquarters is preserved as a museum, his reading glasses untouched in their leather case on the desk. • Wal-Mart. Sam Walton, founder of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., opened his first Wal-Mart store in 1962. Focusing on the sale of discounted name-brand merchandise in smalltown markets, he began to set up more and more stores in the Sun Belt. At the same time, he began developing effective inventory control systems and marketing techniques. Today, Wal-Mart has not only become the largest retailer but also one of the biggest firms in the world. Although Sam died many years ago, his legacy and cultural values continue. For example, Walton himself stressed, and the current management staff continues to emphasize, the importance of encouraging associates to develop new ideas that will increase their store’s efficiency. If a policy does not seem to be working, the company quickly changes it. Executives continually encourage associates to challenge the current system and look for ways to improve it. Those who do these things are rewarded; those who do not perform up to expectations are encouraged to do better. Today, Walton’s founding values continue to permeate the organization. To make sure the cultural values get out to all associates, the company has a communication network worthy of the Pentagon. It includes everything from a satellite system to a private air force of numerous planes. Everyone is taught this culture and is expected to operate according to the core cultural values of hard work, efficiency, and customer service. Although the preceding stories of cultural development are well known, in recent years these and other well-known companies founded by charismatic leaders have had varied success. The same is true of the dot-com firms. Some, like Jeff Bezos’s founding and cultural development of Amazon.com, are in some ways similar to and in some ways different from the stories of Ray Kroc at McDonald’s or Sam Walton at Wal-Mart. They are similar in that both started from scratch with very innovative, “out of the box” ideas to build an empire and change the way business is done. They are different in terms of speed and style. Other corporate culture stories today are not necessarily about the founders, but about those who took their company to the next level. For example, John Chambers, the CEO of Cisco, is largely credited for taking this well-known high-tech firm from a market capitalization of $9 billion when he took over in 1995 to being the highest-valued corporation in the world five years later and then repositioning the firm when the economy began to slump.67 The culture of Cisco is largely attributed to his old-school values such as trust, hard work, and customer focus, but as the subsequent economic downturn and the rapid decline in the stock values of Cisco brought out, being at the right place at the right time in terms of the technology environment also had had a lot to do with Cisco’s initial success. After the bubble had burst for Cisco and the other high-tech and especially dot-com firms, those who had the strong, but flexible, cultures were the ones that survived the extreme roller-coaster ride of the economy in recent years. Chambers indicated such desirable organizational cultural values when he declared, “I have no love of technology for technology’s sake. Only solutions for customers.”68 Maintaining Cultures through Steps of Socialization Once an organizational culture is started and begins to develop, there are a number of practices that can help solidify the acceptance of core values and ensure that the culture maintains itself. These practices can be described in terms of several socialization steps. Figure 3.4 illustrates what Richard Pascale has identified as the sequence of these steps.69 Chapter 3 Organizational Context: Design and Culture FIGURE 3.4 Pascale’s Steps of Organizational Culture Socialization. Source: Richard Pascale, “The Paradox of Corporate Culture: Reconciling Ourselves to Socialization.” Copyright © by the Regents of the University of California. Reprinted from the California Management Review, Vol. 27, No. 2, Winter 1985, p. 38. By permission of the Regents. 77 START Consistent role models Careful selection of entry-level candidates DESELECT Humilityinducing experiences promote openness toward accepting organization’s norms and values In-the-trenches training leads to mastery of a core discipline Reinforcing folklore Adherence to values enables the reconciliation of personal sacrifices Rewards and control systems are meticulously refined to reinforce behavior that is deemed pivotal to success in the marketplace Selection of Entry-Level Personnel The first step is the careful selection of entry-level candidates. Using standardized procedures and seeking specific traits that tie to effective performance, trained recruiters interview candidates and attempt to screen out those whose personal styles and values do not make a “fit” with the organization’s culture. There is research indicating that newcomers’ and their supervisors’ perceptions of organization culture fit are related to organizational commitment and intention to leave the organization.70 There is also accumulating evidence that those who have a realistic preview (called realistic job preview, or RJP) of the culture will turn out better.71 An example of effective selection for cultural fit is North Shore Bank, a community bank in Wisconsin. One approach that they have implemented in order to maximize the “fit” as well as productivity is through recruitment and selection in neighborhoods closest to its branches. This helps customers and employees alike identify with the unique differences between their local bank and their large national bank competitors. Placement on the Job The second step occurs on the job itself, after the person with a fit is hired. New personnel are subjected to a carefully orchestrated series of different experiences whose purpose is to cause them to question the organization’s norms and values and to decide whether or not they can accept them. For example, many organizations with strong cultures make it a point to give newly hired personnel more work than they can handle. Sometimes these assignments are beneath the individual’s abilities. At Procter & Gamble, for example, new personnel may be required to color in a sales territory map. The experience is designed to convey the message, “Although you’re smart in some ways, you’re in kindergarten as far as what you know about this organization.” The objective is also to teach the new entrant into the culture the importance of humility. These experiences are designed to make newly hired personnel vulnerable and to cause them to move emotionally closer to their colleagues, thus 78 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context intensifying group cohesiveness. Campus fraternities and the military have practiced this approach for years. Job Mastery Once the initial “cultural shock” is over, the next step is mastery of one’s job. This is typically done via extensive and carefully reinforced field experience. For example, Japanese firms typically put new employees through a training program for several years. As personnel move along their career path, their performance is evaluated, and additional responsibilities are assigned on the basis of progress. Quite often companies establish a step-by-step approach to this career plan, which helps reduce efforts by the personnel to use political power or to take shortcuts in order to get ahead at a faster pace. Highly successful “Coca-Cola slowly steeps its new employees in the company culture—in this case, an understanding of the trademark’s image. The people system then ensures that only Coke managers who have been thoroughly socialized into worrying about the company as a whole get to make decisions affecting the company.”72 Measuring and Rewarding Performance The next step of the socialization process consists of meticulous attention to measuring operational results and to rewarding individual performance. These systems are comprehensive and consistent, and they focus on those aspects of the business that are most crucial to competitive success and to corporate values. For example, at Procter & Gamble there are three factors that are considered most important: building volume, building profit, and making changes that increase effectiveness or add satisfaction to the job. Operational measures are used to track these three factors, and performance appraisals are tied to milestones. Promotions and merit pay are determined by success in each of these critical areas. Motorola personnel are taught to adhere to the core cultural values through careful monitoring of team performance and through continual training programs. Typically, in companies with a strong culture, those who violate cultural norms, such as overzealousness against the competition or harsh handling of a subordinate, are sent to the “penalty box.” This typically involves a lateral move to a less-desirous location. For example, a branch manager in Chicago might be given a nebulous staff position at headquarters in Newark. This individual is now off-track, which can slow his or her career progress. Adherence to Important Values The next step involves careful adherence to the firm’s most important values. Identification with these values helps employees reconcile personal sacrifices brought about by their membership in the organization. They learn to accept these values and to trust the organization not to do anything that would hurt them. As Pascale observes: “Placing one’s self ‘at the mercy’ of an organization imposes real costs. There are long hours of work, missed weekends, bosses one has to endure, criticism that seems unfair, job assignments and rotations that are inconvenient or undesirable.”73 However, the organization attempts to overcome these costs by connecting the sacrifices to higher human values such as serving society with better products and/or services. Today’s firms in the global economy must give special attention to cultural differences around the globe, but maintain the core values. For example, when Wal-Mart Stores entered the German market a few years ago, it took along the “cheer”—Give me a W! Give me an A!, etc. Who’s Number One? The customer!— which went over as well with the German associates as it did with their counterparts in the United States. However, the cultural value of greeting any customer within a 10-foot radius did not. German employees and shoppers were not comfortable with this Wal-Mart custom, and it was dropped from the German stores. Chapter 3 Organizational Context: Design and Culture 79 Reinforcing the Stories and Folklore The next step involves reinforcing organizational folklore. This entails keeping alive stories that validate the organization’s culture and way of doing things. The folklore helps explain why the organization does things a particular way. One of the most common forms of folklore is stories with morals the enterprise wants to reinforce. For example, Leonard Riggio, the CEO of Barnes & Noble, often tells stories about his childhood experiences in Brooklyn and in particular his father’s stint as a boxer. These often-told stories have been a great help to communicate a populist culture that needed to shed its elitist past. Also, Bill Hewlett of Hewlett-Packard is known for the often-told story of him using a bolt cutter to remove a lock that he encountered on the supply room. He left a note behind instructing that the door never be locked again to forever communicate the important cultural value of trust at H-P. 3M is probably the best known firm to use stories and sagas to emphasize cultural values. The famous Post-it Notes legacy is a great example. The idea originated with Art Fry, a 3M employee who used bits of paper to mark hymns when he sang in his church choir. But these markers kept falling out of the hymnals. He decided that he needed an adhesive-backed paper that would stick as long as necessary but could be removed easily, and soon found what he wanted in a 3M laboratory. Fry saw the market potential of his invention, but others did not. Market survey results were negative; major office supply distributors were skeptical. Undeterred, because he had heard stories about other 3M employees that conveyed the importance of perseverance, Fry began giving samples to 3M executives and their secretaries. Once they actually used the little notepads, they were hooked. Having sold 3M on the project, Fry used the same approach with the secretaries of other companies’ executives throughout the United States.74 The rest is history. Post-it Notes became a huge financial success for 3M, and retelling the story reinforces cultural values of innovation that can come from anywhere, perseverance, and championing of your good ideas. Recognition and Promotion The final step is the recognition and promotion of individuals who have done their jobs well and who can serve as role models to new people in the organization. By pointing out these people as winners, the organization encourages others to follow their example. Role models in strong-culture firms are regarded as the most powerful ongoing training program of all. Morgan Stanley, the financial services firm, chooses role models on the basis of energy, aggressiveness, and team play. Procter & Gamble looks for people who exhibit extraordinary consistency in such areas as tough-mindedness, motivational skills, energy, and the ability to get things done through others. There is considerable research evidence that recognition can serve as a powerful reinforcer,75 and thus those exhibiting cultural values that are given either formal recognition or even one-on-one social attention/recognition from relevant others can build and sustain the organizational culture.76 Changing Organizational Culture Sometimes an organization determines that its culture has to be changed. For example, the current environmental context has undergone drastic change and either the organization must adapt to these new conditions or it may not survive. In fact, as Chapters 1 and 2 pointed out, it is no longer sufficient just to react to change. Today, as was pointed out in the earlier discussion in this chapter about organizational learning, organizations must have a culture that learns and anticipates change. New product development, advanced information technology and the economy are changing so rapidly that any examples would be soon out-ofdate. However, if the appropriate organization culture is in place, then such rapid change can 80 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context be welcomed and accommodated with as little disruption and as few problems as possible. One example of an organization culture literally built around change is Steelcase’s corporate development center, shaped like a pyramid with an open atrium containing a huge swinging pendulum to remind employees that the world is always changing. Another example of keeping up with the changing workplace is Zenith, who uses its intranet as a kind of virtual water cooler. As the head of the marketing group notes, “Every day we say who is having a birthday, a service anniversary, or if we’ve had an incredible sales day.”77 Even though some firms have had a culture in place to anticipate change, moving to a new culture or changing old cultures can be quite difficult: a case can even be made that it really can’t be done successfully. Predictable obstacles include entrenched skills, staffs, relationships, roles, and structures that work together to reinforce traditional cultural patterns. For example, the head of Bell Canada, which is trying to undergo a significant cultural change (from its 122-year-old monopolist mentality to a highly competitive environment), started with implementing formal quality and cost cutting programs, but realized very quickly that “We needed to get to the front lines of the organization, and my view is that it’s very hard to do that through formal programs.”78 Another example would be the traditional tough, macho culture found on offshore oil rigs. It was very difficult to change the traditional cultural values of displaying masculine strength and daring to a caring, helping environment. This shift was difficult but over a long period of time these “rough necks” came to “appreciate that to improve safety and performance in a potentially deadly environment, they had to be open to new information that challenged their assumptions, and they had to acknowledge when they were wrong.”79 The result of this cultural change on the oil rigs dramatically decreased the accident rate by 84 percent and productivity, efficiency, and reliability all increased beyond the industry benchmarks.80 In addition to the importance of frontline workers in cultural change, powerful stakeholders such as unions, management, or even customers may support the existing culture and impede the change. The problems are compounded by the cultural clash that is the rule rather than the exception in mergers and acquisitions (M&As), emerging relationship enterprises, and the recent economic crisis. The Case of Mergers and Acquisitions Although M&As were thought to have peaked over a decade ago, they have again become very common because the wide divergence in stock-market values between firms, globalization, and the recent financial/economic crisis have left a climate for both friendly buyouts and hostile takeovers. Besides the financial implications of M&As, the often slighted or even ignored organizational culture implications can be dramatic. As one veteran of a number of M&As concluded about the cultural side of mergers: (1) you can’t do too much, and (2) too little will be done. In the heat of the deal, he says, “people issues, as real as they are, become obscured.”81 The clash between the two cultures in a merger or acquisition can be focused into three major areas: 1. Structure. These factors from the two cultures include the size, age, and history of the two firms; the industry in which the partners come from and now reside; the geographic locations; and whether products and/or services are involved. 2. Politics. Where does the power and managerial decision making really reside? Corporate cultures range from autocratic extremes to total employee empowerment, and how this plays out among the partners will be important to cultural compatibility. 3. Emotions. The personal feelings, the “cultural contract” that individuals have bought into to guide their day-to-day thoughts, habits, attitudes, commitment, and patterns of Chapter 3 Organizational Context: Design and Culture 81 daily behavior. These emotions will be a major input into the clash or compatibility of the two cultures.82 The potential (high probability) cultural clash from M&As will be greatly compounded when the partners are from different countries.83 With globalization now a reality (see Chapter 2), cross-border alliances are commonplace. Announcements of megamergers such as DaimlerChrysler, British Petroleum-Amoco, and Deutsche Bank-Bankers Trust reach the headlines, but the cultural clash aftermath seldom, if at all, is discussed. The highly visible DaimlerChrysler merger problems with advertising and U.S.-governmentsponsored research aimed at fuel efficiency and cleaner cars is given attention, but the cultural issues are not given as much attention. Yet, the day-to-day cultural clashes at all levels are the reality. As auto industry analysts have pointed out, Daimler-Benz had a conservative, slow-moving corporate culture while Chrysler at the time of the merger had a fast, lean, informal, and daring corporate culture. For example, the Mercedes-Benz plant in Vance, Alabama, represents the merger in microcosm. The German “wunderkind” plant manager deliberately selected German, U.S., and Canadian managers (some with Japanese auto firm experience) for his team. They clashed not just over the operations system, but also on more subtle but explosive cultural issues such as image and decorum. This type of cultural conflict is greatly trying to be worked out, but guidelines and help are still needed for meeting the challenge of managing the cultural change on both sides. The Case of Emerging Relationship Enterprises Today’s networked global environment is going beyond formal M&As with what are being called “relationship enterprises.”84 Somewhat like network and virtual organization designs discussed earlier in the chapter, these relationship enterprises consist of a global network of independent companies that act as a single company with a common mission. Examples include the following: • The aerospace industry at the turn of the century is controlled by two networks— Boeing (based in the United States) and Airbus (France). Importantly, each of these relationship enterprises consists of more than 100 partners around the world. • In the telecommunications industry, the Global One joint venture, led by Sprint, Deutsche Telekom, and France Telecom, serves 65 countries and functions as one relationship enterprise to serve the global telecom needs of many corporations. • In the airline industry, United, Lufthansa, SAS, Varig, Thai Airways, and others have formed into a relationship enterprise called Star Alliance. They provide the international traveler with seamless service anywhere on the planet and share systems, marketing, in-country operations, schedules, and frequent flier miles—everything except crews. In the near future such relationship enterprises will become common in more traditional industries such as chemicals, textiles, and food, as well as new frontier industries such as biotech and memory. The reason that this loose network of alliances is the trend over more formal M&As has to do with legal terms (by law some countries do not allow majority purchase of their firms by foreigners), but mainly with political nationalism and organizational cultural values. Pride and pragmatic needs are driving this new form of global alliance, but the perspective and management of the organizational cultures in this new relationship is a challenge. Issues such as trust, communication, and negotiation skills become very relevant and important to success. The organizations and managers in the global relations “must learn to communicate across the cultural divide; each must understand that the other perceives and interacts in a fundamentally different way.”85 Importantly, three-fourths of 82 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context companies believe their alliances failed because of an incompatibility of country and corporate cultures.86 Impact of Organizational Culture in an Economic Crisis Besides M&As and the new organizational designs having an impact on organizational cultural change, the recent economic crisis has also stimulated both scholars and practitioners to reexamine the role that culture played and the lessons to be learned to effectively change the culture. For example, the mortgage companies (e.g., Countrywide Financial) and investment banks (e.g., Lehman Brothers) that collapsed at the end of 2008 were known to have very strong corporate cultures. However, as one analysis pointed out, “they were cultures characterized by rampant individualism, little attention or oversight from supervisors, and huge rewards for successful performance. Those values generated tremendous pressure to maximize individual performance and payouts, often by taking outsized risks and hiding failures. That same pressure often caused players to push the environment as to acceptable ethical behavior.”87 By contrast, at least at this writing, Goldman Sachs was one of the few that escaped the purge in investment banking. They are known for having a team-oriented culture (as opposed to “rampant individualism”) and according to Steven Kerr, a former organizational behavior professor who then became chief learning officer at GE and then Goldman Sachs, the managers had several meetings a day and “making any decision required checks with many people, and before we made a decision to invest, many eyes had seen the proposal.”88 In other words, lessons from the recent economic crisis are that first, the organizational culture can affect not only the ethical, “right thing to do,” but also survival in the long-term. Second, organizations need to continually challenge and change their cultural values. For example, Goldman managers regularly review their cultural values by asking questions such as: “Which are we most or least faithful to?” and “Which need refreshing or reaffirming?”89 Such a culture of continual questioning seems to be an effective starting point in cultural change, but there is also a need to go beyond such specific guidelines and focus on a more comprehensive approach that will be able to adapt to changing conditions. Guidelines for Change Despite the complexity, significant barriers, and resistance to change, organizational cultures can be managed and changed over time.90 This attempt to change culture can take many different forms. Simple guidelines such as the following can be helpful:91 1. Assess the current culture. 2. Set realistic goals that impact the bottom line. 3. Recruit outside personnel with industry experience, so that they are able to interact well with the organizational personnel. 4. Make changes from the top down, so that a consistent message is delivered from all management team members. 5. Include employees in the culture change process, especially when making changes in rules and processes. 6. Take out all trappings that remind the personnel of the previous culture. 7. Expect to have some problems and find people who would rather move than change with the culture and, if possible, take these losses early. 8. Move quickly and decisively to build momentum and to defuse resistance to the new culture. 9. Stay the course by being persistent. Chapter 3 Organizational Context: Design and Culture 83 Also, organizations attempting to change their culture must be careful not to abandon their roots and blindly abandon their core, but distinctive, competencies and core values. For example, it is generally recognized that the reason “New Coke” failed was that it broke away from the tried-but-true Coca-Cola traditional culture; and the reason Google so far has remained at or near the top in all categories, from profits, to growth, to best places to work, is because it has remained true to its core cultural values and all Googlers buy into them. As was recently observed: Talk to more than a dozen Googlers at various levels and departments, and one powerful theme emerges: Whether they’re designing search for the blind or preparing meals for their colleagues, these people feel that their work can change the world. That sense is nonexistent at most companies, or at best intermittent, inevitably becoming subsumed in the day-to-day quagmire of PowerPoints, org charts, and budgetary realities.92 Where Coca-Cola is an example of a firm with a long history and strong corporate culture, and Google is a new age company with a very powerful corporate culture, IBM, discussed earlier under creating and maintaining a corporate culture, is a good example of a firm that has successfully undergone cultural changes. Summary Organization theory is presented from a historical perspective and the learning organization. The learning organization draws on systems theory and emphasizes the importance of not only adaptive learning but also generative learning, leading to creativity, innovation, and staying ahead of change. Modern organization designs are a marked departure from the classical bureaucratic model. The horizontal, hollow, modular, network, and virtual organization designs have emerged to better meet the needs for flexibility and change in the new environment. The second half of this chapter on the organization context is concerned with organizational culture. It is a pattern of basic assumptions that are taught to new personnel as the correct way to perceive, think, and act on a day-to-day basis. Some of the important characteristics of organizational culture are observed behavioral regularities, norms, dominant values, philosophy, rules, and organizational climate. Although everyone in an organization will share the organization’s culture, not all may do so to the same degree. There can be a dominant culture, but also a number of subcultures. A dominant culture is a set of core values that are shared by a majority of the organization’s members. A subculture is a set of values shared by a small percentage of the organization’s members. A culture typically is created by a founder or top-level manager who forms a core group that shares a common vision. This group acts in concert to create the cultural values, norms, and climate necessary to carry on this vision. In maintaining this culture, enterprises typically carry out several steps such as the following: careful selection of entry-level candidates; on-the-job experiences to familiarize the personnel with the organization’s culture; mastery of one’s job; meticulous attention to measuring operational results and to rewarding individual performance; careful adherence to the organization’s most important values; a reinforcing of organizational stories and folklore; and, finally, recognition and promotion of individuals who have done their jobs well and who can serve as role models to new personnel in the organization. In some cases organizations find that they must change their culture in order to remain competitive and even survive in their environment. The cultural change process at IBM demonstrates how this may be successfully accomplished. 84 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context Ending with Meta-Analytic Research Findings OB PRINCIPLE FOR EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE Organizational configurations affect organizational performance. Meta-Analysis Results: [33 studies; 40 organizations; d = .55] On average, there is a 65 percent probability that an identified organizational configuration will better predict performance of included organizations than if no configuration is identified and utilized. Moderator analyses revealed that organizations’ configurations contributed more to the explanation of performance to the extent that studies used broad definitions of configuration, single-industry samples, and longitudinal designs. Conclusion: Organizational configurations are groups of firms sharing a common profile of organizational structural characteristics. The Miles and Snow typology describes four such configurations—defender, prospector, analyzer, and reactor. Each of these examines the relationship between strategy and structure. At the heart of configuration research is the relationship that firms have with their environments. Specifically, organizations that exist in environments where goals are attainable, resources are acquirable, internal processes are growing and thriving, and stakeholders are satisfied will be more effective than those that do not have such a configuration. Source: Adapted from David J. Ketchen Jr., James G. Combs, Craig J. Russell, Chris Shook, Michelle A. Dean, Janet Runge, Franz T. Lohrke, Stefanie E. Naumann, Dawn Ebe Haptonstahl, Robert Baker, Brenden A. Beckstein, Charles Handler, Heather Honig, and Stephen Lamoureux, “Organizational Configuration and Performance: A Meta-Analysis,” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 40, No. 1, 1997, pp. 223–240. Questions for Discussion and Review 1. What was Chester Barnard’s contribution to organization theory? 2. How does a learning organization differ from a traditional organization? 3. Briefly define the horizontal, hollow, modular, network, and virtual organization designs. How do these differ from the classical design? How do they better meet the challenges of the new environment? 4. What is meant by the term organizational culture? Define it and give some examples of its characteristics. 5. How does a dominant culture differ from a subculture? In your answer be sure to define both terms. 6. How do organizational cultures develop? What four steps commonly occur? 7. How do organizations go about maintaining their cultures? What steps are involved? Describe them. Chapter 3 Organizational Context: Design and Culture Internet Exercise: The Structure and Culture of Organizations 85 As this chapter has discussed, there are dramatic differences in both the design and culture of organizations. In part, the culture of an organization is determined by the structure. Some organizations tend to be hierarchical and rigid, whereas others are horizontal and flexible. Visit some corporate Web sites that describe various structural design components and corporate values. To get an idea of corporate culture preferences, go to http://www.mhhe.com/business/management/management_tutor_series/corp CulturePrefScale/index.html. Then going from there, choose a specific firm such as Toyota or Google or search under “organization design” and/or “organization culture” to see where it leads you. Try to determine what the company’s structure and culture may be. 1. Compare structure and culture of two or more firms in the same industry. Which would you prefer to work for? 2. What other issues do the structure and culture have for other topics of organizational behavior (motivation, reward systems, etc.)? Real Case: Web-Based Organizations There is hope, and the promise of at least partial liberation from the tyranny of time constraints. Why? Because the long-term interests of individuals and smart companies are aligned. To compete, successful corporations will have to make it easier and less time-consuming for their employees to collaborate. They will learn how to live with fewer time-sapping meetings and unnecessary feedback loops—or find themselves outrun by more nimble competitors. The eventual result: less frustration for knowledge workers. Moves in this direction are already under way as savvy companies analyze their internal social networks and identify bottlenecks. Intel Corp., for example, sees an opportunity in creating technology that lowers the time cost of teamwork. And others, such as Eli Lilly & Co., are providing more corporate support for both internal and external networks. “It’s a new mental model for how you run a company,” says McKinsey’s Bryan. “The winners will be those who can handle more complexity.” At the same time we may see a rise in new forms of Web-based organizations where people can contribute without having their time eaten up by existing hierarchy. Blogs, collaborative online databases (called wikis) and open-source software development all use the Net to handle much of the coordination among people rather than relying on top-down command and control. Such a shift to a digital spine could eventually lessen bureaucratic time burdens on over-worked professionals, especially those in such high-cost industries as health care. Even high pay can’t compensate for unrelenting time pressure. Top managers have to realize that encouraging networks and collaboration demands as much attention and resources as supervising and measuring performance in traditional ways. Most companies have built up large human-resources departments, but few have a department of collaboration. “Most managers don’t manage social networks effectively,” says Babson’s Davenport. At Intel, the drive to reduce the time spent sharing knowledge and collaborating is an outgrowth of efforts to better coordinate far-flung operations that stretch from Israel to India. One idea being pursued by Luke Koons, director for information and knowledge management, is “dynamic profiling”—technologies that automatically summarize areas on which a researcher or a manager is focusing, based on the subjects of their e-mails and Web searches. Such a regularly updated profile could make it less time-consuming to locate potential collaborators and resources, an especially daunting prospect in a large, innovation-minded company such as Intel. Equally important, dynamic profiling doesn’t force individuals to spend hours manually updating their profiles as their focus changes. 1. How can the organization structure facilitate speed, collaboration, and teamwork? Contrast traditional bureaucratic organizations with the examples in this case. 2. What is meant by a Web-based organization? How does this fit into the various organization theories discussed in the first part of the chapter? 3. Are there any downside risks inherent in the way the firms are organized in this case? What do you think the future will be for organization designs? 86 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context Organizational Behavior Case: The Outdated Structure Jake Harvey has a position on the corporate planning staff of a large company in a high-technology industry. Although he has spent most of his time on longrange, strategic planning for the company, he has been appointed to a task force to reorganize the company. The president and board of directors are concerned that they are losing their competitive position in the industry because of an outdated organization structure. Being a planning expert, Jake convinced the task force that they should proceed by first determining exactly what type of structure they have now, then determining what type of environment the company faces now and in the future, and then designing the organization structure accordingly. In the first phase they discovered that the organization is currently structured along classic bureaucratic lines. In the second phase they found that they are competing in a highly dynamic, rapidly growing, and uncertain environment that requires a great deal of flexibility and response to change. 1. What type or types of organization design do you feel this task force should recommend in the third and final phase of the approach to their assignment? 2. Do you think Jake was correct in his suggestion of how the task force should proceed? What types of problems might develop as by-products of the recommendation you made in question 1? Organizational Behavior Case: Keeping Things the Same Metropolitan Hospital was built two years ago and currently has a workforce of 235 people. The hospital is small, but because it is new, it is extremely efficient. The board has voted to increase its capacity from 60 to 190 beds. By this time next year, the hospital will be over three times as large as it is now in terms of both beds and personnel. The administrator, Clara Hawkins, feels that the major problem with this proposed increase is that the hospital will lose its efficiency. “I want to hire people who are just like our current team of personnel—hardworking, dedicated, talented, and able to interact well with patients. If we triple the number of employees, I don’t see how it will be possible to maintain our quality patient care. We are going to lose our family atmosphere. We will be inundated with mediocrity, and we’ll end up being like every other institution in the local area—large and uncaring!” The chairman of the board is also concerned about the effect of hiring such a large number of employees. However, he believes that Clara is overreacting. “It can’t be that hard to find people who are like our current staff. There must be a lot of people out there who are just as good. What you need to do is develop a plan of action that will allow you to carefully screen those who will fit into your current organizational culture and those who will not. It’s not going to be as difficult as you believe. Trust me. Everything will work out just fine.” As a result of the chairman’s comments, Clara has decided that the most effective way of dealing with the situation is to develop a plan of action. She intends to meet with her administrative group and determine the best way of screening incoming candidates and then helping those who are hired to become socialized in terms of the hospital’s culture. Clara has called a meeting for the day after tomorrow. At that time she intends to discuss her ideas, get suggestions from her people, and then formulate a plan of action. “We’ve come too far to lose it all now,” she told her administrative staff assistant. “If we keep our wits about us, I think we can continue to keep Metropolitan as the showcase hospital in this region.” 1. What can Clara and her staff do to select the type of entry-level candidates they want? Explain. 2. How can Clara ensure that those who are hired come to accept the core cultural values of the hospital? What steps would you recommend? 3. Could Clara use this same approach if another 200 people were hired a few years from now? Chapter 3 Organizational Context: Design and Culture 87 Organizational Behavior Case: Out with the Old, In with the New The Anderson Corporation was started in 1962 as a small consumer products company. During the first 20 years the company’s R&D staff developed a series of new products that proved to be very popular in the marketplace. Things went so well that the company had to add a second production shift just to keep up with the demand. During this time period the firm expanded its plant on three separate occasions. During an interview with a national magazine, the firm’s founder, Paul Anderson, said, “We don’t sell our products. We allocate them.” This comment was in reference to the fact that the firm had only 24 salespeople and was able to garner annual revenues in excess of $62 million. Three years ago Anderson suffered its first financial setback. The company had a net operating loss of $1.2 million. Two years ago the loss was $2.8 million, and last year it was $4.7 million. The accountant estimates that this year the firm will lose approximately $10 million. Alarmed by this information, Citizen’s Bank, the company’s largest creditor, insisted that the firm make some changes and start turning things around. In response to this request, Paul Anderson agreed to step aside. The board of directors replaced him with Mary Hartmann, head of the marketing division of one of the country’s largest consumer products firms. After making an analysis of the situation, Mary has come to the conclusion that there are a number of changes that must be made if the firm is to be turned around. The three most important are as follows: 1. More attention must be given to the marketing side of the business. The most vital factor for success in the sale of the consumer goods produced by Anderson is an effective sales force. 2. There must be an improvement in product quality. Currently, 2 percent of Anderson’s output is defective, as against 0.5 percent for the average firm in the industry. In the past the demand for Anderson’s output was so great that quality control was not an important factor. Now it is proving to be a very costly area. 3. There must be a reduction in the number of people in the operation. Anderson can get by with two-thirds of its current production personnel and only half of its administrative staff. Mary has not shared these ideas with the board of directors, but she intends to do so. For the moment she is considering the steps that will have to be taken in making these changes and the effect that all of this might have on the employees and the overall operation. 1. What is wrong with the old organizational culture? What needs to be done to change it? 2. Why might it be difficult for Mary to change the existing culture? 3. What specific steps does Mary need to take in changing the culture? Identify and describe at least two. Chapter Four Organizational Context: Reward Systems Learning Objectives • Discuss the theoretical background on money as a reward. • Present research evidence on the effectiveness of pay. • Describe some of the traditional methods of administering pay. • Relate some forms of “new” pay and their value in helping attract and retain talented employees. • Explain how recognition is used as an organizational reward. • Discuss the role of benefits as organizational rewards. Although reward systems are not necessarily found in the first part of organizational behavior textbooks, it is placed here for two very important reasons. First, in the social cognitive theory presented in Chapter 1 as the conceptual framework for this text, the environment variable in the triadic reciprocal interaction model (along with the personal/cognitive and organizational behavior itself) consists of both the external and organizational contexts. The last chapter covered the structural design and culture of the organization, and especially in a social cognitive approach, the reward system covers the remaining major contextual variable for organizational behavior. Specifically, in social cognitive theory, reward consequences or contingencies play an important role in organizational behavior. For example, Bandura has noted that human behavior cannot be fully understood without considering the regulatory influence of rewards,1 and basic research has found that reward systems have a significant impact on employees’ perception of organizational support and leadership.2 Although behavioral management is not covered until the last part of the book (Chapter 12), it can be said now that the organization may have the latest technology, welldesigned structures, and a visionary strategic plan, but unless the people at all levels are rewarded, all these other things may become hollow and not be carried out for performance improvement. One way to put this importance of organizational rewards as simply as possible is to remember: you get what you reward!3 The second major reason for putting organizational reward systems up front is to emphasize the emerging importance of human capital introduced in Chapter 1. Because intellectual/ human capital is now recognized as being central to competitive advantage in the new paradigm environment, attention must be given to rewarding this capital to sustain/retain it and leverage it.4 Since humans represent such a significant cost to organizations, as the accompanying OB in Action: Now It’s Getting Personal indicates, more attention is being given to analyzing the return on this human capital. The importance of reward systems is now recognized as being a vital dimension of the organizational environment, and that is why it is 88 OB in Action: Now It’s Getting Personal Imagine that your company’s human resources department does away with standard salaries, one-size-fits-all benefits, and the usual raft of yawn-inducing seminars. Instead, HR execs huddle over computer programs that slice and dice data on you and your cube-mates—controlling for age, tenure, educational background, commute time, residential Zip Code, even the age and condition of the office you work in. The aim is to predict your behavior, ascertaining exactly how to cut costs without sabotaging morale—as well as which incentives would spike your productivity the most. Could they pay you 20% less but give you a three-month sabbatical every two years, cementing your allegiance and jolting your output? If they dumped your 401(k) match, would you bolt from your job or barely notice? Does your boss’s managerial touch inspire you or undermine your ability to produce? And what if, instead of parking you in a lecture in some stuffy hotel ballroom, you got a customized seminar that unleashed your ability to lock in 20% more in annual sales? This may seem the stuff of corporate sci-fi—but it’s actually here. A growing vanguard of HR heads are quickly embracing a new discipline, human capital management, that attempts to capture new gains from workers just as Six Sigma squeezed new efficiencies from factories. Some of the most groundbreaking work is coming from Mercer Human Resource Consulting, which is pioneering its new statistical modeling technology with clients including Quest Diagnostics, FleetBoston Financial, and First Tennessee. These kinds of analyses are helping a lengthening list of blue chips figure out exactly what kind of a return on investment they are getting from the millions of dollars they spend on their workforces. “This is the new thinking in new HR,” says Kurt Fischer, vice-president of HR at Corning Inc. “Here’s what we’re spending. What are we getting for it?” Caught in the profits crunch, companies crippled by anemic growth are desperate to energize earnings. Labor costs, which account for an average 60% of sales, represent a huge opportunity. Instead of placing precise bets on what compensation mix or management approach would work best, companies have usually thrown “everything at the wall, ratcheting things up slowly every year and hoping some of it works,” says Dave Kieffer, head of Mercer’s human capital group. When companies make cuts, just as much guesswork—and potential for backlash—comes into play. With the new technologies, companies can now accurately measure the ROI on their people. The growing interest in the new human capital metrics stems from a rejection in some quarters of benchmarking—the practice, promoted by many big consulting firms and management gurus, of aping the best-performing companies such as General Electric Co. and Microsoft Corp. The result has been a cascade of CEOs copying everything Jack Welch and Bill Gates did—with many of them failing. Some developed a mania for rank-and-yank performance reviews, without ascertaining if tenure actually enhanced productivity. Others adopted flexible, justin-time workforces that they could switch off and on like a spigot, without assessing the drag on productivity parttimers could cause. The perils of this kind of blind benchmarking were evident at one major hospital chain, where the CFO bragged that his aggressive use of part-timers was saving the company $5 million a year. Each time the CFO found a rival with a lower ratio of full-timers, he would ax more at his own hospitals—to the point where one facility was being run by a staff of 80% part-timers. Not surprisingly, those employees were often clueless about local hospital practices and wound up wasting the time of the full-time staff. What Mercer’s analysis showed was that the use of so many part-timers was actually costing the company $25 million in reduced productivity—3% of annual revenues. By hiking the ratio of full-timers back up to 63%, the chain regained 18% in overall productivity within two months. This points to one big difference between the new human capital management and old-era HR: Instead of looking outside to others for cookie-cutter answers, the new thinking argues that it’s better to look at the company’s internal labor market. One blue-chip beverage maker assumed its longest-tenured drivers were the most productive. After a time-series analysis—controlling for factors such as older drivers getting their pick of the best routes—the company realized that once its drivers hit the nine-year mark, productivity plummeted even as their pay rose. In this case the company reassigned the drivers to less physically taxing jobs. The new human capital initiatives can provide valuable insights. After studying its ranks, First Tennessee realized that bank customers reacted far more favorably to experienced employees than it did to new hires. That meant that no matter how many college grads the bank hired nor how many experienced pros it brought in, it could not beat the tens of millions more in annual sales it could reap merely by increasing retention of current workers by at least one year. In another such analysis, a blue-chip technology company learned that its pay structure was penalizing the highest performers and rewarding the weakest; lackluster employees were clustered in a cash-cow unit, while superstars were toiling in a still-profitless upstart division. “Most companies are just cutting without this kind of analysis,” says Kieffer. That’s not likely to last, as more and more businesses realize how much they’re spending on something about which they know so little. 89 90 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context included here to conclude the introductory environmental context for the study and application of organizational behavior. Certainly the tendency with most people, and often in actual organizational practice, is to equate organizational reward systems only with money. Obviously, money is the dominant reward and will be given first and foremost attention in this chapter. The theory, research, and analysis of all the ways money can be administered by today’s organizations is given detailed attention. However, this is followed by the potentially powerful, and importantly much less costly, recognition rewards system.5 Finally, the costly, but often not effective, use of benefits is presented. PAY: THE DOMINANT ORGANIZATIONAL REWARD Organizations provide rewards to their personnel in order to try to motivate their performance and encourage their loyalty and retention. Organizational rewards take a number of different forms including money (salary, bonuses, incentive pay), recognition, and benefits. This first part examines money as the most dominant reward system in today’s organizations. The Theoretical Background on Money as a Reward Money has long been viewed as a reward and, at least for some people, it is more important than anything else their organization can give them. Some surveys of employees rank money at the top of their list of motivators6 and others rank it lower. It seems to vary widely with the individual and the industry. However, as the well-known scholar and consultant Manfred Kets de Vries recently declared, “It’s easy to say money isn’t everything as long as we have enough of it. Unfortunately, though, the typical scenario is that the more money we have, the more we want.”7 Also, commenting on money, Steven Kerr, the well-known organizational behavior scholar and executive at both GE and Goldman Sachs referenced in the last chapter, noted that “Nobody refuses it, nobody returns it, and people who have more than they could ever use do dreadful things to get more.”8 By the same token, a large majority (82 percent) of employees in the United States and worldwide (76 percent) recently indicated they would take a pay cut to pursue their dream job.9 Money Can Explain Behavior Money provides a rich basis for studying behavior at work because it offers explanations for why people act as they do.10 For example, Mitchell and Mickel have noted that money is a prime factor in the foundation of commerce, that is, people organize and start businesses to make money.11 Money is also associated with four of the important symbolic attributes for which humans strive: achievement and recognition, status and respect, freedom and control, and power.12 In fact, in most of the management literature dealing with money, researchers have focused on money as pay and the ways in which pay affects motivation, job attitudes, and retention. In particular, money helps people attain both physical (clothing, automobiles, houses) and psychological (status, self-esteem, a feeling of achievement) objectives. As well-known moneymaker Donald Trump has said, “Money was never a big motivation for me, except as a way to keep score. The real excitement is playing the game.”13 As a result of this perspective, money has been of interest to organizational behavior theorists and researchers who have studied the linkages between pay and performance by seeking answers to questions such as: How much of a motivator is money? How long lasting is its effects? What are some of the most useful strategies to employ in using money as a motivator?14 Chapter 4 Organizational Context: Reward Systems 91 Money has also played an integral role in helping develop theories of organizational behavior. For example, if employees are interested in money, how much effort will they expend in order to earn it, and how much is “enough”? It is like the philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer once said, “Wealth is like seawater, the more we drink the thirstier we become.”15 Moreover, if people work very hard but do not receive the rewards they expect, how much of a dampening effect will this have on their future efforts? Answers to these types of questions have helped develop some of the most useful theories of motivation, which will be covered in Chapter 6. An Agency Theory Explanation Another important perspective on money as a reward is provided by agency theory, a widely recognized finance and economics approach to understanding behavior by individuals and groups both inside and outside the corporation. Specifically, agency theory is concerned with the diverse interests and goals that are held by a corporation’s stakeholders (stockholders, managers, employees) and the methods by which the enterprise’s reward system is used to align these interests and goals. The theory draws its name from the fact that the people who are in control of large corporations are seldom the owners; rather, in almost every case, they are agents who are responsible for representing the interests of the owners. Agency theory seeks to explain how managers differ from owners in using pay and other forms of compensation to effectively run the organization. For example, the owners of a corporation might be very interested in increasing their own personal wealth, and so they would minimize costs and work to increase the stock value of the enterprise. In contrast, their agents, the managers, might be more interested in expending corporate resources on activities that do not directly contribute to owner wealth. Agency theory also examines the role of risk and how owners and managers may vary in their approach to risk taking. For example, owners may be risk aversive and prefer conservative courses of action that minimize their chances of loss. Managers may be greater risk takers who are willing to accept losses in return for the increased opportunity for greater profits and market share; when their decisions are incorrect, the impact may be less than it would be on the owners and thus not greatly diminish their willingness to take risks.16 Finally, agency theory examines the differences in time horizons between owners and managers. Owners may have longer time horizons because their goal is to maximize their value over time. Managers may have much shorter time horizons because their job tenure may require good short-term results, in addition to the fact that their bonuses or merit pay may be tied closely to how well they (or the corporation) performed in the last four quarters. This last point about managers trying to look good in the short run is given as one of the major reasons for the recent economic crisis. For example, Cascio and Cappelli conclude in their analysis, referred to in the last chapter, by noting that even one of the founding fathers of agency theory recognized that “Where questionable ethics intersect with company and individual incentives, managers may end up cheating on practices such as budgeting because it makes their lives easier.” They go on to note that “every scandal has involved executives pushing the financial and accounting envelope to the point of breaking to inflate profits, cover losses and make their own performances better.”17 There are also other analyses critical of agency theory predictions such as the spectacular rise and sudden fall of Nortel (the large multinational Canada-headquartered telecommunications company) that illustrates “excesses of actors within, and contradictions of the system of corporate governance implied by the agency model.”18 Despite these limitations, there is still considerable evidence that agency theory provides useful insights into pay as a reward.19 This becomes increasingly clear when research on the effectiveness of pay is examined. 92 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context Research on the Effectiveness of Pay Despite the tendency in recent years to downgrade the importance of pay as an organizational reward, there is ample evidence that money can be positively reinforcing for most people20 and, if the pay system is designed properly to fit the strategies,21 can have a positive impact on individual, team, and organizational performance.22 For example, many organizations use pay to motivate not just their upper-level executives but everyone throughout the organization. For example, recently in the oil industry where personnel are extremely well paid, the CEO of Exxon Mobil was compensated $16.7 million,23 new petroleum engineering graduates earned about $80,000, and experienced “roughnecks” out on the offshore rigs earned around $100,000.24 Moreover, these rewards may not always have to be immediately forthcoming. Many individuals will work extremely hard for rewards that may not be available for another 5 or 10 years. As Kerr has noted: Such attractive rewards as large salaries, profit sharing, deferred compensation, stock grants and options, executive life and liability insurance, estate planning and financial counseling, invitations to meetings in attractive locations, and permission to fly first class or use the company plane, are typically made available only to those who reach the higher organizational levels. Do such reward practices achieve the desired results? In general, yes. Residents and interns work impossible hours to become M.D.s, junior lawyers and accountants do likewise to become partners, assistant professors publish so they won’t perish, and Ph.D. students perform many chores that are too depressing to recount here to obtain their doctorates.25 Additionally, not only is money a motivator, but, as was said in the introductory comments, the more some people get, the more they seem to want. The idea here is that once money satisfies basic needs, people can use it to get ahead, a goal that is always just out of their reach, so they strive for more. Conversely, there is evidence that shows that if an organization reduces its pay, morale may suffer. So pay may need to continue to escalate. One researcher, for example, interviewed more than 330 businesspeople and found that employee morale can be hurt by pay cuts because the employees view this is an “insult” that impacts on their self-worth and value to the organization.26 There is recent basic research indicating that reward systems have a strong influence on employee trust in the workplace.27 In other words, employee morale and other psychological variables such as trust are very fragile, and when employees feel they are not being compensated fairly, this can impact on their performance and hurt the bottom line. Even in the midst of the recent financial crisis, a large sample of firms indicated they were taking deliberate measures to reward their people with special bonuses and stock awards to boost their morale and confidence.28 There is also considerable evidence showing that money means different things to different people.29 Moreover, sometimes these “individual differences” end up affecting group efforts. For example, one study examined pay and performance information among baseball players.30 With statistical methods used to control for such things as total team payroll, team talent, and market size,31 the data were analyzed from 1,644 players on 29 teams over a nine-year period. It was found that, all other things being equal, the greater the pay spread on a team, the more poorly the players performed. These findings led to the conclusion that pay distributions have significant negative effects on player performance. Perhaps a better gauge of the effect of pay on performance of baseball teams may be total payroll. This reflects the overall salaries of the players; and if pay is indeed a motivator, would not a well-paid group outperform their less-well-paid counterparts? Again in application to baseball, for example, the New York Yankees have had the highest payroll in recent years, and their performance in these years has been very good. Compensation expert Edward Lawler echoes these sentiments, noting that there is a strong relationship between the total payroll of teams and how many games they win. “In a world of free Chapter 4 Organizational Context: Reward Systems 93 agency, it takes a high payroll to attract and retain top talent. Thus, teams with the highest payrolls usually end up in the World Series.”32 Additionally, Lawler has argued that the rewarding of team performance is more important than the size of the pay differences among the individual players. The question of pay ranges and their impact on productivity is one that merits more consideration as organizations seek to determine the effectiveness of pay on performance. A case in point is the huge pay package most CEOs of large firms receive, but the performance of their firms certainly did not justify the millions of dollars of compensation. The result of such disparities is that a growing number of corporate shareholders are demanding that the chief executive officer pay be tied to a multiple of the lowest worker’s pay, thus controlling the range between the lowest and highest paid person in the organization.33 A public poll indicated that a vast majority (87 percent) believe that executives “had gotten rich at the expense of ordinary workers.”34 Although money was probably overemphasized in classical management theory and motivation techniques, the pendulum now may have swung too far in the opposite direction. Money remains a very important but admittedly complex potential motivator. In terms of Maslow’s well-known hierarchy of needs covered in Chapter 6, money is often equated only with the most basic requirements of employees. It is viewed in the material sense of buying food, clothing, and shelter. Yet, as indicated in the earlier comments, money has a symbolic as well as an economic, material meaning. It can provide power and status and can be a means to measure achievement. In the latter sense, as Chapter 12 will discuss in detail, a recent meta-analysis of 72 studies found money to be a very effective positive reinforcement intervention strategy to improve performance.35 Beyond Maslow, more sophisticated analyses of the role of money are presented in cognitive terms. For example, a number of years ago some organizational psychologists concluded, based on their laboratory studies, that the use of extrinsic rewards such as money decreased the intrinsic motivation of subjects to perform a task.36 Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation will be given specific attention in Chapter 6, but for now it is sufficient to know that the intrinsic motivation was usually measured in the laboratory by time spent on a task following the removal of the reward. However, through the years, there have been many criticisms of these studies, and a meta-analysis of 96 experimental studies concluded that “overall, reward does not decrease intrinsic motivation.”37 Although these studies used other rewards besides money, and the controversy still continues between the behavioral and cognitive schools of thought as outlined in Chapter 1, it is becoming clear that the real key in assessing the use of monetary rewards is not necessarily whether they satisfy inner needs but rather how they are administered. In order for money to be effective in the organizational reward system, the system must be as objective and fair as possible38 and be administered contingently on the employee’s exhibiting critical performance behaviors.39 This has been made particularly clear by Kerr, who notes that an effective pay system for rewarding people has to address three considerations. First, the organization must ask itself what outcomes it is seeking. Examples include higher profits, increased sales, and greater market share. Second, the enterprise must be able to measure these results. Third, the organization must tie its rewards to these outcomes. The problem for many of today’s organizations is that they do still not know what they want to achieve or are unable to measure the results.40 Traditional Methods of Administering Pay Traditionally, organizations have used two methods of administering pay: base pay and merit pay. These methods are then sometimes supplemented by pay-for-performance plans and “new pay” programs that extend, and in some cases radically revise, the traditional approaches. 94 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context Base Pay Approach Base wages and salary is the amount of money that an individual is paid on an hourly, weekly, monthly, or annual basis. For example, a person working on a part-time basis may earn $12.00 an hour. This is the hourly wage for that position. Most managers are paid on an annual salary basis, and the sum is broken down into weekly, biweekly, or monthly amounts. As another example, a new college graduate may be offered $36,000, which comes to just over $692 a week before taxes and other deductions. Base pay is often determined by market conditions. For example, graduating engineers may be paid $55,000 annually whereas engineering managers with 10 years of experience earn $110,000. If base pay is not in line with the market rate, organizations may find that they are unable to hire and retain many of their personnel. At the same time, one of the major problems with base pay forms of compensation is that they tend to be most competitive at the entry level and are often less competitive thereafter. So an engineering manager who is making $105,000 may be $5,000 off the market when compared to what other engineering managers within the same region and similar job requirements are making, but the individual may also find that firms paying higher salaries prefer to develop their own management talent internally and do not hire from outside. In any event, most organizations have some form of merit pay system that is used to give annual salary increases, thus raising the base pay and preventing personnel from getting too far out of step with the market. Merit Pay Approach Merit pay is typically tied to some predetermined criteria. For example, a company may give all of its employees a cost-of-living allowance and then allocate additional funds for those who are judged “meritorious.” The amount of merit pay can take one of two forms: a flat sum, such as $3,000, or a percentage of the base salary, such as 6 percent. In some cases companies use a combination of the two, such as giving everyone who qualifies for merit pay an additional 6 percent up to a maximum amount of $5,000. This approach ensures that those who are making lower salaries get larger percentage increases, whereas those earning higher salaries get a flat merit raise. For example, under the combination merit pay just described, a lower-level manager with a base salary of $50,000 will get an additional $3,000 (6 percent of $50,000), whereas a top-level manager with a base salary of $150,000 will get $5,000. The intent of merit pay is to reward and thus motivate and retain the star performers. One seasoned compensation expert describes the process as follows: Differentiation is the name of the game now when it comes to rewards. By differentiating, companies are increasingly willing to pay more money to employees who are accomplishing the most for the organization—at all levels in their companies. We believe that in any organization there are three kinds of employees: the middle group, which is the largest and gets the job done; those that truly make a difference; and some small percentage at the bottom that are not getting the job done for a variety of reasons. Make sure you take care of those that make a difference. Make sure you take care of the middle group—pay them fairly. The bottom group is the group you should constantly keep trading so, hopefully, you can hire more stars.41 Unfortunately, merit pay also has a number of major shortcomings. One of the problems is that the criteria for determining merit are often nebulous because the organization does not clearly spell out the conditions for earning this pay. An example is a firm that decides to give merit to its best employees as described above. Unless the criteria for “best” are objectively spelled out, most of those who do not get merit money will feel left out because they believe they are among the best. A second, and related, problem is that it can often be difficult to quantify merit pay criteria. In particular, the work output of Chapter 4 Organizational Context: Reward Systems 95 some people, production-line and salespeople being good examples, is easily measured, but the work output of others, such as accountants, engineers, and other staff specialists, office personnel, and managers/supervisors, may be quite difficult to objectively measure. Recent Web-enabled employee software may help the measurement of performance. For example, British Airways installed software that ensures a customer service rep’s time in the break room or on personal calls doesn’t count, but customer complaint resolutions and sales revenue are measured for merit pay.42 A second major problem is that merit pay can end up being “catch-up” pay. For example, everyone may be given a 2 percent across-the-board raise and then those whose pay is extremely low are given merit to get them closer to market value. This approach is common in enterprises that suffer salary compression brought on by the need to pay higher salaries to hire new personnel at the lower levels. Over time, the salary range between new hires and those who have been with the organization for, say, five years may be totally eliminated. So unless the longer-tenured employees are given more money, there is the likelihood that they will look for jobs at companies that are willing to pay them more based on their job experience. In a way, merit pay is supposed to be a form of “pay for performance.” Individuals who do superior work are given increases greater than the rest of their colleagues. However, because of the problems of linking merit pay directly with performance, many organizations have created specific pay-for-performance plans. Pay for Performance There are two basic types of “pay-for-performance” plans: individual incentive plans and group incentive plans. Individual incentive plans have been around for many years. They were particularly popular during the height of the scientific management movement over a hundred years ago in the form of piece rate incentive plans. For example, in those early days a person loading iron ingots in a steel mill could earn as much as 7 cents per long ton (2,200 pounds) under an incentive plan. As a result, a highly skilled loader could make 50 percent more money per day than an individual who was being paid a basic day rate.43 So individuals who were willing to work hard and had the necessary stamina could opt for incentive pay that was determined by the amount of iron ore they were able to load each day. Individual Incentive Pay Plans Like the piece rate incentive plan of the pioneering scientific managers, today’s individual incentive plans also pay people based on output or even quality. For example, at Woolverton Inn’s hotels, housekeepers are given a 40-item checklist for each room. Those who meet 95 percent of the criteria over six months of random checks receive an extra week’s salary. Most salespeople work under an individual incentive pay plan earning, for example, 10 percent commission on all sales. At Lincoln Electric in Cleveland, Ohio, there is an individual incentive plan in effect that, over the years, has helped some factory workers earn more than $100,000 annually.44 Pay for some jobs is based entirely on individual incentives. However, because of the risk factor, in the very turbulent economy of recent years many companies have instituted a combination payment plan in which the individual receives a guaranteed amount of money, regardless of how the person performs. So a salesperson might be paid 10 percent of all sales with a minimum guarantee of $2,000 per month. Another popular approach is to give the person a combination salary/incentive such as $26,000 plus 5 percent of all sales. A third approach is to give the person a “drawing account” against which the individual can take money and then repay it out of commissions. An example would be a 96 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context salesperson who is paid a flat 10 percent of all sales and can draw against a $25,000 account. If the first couple of months of the year are slow ones, the individual will draw on the account, and then as sales pick up the person will repay the draw from the 10 percent commissions received. The Use of Bonuses Another common form of individual incentive pay is bonuses. The signing bonus is one of the biggest incentives for athletes and upper-level managers. For example, Conseco Inc., an insurance company, paid Gary Wendt, a former executive at General Electric, a $45 million bonus for agreeing to join the company for at least five years as its chairman and chief executive officer. Additionally, Conseco also paid Wendt a multimillon dollar bonus at the end of his second year based on the firm’s performance, and a minimum bonus of $2.8 million was to be paid at the end of the fifth year.45 Although this bonus package is extremely large, successful managers and individuals who can generate large accounts for a firm can also expect sizable bonuses. For example, the PaineWebber Group recruited a top-producing brokerage team from one of its competitors by offering the group a signing bonus of $5.25 million and an additional $2 million if they bring more customers to PaineWebber.46 In the roller-coaster economy, most companies are moving to bonus pay based on performance rather than fixed pay increases. A survey of a wide array of firms found that 10.8 percent use bonuses compared to only 3.8 percent ten years before,47 but The Wall Street Journal report at the end of 2008 indicated that pay raises of any kind were likely to sink in the coming years.48 The Use of Stock Options Another form of individual incentive pay is the stock-option plan. This plan is typically used with senior-level managers and gives them the opportunity to buy company stock in the future at a predetermined fixed price. The basic idea behind the plan is that if the executives are successful in their efforts to increase organizational performance, the value of the company’s stock will also rise.49 During the boom period several years ago, many firms depended greatly on stock options to lure in and keep top talented managers and entrepreneurs. However, if these lucrative options were not exercised, when the economy had a meltdown, these stock values in many cases were halved or less. For example, Oracle’s stock was off 57 percent from its high when CEO Lawrence J. Ellison exercised his option and lost more than $2 billion, but he still made $706 million, more than the economy of Grenada and one of the biggest single year payoffs in history.50 More recently, there are reports of increasing numbers of firms trying to counteract unprofitable stock options held by top managers by exchanging the options for cash and/or issuing new options with a better chance of becoming profitable. The organizations doing this feel it is necessary to keep and motivate top talent, but of course the stockholders (and general public) object because nobody makes good their losses when stocks decline.51 Potential Limitations Although bonuses and stock options remain popular forms of individual pay, there are potential problems yet to be overcome. A general problem inherent in these pay plans may have led to the excesses and ethical breakdowns experienced by too many firms in recent years. For example, as an editor for the Financial Times observed, “If we treat managers as financially self-interested automatons who must be lured by the carrot of stock options and beaten with the stick of corporate governance, that attitude will become self-fulfilling.”52 There is recent research evidence supporting such observations. A study found that the heads (CEOs) of corporations holding stock options leads to high levels of investment Chapter 4 Organizational Context: Reward Systems 97 outlays and brings about extreme corporate performance (big gains and big losses). The results thus indicate that stock options prompt CEOs to take high-variance risks (not simply larger risks), but importantly it was also found that option-loaded CEOs deliver more big losses than big gains.53 In addition to these underlying problems, another obstacle is that reward systems such as pay for performance are practical only when performance can be easily and objectively measured. In the case of sales, commissions can work well. In more subjective areas such as most staff support jobs and general supervision, they are of limited, if any, value. A second problem is that individual incentive rewards may encourage only a narrow range of behaviors. For example, a salesperson seeking to increase his or her commission may spend less time listening to the needs of the customer and more time trying to convince the individual to buy the product or service, regardless of how well it meets the buyer’s needs. Also, there may be considerable differences along customer and industry lines with salespeople operating under the same incentive plan. For example, the New York Times sales force had considerable heterogeneity among clients that resulted in substantial earnings inequity and failure to pay for performance. When the plan was restructured and customized for each area, the sales force perceived the new plan as fairer and more motivational.54 Finally, especially in light of the ethical issues brought out in the recent economic crisis, the pay for performance, unfortunately, does not add the qualifier, pay for performance with integrity. As explained by a recent analysis of executive compensation: The omission—evident from compensation committee reports in top companies’ proxy statements—is striking. Corporations, after all, face unceasing pressures to make the numbers by bending the rules, and an integrity miss can have catastrophic consequences, including indictments, fines, dismissals, and collapse of market capitalization. Furthermore, performance with integrity creates the fundamental trust—inside and outside the company— on which corporate power is based. A board should explicitly base a defined portion of the CEO’s cash compensation and equity grants on his or her success in handling the foundational task of fusing high performance with high integrity at all levels of the company.55 Bonuses are also proving unpopular in some situations such as educational compensation. Delegates to the National Education Association convention, for example, recently rejected the idea of linking job performance to bonuses. One reason is that the association believes that a bonus system will discourage people from teaching lower-ability students or those who have trouble on standardized tests, as bonuses would be tied to how well students perform on these tests.56 Finally, individual incentive plans may pit employees against one another that may promote healthy competition, or it may erode trust and teamwork.57 One way around this potential problem is to use group incentive plans. Group Incentive Pay Plans As Chapter 11 will discuss in detail, there has been a growing trend toward the use of teams. There is increasing evidence that teams and teamwork can lead to higher productivity, better quality, and higher satisfaction than do individuals working on their own.58 As a result, group incentive pay plans have become increasingly popular.59 One of the most common forms of group pay is gain-sharing plans.60 These plans are designed to share with the group or team the net gains from productivity improvements. The logic behind these plans is that if everyone works to reduce cost and increase productivity, the organization will become more efficient and have more money to reward its personnel. The first step in putting a gain-sharing plan into effect is to determine the costs associated with producing the current output. For example, if a computer manufacturer finds that it costs $30 million to produce 240,000 printers, the cost per printer is $125, and these data will be used as the base for determining productivity improvements. Costs and output are 98 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context then monitored, while both the workers and the managers are encouraged to generate costsaving ideas and put more effort into producing more with better quality. Then, at some predetermined point, such as six months, costs and output are measured and productivity savings are determined. For example, if the firm now finds that it costs $14 million to produce 125,000 printers, the cost per unit is $112. There has been a savings of $13 per printer or $1,625,000. These gain-sharing savings are then passed on to the employees, say, on a 75:25 basis. A number of organizations use gain-sharing in one form or another. At Owens Corning, for example, the company has instituted a gain-sharing plan designed to reduce costs and increase productivity in the production of fiberglass. Savings in the manufacturing cost per pound are then shared with the employees. In another example, Weyerhaeuser, the giant forest and paper products company, employs what it calls “goalsharing” in its container board packaging and recycling plants. The company’s objective is to enlist the workforce in a major performance improvement initiative designed to achieve world-class performance by reducing waste and controllable costs and increasing plant safety and product quality. Although the research evidence to date is somewhat mixed and complex, there is definitive evidence that gain-sharing plans can have a significant impact on employee suggestions for improvement.61 Another common group incentive plan is profit sharing. Although these plans can take a number of different forms, typically some portion of the company’s profits is paid into a profit-sharing pool, and this is then distributed to all employees. Sometimes this is given to them immediately or at year-end. Some plans defer the profit share, put it into an escrow account, and invest it for the employee until retirement. To date, research on the impact of profit sharing on performance via improved employee attitudes has been mixed. However, one study of engineering employees did find that favorable perceptions of profit sharing served to increase their organizational commitment (loyalty).62 A third type of group incentive plan is the employee stock ownership plan or ESOP. Under an ESOP the employees gradually gain a major stake in the ownership of the firm. The process typically involves the company taking out a loan to buy a portion of its own stock in the open market. Over time, profits are then used to pay off this loan. Meanwhile the employees, based on seniority and/or performance, are given shares of the stock, a key component of their retirement plan. As a result, they eventually become owners of the company. However, because new accounting rules require more oversight, many companies such as Kodak, Aetna, and Time Warner are reducing the number of employees who are eligible to receive ownership in their firm as part of the incentives package.63 Also, when the media company Tribune recently filed for bankruptcy, it exposed the risks to employees who had bought into the ESOP, especially retirees and those who were promised deferred compensation.64 Potential Limitations As noted earlier, group incentives plans are becoming increasingly popular. However, they may have a number of shortcomings. One is that they often distribute rewards equally, even though everyone in the group may not be contributing to the same degree. So all of a team or defined group may get a gain-sharing bonus of $2,700, regardless of how much each did to help bring about the productivity increases and/or reduced costs. A second shortcoming is that these rewards may be realized decades later as in the case of an employee’s profit sharing or ESOP that is placed in a retirement account. So their motivational effect on dayto-day performance may, at best, be minimal. A third shortcoming is that if group rewards are distributed regularly, such as quarterly or annually, employees may regard the payments as part of their base salary and come to expect them every year. If the group or firm fails to Chapter 4 Organizational Context: Reward Systems 99 earn them, as has been the case in recent years, motivation and productivity may suffer because the employees feel they are not being paid a fair compensation. Realizing that base pay, merit pay, and both individual and group forms of incentive pay all have limitations, organizations are now beginning to rethink their approach to pay as an organizational reward and formulate new approaches that address some of the challenges they are facing in today’s environment.65 For example, especially labor-intensive firms such as Marriott Hotels, which annually pays billions to their people, have undergone an examination of their reward systems to align with associates’ needs, improve attraction and retention, enhance productivity, and in general increase the return invested in people.66 The result has been the emergence of what are sometimes called “new pay” techniques. New Pay Techniques As noted earlier in this section, the standard base-pay technique provides for minimum compensation for a particular job. It does not reward above-average performance nor penalize below-average performance. Pay-for-performance plans correct this problem. In fact, in many cases, such as those in which pay is tied directly (i.e., contingently) to measured performance, pay-for-performance plans not only reward high performance but also punish low performance. Sometimes, of course, these plans are unfair in the sense that some jobs may be easy to do or carry very high incentives, thus allowing employees to easily earn high rates of pay, whereas in other cases the reverse is true. Similarly, in a group incentive arrangement in which all members are highly productive, the personnel will maximize their earnings, but in groups where some individuals are poor performers, everyone in the group ends up being punished. Despite the downside to some of these pay-for-performance plans and the fact that they have been around for many years, they have become quite popular and can be considered new pay techniques. Examples include especially the group or team incentives such as gain-sharing, profit sharing, employee stock-ownership plans, and stock-option plans. Although recently the extremely high incentive pay packages are under attack by unions, shareholders, and the general public (e.g., there have been resolutions banning stock options for senior executives at firms such as American Express and AOL Time Warner), surveys have found that a large majority of Fortune 1000 firms are using them.67 Additionally, as organizations undergo continual changes brought about by technology, globalization, legislation, and the economic crisis, many enterprises are rethinking and redesigning their pay plans to reflect the demands of the new environment. For example, attention has been given to the role that reward systems play in both knowledge management68 and globalization.69 What is emerging are the so-called new pay approaches. The following is a brief summary of some of these.70 1. Commissions beyond sales to customers. As with all of these new pay plans, the commissions paid to sales personnel are aligned with the organization’s strategy and core competencies. As a result, besides sales volume, the commission is determined by customer satisfaction and sales team outcomes such as meeting revenue or profit goals. 2. Rewarding leadership effectiveness. This pay approach is based on factors beyond just the financial success of the organization. It also includes an employee-satisfaction measure to recognize a manager’s people-management skills. For example, at Nationwide Insurance, management bonuses are tied to their people’s satisfaction scores. 3. Rewarding new goals. In addition to being based on the traditional profit, sales, and productivity goals, rewards under this approach are aimed at all relevant employees (top to bottom) contributing to goals such as customer satisfaction, cycle time, or quality measures. 100 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context 4. Pay for knowledge workers in teams. With the increasing use of teams, pay is being linked to the performance of knowledge workers or professional employees who are organized into virtual, product development, interfunctional, or self-managed teams. In some cases, part of this pay is initially given to individuals who have taken additional training, the assumption being that their performance will increase in the future as a result of their newly acquired knowledge or skills.71 5. Skill pay. This approach recognizes the need for flexibility and change by paying employees based on their demonstrated skills rather than the job they perform. Although it is currently used with procedural production or service skills, the challenge is to apply this concept to the more varied, abstract skills needed in new paradigm organizations (e.g., design of information systems, cross-cultural communication skills). 6. Competency pay. This approach goes beyond skill pay by rewarding the more abstract knowledge or competencies of employees, such as those related to technology, the international business context, customer service, or social skills. 7. Broadbanding. This approach has more to do with the design of the pay plan than do the others. Formally defined as a compensation strategy, broadbanding “is the practice of collapsing the traditional large number of salary levels into a small number of salary grades with broad pay ranges.”72 So, for example, rather than having three levels of supervisors whose salary ranges are $25,000 to $40,000, $35,000 to $55,000, and $50,000 to $80,000, the company will have one supervisory salary grade that extends from $25,000 to $80,000. This allows a manager to give a salary increase to a supervisor without having to first get approval from higher management because the supervisor’s salary puts the individual in the next highest salary level. Broadbanding sends a strong message that the organization is serious about change and flexibility, not only in the structural and operational processes but also in its reward system. Simply put, with broadbanding the organization puts its money where its mouth is. These new pay techniques are certainly needed to meet new paradigm challenges. If organizations expect customer satisfaction, leadership, satisfied employees, quality, teamwork, knowledge sharing, skill development, new competencies (e.g., technical, crosscultural, and social), and employee growth without promotions, then they must reward these as suggested by the new pay techniques. Once again, you get what you reward. RECOGNITION AS AN ORGANIZATIONAL REWARD Pay is an unquestionably important form of reward. However, it is not the only way in which organizations can reward their people. In addition to money, forms of recognition to identify and reward outstanding performance can be a vital, but too often overlooked, part of the organizational reward system. When people are asked what motivates them, money is always prominently featured on their list. However, both formal organizational recognition and social recognition used systematically by supervisors and managers is very important to their people and their day-to-day behaviors and performance effectiveness. For example, there is considerable research evidence that social recognition (in formal acknowledgment, attention, praise, approval, or genuine appreciation for work well done) has a significant impact on performance at all levels and types of organizations.73 Recognition versus Money There are a number of reasons why recognition may be as important as, or even more important than, money as a reward for today’s employees. One of the most obvious is that Chapter 4 Organizational Context: Reward Systems 101 enterprises typically have pay systems that are designed to review performance and give incentive payments only once or twice a year. So if someone does an outstanding good job in July, the manager may be unable to give the person a financial reward until after the annual performance review in December. Nonfinancial rewards, on the other hand, such as genuine social recognition, can be given at any time. It is these more frequent nonfinancial rewards that have a big impact on employee productivity and quality service behaviors. Recognition rewards can take many different forms, can be given in small or large amounts, and in many instances are controllable by the manager. For example, in addition to social recognition and formal awards, a manager can give an employee increased responsibility. The human resource manager for Orient-Express Hotels, Inc. notes, “I’m a big believer in empowerment. I always tell employees, ‘I’m the HR expert; you’re the expert at what you do.’ I put the power in their hands and say ‘I trust you.’ That pays off.”74 The employee may find this form of recognition motivational, and the result is greater productivity and quality service to customers. As a follow-up, the manager can then give this employee even greater responsibility. Unlike many financial forms of reward, there is no limit to the number of people who can receive this type of reward or how often it is given. One expert on rewards puts it this way: You can, if you choose, make all your employees . . . eligible for nonfinancial rewards. You can also make these rewards visible if you like, and performance-contingent, and you needn’t wait for high level sign-offs and anniversary dates, because nonfinancial rewards don’t derive from the budget or the boss, and are seldom mentioned in employment contracts and collective bargaining agreements. Furthermore . . . if you inadvertently give someone more freedom or challenge than he can handle, you can take it back. Therefore, organizations can be bold and innovative in their use of nonmonetary rewards because they don’t have to live with their mistakes.75 Research shows that there are many types of recognition that can lead to enhanced performance and loyalty.76 One of these that is receiving increased attention is recognition of the fact that many employees have work and family responsibilities and when the organization helps them deal with these obligations, loyalty increases. This finding is particularly important in light of findings such as a survey that found 25 percent of the most sought after employees (highly educated, high-income professionals) reported they would change jobs for a 10 percent increase in salary and 50 percent would move for a 20 percent raise.77 These data are not an isolated example. Another survey of the attitudes and experiences of a large number of employees in business, government, and nonprofit organizations around the United States revealed the following: (1) only 30 percent feel an obligation to stay with their current employer; (2) individuals who are highly committed to their organization tend to do the best work; (3) workers who are discontent with their jobs are least likely to be productive; (4) employees in large organizations (100 or more people) tend to be less satisfied than their peers in small enterprises; (5) lower-level employees are less satisfied than those in higher-level positions; and (6) the things that the respondents would like their companies to focus on more include being fair to employees, caring about them, and exhibiting trust in them.78 Recognizing creativity is becoming increasingly necessary for competitive advantage. One recent estimate is that professionals (e.g., software developers and other knowledge workers) whose primary responsibilities include innovating, designing, and problem solving (i.e., the creative class), make up an increasing percentage of the U.S. workforce. To get peak performance from its creative workforce, the widely respected and successful software company SAS rewards excellence with challenges, values the work over the tools, and minimizes hassles.79 102 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context Although research on the complexities of the relationship of satisfaction and commitment with outcomes will be given attention in Chapter 5, it is interesting to note here that groups such as the National Association for Employee Recognition have concluded that practicing human resource professionals and managers still seem to underestimate how useful recognition can be in motivating employees to achieve goals. Moreover, recognition as a reward does not have to be sophisticated or time consuming. In fact, many firms that are now working to improve their recognition systems all use fairly basic and easy-toimplement programs. Steps such as the following need to be set up to effectively manage a formal and informal recognition program:80 1. When introducing new recognition procedures and programs, take advantage of all communication tools including Intranet and other knowledge-sharing networks—let everyone know what is going on. 2. Educate the managers so that they use recognition as part of the total compensation package. 3. Make recognition part of the performance management process, so that everyone begins to use it. 4. Have site-specific recognition ceremonies that are featured in the company’s communication outlets such as the weekly newsletter and the bimonthly magazine. 5. Publicize the best practices of employees, so that everyone knows some of the things they can do in order to earn recognition. 6. Let everyone know the steps that the best managers are taking to use recognition effectively. 7. Continually review the recognition process in order to introduce new procedures and programs and scrap those that are not working well. 8. Solicit recognition ideas from both employees and managers, as they are the ones who are most likely to know what works well—and what does not. Examples of Effective Formal Recognition Systems Chapter 12 on behavioral performance management focuses on social recognition as an effective contingent reinforcer that supervisors/managers can use as a style in interpersonal relations. Research has clearly demonstrated that this improves employee performance.81 In this chapter on the role rewards play in the organizational context, formal recognition programs implemented by organizations are the primary focus, along with money and benefits (covered next). Formal recognition is a vital part of the reward system that makes up the environmental component of the social cognitive framework for understanding and effectively managing organizational behavior (see Chapter 1). Today there are a wide number of formal recognition systems that are being effectively used by organizations nationwide. Many of these are the result of continual modification, as organizations have altered and refined their reward systems to meet the changing needs of their workforce. However, all effective programs seem to have two things in common. First, they are designed to reward effective employee performance behavior and enhance employees’ satisfaction and commitment. In other words, effective recognition systems lead to improved employee performance and retention. Second, they are designed to meet the specific and changing needs of the employees. Simply put, a recognition system that worked in the past or in one enterprise may have little value in another. This is why many firms have gone through a trial-and-error approach before they have settled into a unique system that works best today for their employees. Thus, recognition programs often vary widely from company to company—and many of them are highly creative. For example, Chapter 4 Organizational Context: Reward Systems 103 one expert on implementing recognition systems offers the following creative, but practical, suggestions:82 1. Select a pad of Post-it Notes in a color that nobody uses and make it your “praising pad.” Acknowledge your employees for work well done by writing your kudos on your praising pad. 2. Hire a caterer to bring in lunch once a week. Besides showing your respect and appreciation, this encourages mingling and the sharing of information, knowledge, ideas, and innovative solutions. 3. To get a team motivated during an important project, have them design a simple logo for the assignment. This will give the team not only a sense of camaraderie and cohesion, but also group identification and focus. These tidbits represent useful suggestions, but many companies have gone much further by designing formal recognition systems that align their overall objectives (increased productivity, reduced cost, better-quality products and customer service, and even higher profitability) and employee performance behaviors. For example, at Dierbergs Family Market, a supermarket chain in Missouri, the firm has created what it calls the “Extra Step” program. This formal recognition program is designed to reward employees who are proactive in meeting customer needs. The objective of the program is twofold: make the company a place where employees love to work and keep customers coming back. In achieving this, the company rewards workers who go out of their way to do things for customers. For example, in one case, a customer left some of her purchases at one of the stores during a snowstorm. The store manager did not want any of the employees going out in the inclement weather, so he called a cab and paid the driver to deliver the packages she had left behind. In another case, an employee on his way to work recognized a good customer trying to change a flat tire. He went over, introduced himself as working for Dierbergs, and changed the tire for the customer. These “extra steps” are rewarded by Dierbergs in a number of ways, including gift certificates, movie passes, and even lunch with the chief executive officer. They also help the company achieve its objectives of increased revenues through word-of-mouth advertising (the best form, at no cost) and repeat business, customer satisfaction, and employee productivity and retention. Customer feedback has been overwhelmingly complimentary, and the firm’s turnover rate has rapidly declined, in an industry where labor turnover is extremely high. For its efforts, Dierbergs was given an Award for Best Business Practices for Motivating and Retaining Employees. Dierbergs is not alone. A growing number of firms are finding that well-structured and implemented employee recognition reward systems yield very positive cost-benefit results. In particular, formal recognition systems have become important in the hotel and restaurant industry, where annual turnover rates of 100 percent are typical. Firms that have implemented recognition systems have experienced dramatic improvement in retention of their best employees. For example, at the Hotel Sofitel Minneapolis the director of human resources has reported that thanks to the organization’s recognition system, annual turnover has declined significantly. One of the most successful plans in its system is called the Sofitel Service Champions. This program is inexpensive to monitor and all employees participate. It works this way: When employees do something noteworthy, they are given a little slip of paper by a customer or a manager. This resembles a French franc (that goes with the Hotel’s French theme), and when an employee gets three of these francs, he or she receives a $35 gift certificate that can be redeemed at one of the hotel’s restaurants. Seven francs can be exchanged for dinner at one of the restaurants or a $35 gift certificate 104 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context redeemable at any area store or restaurant. Ten francs entitles the person to a day off with pay or a $50 gift certificate that can be used in any store or restaurant in the area. Another successful component in the Sofitel recognition system is the Team Member of the Month program. These members are chosen from one of the department teams within the hotel (e.g., housekeeping, receiving, room service, accounting, front office, etc). Each department director fills out a nomination form with the name of the team member who is believed to have done something outstanding that month. If chosen, the employee receives a $50 check, a special luncheon honoring the recipient in the employee cafeteria, a picture taken with the general manager and the direct report manager, which is placed in a display case, and a specially designated parking spot. If a person is nominated but does not win, the individual still remains eligible for the next three months. All monthly winners and nominees are tracked throughout the year and are eligible for the Team Member of the Year Award. This winner is given either $500 or a trip to one of the other Sofitel Hotels in North America. A key success factor in such public recognition plans is that it is viewed as being fair, and those not recognized agree that recipients are deserving. At Sofitel the recognition programs are continually changed based on input from the employees. One of the additions to the recognition system at Sofitel is a recognition program called Department Appreciation Days. Each month, one department is chosen to be recognized by another. The recognition is typically something small and inexpensive, such as a jar of cookies, and has proven to be very popular with the personnel and departments and has led to constructive, friendly competition to win this award. Other organizations use similar approaches to recognizing and praising their people. (See the accompanying OB in Action: Some Easy Ways to Recognize Employees.) For example, at the Fremont Hotel & Casino in Las Vegas, a large portion of the human resource budget is set aside for recognition programs. One of these is called “Personality with a Hustle” and is designed to encourage employees to do everything they can to proactively help customers stay and play at the Fremont. Personnel who do so can end up being nominated as employee of the month. Winners are given $100, dinner for two at any of the company’s restaurants, two tickets to a show, a special parking spot, and an Employee of the Month jacket. They are also eligible to win the Employee of the Year Award, which entitles them to an extra week’s vacation, an all-expense-paid trip to Hawaii with $250 spending money, and a dinner for two with the company’s chief executive officer. In addition to these representative types of recognition systems, there are many other innovative, fun recognition awards in today’s firms. At First Chicago, for example, there are Felix and Oscar awards (based on the characters in The Odd Couple) given to employees with the neatest and messiest work areas. At Chevron USA in San Francisco, an employee who is recognized for an outstanding accomplishment is immediately brought to a large treasure chest and is allowed to choose an item from the box: a coffee mug, pen-and-pencil set, gift certificate, or movie tickets. At Goodmeasure, a management consulting firm in Cambridge, Massachusetts, a person who does something outstanding is given an “Atta Person” award. At Mary Kay Cosmetics, pink Cadillacs, mink coats, and diamond rings are given to their leading sellers. At Hewlett-Packard, marketers send pistachio nuts to salespeople who excel or who close an important sale. Salespeople at Octocom Systems in Chelmsford, Massachusetts, receive a place setting of china each month for meeting their quota. In a different, and for the long run perhaps questionable, approach, at Microage Computer in Tempe, Arizona, employees who come to work late are fined, and this money is passed out to people who arrive on time. The Commander of the Tactical Air Command of the U.S. Air Force rewards individuals whose suggestions are implemented with bronze, silver, and gold buttons to wear on their uniforms.83 OB in Action: Some Easy Ways to Recognize Employees Employees never seem to tire of recognition. In psychological terms, they do not seem to become satiated, or filled up with recognition as they do, say, with food or even money. For some, in fact, the more recognition they get, the more they want. Fortunately, it is not difficult to recognize people, and there are many ways in which it can be done. Some of the easiest and representative ways are the following: 1. Practice giving concentrated, focused recognition by calling deserving employees into your office and thanking them for doing an outstanding job. During this interaction, focus is only on the detailed recognition and nothing else, so that the effect is not diluted by the discussion of other matters. 2. Buy a trophy and give it to the most deserving employee in the unit or department. Inscribe the individual’s name on the trophy, but leave room for additional names. To help ensure fairness and acceptance, at the end of a month, have this recipient choose the next member of the unit to be recognized and explain why this individual was chosen. 3. Recognize an employee who is located in another locale and does not get a chance to visit the home office very often. Deal with this “out of sight, out of mind” problem by faxing, e-mailing, or leaving a voice mail for the person that says “thank you for a job well done.” 4. Write a note that recognizes an individual’s contributions during the last pay period and attach this note to the person’s paycheck. 5. When you get a raise or a promotion, acknowledge the role that was played by your support staff by taking all of them out to lunch. In sports, a smart quarterback who receives all the attention for a win will always recognize especially his line in front of him and may even take these “unsung heroes” out for dinner or buy them something. 6. Take a picture of someone who is being congratulated by his or her manager. Give a copy of the photo to the employee and put another copy in a prominent location for everyone to see. 7. Have a senior manager come by and attend one of your team meetings during which you recognize people for their accomplishments. 8. Invite your work team or department to your house on a Saturday evening to celebrate their completion of a project or attainment of a particularly important work milestone. 9. Recognize the outstanding skill or expertise of an individual by assigning the person an employee to mentor, thus demonstrating both your trust and your respect. 10. The next time you hear a positive remark made about someone, repeat it to that person as soon as possible. 11. Stay alert to the types of praise and recognition that employees seem to like the best and use these as often as possible. 12. Catch people doing things right—and let them know! In some cases, recognition awards are delivered on the spot for a job well done. For example, at Kimley-Horn, a big engineering firm in North Carolina, at any time, for any reason, without permission, any employee can award a $55 recognition check ($50 plus $5 for tax payment) paid by the company to any other employee. As the HR director notes, “Any employee who does something exceptional receives recognition from peers within minutes.”84 In a recent year, 6,174 such awards ($339,570) were made with very little oversight and virtually no abuses. In another example, at Tricon, a spin-off of PepsiCo that has become the world’s largest restaurant company in units and second behind McDonald’s in sales, the chief executive officer gave a Pizza Hut general manager a foam cheesehead for achieving a crew turnover rate of 56 percent in an industry where 200 percent is the norm. Commenting on the event, the CEO noted, “I wondered why anyone would be moved by getting a cheesehead, but I’ve seen people cry. People love recognition.”85 Yet, as pointed out at the beginning of this section, this powerful reward is still being underutilized, as seen by the results of a survey in which 96 percent of the respondents said that they had an unfulfilled need to be recognized for their work contributions.86 As the now deceased head of the Gallup Organization Don Clifton used to say, “I’ve never met an employee who was suffering from too much recognition.” A more 105 106 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context visible and much more costly form of organizational reward system involves the benefits that are provided to employees. BENEFITS AS ORGANIZATIONAL REWARDS Every permanent employee receives benefits, even though they often seem to be unaware and not know the usually high monetary value of these benefits. For example, a recent survey indicated that 50 percent of Americans spend more time filing their taxes and doing their holiday shopping than they do reviewing and trying to understand their benefit choices. As one benefits expert noted, “Employees can be overwhelmed with the variety of health care and retirement choices offered to them.”87 Even though employees may not be aware, the fact is that benefits constitute a large percentage of most company’s expenses. In recent years these costs have been escalating. For example, over the past decade premiums for health coverage alone have increased well over 75 percent and the employees normally pay only a small portion of that cost.88 Benefit costs to employers range between 30 to 35 percent of wages and salaries. So a company that is paying an employee $70,000 annually is spending an additional $22,000 in benefits including life and health insurance, a pension plan, mandated government benefits such as Social Security, vacation time, and so forth. Although some managers and small business owners question the high cost of benefits, many believe that it is money well spent because it is a vital part of the organization’s reward system and helps attract, maintain, and retain outstanding employees. This reasoning is known as efficiency wage theory and holds that firms can save money and become more productive if they pay higher wages and better benefits because they are able to hire and leverage the best talent. This theory is particularly useful in explaining the importance of offering benefits that appeal to and are needed by today’s employees to make them satisfied, stress free, and productive. For example, in recent years, with so many women in the workforce, a growing number of companies have been helping their people deal with family-related challenges by providing on-site day care, dual parental maternity leave, and flexible work hours so individuals who have young children or elderly relatives who need their assistance can deal with these issues. In general, the benefits portion of the organizational reward system can be categorized in a number of different ways. The following examines both the traditional and newly emerging benefits used in today’s organizational reward system. Traditionally Offered Benefits Commonly offered benefits are of two types: those that must be offered because they are required by law and those that most organizations typically have given to their personnel. When benefits are used as part of the organizational reward system, these are standard offerings and, for the most part, differ very little from one organization to another. Federal Government–Mandated Benefits One traditional government-mandated benefit is Social Security. The initial purpose of Social Security, officially known as the Old Age Survivors and Disability Insurance Program, was to provide limited income to retired people to supplement such things as their personal savings, private pensions, and part-time work earnings. Both employees and employers are required to pay a Social Security tax. Additionally, both employees and their employer pay Medicare taxes. In turn, this federal government–mandated program pays both a retirement benefit and Medicare benefits, although payments will vary depending on a number of factors such as the age at which the person elects to start receiving payments. Chapter 4 Organizational Context: Reward Systems 107 Another mandated benefit is workers’ compensation. This is insurance that covers individuals who suffer a job-related illness or accident. Employers pay the cost of this insurance. Other mandated programs that are offered to employees do not specify a particular benefit, but they do require the employer to take specific types of actions. For example, the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 covered in Chapter 2 requires all organizations with 50 or more employees to grant any worker who has been employed there for at least one year an unpaid leave of up to 12 weeks for childbirth, the adoption of a child, to care for a family member with a serious health problem, or because of a personal health problem. During this period, all of the employee’s existing health benefits must remain intact, and the individual must be allowed to return to the same or an equivalent job after the leave. Another mandated program is the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, which requires that if an employer sets up a pension fund for employees and deducts contributions to that fund, the company must follow certain guidelines. These guidelines restrict the firm’s freedom to take money out of the fund and provides formulas for employee vesting (when the employee has a right to the employer’s contributions to the fund) and portability (the employee’s ability to transfer funds to a different retirement account). A third mandated program is the result of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978, which protects a woman from being fired because she is pregnant. A fourth program is a result of the Economic Recovery Act of 1981, which allows employees to make taxdeductible contributions to a pension, savings, or an individual retirement account (IRA). All of these programs provide government-mandated benefits to employees. Life, Disability, and Health Insurance Another major category of traditional benefits consists of insurance coverage. Virtually all large (but less than half of those with 10 or fewer employees) companies offer health insurance to their employees and pay a major portion of the premiums for this coverage. However, about three-quarters (and growing) of U.S. employers do require employee participants to share the health costs via deductibles, coinsurance, copayments, and other means.89 Life insurance is often based on the individual’s annual salary so that the premium provides protection, for example, for two times the person’s yearly salary. Additionally, employers often make disability insurance available for a minimum premium fee. In recent years, even though health coverage costs are rapidly escalating, they have become an expected benefit. Thus, firms are trying to manage for cost containment through copayment and preferred providers in order to compete for top employees and retain the best. In fact, many employers are expanding coverage to encompass a variety of health care including prescription drugs, vision care products, mental health services, and dental care. Over half of employees are enrolled in preferred provider organization (PPO) plans and less than half have the option to join a health maintenance organization (HMO) that offers medical and health services on a prepaid basis. This HMO approach has seemed to run its course and now an increasing number of firms are implementing what are sometimes called “disease management programs.” As explained: Disease management programs are a sophisticated version of old-style preventative medicine. Rather than rationing services through managed care, employers throw lots of early medical attention at chronically ill workers, who absorb about 60 percent of all health dollars.90 Another example would be the growing recognition by companies of the costs of obesity (now estimated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to affect one of three adults). Having overweight employees not only affects a firm’s health care costs, but also lost productivity due to absenteeism. One report estimated that obesity costs a company 108 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context with a thousand employees an extra $395,000 per year and, for private employers in general, obesity-related costs stemming from medical expenditures and work loss amount to $45 billion annually.91 An increasing number of firms are trying to combat this increasing problem through preventative programs. For example, VSM Abrasives, a sandpaper manufacturer in Missouri, offers cash and time-off incentives for employees who maintain or lose weight and have saved 10–15 percent on annual insurance claims.92 Pension Benefits In addition to the pension benefits that are provided by Social Security, most organizations today have also established private pension plans. Contributions are generally made by both the employer and employee, and there are a variety of plans available. Two of the most popular are individual retirement accounts (IRAs) and 401(k) plans that allow employees to save money on a tax-deferred basis by entering into salary-deferral agreements with the employer. These built-up funds are then available to the employee in retirement and typically provide far more money than the monthly Social Security checks from the federal government. Many of these plans are invested in stock and when the market goes up these pension plans do very well, but of course when the stock values go down, as they did at the end of 2008, the pensions of many people take a big hit. Time-Off Benefit Another common benefit, often taken for granted by many, is paid time off. In the accompanying OB in Action: You Can’t Make More Time, Randy Pausch, the college professor who gave the famous “last lectures” while he was dying of cancer, passionately points out that time is indeed a precious gift. Increasingly, this message of the importance of more free time is being taken to heart by employers as an effective benefit for their employees. For example, retailer Eddie Bauer focuses on making sure its benefit programs give time back to employees, help employees save time, and equate the saving of time with money. One such benefit at Eddie Bauer was to have employees save time by having services on the corporate campus such as dry cleaning and film developing pick-up and delivery, an ATM machine, a gym, will preparation, and flu shots. This firm believes that employee time saving results in productivity and retention. An innovative way to meet corporate social responsibility objectives would be to give employees paid time off to do charitable and volunteer work in the community. There is evidence that such a benefit helps in recruiting and retaining top talent.93 The more traditional time benefit is vacation time. In most organizations employees are entitled to at least one week of vacation with pay after being with the firm for one year, and by the end of five years, most are given at least two weeks and, in some cases, as many as four. Moreover, some firms will pay, say, 1.5 times the person’s weekly salary for every week of vacation that the individual forgoes, and some employers allow people to accumulate vacation time and, at some point, pay them for any unused time. Another form of time off is paid religious holidays. Still another is paid sick leave. In many organizations individuals are given a predetermined number of sick days per year, such as six, whereas in others there is no limit. Finally, many firms give paid personal leave such as a day to attend the funeral of a friend or relative or for simply any personal reasons. Newer Types of Benefits In recent years, a number of newer types of benefits have emerged and are gaining in popularity. One example of these is wellness programs, and another, mentioned earlier in this section, is assistance with family-related responsibilities. These, in addition to others, are emerging as an important part of today’s organizational reward system. OB in Action: You Can’t Make More Time Randy Pausch’s Heartfelt Views on Using Time to the Fullest Randy Pausch was truly passionate about the benefits of time management. He was asked to write this not long before his death on July 25, 2008 at age 47, and he was excited to have the opportunity. In fact, it led to one of the last e-mails I got from him, which was full of exclamation points and closed with the word “AWESOME!” In the end, he didn’t have the energy to finish it. Thus, his friends have put the following together using the phrases he used many times. So you’ve decided to take the time to read this article. Every moment of our lives requires this kind of decision, which is the fundamental time-management question: Should I do X, or should I do Y? All his life, Randy Pausch knew time was a gift. He was always logical about time, sometimes to the point of exasperating his friends with comments about the size of their in-boxes. But his reverence for hours, minutes— even seconds—served him well. He would stand before a room full of students and tell them time was their most precious commodity. They all knew they had finite money, but they lived as if they had infinite time. “You can always make more money later,” Randy would say. “But you can’t make more time.” Time, like money, he explained, must be explicitly managed. He had all sorts of practical advice for work. Stand while on the phone. (You’ll be more eager to finish up.) Avoid copying five people on an e-mail when you want something done. (Each will assume that one of the other four is going to step up to the plate.) Minimize interruptions. (Turn off the “new e-mail” pop-up alert or shut down e-mail during your good working hours.) Other tips were reminders of the big picture. Do the “ugliest” thing first—everything else will come more easily after that. Make time for the important things, not just for critical things; it is all too easy to spend time fighting fires rather than doing the necessary deep thinking. And recognize that the best reason to save time in your work is to increase time with your family. SO LITTLE OF IT LEFT Toward the end of his life, Randy became something of a poster boy for the limits of time. Last September he gave a “last lecture” at Carnegie Mellon. He talked about the joys of life and how much he appreciated it, even with so little of his own left. It was a talk for his students and colleagues, but because it was recorded, he hoped it could be a message to his three kids, too. Footage of the talk unexpectedly spread online, and he heard from thousands of people. (As a result, another lecture of his, on time management, was widely watched online, too.) Many wanted to know if his views on time changed as he got closer to the end of his life. But there were no great epiphanies. “Everything now is more so,” he told people. He lived longer than doctors predicted, and he mapped out that “extra” time with fervor. He went on a few romantic trips with his wife, Jai. He made a point of doing memorable activities with his children, such as swimming with dolphins and visiting Disney World. He was trying to give his kids—ages 2, 3, and 6—vivid memories of their time together. Even before the last stages of his illness, people asked him how to best prioritize their time. His answer was simple: “If I don’t do X, will it matter? And if I have to pick either X or Y, which one is more important? At the end of my life, which of these things will I be glad I did?” Time is all we have. And, like Randy, we may find one day we have less than we think. Note: Randy Pausch’s time-management lecture is viewable at www.thelastlecture.com. Wellness Programs Wellness programs, which will also be discussed in Chapter 9 on coping with stress, are a special type of benefit program that focuses on keeping employees from becoming physically and/or mentally ill. There is considerable evidence that employees who exercise regularly and maintain or lose excess weight are less likely to take sick days and thus reduce health insurance premiums and lost productive time. As a result, more and more firms are now encouraging their people to work out regularly by installing a gymnasium or workout center on the premises or offering to finance at least part of the cost of joining a local health club. Another wellness practice is to encourage employees to exercise by giving them a financial payment such as $1 for every mile they jog during the year. So a person who jogs three miles a day at the company gym will earn $15 a week. As indicated earlier in the chapter, some also encourage their people to keep their weight under control, and individuals who are too heavy are 109 110 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context paid to lose the extra weight. For example, a firm may pay $10 for every pound an employee loses. Of course, once the individual has reached the weight recommended by the doctor, this weight must stay off. If the person gains it back, the individual may have to pay the firm $10 for every pound above the doctor’s recommended limit. Many firms find that these are small sums to pay when contrasted with the cost of having someone, for example, out of work six days a year due to poor health. In fact, in order to encourage everyone to stay healthy, some organizations pay people for unused sick days. So those who are in good health have an incentive to maintain this status. Finally, a growing number of large firms have on-site health care services that primarily focus on prevention rather than treatment.94 Life Cycle Benefits Another popular group of new benefits comes under the heading of what collectively are being called “life cycle” benefits. These are based on a person’s stage of life and include such things as child care and elder care. Child care benefits are extremely popular and many of the “best places to work” such as the software development firm SAS have on-site day care. Employees can drop off their child at the day care center, come by and have lunch with the child, and then pick up the youngster after work and drive home together. In a few instances, firms have even installed TV cameras so employees can view and keep track of their child throughout the day in the center. One of the primary benefits of this program is the elimination of day care costs, which can run well over $100 a week, as well as spending quality time with the child before, during, and after work, or, in the case of the TV-monitored systems, during the workday. Elder care takes a number of different forms. One of the most common is referral services, which can be used by an employee who has a disabled parent or one who needs constant care. Another form is long-term health care insurance, which provides for nursing homes or at-home care. Another popular benefit is employee assistance programs (EAPs for short), which were originally designed to assist employees who had problems with alcohol. In recent times, EAPs deal with drug abuse and now have generally expanded into marital problems and financial planning. The purpose of these programs is to provide help to employees in dealing with personal problems that can negatively impact their lives and their job performance. The use of EAPs should be kept confidential so that employees are not hesitant to use the services for fear of career repercussions. Other Benefits In recent years a number of other benefits have begun to appear, many of them offered by especially innovative companies. One is concierge services that help employees choose gifts for presents, get tickets to concerts, schedule home or auto repairs, and so forth. Another is the use of tuition assistance to help employees obtain a college education or advanced degree. A third is the use of noninsured benefit programs that help low-wage and part-time workers purchase medicines and medical assistance at a discount. Still another example is prepaid legal plans that offer a variety of services such as legal advice, wills and estate planning, and investment counseling. Finally, some firms just come up with relatively small, but still effective benefits for their employees. For example, at the accounting firm KPMG, employees received a hot summer surprise: six pints of gourmet ice cream, toppings, and a scooper; the L.A. law firm DLA Piper recently whisked 400 employees and their families off to Disneyland for the day; in Dallas the PR firm Weber Shandwick encourages employees to use their expense account to pay for cab rides after drinking alcohol; and Safeco, Microsoft, and IBM offer employees work-from-home opportunities and subsidies for alternative transportation.95 Chapter 4 Organizational Context: Reward Systems 111 Flexible, Cafeteria-Style Benefits Every organization has its own way of providing/administering the benefit package, but in recent years a growing number have begun offering flexible, cafeteria-style benefit plans. Just like most firms today96 offer their employees flexible times for arriving and departing work (see Chapter 2), they also offer plans that allow employees self-control and choice over the benefits received. Employees are allowed to put together their own package by choosing those benefits that best meet their personal needs. Under this arrangement, the organization will establish a budgeted amount that it is willing to spend per employee, and the individual is then allowed to decide how to spend this money. For example, some employees may want more life insurance because they have a young family, whereas others may prefer to spend more on health insurance coverage because they have a spouse with a debilitating illness. There is evidence that these cafeteria-style programs can lead to increased satisfaction and reduced turnover.97 However, organizations have also found that these plans can be somewhat expensive to administer because there are many different types of benefit packages, and someone has to keep track of what each person has chosen. Additionally, employees are usually allowed to make changes in their package on an annual basis, further complicating the problem of administering the benefits and the accompanying tax implications.98 Finally, even though employees seem to like cafeteria-style benefit plans, there is no assurance that they always make rational decisions.99 For example, young employees with families may opt to deal only with more immediate concerns such as better hospital coverage for their spouse and children and completely ignore the benefits of contributing to a retirement program for their future. In summary, benefits are clearly an important component of the organizational reward system. Unfortunately, because they are so common and everyone gets them, their value as a reward often goes unnoticed. Benefits are too often taken for granted and are considered to be an entitlement and thus become a hollow reward for employee performance and retention. Summary This chapter examines reward systems as an important part of the organizational context for organizational behavior. For most organizations, pay dominates the organizational reward system. There is considerable evidence that pay is vital not only for hiring and retaining talented employees, but also if properly administered for its positive impact on desirable outcomes such as productivity, quality, and customer service. In particular, pay provides employees with the opportunity to meet both lower-level maintenance and upperlevel growth and achievement needs. The challenge for managers is to administer rewards properly. In particular, this means setting up pay systems that allow employees to know the outcomes that are to be rewarded, that measure these outcomes as fairly and objectively as possible, and that tie monetary incentives directly to the results. Pay administration takes several forms. Traditional methods include base salary and merit pay. Both of these, however, are often insufficient for retaining talented people. Organizations have to offer incentives for desirable outcomes. As a result, pay-forperformance systems are in place in many firms. These include both individual and group incentive plans. Common examples of individual incentives include commissions based directly on sales or work output, bonuses, and stock options. Group incentives include gain sharing, profit sharing, and employee stock ownership plans. In recent years many organizations have realized that they must develop new pay approaches. One example is the use of commissions that go beyond sales to outcomes such as customer service. Others include skill pay that is based on employees’ demonstrating completion of training and competency in particular job-related skills, competency pay that 112 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context is based on rewarding people for abstract knowledge or competencies related to things such as technology or leadership, and broadbanding in which salary levels are collapsed into a small number of salary grades with broad pay ranges. Another important but often overlooked component of organizational reward systems is recognition. In contrast to money, recognition is easier to control for an individual supervisor or manager and can be easily altered to meet the individual employee needs. Social recognition is provided by managers/supervisors contingent on performing desirable behaviors and is given more detailed attention in Chapter 12 on behavioral performance management. As part of the organizational reward system discussed in this chapter, formal recognition systems can innovatively provide awards for desirable outcomes, and many actual examples are provided. Benefits are the third major component of organizational reward systems. Some of these benefits are mandated by the federal government (e.g., Social Security and workers’ compensation). However, numerous other benefits are received by today’s permanent employees (not by temps, and this is a major problem for them). Examples include paid vacations, days off for religious holidays, personal leave, life and health insurance, and pensions. In addition there are benefits that have emerged in recent years that are proving quite popular. Examples include wellness programs, child care benefits, employee assistance programs (EAPs), tuition assistance, prepaid legal expenses, and a host of other perks. In recent years the value of benefits as part of the reward system has increased, but so has the cost. The challenge for today’s management is to make sure there is a favorable cost-benefit ratio and go beyond what is required by law to contribute to desired outcomes such as retention and performance. Ending with Meta-Analytic Research Findings OB PRINCIPLE FOR EVIDENCED-BASED PRACTICE The systematic administration of pay-for-performance reward systems can increase employee performance. Meta-Analysis Results: [19 studies; 2,818 participants; (1) d = 1.36 for pay incentive in manufacturing firms; (2) d = 1.82 for pay incentive combined with performance feedback and social recognition in manufacturing settings; (3) d = .42 for pay incentive in service organizations; (4) d = .89 for pay incentive combined with performance feedback in service organizations (there were no studies with this combination in manufacturing); and (5) d = .27 for pay incentive combined with performance feedback and social recognition in service organizations] On average, there is a: 1. 83 percent probability that a systematically administered pay-for-performance reward system to employees in manufacturing settings will increase their performance more than those who do not receive this approach; 2. 90 percent probability that a systematically administered pay combined with social recognition and feedback-for-performance reward system to employees in manufacturing settings will increase their performance more than those who do not receive this approach; Chapter 4 Organizational Context: Reward Systems 113 3. 62 percent probability that a systematically administered pay-for-performance reward system to employees in service organizations will increase their performance more than those who do not receive this approach; 4. 74 percent probability that a systematically administered pay combined with feedback-for-performance reward system to employees in service organizations will increase their performance more than those who do not receive this approach; and 5. 58 percent probability that a systematically administered pay combined with social recognition and feedback-for-performance reward system to employees in service organizations will increase their performance more than those who do not receive this approach. As the preceding probability statements reflect, moderator analyses revealed that the impact of the systematically administered pay (and its combinations with social recognition and feedback) varied depending on the type of organization. As indicated, the pay-forperformance reward system had a bigger impact in manufacturing than in service organizations. Conclusion: As discussed in this chapter, although there are a variety of techniques in organizational reward systems, pay is the one that comes to the forefront in any discussion or analysis. There is an automatic assumption that pay has a positive effect on employee performance. Despite this assumption and the popularity of money as a reward, managers are still searching for answers of effective ways to increase the incentive effects of money. Pay for performance or incentive pay is one answer because it supposedly links pay directly to performance results. It motivates employees because it gives something extra—compensation above and beyond basic wages or salaries. However, just as there have been problems with pay in general, as the chapter points out, there have also been mixed results with pay for performance. One way to improve pay for performance is to systematically administer the plan so that employees can clearly see the contingent (i.e., the if-then) relationship between their behaviors, the resulting performance, and what they are paid. One way to systematically administer such a pay-for-performance plan is through the behavioral management steps that will be given attention in Chapter 12. Such a systematic application of pay for performance, as was shown in the meta-analysis reported here, can have a positive impact on employee performance. Source: Alexander D. Stajkovic and Fred Luthans, “A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Organizational Behavior Modification on Task Performance,” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 40, No. 5, 1997, pp. 1122–1149. Questions for Discussion and Review 1. In what way does agency theory provide understanding for pay as an important component of the organizational reward system? 2. Is pay an effective organizational reward? Does the fact that the chief executive officer makes 20 times as much as the lowest-paid member of the company have any effect on the value of pay as a determinant of organizational performance? 3. “The team with the highest payroll usually ends up in the World Series.” How does this statement relate to the importance of pay as a reward? 4. Why have many organizations begun to supplement their traditional pay systems with “payfor-performance” plans? Of these plans, what about individual versus group incentives? 114 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context 5. How can the so-called new pay techniques help solve some of the major challenges facing today’s organizations? Give some specific examples. 6. Why have more and more firms begun developing recognition programs as part of their organizational reward system? Why not just give people more money? 7. What role do benefits play in the organizational reward system? How can these costly benefits contribute more to desirable organizational outcomes? Internet Exercise: Rewards in the Workplace Visit Web sites such as http://www.adcentive.com and http://www .corporaterewards.com/index.cfm?track_id=1314. Here you will find various ideas on how to use and implement various reward and incentive systems. Find various tips and programs currently being used by organizations. Also, search under “pay for performance” to see other developments of this type of reward system. 1. From information you gained from the Web sites, how do you think these suggestions could influence work behavior? Which ones do you think will work better than others? Why? 2. Using a search engine to go to specific companies, what other types of reward systems can you find? Give the specifics and critique their value to improving performance in the workplace. Real Case: CEOs Get Fewer Perks New SEC rules requiring companies to disclose perks that cost more than $10,000 lead to a decline in swanky extras It may still be good to be king, but increasingly the job is coming with fewer perks. In its third annual study of fringe benefits for chief executives, compensation research firm Equilar found that the median values of seven of the nine major CEO perquisites that it tracks—from persona1 aircraft use to country club memberships—were down or remained flat from 2006 to 2001. The prevalence of such swanky extras fell too, with most categories showing lower rates of occurrence this year. The decline is an expected result of SEC rules that went into effect last year. The new rules stipulate that companies disclose perks that cost more than $10,000, far lower than the previous $50,000 threshold. With a brighter spotlight on lavish extras that could prove embarrassing to a company, more boards have been ending or reducing CEO benefits. “For many shareholders, the presence of excessive perquisites has become an acid test on governance,” says David Wise, a senior consultant in the compensation practice at management consulting firm Hay Group. In addition, more disclosure may explain some of the increases that remain, such as the prevalence of corporate housing benefıts, says Equilar research manager Alexander Cwirko-Godycki, which may not have been disclosed separately in the past. Some companies, especially after the SEC sent letters to companies last fall asking for more detail on compensation decisions, are choosing to disclose more than what’s required. Others may be disclosing more because, due to the timing of their fıscal calendar, this was the fırst year they were required to fıle under the new regulations. Beefed-Up Security at Dell Still, the study, which examines perks for CEOs of the 95 largest public companies by revenue, did show two increases that ran counter to the overall trend. Tax payments on perks and benefits—extra cash to make up for taxes assessed for the imputed income of fringe benefits for CEOs—actually rose in value this year by 43.6%, from a median of $23,951 in 2006 to $34,396 in 2007. [These payments are separate from the tax “gross-ups,” as they’re often called, that some CEOs receive for their severance packages.] That’s surprising,” Chapter 4 Organizational Context: Reward Systems 115 says Cwirko-Godycki, especially given how much attention has been paid to this issue. “Perks have always been a controversial issue; paying the taxes on top of the perks has been even more so.” Meanwhile, the median value of personal and home security benefits for CEOs also increased by 14.4%, from $25,609 to $29,291. But Cwirko-Godycki is quick to point out that the value would have actually fallen this year had it not been for one significant outlier: Michael Dell, who received $l,034,750 in security benefits. [The amount was similar to what Dell earned as chairman the year before, but he was included in Equilar’s study only after returning as CEO in early 2007.] In a statement to BusinessWeek, a spokesman for Round Rock, Texas– based Dell (DELL) says the company does not consider the security payments a perk, but a business-related expense mandated by the board. The company also says the amount of security Michael Dell receives is determined with consideration that he is a recognizable industry leader and public figure worldwide. Most perks, however, declined in value or prevalence. The median value of club memberships dropped most significantly, falling 64% from $11,070 in 2006 to $3,996 in 2007. Financial planning fees were down 9.2%, from $17,156 to $15,575. And personal use of aircraft, the perk that most “seems to get under shareholders’ skin,” says Hay Group’s Wise, also fell. In 2007, the median outlay for CEOs flying on corporate jets was $109,743, down 9.8% from $121,676 in 2006. 1. Make a case both for and against executive perks. Do you agree that such perks should be cut? Why? 2. Do you think paying the taxes on top of the perks is ethical? 3. Would you turn down the perks if you ever become a CEO? Real Case: Rewarding Teamwork in the Plains In the past, most reward systems have been geared to the individual employee. However, with the emergence of teams in most of today’s organizations, systems are being revamped to reward teamwork. A good example is Behlen Manufacturing Company in Columbus, Nebraska. The 1,100 mostly production employees are organized into 32 teams. Some of these teams have only a handful of members, whereas others have as many as 60. Although each individual receives a relatively low base-pay component, the rest of the compensation is variable and is determined in a number of different ways, including how one’s team is performing. The centerpiece of the manufacturing company’s variable-reward plan is gain sharing, an increasingly popular form of compensation whereby all members share a usually fixed percentage of the documented savings or performance gain accomplished by the team. Behlen employees can earn monthly gain sharing of up to $1 an hour when their teams meet productivity goals. The CEO explained this team reward system as follows: “If you’re in a group that makes stock tanks, for example, from the start of the process to the end of the process, over all shifts, all month long, if the team achieves certain levels of productivity, each of its members is rewarded anywhere from 0 cents to $1 an hour for every hour worked in that area.” Documentation of the gains is based on actual pounds of products, so that everyone on the team knows exactly how well their team is doing. Another part of the company’s variable-reward system involves profit sharing. Employees receive 20 percent of the profits. In recent years this has resulted in everyone’s getting a profit-sharing bonus equivalent to three weeks’ salary. Still another part of the reward package is the employee stock ownership plan. Each employee receives company stock equal in value to 2 percent of his or her base salary each year. Senior managers in the company participate in the same reward system as the workers, receiving the same proportional benefits. However, in the case of managers, performance is calculated on the gross margin of their business unit before selling and administrative costs are deducted. How well has this company in the middle of the Great Plains performed with this organizational reward system? In each of the eight years this pay plan has been in place, performance has exceeded top management’s expectations. In addition to the $5 million the firm saved because of safety, quality, and efficiency ideas that were submitted through the teams, the company has exceeded its profit goals each year. In fact, in the most recent 116 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context reported year profits were $1 million greater than expectations. The CEO explained it this way, “As people focused in on their gain-sharing opportunities—and they’ve understood their profit-sharing opportunities— we’re seeing positive productivity improvements in every corner of the plant.” 1. Explain the organizational reward system this firm uses. 2. Although this reward system has obviously been very effective, what more can be done? What specific recommendations would you make? 3. What if the agricultural economy goes bad and the sales of this agribusiness company greatly decreases? What will be the impact on the reward system this company uses, and what would you now recommend? Real Case: Different Strokes for Different Folks Organizations are finding that the best reward system entails a combination of money, recognition, and benefits. Money is important, of course, but if a person earns $50 in incentive pay every month, after a while this monetary reward may begin to lose some of its power. So financial rewards have to be altered and different ones offered. The same is true for recognition awards; although people never suffer from too much recognition, organizations have to be sure awards are fair, and highly creative organizations often ensure that change is built into the recognition system. The important thing that many firms have found is that what is truly rewarding for one person may not have the same impact for another. In short, there are individual differences when it comes to reward systems, and there have to be different strokes for different folks. Here are some representative innovative monetary and recognition rewards that have been offered by a variety of different enterprises. • At Busch Gardens in Tampa, the company gives a Pat on the Back Award to employees who do an outstanding job and also has a copy of the notice of the award put in the employee’s file. • At Metro Motors in Montclair, California, the name of the Employee of the Month is put up on an electronic billboard over the dealership. • At Colin Service Systems, a janitorial service in White Plains, New York, coworkers vote for the employees that they feel should be given awards as the Most Helpful Employee and the Nicest Employee, and executives make the presentations. • At the Amway Corporation, on days when some workloads are light, the department’s employees help • • • • out in other departments, and after accumulating eight hours of such work, employees get a personal thank-you note from the manager of programs and services. At South Carolina Federal financial services in Columbia, the president and other top managers serve employees lunch or dinner as a reward for a job well done. At the Gunneson Group International, a total-quality consulting firm in Landing, New Jersey, when an employee refers business that results in a sale, the individual receives a cash award of 1 to 5 percent of the gross sale, depending on the value of the new business to the company. At QuadGraphics printing company in Pewaukee, Wisconsin, employees are paid $30 to attend a seminar devoted to quitting smoking, and the company gives $200 to anyone who quits for a year. At the Taylor Corporation, a printing company in North Mankato, Minnesota, in lieu of year-end bonuses, employees are allowed to make selections from a merchandise catalog. 1. Why are more and more companies complementing their monetary incentives with recognition awards in their organizational reward system? 2. How would you rate each of the examples? What are some strengths and weaknesses of each? 3. If you work for a human resource management consulting firm and are given the assignment to head up a project team to develop reward systems that would be appealing to today’s employees, what would you recommend? Chapter 4 Organizational Context: Reward Systems 117 Organizational Behavior Case: Huge Benefits, Little Understanding or Use The Velma Company designs and manufactures hightech communications equipment. The firm is a worldclass supplier, and its three largest customers are Fortune 50 firms. Velma also has major clients in China and the European Union. Over the last five years the company’s sales have tripled, and the biggest challenge it faces is hiring and retaining state-of-the-art people. In particular, there are two groups that are critical to the company’s success. One is the design people who are responsible for developing new products that are more efficient and price competitive than those currently on the market. The other is the manufacturing people who build the equipment. In an effort to attract and keep outstanding design people, Velma has a very attractive benefit package. All of their health insurance premiums and medical expenses are covered (no copay or deductibles). The company contributes 10 percent of their annual income toward a retirement program, and these funds are vested within 24 months. So a new design person who is earning $75,000 annually will have $7,500 put into a retirement fund by the company, and the individual can make additional personal contributions. Each year all designers are given 100 shares of stock (the current sales price is $22) and an option to buy another 100 shares (the current stock price is $25 and this option is good for 10 years or as long as the person works for the firm, whichever comes first). The manufacturing people are on a pay-forperformance plan. Each individual is paid $7 for each unit he or she produces, and the average worker can turn out three units an hour. There is weekend work for anyone who wants it, but the rate per unit does not change. In addition, the company gives all of the manufacturing people free health insurance and covers all medical expenses. Another benefit is that everyone in the company is eligible for five personal days a year, and the company will pay for any unused days. Velma also has a large day care facility that is free for all employees, and there is a state-of-the-art wellness center located on the premises. Last year the company’s turnover was 9 percent, and the firm would like to reduce it by 50 percent this year. One proposed strategy is to strengthen the benefits package even more and make it so attractive that no one will want to, or could afford to, leave. Some top managers privately are concerned that the fırm is already doing way too much for these employees and are troubled by the fact that exit interviews with designers who left in the last year indicated that many of them were unaware of the benefits they were receiving. For example, most of the designers who have gone elsewhere reported that they were attracted to the stock offered them, yet they did not exercise the options to buy additional shares of Velma stock because they were not sure what the financial benefits were to them. The manufacturing people who left reported that $7 per unit was acceptable, although a higher rate would have resulted in their remaining with the fırm. The manufacturing people also liked the stock that the company gave them, but were somewhat confused about the options they held. Both groups—designers and manufacturing personnel—seemed pleased with the contribution that the company made to their retirement program, but most of them did not put any additional personal contributions into their retirement fund. When asked why, the majority of them were unaware that this could be done on a before-tax basis, thus temporarily shielding the contributions from taxes and making it easier to build a nest egg for the future. Finally, all of those who left said that they liked the child care benefit, although most of them did not have young children so they did not use it, and they thought the wellness center was also a good idea but they were so busy working that they admitted to never using the facilities. 1. Which benefits did the employees who were leaving seem to best understand and like? 2. Which benefits did they find confusing or of little value? 3. Based on your answers and other relevant considerations, what recommendations would you make to Velma’s management regarding how they can do a better job of using the benefits package in their organizational reward system? 118 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context Experiential Exercises for Part One EXERCISE: Synthesis of Student and Instructor Needs* Goals: 1. To “break the ice” in using experiential exercises 2. To initiate open communication between students and the instructor regarding mutual learning goals and needs 3. To stimulate the students to clarify their learning goals and instructional needs and to commit themselves to these 4. To serve as the first exercise in the “experiential” approach to management education Implementation: 1. The class is divided into groups of four to six students each. 2. Each group openly discusses what members would like from the course and drafts a set of learning objectives and instructional aims. The group also makes up a list of learning/course objectives that they feel the instructor wants to pursue. (About 20 minutes.) 3. After each group has “caucused,” a group spokesperson is appointed to meet with the instructor in an open dialogue in front of the class about course objectives. 4. The instructor meets with each group representative at the front of the classroom to initiate an open dialogue about the semester of learning. (About 30 minutes.) Several activities are carried out: a. Open discussion of the learning objectives of both the students and the instructor b. Recognition of the constraints faced by each party in accommodating these goals c. Identification of areas of goal agreement and disagreement, and feasible compromises d. Drafting a set of guidelines for cooperation between the parties, designed to better bring about mutual goal attainment EXERCISE: Work-Related Organizational Behavior: Implications for the Course* Goals: 1. To identify course topic areas from the participant’s own work experience 2. To introduce experiential learning *Sources: (1) “Synthesis of Student and Instructor Needs” was suggested by Professor Philip Van Auken and is used with his permission. (2) “Work-Related Organizational Behavior: Implications for the Course” is from “Getting Acquainted Triads,” in J. William Pfeiffer and John E. Jones (Eds.), A Handbook of Structured Experiences, Vol. 1, University Associates, San Diego, Calif., 1969, and “Defining Organizational Behavior,” in James B. Lau, Behavior in Organizations, Irwin, Burr Ridge, Ill., 1975. Chapter 4 Organizational Context: Reward Systems 119 Implementation: Task 1: Each class member does the following: 1. Describes an experience in a past work situation that illustrates something about organizational behavior. (Some students have had only part-time work experience or summer jobs, but even the humblest job is relevant here.) 2. Explains what it illustrates about organizational behavior. (Time: five minutes for individuals to think about and jot down notes covering these two points.) Task 2: The class forms into triads and each triad does the following: 1. Member A tells his or her experience to member B. Member B listens carefully, paraphrases the story back to A, and tells what it illustrates about organizational behavior. Member B must do this to A’s satisfaction that B has understood fully what A was trying to communicate. Member C is the observer and remains silent during the process. 2. Member B tells his or her story to C, and A is the observer. 3. Member C tells his or her story to A, and B is the observer. (Each member has about five minutes to tell his or her story and have it paraphrased back by the listener. The instructor will call out the time at the end of each five-minute interval for equal apportionment of “airtime” among participants. Total time: 15 minutes.) Task 3: Each triad selects one of its members to relate his or her incident to the class. The instructor briefly analyzes for the class how the related story fits in with some topic to be studied in the course, such as perception, motivation, communication, conflict, or leadership. The topic areas are listed in the table of contents of this book. EXERCISE: Organizations* Goals: 1. To identify some of the important organizations in your life 2. To determine relevant, specific characteristics of organizations 3. To describe some of the important functions of management in organizations Implementation: Read the Overview and Procedure sections. Complete the Profile of Organizations form, which follows these sections. Overview: Undoubtedly, you have had recent experiences with numerous organizations. Ten to 15 minutes of reflective thinking should result in a fairly large list of organizations. Don’t be misled by thinking that only large organizations, such as your college or Microsoft, are relevant for consideration. How about the clinic, with the doctors, nurses, and secretary/ bookkeeper? Or the corner garage or service station? The local bar, McDonald’s, and the *Source: Reprinted with permission from Fremont E. Kast and James E. Rosenzweig, “Our Organizational Society,” in Experiential Exercises and Cases in Management, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1976, pp. 13–15. 120 Part One Environmental and Organizational Context neighborhood theater are all organizations. You should have no difficulty listing several organizations with which you have had recent contact. The second part of the exercise, however, is tougher. Describe several of the key characteristics of the organizations that you have listed. One of the major issues in studying and describing organizations is deciding what characteristics or factors are important. Some of the more common characteristics considered in the analysis of organizations are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Size (small to very large) Degree of formality (informal to highly structured) Degree of complexity (simple to complex) Nature of goals (what the organization is trying to accomplish) Major activities (what tasks are performed) Types of people involved (age, skills, educational background, etc.) Location of activities (number of units and their geographic location) You should be able to develop a list of characteristics that you think are relevant for each of your organizations. Now to the third, final, and most difficult task. Think about what is involved in the management of these organizations. For example, what kinds of functions do their managers perform? How does one learn the skills necessary to be an effective manager? Would you want to be a manager in any of these organizations? In effect, in this exercise you are being asked to think specifically about organizations you have been associated with recently, develop your own conceptual model for looking at their characteristics, and think more specifically about the managerial functions in each of these organizations. You probably already know a great deal more about organizations and their management than you think. This exercise should be useful in getting your thoughts together. Procedure: Step 1. Prior to class, list up to 10 organizations (for example, work, living group, club) in which you have been involved or with which you have had recent contact. Step 2. Enter five organizations from your list on the form on the next page (use extra sheets as needed). 1. List the organization. 2. Briefly outline the characteristics that you consider most significant. 3. Describe the managerial functions in each of these organizations. Step 3. During the class period, meet in groups of five or six to discuss your list of organizations, the characteristics you consider important, and your descriptions of their management. Look for significant similarities and differences across organizations. Step 4. Basing your selections on this group discussion, develop a list entitled “What we would like to know about organizations and their management.” Be prepared to write this list on the chalkboard or on big sheets of paper and to share your list with other groups in the class. Chapter 4 Organizational Context: Reward Systems 121 Profile of Organizations Organization 1. ____________________ 2. ____________________ 3. ____________________ 4. ____________________ 5. ____________________ Key Characteristics Managerial Functions ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior 5. Personality, Perception, and Employee Attitudes 6. Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications 7. Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Captial 125 156 199 EVIDENCE-BASED CONSULTING PRACTICES GALLUP’S ANSWER FOR AN EMOTIONAL ECONOMY: HUMANSIGMA™ This second major part of the text is concerned with the micro, individual level of analysis of organizational behavior. Recent workplace research by The Gallup Organization has led to the management metric known as HumanSigma™ (for example, see the book by this title by Gallup principals John Fleming and Jim Asplund published by Gallup Press). This is a measure of “the human difference” and is made up of two complementary economic factors, known as employee and customer engagement. Together, these factors assess an organization’s success in managing the Emotional Economy and driving financial performance. HumanSigma™ is a reliable indication of how organizations manage and leverage employee and customer engagement and productivity. It is a new way of thinking about how human differences interact. At the same time, it is a process, or sequence, of activities to leverage this human difference. Finally, it is a metric that indicates how well companies are progressing in the deployment of their human difference. Because there is significantly more HumanSigma variance within companies than between companies in the same industry, it is most effectively measured and managed at the work group level, one employee and one customer at a time. Successful management of these metrics requires the active involvement of local managers and associates. The Gallup Path™, the sequence of linkages between human performance and financial metrics including revenue, earnings, and stock value, further explains the components of HumanSigma™ management. 124 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior WHAT IS EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT? A recent issue of the Journal of Applied Psychology included an article summarizing a meta-analysis of Gallup research that illustrated the meaningful relationship between employee engagement and important workplace measures such as productivity, retention, customer ratings, and safety. Engaged employees are those who are emotionally invested in their jobs. Employee engagement is measured by Gallup’s 12 questions, known as the Q12®. These powerful questions measure dimensions that can be influenced at the local level by leaders, managers, and employees. Organizations that have implemented performance management systems designed to increase employee engagement have realized many of the workplace performance improvements outlined above. WHAT IS CUSTOMER ENGAGEMENT? Customer engagement goes beyond customer satisfaction and loyalty to a deeper, emotional attachment to the organization’s brands or services. For organizations to succeed in today’s emotional economy, they must understand, develop, and sustain engaged customers. Gallup’s extensive research led to 11 questions, known as the CE11®, that measure customer engagement and powerfully link to financial performance. As with employee engagement, these items measure dimensions able to be influenced at the local level. Successful performance management programs have produced customers with increased emotional attachment to products, services, and brands, resulting in improved financial performance for the organization. WHY DOES HUMANSIGMA™ MATTER? HumanSigma takes performance management beyond total quality management gurus Deming and Juran’s Six Sigma to optimize human performance by reducing variability in the extent to which both employees’ and customers’ emotional needs are met. Recent estimates indicate that at least 10 percent of the U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) is wasted by organizations due to unmanaged variation of the human aspects of performance. HumanSigma research has shown that, in general, the top 10 percent of organizations’ business units generate earnings up to seven times higher than the bottom 10 percent. Further, variation of HumanSigma across time determines the variation of earnings growth and sustained potential. Thus, it’s not enough just to measure HumanSigma; managers and employees need to take responsibility for effective HumanSigma management to realize meaningful increases in earnings. Increasing research evidence suggests that managing HumanSigma™ can generate more earnings than most of the management initiatives currently being pursued. It seems that the future success of organizations will be realized by leveraging human potential within the emotional economy. Chapter Five Personality, Perception, and Employee Attitudes Learning Objectives • Define the overall meaning of personality. • Identify the “Big Five” personality traits and the Myers-Briggs types. • Describe the perceptual process and its major dimensions. • Examine the sources and outcomes of the major employee attitudes of job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and organizational citizenship behaviors. This chapter discusses the cognitive, personal variables of personality, perception, and employee attitudes. These major psychological constructs are very popular ways to describe and analyze what goes into organizational behavior. Yet, like the other cognitively oriented processes, personality, perception, and employee attitudes are quite complex. The aim of this chapter is to facilitate a better understanding of such complexities of today’s employees. Such an analysis of personality and attitudes is vital to the study of organizational behavior. The first section of the chapter defines and clarifies the concept of personality. The next section is devoted to personality development and the socialization process. This foundation of understanding of the complex personality and how it is developed is followed by the two major applications to organizational behavior. Specifically, attention is given to the “Big Five” personality traits that have been found to best relate to performance in organizations and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) based on Carl Jung’s personality theory, which has been a very popular personal development and career assessment tool. The remaining sections of the chapter then focus on two more important cognitive processes, perception and attitudes. After examining the perceptual process and dimensions, a detailed analysis is first made of the dispositions of positive and negative affectivity, the two most widely recognized attitudes to organizational behavior, job satisfaction and organizational commitment, and finally the more recent relevant construct of prosocial/organizational citizenship behaviors. THE MEANING OF PERSONALITY Through the years there has not been universal agreement on the exact meaning of personality. Much of the controversy can be attributed to the fact that people in general and those in the behavioral sciences define “personality” from different perspectives. Most people tend to equate personality with social success (i.e., having a “good or popular personality,” or having “a lot of personality”) and to describe personality by a single dominant characteristic (i.e., strong, weak, or polite). When it is realized that thousands of words can be used to describe personality this way, the definitional problem becomes staggering. Psychologists, on 125 126 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior the other hand, take a different perspective. For example, the descriptive-adjective approach commonly used by most people plays only a small part. However, scholars also cannot agree on a definition of personality because they operate from different theoretical bases. Some of the historically important definitions come from trait theory (observable patterns of behavior that last over time), Freud’s psychoanalytic or psychodynamic theory (the unconscious determinants of behavior), and Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow’s humanistic theory (self-actualization and the drive to realize one’s potential). More recently, and the position taken in this chapter, is a more integrative theoretical approach drawing from all the historical theories, but more importantly, the self-concept including nature (heredity and physiological/biological dimensions) and nurture (environmental, developmental dimensions), dispositional traits, the social cognitive interactions between the person and the environment, and the socialization process. In this text personality will mean how people affect others and how they understand and view themselves, as well as their pattern of inner and outer measurable traits and the person-situation interaction. How people affect others depends primarily on their external appearance (height, weight, facial features, color, and other physical aspects) and traits. For example, in terms of external appearance, a very tall worker will have an impact on other people different from that of a very short worker. There is also evidence from meta-analysis that there are gender differences in certain personality characteristics.1 However, of more importance to the physiological/biological approach in the study of personality than the external appearance is the role of heredity and the brain. THE ROLE OF HEREDITY AND THE BRAIN Although heredity’s role in personality was traditionally downplayed, studies of twins in recent years have led to renewed interest. Identical twins share the same genetic endowment, but if they are raised apart (say, through separate adoptions), then the similarities and differences can provide insight into the relative contribution of heredity versus environment or nature versus nurture. That is, identical twins (who have the same genetic endowment) raised together (i.e., they have similar environment and developmental experiences) can be compared to the identical twins raised apart (same genetic endowment but different environment). If the identical twins raised together have the same traits, and this sameness is also found in those raised apart, then the conclusion can be drawn that heredity and not environment plays the largest role. However, if those raised together have similar traits, but those raised apart have significantly different traits, then the importance of the environment must be considered. Although twin studies in general are open to criticism of political influence and lack of scientific controls,2 most behavioral scientists now agree that genes play a role not only in physical characteristics and the brain, but also in personality. For example, a report by the American Psychological Association concludes, “Studies over the past 20 years on twins and adopted children have firmly established that there is a genetic component to just about every human trait and behavior, including personality, general intelligence and behavior disorders.”3 However, the search for identifying genes that affect the potential for certain diseases4 or personality is very complex and may explain very little. For example, a summary analysis concluded: Many genes are responsible for various aspects of people’s temperament, and those genes appear to interact with each other in complicated ways that influence several traits at once— and then likely only in very subtle ways, with any one gene likely accounting for only 1 or 2 percent of the variance in a trait.5 Chapter 5 Personality, Perception, and Employee Attitudes 127 In other words, it appears that hundreds of genes do at least slightly influence the personality traits, but so does the environment. The debate should not be nature or nurture, but nature and nurture that contributes to one’s personality.6 However, the genes also affect brain functions that in turn affect how people interact with their environment and thus their personalities. The brain, which some call the last frontier because we still know relatively little about it, may hold more answers for personality than does heredity. Both evolutionary psychologists (those that suggest humans evolve and retain not only physically over the ages, but also psychologically) and neuropsychologists (those that explain psychological characteristics primarily through the brain) have traditionally not played a mainstream role in the study and understanding of personality. In recent years, however, they are gaining increasing attention because of rapid advances in their respective fields of study. Evolutionary psychologists are suggesting that humans may be “hardwired” from distant previous generations. As was noted in a Harvard Business Review article: Although human beings today inhabit a thoroughly modern world of space exploration and virtual realities, they do so with the ingrained mentality of Stone Age hunter-gatherers . . . an instinct to fight furiously when threatened, for instance, and a drive to trade information and share secrets. Human beings are, in other words, hardwired. You can take the person out of the Stone Age, but you can’t take the Stone Age out of the person.7 There is also a recent position being taken on what is called social evolution. This suggests that humanity is evolving along the lines of social phenomena such as trust, collaboration, and competition. This social evolutionary process is explained as follows: People who are related collaborate on the basis of nepotism. It takes outrageous profit or provocation for someone to do down a relative with whom they share a lot of genes. Trust, though, allows the unrelated to collaborate, by keeping score of who does what when, and punishing cheats. . . . The human mind, however, seems to have evolved the trick of being able to identify a large number of individuals and to keep score of relations with them . . .”8 Very few animals (bats being one of the exceptions) have been able to evolve to this type of collaboration and competition. As to neuropsychology, recent breakthroughs in brain-scanning technology, called functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), allow measurement of brain activity by mapping specific regions that are linked to specialized roles. Although brain dominance theory has been around a long time and has probably been too oversimplified (e.g., the right-side creative brain and the left-side analytical or management brain), there is now general agreement that The frontal lobes are the part of the brain that anticipates events and weighs the consequences of behavior, while deeper brain regions, including the seahorse-shaped hippocampus and the nearby amygdala, are associated with such things as memory, mood and motivation.9 Besides the left and right regions, fMRIs are also able to detect that the amygdala part of the brain has to do with the emotion of the individual. Although there is a very complicated interaction between emotions and thinking, personality and/or behavior,10 there is enough evidence for some to conclude the following implications for the workplace: Recent discoveries in neuroscience reveal that talent and better-quality performance involve not just the frontal lobes—the decision-making brain circuitry that houses intellect—but also the amygdala . . . In tough economic times, talent and emotional engagement are the only natural competitive advantages.11 128 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior The Wall Street Journal even reported a study that indicated those with brain damage impairing their ability to experience emotion made better financial decisions than normal players in a simple investment game.12 It seems that the emotional brain damaged (but normal IQ) participants were more willing to take risks that yielded high payoffs and less likely to react emotionally to losses. They finished the game with significantly more money than the other players. There is also work being done on linking areas of the brain to specific organizational behaviors (e.g., the nucleus accumbens part of the brain responds to money much the way it reacts to sex or cocaine; money is valued for itself and not just for what it can purchase). Other examples include neuroscientific explanations for why employees resist change (i.e., change taps fear receptors in the brain and taxes the brain’s cognitive capacity to learn new ways of doing things13) and beginning research evidence that leaders with high levels of psychological capital (i.e., confidence, hope, optimism, and resiliency, covered in Chapter 7) have different brain activity on a vision task exercise than do those with low psychological capital.14 Although not without criticism,15 there is little question that major inroads are being made in the role that genetics and the brain play both in organizational behavior in general, and personality in particular. However, at present the field of psychology as a whole and organizational behavior itself is still dominated by the developmental, “soft” or nurture side, which is also making significant advances in understanding and application. For example, five personality traits (the so-called Big Five) have emerged from research as being especially related to job performance.16 These specific traits will be given detailed attention after the more theoretical foundation components of personality of self-esteem, person-situation interaction, and socialization are discussed. Self-Esteem People’s attempts to understand themselves are called the self-concept in personality theory. The self is a unique product of many interacting parts and may be thought of as the personality viewed from within. This self is particularly relevant to the widely recognized self-esteem and the emerging self-variables of multiple intelligences, emotion, optimism, and, especially, efficacy, which are all relevant to the field of organizational behavior. These and other newly emerging self-variables and positive psychological capacities are given specific attention in Chapter 7. The more established, recognized self-esteem has to do with people’s self-perceived competence and self-image. Applied to the analysis of personality, the research results have been mixed, and there is growing controversy about the assumed value of self-esteem. For example, one study found that people with high self-esteem handle failure better than those with low self-esteem.17 However, an earlier study found that those with high self-esteem tended to become egotistical when faced with pressure situations18 and may result in aggressive and even violent behavior when threatened.19 After reviewing the research literature, Kreitner and Kinicki conclude, “High self esteem can be a good thing, but only if like many other human characteristics—such as creativity, intelligence, and persistence— it is nurtured and channeled in constructive and ethical ways. Otherwise, it can become antisocial and destructive.”20 Self-esteem has obvious implications for organizational behavior. Although it is considered a global concept, there are attempts to specifically apply it to the organization domain. Called organization-based self-esteem (OBSE), it is defined as the “self-perceived value that individuals have of themselves as organization members acting within an organization context.”21 Those who score high on OBSE view themselves positively, and a meta-analysis found a significant positive relationship with performance and satisfaction on the job.22 Chapter 5 Personality, Perception, and Employee Attitudes 129 Also, both early23 and the more recent studies indicate that self-esteem plays at least an important moderating role in areas such as emotional and behavioral responses and stress of organizational members.24 As has been noted, “Both research and everyday experience confirm that employees with high self-esteem feel unique, competent, secure, empowered, and connected to the people around them.”25 By the same token, as the author of the book, Self-Esteem at Work, notes: “If your self-esteem is low and you aren’t confident in your thinking ability, you are likely to fear decision making, lack negotiation and interpersonal skills and be reluctant or unable to change.”26 One study found that leaders can overcome such self-esteem problems of their people by practicing procedural fairness and rewarding for a job well done.27 As will be noted in Chapter 7, self-esteem is more of a global, relatively fixed trait, whereas other self-variables, such as self-efficacy, are more situation and context specific. There seems little doubt that self-esteem plays an important role in one’s personality, but, as pointed out earlier, the exact nature and impact are still to be determined. For now, the person-situation interaction and socialization are presented to serve as an important part of the social cognitive foundation for the rest of this chapter and for the more specific, positive self-concepts in Chapter 7. Person-Situation Interaction The dimensions of enduring traits and the self-concept add to the understanding of the human personality. The person-situation interaction dimension of personality provides further understanding. Each situation, of course, is different. The differences may seem to be very small on the surface, but when filtered by the person’s cognitive mediating processes such as perception (covered next), they can lead to quite large subjective differences and diverse behavioral outcomes. In particular, this dimension suggests that people are not static, acting the same in all situations, but instead are ever changing and flexible. For example, employees can change depending on the particular situation they are in interaction with. For instance, it should be understood that even everyday work experience can change people. Especially today, with organizations transforming and facing a turbulent environment, those that can find, develop, and retain people who can fit into this dynamically changing situation will be most successful.28 Specifically, there is evidence that the employee’s personality will influence interpersonal behavior29 and the perception and the outcomes of organizational support.30 The next section dealing with the socialization process is especially relevant to today’s important person-organization interaction. The Socialization Process Study of, and research on, the development of personality has traditionally been an important area for understanding human behavior. Modern developmental psychology does not get into the argument of heredity versus environment or of maturation (changes that result from heredity and physical development) versus learning. The human being consists of both physiological and psychological interacting parts. Therefore, heredity, the brain, environment, maturation, and learning all contribute to the human personality. At least historically, the study of personality attempted to identify specific physiological and psychological stages that occur in the development of the human personality. This “stage” approach was theoretical in nature. There are many well-known stage theories of personality development. However, as with most aspects of personality, there is little agreement about the exact stages. In fact, a growing number of today’s psychologists contend that there are no identifiable stages. Their argument is that personality development 130 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior consists of a continuous process and the sequence is based largely on the learning opportunities available and the socialization process. There is increasing recognition given to the role of other relevant persons, groups, and, especially, organizations that greatly influence an individual’s personality. This continuous impact from the social environment is commonly called the socialization process. It is especially relevant to organizational behavior because the process is not confined to early childhood; rather, it takes place throughout one’s life. In particular, evidence is accumulating that socialization may be one of the best explanations for why employees behave the way they do in today’s organizations.31 As Edgar Schein notes: “It is high time that some of our managerial knowledge and skill be focused on those forces in the organization environment which derive from the fact that organizations are social systems which do socialize their new members. If we do not learn to analyze and control the forces of organizational socialization, we are abdicating one of our primary managerial responsibilities.”32 A study found that the socialization tactics that organizations employ can have a positive, long-run impact on the adjustment of newcomers (i.e., lower role conflict and ambiguity, less stress, and higher job satisfaction and commitment)33 and related recent research has found that social processes facilitate job search behavior34 and advancement in management from entry level to upper management.35 Socialization starts with the initial contact between a mother and her new infant. After infancy, other members of the immediate family (father, brothers, and sisters), close relatives and family friends, and then the social group (peers, school friends, and members of the work group) play influential roles. As the accompanying OB in Action: Using Information Technologies to Nurture Relationships indicates, the way these socialization processes are being done is changing, but the impact is still dramatic. However, of particular interest to the study of organizational behavior is Schein’s idea that the organization itself also contributes to socialization.36 He points out that the process includes the learning of those values, norms, and behavior patterns that, from the organization’s and the work group’s points of view, are necessary for any new organization member. Specific techniques of socializing new employees would include the use of mentors or role models, orientation and training programs, reward systems, and career planning. Specific steps that can lead to successful organizational socialization would include the following: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Provide a challenging first job Provide relevant training Provide timely and consistent feedback Select a good first supervisor to be in charge of socialization Design a relaxed orientation program Place new recruits in work groups with high morale37 Such deliberate socialization strategies have tremendous potential impact on socialization. Evidence shows that those new employees attending a socialization training program are indeed more socialized than those who do not38 and have better person-organization fit.39 In summary, personality is very diverse and complex. It incorporates almost everything covered in this text, and more. As defined, personality is the whole person and is concerned with external appearance and traits, self, and situational interactions. Probably the best statement on personality was made many years ago by Kluckhohn and Murray, who said that, to some extent, a person’s personality is like all other people’s, like some other people’s, and like no other people’s.40 OB in Action: Using Information Technologies to Nurture Relationships Just as businesses are shifting from Industrial Age hierarchies to collaborative networks, so, too, is the American family undergoing a parallel social revolution. Parents and children are no longer on the same schedule— unlike the way things were a generation ago. With many educated mothers and fathers working longer hours, they are linked to their kids by a web of cell phones and e-mails. At the same time, kids are taking the initiative to pursue more activities and are using information technologies to nurture their own electronic networks of relationships, from friends at school to cousins in distant cities. “The catalyst for change has been the same in the work hemisphere and family time,” says Julie Morgenstern, a time management consultant and founder of Task Masters in New York. “It’s technology.” The networked economy is leading to far different standards and expectations of what it means to be a parent and a child. It’s not simply enough for the young to get an education. Instead, the goal is to raise children to be creative and adaptable, able both to compete successfully and to collaborate with their Chinese and Indian peers. “We have an economy [whose] functioning depends for the first time on the enhancement of human capability,” says Richard Florida, professor of public policy at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va. Adds Luke Koons, director of information and knowledge management at Intel Corp.: “Fourteen-year-olds are truly collaborating and thinking together. There’s a lot we can learn to apply to a corporate setting.” So how can the typical overworked white-collar American—bombarded by e-mails, beset with late-night meetings, and confronted with unexpected business trips—simultaneously manage at warp speed and cope with the new challenges at home? Gradually, a new body of shared rules-of-thumb is emerging, passed along at playgrounds and in offices. Among them: Transform technology from an oppressor into a liberator. “I love tech,” says Margaret M. Foran, senior vicepresident and associate general counsel at Pfizer Inc., who uses her BlackBerry and her cell phone to mix work and family time. “I can go to the soccer games at 3 P.M. I can go to the play, the book sale, the science demonstration, and the doctor appointments.” Others have mastered the art of interweaving work obligations and home life in a way that was not possible before, answering an e-mail from work one minute and helping with homework the next. And the younger members of the family—already far more sophisticated at multitasking and networking than their parents—are getting a chance to see what approaches work and what falls flat. “My daughter, now working, knows how important it is to use her time well,” says Carrie J. Hightman, president of SBC Illinois, who is married to a regional administrator for Pitney Bowes Inc. “She has seen me do it. Now she’s doing it.” Historically, the organization of the family has mirrored, to some degree, the organization of the workplace. Take the classic middle-class family of the 1950s and ‘60s, the “Golden Age” economy of strong productivity growth and lush gains in real wages. With a secure corporate job, Dad could afford to work not much more than 40 hours a week, and Mom could stay at home to raise the children. The family of that era did many things together. The classic example is eating dinner every evening at the kitchen table. The kids also tagged along when Mom and Dad visited friends. In essence, a family acted like a single unit, with a hierarchy that mirrored the top-down management of factories or large industrial organizations of the day, such as General Motors Corp. Fast-forward to the 2000s. Today, both Mom and Dad are more likely to have careers. The combined workweek of a husband and wife in their prime working years with children is 68 hours, up from 59 hours in 1979, according to calculations by the Economic Policy Institute. The better educated the couple, the more hours they put in. At the same time, their jobs have changed. The rote work is either being done by computers or is in the process of being outsourced to Asia. Instead, what’s left are the more complicated and creative tasks that can’t be easily reduced to a set of instructions. At home, standards for a healthy, emotionally rich family life are a lot higher than they used to be. Schedules during “leisure hours” are crammed with music lessons and play dates for the kids, exercise classes for Mom, and occasional tee times for Dad. Parents are aware that colleges and universities look more favorably on high school students with a demonstrated ability to do many things well, not unlike the skills they will need in the workplace. Says Ann Swidler, a sociologist at the University of California at Berkeley: “It’s the complex management of a life with a wealth of choices.” To achieve these goals, families are learning to turn technology to their advantage. Yes, BlackBerrys, cell phones, e-mail, and other high-tech gear erode traditional boundaries between the office cubicle and the kitchen table, or even the bedroom. But many timepressed workers now realize that technology creates greater possibilities for busy families to stay in touch and, at the same time, increase family times. 131 132 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior TABLE 5.1 The “Big Five” Personality Traits Core Traits Descriptive Characteristics of High Scorers Conscientiousness Dependable, hardworking, organized, self-disciplined, persistent, responsible Calm, secure, happy, unworried Cooperative, warm, caring, good-natured, courteous, trusting Sociable, outgoing, talkative, assertive, gregarious Curious, intellectual, creative, cultured, artistically sensitive, flexible, imaginative Emotional stability Agreeableness Extraversion Openness to experience The “Big Five” Personality Traits Although personality traits, long-term predispositions for behavior, have been generally downplayed and even totally discounted, in recent years there is now considerable support for a five-factor trait-based theory of personality. Many years ago no less than 18,000 words were found to describe personality. Even after combining words with similar meanings, there still remained 171 personality traits.41 Obviously, such a huge number of personality traits is practically unusable, so further reduction analysis found five core personality traits. Called the Five-Factor Model (FFM),42 or in the field of organizational behavior and human resource management, the “Big Five,” these traits have held up as accounting for personality in many analyses over the years43 and even across cultures.44 Table 5.1 identifies the Big Five and their major characteristics. Importantly, not only is there now considerable agreement on what are the core personality trait predispositions, but there is also accumulated research that these five best predict performance in the workplace.45 The Big Five have also been extended through meta-analytic studies to also demonstrate a positive relationship with performance motivation46 (goal setting, expectancy, and self-efficacy, all given detailed attention in later chapters) and job satisfaction.47 Although the five traits are largely independent factors of a personality, like primary colors, they can be mixed in countless proportions and with other characteristics to yield a unique personality whole. However, also like colors, one may dominate in describing an individual’s personality. The real value of the Big Five to organizational behavior is that it does bring back the importance of predispositional traits,48 and these traits have been clearly shown to relate to job performance. Importantly, it should also be noted that these five traits are quite stable. Although there is not total agreement, most personality theorists would tend to agree that after about 30 years of age, the individual’s personality profile will change little over time.49 This does not intend to imply that one or two of the Big Five provide an ideal personality profile for employees over their whole career, because different traits are needed for different jobs. The key is still to find the right fit.50 The following sections examine the research to date on the relationships of the various Big Five traits to dimensions of performance in organizations. The Positive Impact of Conscientiousness There is general agreement that conscientiousness has the strongest positive correlation (about .3) with job performance. From this level of correlation (1.0 would be perfect), it should be noted that less than 10 percent (the correlation squared, or R2) of the performance in the studies is accounted for by conscientiousness. Yet, it should also be noted that this is still significant and conscientious employees may provide a major competitive advantage. As a meta-analysis concluded, “individuals who are dependable, persistent, goal directed, and organized tend to be higher performers on virtually any job; viewed negatively, Chapter 5 Personality, Perception, and Employee Attitudes 133 those who are careless, irresponsible, low achievement striving and impulsive tend to be lower performers on virtually any job.”51 Put in relation to other organizational behavior areas as a personality trait per se, conscientious employees set higher goals for themselves, have higher performance expectations, and respond well to job enrichment (take on more responsibility, covered in Chapter 6) and empowerment strategies of human resource management. As would be expected, research indicates that those who are conscientious are less likely to be absent from work,52 and a study found in international human resource management that conscientiousness of expatriates related positively to the rating of their foreign assignment performance.53 Yet, there are also recent studies with nonsupporting and mixed results pointing to the complexity of this personality trait. For example, in a recent study conscientiousness was found not to be influential in determining managerial performance and in another study of Middle Eastern expatriate managers, conscientiousness was related to home-country ratings of the expats’ performance, but not the host-country ratings of the same expats.54 In addition, studies had indicated that the individual’s ability moderates the relationship between conscientiousness and performance (positive for high ability but zero or even negative for low ability), but a more recent study found no such moderator.55 Another study found the relationship of conscientiousness to job performance was strong when job satisfaction was low, but was relatively weak when satisfaction was high.56 Applied to peer evaluations, as hypothesized, a study found the raters’ conscientiousness was negatively related with the level of the rating. In other words, conscientious raters did not give inflated evaluations, but those with low conscientiousness did.57 Such multiplicative relationships with variables such as culture, ability, and job satisfaction indicate, like other psychological variables, that conscientiousness is complex and is certainly not the only answer for job performance. This has led to a recent research stream that supports the hypothesized interactive effects between conscientiousness and extraversion58 and agreeableness59 on performance and the interaction of conscientiousness and openness to experience and creative behavior.60 The same is true of research on the mediating and moderating effects of conscientiousness when influenced by various organizational behavior dynamics.61 In other words, without getting to the depth of these analyses, it can simply be said that there is considerable complexity involved with the impact of the personality trait of conscientiousness on various work-related variables. However, this is one area of personality where there is enough research evidence to conclude that conscientiousness should be given attention in understanding the impact that personality traits can have on job performance, job satisfaction, and work motivation, and pragmatically for personnel selection for most jobs. The Impact of the Other Traits Although conscientiousness has been found to have the strongest consistent relationship with performance and thus has received the most research attention, the remaining four traits also have some interesting findings. For example, a large study including participants from several European countries, many occupational groups, and multiple methods of measuring performance found both conscientiousness and emotional stability related to all the measures and occupations.62 Yet, the absenteeism study found that conscientiousness had a desirable inverse relationship: but, undesirably, the higher the extraversion trait the more absent the employee tended to be.63 The other traits have a more selective but still logical impact. For example, those with high extraversion tend to be associated with management and sales success; those with high emotional stability tend to be more effective in stressful situations; those with high agreeableness tend to handle customer relations and conflict more effectively; and those open to experience tend to have job training proficiency and make better decisions in a 134 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior training problem solving simulation.64 Another study found that those with a strategic management style were most characterized by conscientiousness and openness to experience, while those with a strong interpersonal management style were most characterized by extraversion and openness.65 Interestingly, with groups rather than individuals becoming more important in today’s workplace, the Big Five may also be predictive of team performance. A study found that the higher the average scores of team members on the traits of conscientiousness, agreeableness, extraversion, and emotional stability, the better their teams performed.66 In other words, depending on the situation, all the Big Five traits should be given attention in the study and application of organizational behavior. Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) Whereas the Big Five has recently emerged from considerable basic research and has generally been demonstrated to significantly relate to job performance, the MBTI is based on a very old theory, has mixed at best research support,67 but is widely used and very popular in real-world career counseling, team building, conflict management, and analyzing management styles.68 The theory goes back to pioneering Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung in the 1920s. He felt people could be typed into extraverts and introverts and that they had two basic mental processes—perception and judgment. He then further divided perception into sensing and intuiting and judgment into thinking and feeling. This yields four personality dimensions or traits: (1) introversion/extraversion, (2) perceiving/judging, (3) sensing/ intuition, and (4) thinking/feeling. He felt that although people had all four of these dimensions in common, they differ in the combination of their preferences of each. Importantly, he made the point that one’s preferences were not necessarily better than another’s, only different. About 20 years after Jung developed his theoretical types, in the 1940s the motherdaughter team of Katharine Briggs and Isabel Briggs-Myers developed about a 100-item personality test asking participants how they usually feel or act in particular situations in order to measure the preferences on the four pairs of traits yielding 16 distinct types. Called the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator or simply MBTI, the questions relate to how people prefer to focus their energies (extraversion vs. introversion); give attention and collect information (sensing vs. intuiting); process and evaluate information and make decisions (thinking vs. feeling); and orient themselves to the outside world (judging vs. perceiving). Table 5.2 summarizes the characteristics of the four major dimensions, which in combination yield the 16 types. For example, the ESTJ is extraverted, sensing, thinking, and judging. Because this type likes to interact with others (E); sees the world realistically (S); makes decisions objectively and decisively (T); and likes structure, schedules, and order (J), this would be a manager type. The MBTI Atlas indicates that most managers studied were indeed ESTJs. As Jung emphasized when formulating his theory, there are no good or bad types. This is a major reason the MBTI is such a psychologically nonthreatening, commonly used (millions take it every year) personality inventory. Although the MBTI has shown to have reliability and validity as a measure of identifying Jung’s personality types69 and predicting occupational choice (e.g., those high on intuition tend to prefer careers in advertising, the arts, and teaching), there still is not enough research support to base selection decisions or predict job performance.70 Yet, the use of MBTI by numerous firms such as AT&T, Exxon, and Honeywell for their management development programs and Hewlett-Packard for team building seems justified. It can be an effective point of departure for discussion of similarities and differences and useful for personal development. However, like any psychological measure, the MBTI can also be misused. As one comprehensive analysis concluded, “Some inappropriate uses include labeling one another, providing a convenient excuse that they simply can’t work with someone else, and avoiding responsibility for their Chapter 5 Personality, Perception, and Employee Attitudes 135 TABLE 5.2 The Jung Theory Dimensions and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicators Where do you get your energy? Extraversion (E) __________________________________________ Introversion (I) Outgoing Interacting Speaks, then thinks Gregarious Quiet Concentrating Thinks, then speaks Reflective What do you pay attention to and collect information on? Sensing (S) ______________________________________________ Intuiting (N) Practical Details Concrete Specific General Possibilities Theoretical Abstract How do you evaluate and make decisions? Thinking (T) _____________________________________________ Feeling (F) Analytical Head Rules Justice Subjective Heart Circumstance Mercy How do you orient yourself to the outside world? Judging (J) _______________________________________________ Perceiving (P) Structured Time oriented Decisive Organized Flexible Open ended Exploring Spontaneous own personal development with respect to working with others and becoming more flexible. One’s type is not an excuse for inappropriate behavior.”71 THE PERCEPTION PROCESS Besides personality covered so far, another important cognitive, personal construct is one’s perceptual process. The key to understanding perception is to recognize that it is a unique interpretation of the situation, not an exact recording of it. In short, perception is a very complex cognitive process that yields a unique picture of the world, a picture that may be quite different from reality. Applied to organizational behavior, an employee’s perception can be thought of as a filter. Because perception is largely learned, and no one has the same learnings and experience, then every employee has a unique filter, and the same situations/stimuli may produce very different reactions and behaviors. Some analyses of employee behavior place a lot of weight on this filter: Your filter tells you which stimuli to notice and which to ignore; which to love and which to hate. It creates your innate motivations—are you competitive, altruistic, or ego driven? . . . It creates in you all of your distinct patterns of thought, feeling, and behavior. . . . Your filter, more than your race, sex, age, or nationality, is you.72 Recognition of the difference between this filtered, perceptual world and the real world is vital to the understanding of organizational behavior. A specific example would be the universal assumption made by managers that associates always want promotions, when, in fact, 136 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior many really feel psychologically forced to accept a promotion.73 Managers seldom attempt to find out, and sometimes associates themselves do not know, whether the promotion should be offered. In other words, the perceptual world of the manager is quite different from the perceptual world of the associate, and both may be very different from reality. One of the biggest problems that new organizational leaders must overcome are the sometimes faulty or negative perceptions of them. If this is the case, what can be done about it? The best answer seems to be that a better understanding of the concepts involved should be developed. Direct applications and techniques should logically follow complete understanding. The place to start is to clearly understand the difference between sensation and perception and have a working knowledge of the major cognitive subprocesses of perception. Sensation versus Perception There is usually a great deal of misunderstanding about the relationship between sensation and perception. Behavioral scientists generally agree that people’s “reality” (the world around them) depends on their senses. However, the raw sensory input is not enough. They must also process these sensory data and make sense out of them in order to understand the world around them. Thus, the starting point in the study of perception should clarify the relationship between perception and sensation. The physical senses are considered to be vision, hearing, touch, smell, and taste. There are many other so-called sixth senses. However, none of these sixth senses, such as intuition, are fully accepted by psychologists. The five senses are constantly bombarded by numerous stimuli that are both outside and inside the body. Examples of outside stimuli include light waves, sound waves, mechanical energy of pressure, and chemical energy from objects that one can smell and taste. Inside stimuli include energy generated by muscles, food passing through the digestive system, and glands secreting behavior-influencing hormones. These examples indicate that sensation deals chiefly with very elementary behavior that is determined largely by physiological functioning. Importantly, however, researchers now know that ears, eyes, fingers, and the nose are only way stations, transmitting signals that are then processed by the central nervous system. As one molecular biologist declares, “The nose doesn’t smell—the brain does.”74 In this way, the human being uses the senses to experience color, brightness, shape, loudness, pitch, heat, odor, and taste. Perception is more complex and much broader than sensation. The perceptual process or filter can be defined as a complicated interaction of selection, organization, and interpretation. Although perception depends largely on the senses for raw data, the cognitive process filters, modifies, or completely changes these data. A simple illustration may be seen by looking at one side of a stationary object, such as a statue or a tree. By slowly turning the eyes to the other side of the object, the person probably senses that the object is moving. Yet the person perceives the object as stationary. The perceptual process overcomes the sensual process, and the person “sees” the object as stationary. In other words, the perceptual process adds to, and subtracts from, the “real” sensory world. The following are some organizational examples that point out the difference between sensation and perception: 1. The division manager purchases a program that she thinks is best, not the program that the software engineer says is best. 2. An associate’s answer to a question is based on what he heard the boss say, not on what the boss actually said. 3. The same team member may be viewed by one colleague as a very hard worker and by another as a slacker. 4. The same product may be viewed by the design team to be of high quality and by a customer to be of low quality. Chapter 5 Personality, Perception, and Employee Attitudes 137 FIGURE 5.1 The Subprocesses of Perception STIMULUS OR SITUATION PERSON EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT Sensual Stimulation Physical Environment: Office Factory floor Research laboratory Store Climate etc. CONFRONTATION of specific stimulus (e.g., supervisor or new procedure) REGISTRATION of stimulus (e.g., sensory and neural mechanisms) Sociocultural Environment: Management styles Values Discrimination etc. INTERPRETATION of stimulus (e.g., motivation, learning, and personality) FEEDBACK for clarification (e.g., kinesthetic or psychological) BEHAVIOR (e.g., overt such as rushing off or covert such as an attitude) BEHAVIOR CONSEQUENCE (e.g., reinforcement/ punishment or some organizational outcome) CONSEQUENCES Subprocesses of Perception The existence of several subprocesses gives evidence of the complexity and the interactive nature of perception. Figure 5.1 shows how these subprocesses relate to one another. The first important subprocess is the stimulus or situation that is present. Perception begins when a person is confronted with a stimulus or a situation. This confrontation may be with the immediate sensual stimulation or with the total physical and sociocultural environment. An example is the employee who is confronted with his or her supervisor or with the total formal organizational environment. Either one or both may initiate the employee’s perceptual process. In other words, this represents the stimulus situation interacting with the person. In addition to the situation-person interaction, there are the internal cognitive processes of registration, interpretation, and feedback. During the registration phenomenon, the physiological (sensory and neural) mechanisms are affected; the physiological ability to hear and see will affect perception. Interpretation is the most significant cognitive aspect of perception. The other psychological processes will affect the interpretation of a situation. For example, in an organization, employees’ interpretations of a situation are largely dependent on their learning and motivation and their personality. An example would be the kinesthetic feedback (sensory impressions from muscles) that helps manufacturing workers perceive the speed of materials moving by them in the production process. An example of psychological feedback that may influence an employee’s perception is the supervisor’s raised eyebrow or a change in voice inflection. Research has shown that both facial expressions and the specific situation will influence perceptions of certain emotions, such as fear, anger, or pain.75 The behavioral termination of perception is the reaction or behavior, either overt or covert, which is necessary if perception is to be considered a behavioral event and thus an important part of organizational behavior. As a result of perception, an employee may move rapidly or slowly (overt behavior) or make a self-evaluation (covert behavior). As shown in Figure 5.1, all these perceptual subprocesses are compatible with the social cognitive conceptual framework presented in Chapter 1. The stimulus or environmental 138 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior situation is the first part; registration, interpretation, and feedback occur within the cognitive processes of the person; then there is the resulting behavior itself; and the environmental consequences of this behavior make up the final part. The subprocesses of registration, interpretation, and feedback are internal cognitive processes that are unobservable, but the situation, behavior, and environmental consequences indicate that perception is indeed related to behavior. Recent summaries of research using the meta-analysis technique have found empirical support for the relationship between cognitive variables such as perception and behaviors.76 SOCIAL PERCEPTION Although the senses and subprocess provide understanding of the overall perceptual process, most relevant to the study of organizational behavior is social perception, which is directly concerned with how one individual perceives other individuals: how we get to know others. Characteristics of Perceiver and Perceived A summary of classic research findings on some specific characteristics of the perceiver and the perceived reveals a profile of the perceiver as follows: 1. Knowing oneself makes it easier to see others accurately. 2. One’s own characteristics affect the characteristics one is likely to see in others. 3. People who accept themselves are more likely to be able to see favorable aspects of other people. 4. Accuracy in perceiving others is not a single skill.77 These four characteristics greatly influence how a person perceives others in the environmental situation. Interestingly, this classic profile is very similar to our very new approach that we call an “authentic leader.”78 Covered in detail in the leadership chapter at the end of the book, for now it can be simply said that authentic leaders are those who know themselves (are self-aware and true to themselves) and true to others. In other words, the recognition and understanding of basic perceptual profiles of social perception can contribute to complex processes such as authentic leadership. There are also certain characteristics of the person being perceived that influence social perception. Research has shown that: 1. The status of the person perceived will greatly influence others’ perception of the person. 2. The person being perceived is usually placed into categories to simplify the viewer’s perceptual activities. Two common categories are status and role. 3. The visible traits of the person perceived will greatly influence others’ perception of the person.79 These characteristics of the perceiver and the perceived suggest the complexity of social perception. Organizational participants must realize that their perceptions of another person are greatly influenced by their own characteristics and the characteristics of the other person. For example, if a manager has high self-esteem and the other person is pleasant and comes from the home office, then the manager will likely perceive this other person in a positive, favorable manner. On the other hand, if the manager has low self-esteem and the other person is an arrogant salesperson, the manager will likely perceive this other person in a negative, unfavorable manner. Such attributions that people make of others play a vital role in their social perceptions and resulting behavior. Chapter 5 Personality, Perception, and Employee Attitudes 139 Participants in formal organizations are constantly perceiving one another. Managers are perceiving workers, workers are perceiving managers, line personnel are perceiving staff personnel, staff personnel are perceiving the line personnel, frontline employees are perceiving customers, customers are perceiving frontline employees, and on and on. There are numerous complex factors that enter into such social perception, but most important are the problems associated with stereotyping and the halo effect. Stereotyping The term stereotype refers to the tendency to perceive another person (hence social perception) as belonging to a single class or category. The word itself is derived from the typographer’s word for a printing plate made from previously composed type. In 1922, Walter Lippmann applied the word to perception. Since then, stereotyping has become a frequently used term to describe perceptual errors. In particular, it is employed in analyzing prejudice. Not commonly acknowledged is the fact that stereotyping may attribute favorable or unfavorable traits to the person being perceived. Most often a person is put into a stereotype because the perceiver knows only the overall category to which the person belongs. However, because each individual is unique, the real traits of the person will generally be quite different from those the stereotype would suggest. Stereotyping greatly influences social perception in today’s organizations. Common stereotyped groups include managers, supervisors, knowledge workers, union members, young people, old people, minorities, women, white- and blue-collar workers, and all the various functional and staff specialists, for example, accountants, salespeople, computer programmers, and engineers. There may be a general consensus about the traits possessed by the members of these categories. Yet in reality there is often a discrepancy between the agreed-upon traits of each category and the actual traits of the members. In other words, not all engineers carry laptop computers and are coldly rational, nor are all human resource managers do-gooders who are trying to keep workers happy. On the contrary, there are individual differences and a great deal of variability among members of these and all other groups. In spite of this, other organization members commonly make blanket perceptions and behave accordingly. For example, one analysis noted that a major problem General Motors has is the institutionalized set of managerial beliefs about its customers, workers, foreign competitors, and the government. These perceptions cause the GM leadership to blame their problems on the famous stereotyped “them” instead of recognizing the need for fundamental corporate culture change.80 There is also research indicating that long exposure to negative stereotypes may result in the members having an inferiority anxiety or lowered expectations.81 There are numerous other research studies82 and common, everyday examples that point out stereotyping and its problems that occur in organizational life. The Halo Effect The halo effect in social perception is very similar to stereotyping. Whereas in stereotyping the person is perceived according to a single category, under the halo effect the person is perceived on the basis of one trait. Halo is often discussed in performance appraisal when a rater makes an error in judging a person’s total personality and/or performance on the basis of a single positive trait such as intelligence, appearance, dependability, or cooperativeness. Whatever the single trait is, it may override all other traits in forming the perception of the person. For example, a person’s physical appearance or dress may override all other characteristics in making a selection decision or in appraising the person’s performance. The opposite is sometimes called the “horns effect” where an individual is downgraded because of a single negative characteristic or incident.83 140 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior The halo effect problem has been given considerable attention in research on performance appraisal. For example, a comprehensive review of the performance appraisal literature found that halo effect was the dependent variable in over a third of the studies and was found to be a major problem affecting appraisal accuracy.84 The current thinking on the halo effect can be summarized from the extensive research literature as follows: 1. It is a common rater error. 2. It has both true and illusory components. 3. It has led to inflated correlations among rating dimensions and is due to the influence of a general evaluation and specific judgments. 4. It has negative consequences and should be avoided or removed.85 Like all the other aspects of the psychological process of perception discussed in this chapter, the halo effect has important implications for the study and eventual understanding of organizational behavior. Unfortunately, even though the halo effect is one of the longest recognized and most pervasive problems associated with applications such as performance appraisal in the field of organizational behavior, a critical analysis of the considerable research concludes that we still do not know much about the impact of the halo effect86 and attempts at solving the problem have not yet been very successful.87 In other words, overcoming perceptual problems such as stereotyping and the halo effect remains an important challenge for effective human resource management. WORK-RELATED ATTITUDES: PA/NA Besides the traditional recognition given to personality and perception in the cognitive domain, in the field of organizational behavior more recent and directly relevant is the attention given to affective (feelings) dispositions as antecedents of important work-related attitudes such as job satisfaction and to lesser extent organizational commitment and organizational citizenship. In particular, the dispositions of positive affectivity (PA) and negative affectivity (NA) have been found to be important antecedents to attitudes about one’s job. As explained by George,88 NA reflects a personality disposition to experience negative emotional states; those with high NA tend to feel nervous, tense, anxious, worried, upset, and distressed. Accordingly, those with high NA are more likely to experience negative affective states—they are more likely to have a negative attitude toward themselves, others, and the world around them. There is accumulating research supporting this biasing effect of NA.89 For example, one study found that employees high in negative affectivity more often perceived themselves as victims and thus open themselves up to be more likely targets of coworkers’ aggressive actions.90 Another study found NA moderated the link between favorable performance appraisal feedback and job attitudes.91 Those with high PA have the opposite disposition and tend to have an overall sense of well-being, to see themselves as pleasurably and effectively engaged, and to experience positive attitudes. Whether PA is the bipolar opposite and independent of NA is still the subject of debate and interpretation of research results.92 People do not necessarily move between opposite mood states, but can be both happy and unhappy. However, most of the time there are swings in mood, that is, NA to PA or PA to NA. Research finds that PAs tend to perform better,93 are less absent from work,94 and are more satisfied,95 whereas NAs may experience more stress.96 There is even evidence that teams with a positive affective tone (i.e., the average PA of members is high) are more effective than teams with a negative affective tone.97 In other words, one’s mood or affective disposition may become a self-fulfilling prophecy as far as organization outcomes are concerned. Chapter 5 Personality, Perception, and Employee Attitudes 141 Similar to the Big Five personality traits, the PA/NA attitudes have reached such a level of development that increasing research attention is being given to refining the concepts. In recent years studies focus on how affectivity is determined (e.g., through the congruence between employee preferences and organizational human resources practices98 or the impact of self-, internally generated information on NA99) and on multiple levels of analysis.100 Besides the interest in the dispositions of PA/NA, over the years there is major attention given to job satisfaction and organizational commitment. EMPLOYEE ATTITUDES Specific employee attitudes relating to job satisfaction and organizational commitment are of major interest to the field of organizational behavior and the practice of human resource management. Whereas the above discussion of positive and negative affectivity are considered to be antecedents of work attitudes, more directly job satisfaction focuses on employees’ attitudes toward their job and organizational commitment focuses on their attitudes toward the overall organization. The more traditionally recognized job satisfaction is first discussed. Next is the discussion of the widely recognized attitude of organizational commitment. Finally, the more recent prosocial or organizational citizenship behaviors are presented to end this chapter. What Is Meant by Job Satisfaction? Locke gives a comprehensive definition of job satisfaction as involving cognitive, affective, and evaluative reactions or attitudes and states it is “a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job or job experience.”101 Job satisfaction is a result of employees’ perception of how well their job provides those things that are viewed as important. It is generally recognized in the organizational behavior field that job satisfaction is the most important and frequently studied employee attitude. Although theoretical analyses have criticized job satisfaction as being too narrow conceptually,102 there are three generally accepted dimensions to job satisfaction. First, job satisfaction is an emotional response to a job situation. As such, it cannot be seen; it can only be inferred. Second, job satisfaction is often determined by how well outcomes meet or exceed expectations. For example, if organizational participants feel that they are working much harder than others in the department but are receiving fewer rewards, they will probably have a negative attitude toward their work, boss, and/or coworkers. They will be dissatisfied. On the other hand, if they feel they are being treated very well and are being paid equitably, they are likely to have a positive attitude toward the job. They will be jobsatisfied. Third, job satisfaction represents several related attitudes. Through the years five job dimensions have been identified to represent the most important characteristics of a job about which employees have affective responses. These are: 1. The work itself. The extent to which the job provides the individual with interesting tasks, opportunities for learning, and the chance to accept responsibility 2. Pay. The amount of financial remuneration that is received and the degree to which this is viewed as equitable vis-á-vis that of others in the organization 3. Promotion opportunities. The chances for advancement in the organization 4. Supervision. The abilities of the supervisor to provide technical assistance and behavioral support 5. Coworkers. The degree to which fellow workers are technically proficient and socially supportive103 142 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior These five dimensions were formulated many years ago and have been widely used to measure job satisfaction over the years, and a meta-analysis confirmed their construct validity.104 Influences on Job Satisfaction There are a number of factors that influence job satisfaction. For example, one study even found that if college students’ majors coincided with their jobs, this relationship predicted subsequent job satisfaction.105 However, the main influences can be summarized along the above five dimensions. The Work Itself The content of the work itself is a major source of satisfaction. For example, research related to the job characteristics approach to job design, covered in the next chapter, shows that feedback from the job itself and autonomy are two of the major job-related motivational factors. Research has found that such job characteristics and job complexity mediate the relationship between personality and job satisfaction,106 and if the creative requirements of employees’ jobs are met, then they tend to be satisfied.107 At a more pragmatic level, some of the most important ingredients of a satisfying job uncovered by surveys over the years include interesting and challenging work, and one survey found that career development (not necessarily promotion) was most important to both younger and older employees.108 Also in line with Chapter 2 on diversity and ethics, a study found work satisfaction is associated with equal opportunities and family-friendly and anti-harassment practices.109 Firms on the annual Fortune list of “100 Best Companies to Work For,” such as VSP, the nation’s largest provider of eye care benefits, which is known for innovative human resources practices, have sustained high levels of employee satisfaction with work.110 Pay Chapter 4 gave detailed attention to both pay and benefits. Wages and salaries are recognized to be a significant but cognitively complex111 and multidimensional factor in job satisfaction.112 Money not only helps people attain their basic needs but is also instrumental in providing upper-level need satisfaction. Employees often see pay as a reflection of how management views their contribution to the organization. Fringe benefits are also important, but they are not as influential. One reason undoubtedly is that most employees do not even know how much they are receiving in benefits. Moreover, most tend to undervalue these benefits because they do not realize their significant monetary value.113 However, research indicates that if employees are allowed some flexibility in choosing the type of benefits they prefer within a total package, called a flexible or cafeteria benefits plan, there is a significant increase in both benefits satisfaction and overall job satisfaction.114 Promotions Promotional opportunities seem to have a varying effect on job satisfaction. This is because promotions take a number of different forms and have a variety of accompanying rewards. For example, individuals who are promoted on the basis of seniority often experience job satisfaction but not as much as those who are promoted on the basis of performance. Additionally, a promotion with a 10 percent salary raise is typically not as satisfying as one with a 20 percent salary raise. These differences help explain why executive promotions may be more satisfying than promotions that occur at the lower levels of organizations. Also, in recent years with the flattening of organizations and accompanying empowerment strategies, promotion in the traditional sense of climbing Chapter 5 Personality, Perception, and Employee Attitudes 143 the hierarchical corporate ladder of success is no longer available as it once was. Employees operating in the new paradigm, as outlined in Part One of this text, know that not only are traditional promotions not available, but as was pointed out earlier, they may not even be desired. A positive work environment and opportunities to grow intellectually and broaden their skill base has for many become more important than promotion opportunities.115 Supervision Supervision is another moderately important source of job satisfaction. Chapter 14 discusses the impact of leadership skills. For now, however, it can be said that there seem to be two dimensions of supervisory style that affect job satisfaction. One is employee-centeredness, which is measured by the degree to which a supervisor takes a personal interest and cares about the employee. It commonly is manifested in ways such as checking to see how well the employee is doing, providing advice and assistance to the individual, and communicating with the associate on a personal as well as an official level. American employees generally complain that their supervisors don’t do a very good job on these dimensions. There is considerable empirical evidence that one of the major reasons employees give for quitting a company is that their supervisor does not care about them.116 The other dimension is participation or influence, as illustrated by managers who allow their people to participate in decisions that affect their own jobs. In most cases, this approach leads to higher job satisfaction. For example, a meta-analysis concluded that participation does have a positive effect on job satisfaction. A participative climate created by the supervisor seems to have a more substantial effect on workers’ satisfaction than does participation in a specific decision.117 Work Group The nature of the work group or team will have an effect on job satisfaction. Friendly, cooperative coworkers or team members are a modest source of job satisfaction to individual employees. The work group, especially a “tight” team, serves as a source of support, comfort, advice, and assistance to the individual members. Research indicates that groups requiring considerable interdependence among the members to get the job done will have higher satisfaction.118 A “good” work group or effective team makes the job more enjoyable. However, this factor is not essential to job satisfaction. On the other hand, if the reverse conditions exist—the people are difficult to get along with—this factor may have a negative effect on job satisfaction. Also, cross-cultural research finds that if members are resistant to teams in general and self-managed teams in particular, they will be less satisfied than if they welcome being part of teams.119 Working Conditions Working conditions have a modest effect on job satisfaction. If the working conditions are good (clean, attractive surroundings, for instance), the personnel will find it easier to carry out their jobs. If the working conditions are poor (hot, noisy surroundings, for example), personnel will find it more difficult to get things done. In other words, the effect of working conditions on job satisfaction is similar to that of the work group. If things are good, there may or may not be a job satisfaction problem; if things are poor, there very likely will be. Most people do not give working conditions a great deal of thought unless they are extremely bad. Additionally, when there are complaints about working conditions, these sometimes are really nothing more than manifestations of other problems. For example, a manager may complain that his office has not been properly cleaned by the night crew, but 144 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior his anger is actually a result of a meeting he had with the boss earlier in the day in which he was given a poor performance evaluation. However, in recent years, because of the increased diversity of the workforce, working conditions have taken on new importance. Chapter 2 discussed ways in which today’s organizations are trying to make conditions more supportive and more nondiscriminatory/nonthreatening. There is also evidence of a positive relationship between job satisfaction and life satisfaction,120 and that the direction of causality is that people who are satisfied with their lives tend to find more satisfaction in their work.121 Outcomes of Job Satisfaction To society as a whole as well as from an individual employee’s standpoint, job satisfaction in and of itself is a desirable outcome. However, from a pragmatic managerial and organizational effectiveness perspective, it is important to know how, if at all, satisfaction relates to desired outcome variables. For instance, if job satisfaction is high, will the employees perform better and the organization be more effective? If job satisfaction is low, will there be performance problems and ineffectiveness? This question has been asked by both researchers and practitioners through the years. There are no simple answers, and the results range from weak to strong. In examining the outcomes of job satisfaction, it is important to break down the analysis into a series of specific outcomes. The following sections examine the most important of these. Satisfaction and Performance Do satisfied employees perform better than their less-satisfied counterparts? This “satisfactionperformance controversy” has raged over the years. Although most people assume a positive relationship, the research to date has been mixed. About 25 years ago, the studies assessed by a meta-analysis indicated a weak (.17 best-estimate correlation) relationship between satisfaction and performance.122 However, conceptual, methodological, empirical, and practical analyses have questioned and argued against these weak results.123 So, more recently a sophisticated meta-analysis conducted by Tim Judge and his colleagues on 312 samples with a combined N of 54,417 found the mean true correlation to be .30.124 This latest analysis thus shows a much stronger relationship between employee job satisfaction and performance, but still not greater than the Big Five personality trait of conscientiousness discussed earlier in this chapter nor as great as the meta-analytic findings of other psychological constructs such as the relationship between self-efficacy (covered in Chapter 7) and performance (.38).125 Perhaps the best conclusion about satisfaction and performance is that there is definitely a positive relationship, but probably not as great as conventional wisdom assumed concerning happy workers as productive workers. Although there is recent supporting research evidence on the causal direction (that correlational studies do not permit), showing satisfaction influences performance rather than vice versa,126 the relationship may even be more complex than others in organizational behavior. For example, there seem to be many possible moderating variables, the most important of which are rewards. If people receive rewards they feel are equitable, they will be satisfied, and this is likely to result in greater performance effort.127 Also, research evidence indicates that satisfaction may not necessarily lead to individual performance improvement but does lead to departmental128 and organizational-level improvement.129 A meta-analysis of such business units (7,939 in 36 companies) found that when satisfaction is defined and measured by employee engagement, there is a significant relationship with performance outcomes of productivity, customer satisfaction, and even profit.130 In total, job satisfaction should not be considered the endpoint in human performance, but there is accumulating evidence that it should, along with the other dimensions discussed throughout this text, play an important role in the study and application of organizational behavior. Chapter 5 Personality, Perception, and Employee Attitudes 145 Satisfaction and Turnover Does high employee job satisfaction result in low turnover? Research has uncovered a moderately inverse relationship between satisfaction and turnover.131 High job satisfaction will not, in and of itself, keep turnover low, but it does seem to help. On the other hand, if there is considerable job dissatisfaction, there is likely to be high turnover. Obviously, other variables enter into an employee’s decision to quit besides job satisfaction. For example, age, tenure in the organization, and commitment to the organization (covered in the next major section), may play a role. Some people cannot see themselves working anywhere else, so they remain regardless of how dissatisfied they feel. Another factor is the general economy. When things in the economy are going well and there is little unemployment, typically there will be an increase in turnover because people will begin looking for better opportunities with other organizations. Even if they are satisfied, many people are willing to leave if the opportunities elsewhere promise to be better. On the other hand, if jobs are tough to get and downsizing, mergers, and acquisitions are occurring, as in recent years, dissatisfied employees will voluntarily stay where they are. Research findings verify that unemployment rates do directly affect turnover.132 On an overall basis, however, it is accurate to say that job satisfaction is important in employee turnover. Although absolutely no turnover is not necessarily beneficial to the organization, a low turnover rate is usually desirable because of the considerable training costs and the drawbacks of inexperience, plus the loss of the tacit knowledge that those who leave take with them. Satisfaction and Absenteeism Research has only demonstrated a weak negative relationship between satisfaction and absenteeism.133 As with turnover, many other variables enter into the decision to stay home besides satisfaction with the job. For example, there are moderating variables such as the degree to which people feel that their jobs are important. For example, research among state government employees has found that those who believed that their work was important had lower absenteeism than did those who did not feel this way. Additionally, it is important to remember that although high job satisfaction will not necessarily result in low absenteeism, low job satisfaction is more likely to bring about absenteeism.134 Other Effects and Ways to Enhance Satisfaction In addition to those noted above, there are a number of other effects brought about by high job satisfaction. Research reports that highly satisfied employees tend to have better physical health, learn new job-related tasks more quickly, have fewer on-the-job accidents, and file fewer grievances. Also on the positive side, it has been found that there is a strong negative relationship between job satisfaction and perceived stress.135 In other words, by building satisfaction, stress may be reduced. Overall, there is no question that employee satisfaction in jobs is in and of itself desirable. It cannot only reduce stress, but as the preceding discussion points out, may also help improve performance, turnover, and absenteeism. Based on the current body of knowledge, the following evidence-based guidelines may help enhance job satisfaction.136 1. Make jobs more fun. World-class companies such as Southwest Airlines have a fun culture for their employees. Southwest management makes it clear that irreverence is okay; it’s okay to be yourself; and take the competition seriously, but not yourself.137 Having a fun culture may not make jobs themselves more satisfying, but it does break up boredom and lessen the chances of dissatisfaction. 2. Have fair pay, benefits, and promotion opportunities. These are obvious ways that organizations typically try to keep their employees satisfied. Recent national surveys 146 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior indicate that employees rank benefits and pay as very important to their job satisfaction.138 As Chapter 4 pointed out, an important way to make benefits more effective would be to provide a flexible, so-called cafeteria approach. This allows employees to choose their own distribution of benefits within the budgeted amount available. This way there would be no discrepancies between what they want, because it’s their choice. 3. Match people with jobs that fit their interests and skills. Getting the right fit is one of the most important, but overlooked, ways to have satisfied employees. This, of course, assumes that the organization knows what those interests and skills are. Effective human resource management firms such as Disney, Southwest Airlines, Google, and Microsoft put considerable effort into finding out interests and skills of potential new hires, as well as existing employees, in order to make the match or fit with the right job. 4. Design jobs to make them exciting and satisfying. Instead of finding people to fit the job as in point 3, this approach suggests designing jobs to fit the people. Most people do not find boring, repetitive work very satisfying. For example, the Canadian aerospace firm Nordavionics was losing too many of their talented engineers. They found that they could increase job satisfaction and reduce turnover by being more sensitive to and providing their engineers with more challenging work and professional growth. Unfortunately, too many jobs today are boring and should be changed or eliminated as much as possible. Chapter 6 is concerned with designing jobs to help motivate and satisfy today’s employees. Examples include providing more responsibility and building in more variety, significance, identity, autonomy, and feedback. In summary, most organizational behavior scholars as well as practicing managers would argue that job satisfaction is important to an organization. Some critics have argued, however, that this is pure conjecture because there is so much we do not know about the positive effects of satisfaction. On the other hand, when job satisfaction is low, there seem to be negative effects on the organization that have been well documented. So if only from the standpoint of viewing job satisfaction as a minimum requirement or point of departure, it is of value to the employees’ well-being and the organization’s overall health and effectiveness and is deserving of study and application in the field of organizational behavior. Organizational Commitment Although job satisfaction has received the most attention of all work-related attitudes, organizational commitment has become increasingly recognized in the organizational behavior literature. Whereas satisfaction is mainly concerned with the employee’s attitude toward the job and commitment is at the level of the organization, a strong relationship between job satisfaction and organizational commitment has been found over the years.139 Yet, there are always many employees who are satisfied with their jobs, but dislike, say, the highly bureaucratic organization they work for, or the software engineer may be dissatisfied with her current job, but be very committed to the overall visionary high-tech firm. On balance, research studies and the field of organizational behavior in general treat satisfaction and commitment as different attitudes. In light of the new environment that includes downsizing, telecommuting, mergers and acquisitions, globalization, and diversity, organizational commitment has resurfaced as a very important topic of study and concern. Although some expert observers feel that organizational commitment is a dead issue because of the new environment and should be replaced by career commitment,140 others such as the following see organizational commitment as the major challenge in modern times: Today’s workplace is enveloped by the fear of downsizing, loss of job security, overwhelming change in technology and the stress of having to do more with less . . . managers [need to] establish the type of caring, spirited workplace that will ignite employee commitment.141 Chapter 5 Personality, Perception, and Employee Attitudes 147 After first defining commitment and its dimensions, what research has found to date about its outcomes is then summarized. The Meaning of Organizational Commitment As with other topics in organizational behavior, a wide variety of definitions and measures of organizational commitment exist.142 As an attitude, organizational commitment is most often defined as (1) a strong desire to remain a member of a particular organization; (2) a willingness to exert high levels of effort on behalf of the organization; and (3) a definite belief in, and acceptance of, the values and goals of the organization.143 In other words, this is an attitude reflecting employees’ loyalty to their organization and is an ongoing process through which organizational participants express their concern for the organization and its continued success and well-being. Using this definition, it is commonly measured by the Organizational Commitment Questionnaire shown in Figure 5.2. The organizational commitment attitude is determined by a number of personal (age, tenure in the organization, career adaptability, and dispositions such as positive or negative affectivity, or internal or external control attributions) and organizational (the job design, values, support, procedual fairness, and the leadership style of one’s supervisor) variables.144 Even nonorganizational factors, such as the availability of alternatives after making the initial choice to join an organization, will affect subsequent commitment.145 Also, because of the new environment where many organizations are not demonstrating evidence of commitment to their employees, recent research has found that an employee’s FIGURE 5.2 Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ) Source: R. T. Mowday, R. M. Steers, and L. W. Porter, “The Measure of Organizational Commitment,” Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 14, 1979, p. 288. Used with permission Listed below are a series of statements that represent possible feelings that individuals might have about the company or organization for which they work. With respect to your own feelings about the particular organization for which you are now working, please indicate the degree of your agreement or disagreement with each statement by checking one of the seven alternatives below each statement.* 1. I am willing to put in a great deal of effort beyond what is normally expected in order to help this organization be successful. 2. I talk up this organization to my friends as a great organization to work for. 3. I feel very little loyalty to this organization. (R) 4. I would accept almost any type of job assignment in order to keep working for this organization. 5. I find that my values and the organization’s values are very similar. 6. I am proud to tell others that I am a part of this organization. 7. I could just as well be working for a different organization as long as the type of work was similar. (R) 8. This organization really inspires the very best in me in the way of job performance. 9. It would take very little change in my present circumstances to cause me to leave this organization. (R) 10. I am extremely glad that I chose this organization to work for over others I was considering at the time I joined. 11. There’s not too much to be gained by sticking with this organization indefinitely. (R) 12. Often, I find it difficult to agree with this organization’s policies on important matters relating to its employees. (R) 13. I really care about the fate of this organization. 14. For me this is the best of all possible organizations for which to work. 15. Deciding to work for this organization was a definite mistake on my part. (R) *Responses to each item are measured on a 7-point scale with scale point anchors labeled (1) strongly disagree; (2) moderately disagree; (3) slightly disagree; (4) neither disagree nor agree; (5) slightly agree; (6) moderately agree; (7) strongly agree. An “R” denotes a negatively phrased and reverse-scored item. 148 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior career commitment is a moderator between the perceptions of company policies and practices and organizational commitment.146 For example, even though employees perceive supervisory support, they would also need to have a commitment to their careers, say, in engineering or marketing, in order to have high organizational commitment. Because of this multidimensional nature of organizational commitment, there is growing support for the three-component model proposed by Meyer and Allen.147 The three dimensions are as follows: 1. Affective commitment involves the employee’s emotional attachment to, identification with, and involvement in the organization. 2. Continuance commitment involves commitment based on the costs that the employee associates with leaving the organization. This may be because of the loss of senority for promotion or benefits. 3. Normative commitment involves employees’ feelings of obligation to stay with the organization because they should; it is the right thing to do. There is considerable research support for this three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment.148 It also generally holds up across cultures.149 The Outcomes of Organizational Commitment As is the case with job satisfaction, there are mixed outcomes of organizational commitment. Both early150 and more recent research summaries151 do show support of a positive relationship between organizational commitment and desirable outcomes such as high performance, low turnover, and low absenteeism. There is also evidence that employee commitment relates to other desirable outcomes, such as the perception of a warm, supportive organizational climate152 and being a good team member willing to help.153 Yet, as with satisfaction, there are some studies that do not show strong relationships between commitment and outcome variables154 and others where there are moderating effects between organizational commitment and performance. For example, one study found a stronger relationship between organizational commitment and performance for those with low financial needs than for those with high ones,155 and another study found that the more tenure the employees had on the job and with the employing organization, the less impact their commitment had on performance.156 Also, a study found that commitment to supervisors was more strongly related to performance than was commitment to organizations.157 These and a number of other studies indicate the complexity of an attitude such as commitment.158 On balance, however, most researchers would agree that the organizational commitment attitude as defined here may be a better predictor of desirable outcome variables than is job satisfaction159 and thus deserves management’s attention. Guidelines to Enhance Organizational Commitment As the opening discussion of commitment indicated, management faces a paradoxical situation: “On the one hand today’s focus on teamwork, empowerment, and flatter organizations puts a premium on just the sort of self-motivation that one expects to get from committed employees; on the other hand, environmental forces are acting to diminish the foundations of employee commitment.”160 Dessler suggests the following specific guidelines to implement a management system that should help solve the current dilemma and enhance employees’ organizational commitment: 1. Commit to people-first values. the talk. Put it in writing, hire the right-kind managers, and walk Chapter 5 Personality, Perception, and Employee Attitudes 149 2. Clarify and communicate your mission. Clarify the mission and ideology; make it charismatic; use value-based hiring practices; stress values-based orientation and training; build the tradition. 3. Guarantee organizational justice. Have a comprehensive grievance procedure; provide for extensive two-way communications. 4. Create a sense of community. Build value-based homogeneity; share and share alike; emphasize barnraising, cross-utilization, and teamwork; get together. 5. Support employee development. Commit to actualizing; provide first-year job challenge; enrich and empower; promote from within; provide developmental activities; provide employee security without guarantees.161 Organizational Citizenship Behaviors (OCBs) An appropriate concluding section for this chapter covering personality, perception, and attitudes are the prosocial/organizational citizenship behaviors, simply known as OCBs. This now very popular construct in organizational behavior was first introduced over 25 years ago with a cognitively based theoretical foundation. Organ defines OCB as “individual behavior that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning of the organization.”162 The personality foundation for these OCBs reflects the employee’s predispositional traits to be cooperative, helpful, caring, and conscientious. The attitudinal foundation indicates that employees engage in OCBs in order to reciprocate the actions of their organizations. Motivational dimensions,163 job satisfaction,164 and organizational commitment165 clearly relate to OCBs. More important to OCBs, however, is that employees must perceive that they are being treated fairly, that the procedures and outcomes are fair. A number of studies have found a strong relationship between justice and OCBs.166 It seems that procedural justice affects employees by influencing their perceived organizational support, which in turn prompts them to reciprocate with OCBs, going beyond the formal job requirements.167 Besides being extra-role or going beyond “the call of duty,” other major dimensions are that OCBs are discretionary or voluntary in nature and that they are not necessarily recognized by the the formal reward system of the organization.168 OCBs can take many forms, but the major ones could be summarized as: (1) altruism (e.g., helping out when a coworker is not feeling well), (2) conscientiousness (e.g., staying late to finish a project), (3) civic virtue (e.g., volunteering for a community program to represent the firm), (4) sportsmanship (e.g., sharing failure of a team project that would have been successful by following the member’s advice), and (5) courtesy (e.g., being understanding and empathetic even when provoked).169 Research also examines antecedents such as job attitudes that account for loyalty OCBs, personality that accounts for service delivery OCBs, effects of nationality on the role of OCBs,170 the amount of control people have over their job relates to OCBs,171 customer knowledge and personality that jointly predict participation in OCBs,172 and relationship quality and relationship context as antecedents of person- and task-focused interpersonal citizenship behaviors.173 Obviously, all these different types of OCBs are valuable to organizations and, although they frequently go undetected by the reward system, there is evidence that individuals who exhibit OCBs do perform better and receive higher performance evaluations.174 Also, OCBs do relate to group and organization performance and effectiveness.175 However, as with job satisfaction and organizational commitment, there is still some criticism of the conceptualization and research on OCBs,176 and more research is certainly warranted. For example, one study found that OCBs do influence organizational outcomes rather than the 150 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior other way around177 and another study has begun to analyze the influence of gender on the performance of OCBs.178 Also, although the research has focused on the positive impact of OCBs, a recent study found that at least too much of the individual initiative portion of OCB is related to higher levels of employee role overload, job stress, and work-family conflict.179 Yet, as a summary statement, today’s managers would be very wise in trying to enhance not only job satisfaction and organizational commitment, but also prosocial, organizational citizenship behaviors of their employees. Summary Personality, perception, and attitudes represent important micro, cognitively oriented variables in the study of organizational behavior. Personality represents the “whole person” concept. It includes perception, learning, motivation, and more. According to this definition, people’s external appearance and traits, their inner awareness of self, and the personsituation interaction make up their personalities. Although the nature versus nurture debate continues, the findings of twin studies point out the importance that heredity may play in personality, and recent breakthroughs in neuropsychology indicate the importance of the brain in personality have led most psychologists to recognize nature and nurture. However, the nurture side still dominates. Self-esteem, the person-situation interaction, and the socialization process of personality development are all very relevant to the understanding and application of organizational behavior. Besides the recent advances in the genetic and brain input into personality, the study of relatively fixed dispositions have recognized importance in the form of the “Big Five” personality traits. Conscientiousness, emotional stability, agreeableness, extraversion, and openness to experience have been found to significantly relate to job performance, especially conscientiousness. In addition, the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) remains a popular tool for personal and career development. Whereas the Big Five is based on research, the MBTI is based on the historically important Carl Jung theory of personality types and mental processes. Both the Big Five and MBTI if carefully interpreted and used can make a contribution to the understanding and application of organizational behavior. Whereas personality is an important cognitive construct to help explain organizational behavior, perception is an important cognitive process. Through this complex perceptual process or filter, persons make interpretations of the stimulus or situation facing them. The social context that this process takes place is particularly important to the study of organizational behavior. Particularly relevant problems in this social perception are stereotyping (the tendency to perceive another person as belonging to a single class or category) and the halo effect (the tendency to perceive a person on the basis of one trait). The remainder of the chapter is concerned with cognitively based attitudes. Personality traits, perceptions, and dispositions such as positive affectivity (PA) and negative affectivity (NA), are important antecedents to attitudes about one’s job. However, traditionally the most important attitude studied in organizational behavior and given concern in the real world is job satisfaction. This attitude is defined as a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job or job experience. A number of factors influence job satisfaction. Some of the major ones are the work itself, pay, promotions, supervision, the work group, and working conditions. There are a number of outcomes of job satisfaction. For example, although the relationship with performance was thought to be relatively weak, more recent research is showing a much stronger relationship. Low job satisfaction tends to lead to both turnover and absenteeism, whereas high job satisfaction often results in fewer on-the-job accidents and work grievances, less time needed to learn new job-related tasks, and less stress. There are also specific guidelines to enhance employee satisfaction such as making jobs fun, ensuring fairness, getting the right fit, and designing jobs to make them more exciting and satisfying. Chapter 5 Personality, Perception, and Employee Attitudes 151 Closely related to job satisfaction is the organizational commitment attitude. It traditionally refers to the employees’ loyalty to the organization and is determined by a number of personal, organizational, and nonorganizational variables. Now commitment is generally conceived as having three components: affective (emotional attachment), continuance (costs of leaving), and normative (obligation to stay). Like job satisfaction, the organizational commitment attitude is very complex and has mixed results, but in general, it is thought to have a somewhat stronger relationship with organizational outcomes such as performance, absenteeism, and turnover. Like satisfaction, organizational commitment can be enhanced. The concluding section draws from personality, perception, and attitudes. The extrarole, prosocial/organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs) involve predispositional traits to be cooperative and conscientious and reflect through attitudes fair treatment from the organization. OCBs can take a number of forms such as altruism, conscientiousness, civic virtue, sportsmanship, and courtesy. Although there is still some criticism of the conceptualization and research on OCBs, there is growing evidence that OCBs positively relate to individual, group, and organizational performance. Ending with Meta-Analytic Research Findings OB PRINCIPLE: Conscientious employees are effective performers. Meta-Analysis Results: [117 studies; 19,721 participants; d = .26] On average, there is a 57 percent probability that conscientious employees will turn out to be better performers than those who do not have the conscientious personality trait. Out of all the “Big Five” personality dimensions tested, only conscientiousness showed consistent relations with all job performance criteria across occupational groups. Conclusion: Personality measures are widely used in employee analysis and selection because they contribute to the learning and understanding of today’s employees. Though many personality traits have been investigated over the years, the Big Five personality dimensions (conscientiousness, extroversion, agreeableness, openness to experience, and emotional stability) have emerged as the most important because of their relationship with performance. However, consistent with what was discussed in this chapter, conscientiousness is the single strongest Big Five predictor of work performance. Conscientious people can be characterized as dependable, hardworking, responsible, persevering, and achievement oriented—all desirable qualities of effective, high-performing employees. Source: Adapted from Murray R. Barrick and Michael K. Mount, “The Big Five Personality Dimensions and Job Performance: A Meta-Analysis,” Personnel Psychology, Vol. 44, 1991, pp. 1—26. OB PRINCIPLE: Employees who are satisfied with their jobs participate more in prosocial, organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs). 152 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior Meta-Analysis Results: [28 studies; 6,746 participants; d = .47] On average, there is a 63 percent probability that employees who are satisfied in their jobs will participate in more prosocial, organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs) than those who are not satisfied. Self—versus other— ratings of organizational citizenship behaviors was a notable moderator of the relationship. Self-reports of citizenship behaviors tend to be inflated. Overall, the evidence provides support that measures of OCBs will be better related to job satisfaction than would inrole performance, with the exception that this applies mainly to nonmanagerial, nonprofessional employees. Conclusion: Individuals who contribute to organizational effectiveness by doing things that are above and beyond their primary task or role are assets to their organizations. Examples of organization citizenship behaviors or OCBs are volunteering for extra job activities, helping coworkers, and making positive comments about the company. As this chapter has discussed, OCBs are of value to the organization because, although they are not viewed as a traditional measure of performance, they can still impact on an organization’s performance by supporting ongoing task activities and influencing performance evaluations. Employees who exhibit citizenship behaviors such as helping others or making innovative suggestions receive higher performance ratings. Moreover, other attitudinal variables discussed in this chapter such as job satisfaction and organizational commitment predict and may lead to OCBs. Source: Adapted from Dennis W. Organ and Katherine Ryan, “A Meta-Analytic Review of Attitudinal and Dispositional Predictors of Organizational Citizenship Behavior,” Personnel Psychology, Vol. 48, 1995, pp. 775—802. Questions for Discussion and Review 1. Critically analyze the statement that “the various psychological processes can be thought of as pieces of a jigsaw puzzle and personality as the completed puzzle picture.” 2. What is the comprehensive definition of personality? Give brief examples of each of the major elements. 3. What side would you prefer to argue in the nature versus nurture debate? What would be the major points each side would make? How would you resolve the controversy? 4. What are the “Big Five” personality traits? Which one seems to have the biggest impact on performance? How would knowledge of the Big Five help you in your job as a manager? 5. What are the four major dimensions of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) that yield the 16 types? How can the MBTI be used effectively? 6. In understanding the process of perception, do you agree with the observation that people are human information processors? Why? 7. How does sensation differ from perception? 8. What does stereotyping mean? Why is it considered to be a perceptual problem? 9. What is meant by the halo effect? Summarize the current thinking on this halo effect. 10. What is negative affectivity (NA)? What would be an example of an employee with high NA? What is PA? Provide an example. 11. What is meant by the term job satisfaction? What are some of the major factors that influence job satisfaction? Chapter 5 Personality, Perception, and Employee Attitudes 153 12. What are some of the important outcomes of job satisfaction? 13. What is organizational commitment? What three components have emerged to help better explain the complexities of commitment? Why may an understanding of organizational commitment be especially important in the years ahead? 14. What are organization citizenship behaviors (OCBs)? How do they come about and what are some examples? Internet Exercise: Assessing Your Personality This chapter was concerned with how personality traits may affect performance in the workplace. To understand this better, many organizations are using outside resources to assess employee personalities in an effort to get them into jobs that fit their characteristics. One such organization can be found at http://www.personality-tests-personalityprofiles.com/home.htm. This site discusses the services that they provide, and provides some sample personality questions. Another interesting Web site is http://www .queendom.com/alltests.html. They have many different types of assessment tools that you can take online. Many of them are related to the workplace. Still another possibility is http://www.hartmancommunications.com. Browse through these sites and take some of the tests. Then consider the following questions: 1. Did you learn anything that you didn’t already know about yourself? If so, what? How do you think your personality will affect your work performance? 2. Is there anything you would like to change about yourself in order to improve yourself? If so, what? If not, what type of job would seem to be most suited to your personality? 3. See if you can locate still other Web sites that assess personality. How, if at all, do these personality assessments match up with what you have covered in this chapter on personality and attitudes? Real Case: It’s All a Matter of Personality Largely because of downsizing, the survivors are working harder and longer hours every year—and although some get burned out and stressed, others seem to thrive on it. At Apple Computer, for example, development teams are well known for wearing T-shirts that proclaim, “90 Hours a Week and Loving It!” And high-tech firms are now coaxing double and triple time out of their employees, a practice that is spreading to other sectors of the economy. One of the best examples is provided by the increasing number of telecommuters who work at home. By giving employees PCs, cellular phones, pagers, and other devices, the company can stay in contact. However, many of these telecommuters are now finding that they are on call 24 hours a day. One of the new rules of survival in an increasing number of workplaces appears to be: If you don’t have the personality to work round-the-clock, don’t bother applying for a job here. Of course, for some people work is extremely enjoyable, and they do not mind the new demands. Take the case of entrepreneur Wayne Huizenga, a self-made billionaire. Huizenga started out with a partner in the garbage collection business, confident that his firm could outperform the small mom-and-pop garbage companies and get their business. He was supremely confident of his own ability; it was not long before his plan started to come true. Wall Street did not think much of his ideas, however, and when he issued his first stock offering in 1971 it was to raise a mere $5 million. By the time Huizenga left in 1984, the market value of the firm’s stock was $3 billion. Huizenga’s next move was to Blockbuster Entertainment. He was convinced that the movie rental business was a wave of the future. Again he was right. For a mere $18.5 million, he and his partners were able to buy the company—and soon thereafter sales took off, rising from $43 million annually to over $2 billion. By the time he sold out to Viacom in 1994, he had put another billion dollars in his pocket. The same can be said for Steve Wynn of Mirage Resorts. Wynn’s company was listed as one of Fortune’s 154 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior 10 most admired firms in America. Why? Part of it is a reflection of Wynn’s own personality. He is eternally optimistic and wants his people to be the same. Wynn’s strategy is to keep everybody happy. If anyone is not, Wynn’s employees are to fix it. As he tells his people, “If you see a hotel guest with the tiniest frown on her face, don’t ask a supervisor, take care of it. Erase the charge, send the dinner back, don’t charge for the room.” In addition, Wynn sponsors elaborate parties to honor staffers who have kept the most customers happy. At one recent party for a Vietnamese woman who was being honored as employee of the year, Wynn brought in George and Barbara Bush to congratulate the lady. It cost a lot of money for the party, but, as Wynn puts it, “It’s an investment.” 1. Why do employees at firms such as Apple Computer work so hard and put in such long hours? 2. How would you describe Wayne Huizenga in terms of the self-concept, specifically self-esteem? 3. Why is job satisfaction and organizational commitment so high at Mirage Resorts? How does Steve Wynn manage to keep his employees so happy? Organizational Behavior Case: Same Accident, Different Perceptions According to the police report, on July 9 at 1:27 P.M., bus number 3763 was involved in a minor noninjury accident. Upon arriving at the scene of the accident, police were unable to locate the driver of the bus. Because the bus was barely drivable, the passengers were transferred to a backup bus, and the damaged bus was returned to the city bus garage for repair. The newly hired general manager, Aaron Moore, has been going over the police report and two additional reports. One of the additional reports was submitted by Jennifer Tye, the transportation director for the City Transit Authority (CTA), and the other came directly from the driver in the accident, Michael Meyer. According to Tye, although Mike has been an above-average driver for almost eight years, his performance has taken a drastic nosedive during the past 15 months. Always one to join the other drivers for an afterwork drink or two, Mike recently has been suspected of drinking on the job. Furthermore, according to Tye’s report, Mike was seen having a beer in a tavern located less than two blocks from the CTA terminal at around 3 P.M. on the day of the accident. Tye’s report concludes by citing two sections of the CTA Transportation Agreement. Section 18a specifıcally forbids the drinking of alcoholic beverages by any CTA employee while on duty. Section 26f prohibits drivers from leaving their buses unattended for any reason. Violation of either of the two sections results in automatic dismissal of the employee involved. Tye recommends immediate dismissal. According to the driver, Michael Meyer, however, the facts are quite different. Mike claims that in attempting to miss a bicycle rider he swerved and struck a tree, causing minor damage to the bus. Mike had been talking with the dispatcher when he was forced to drop his phone receiver in order to miss the bicycle. Because the receiver broke open on impact, Mike was forced to walk four blocks to the nearest phone to report the accident. As soon as he reported the accident to the company, Mike also called the union to tell them about it. Mike reports that when he returned to the scene of the accident, his bus was gone. Uncertain of what to do and a little frightened, he decided to return to the CTA terminal. Because it was over a fivemile walk and because his shift had already ended at 3 P.M., Mike stopped in for a quick beer just before getting back to the terminal. 1. Why are the two reports submitted by Jennifer and Mike so different? Did Jennifer and Mike have different perceptions of the same incident? 2. What additional information would you need if you were in Aaron Moore’s position? How can he clarify his own perception of the incident? 3. Given the information presented above, how would you recommend resolving this problem? Chapter 5 Personality, Perception, and Employee Attitudes 155 Organizational Behavior Case: Ken Leaves the Company Good people—valuable employees—quit their jobs every day. Usually, they leave for better positions elsewhere. Take Ken, an experienced underwriter in a northeastern insurance company, who scribbled the following remarks on his exit interview questionnaire: This job isn’t right for me. I like to have more input on decisions that affect me—more of a chance to show what I can do. I don’t get enough feedback to tell if I’m doing a good job or not, and the company keeps people in the dark about where it’s headed. Basically, I feel like an interchangeable part most of the time. In answer to the question about whether the company could have done anything to keep him, Ken replied simply, “Probably not.” Why do so many promising employees leave their jobs? And why do so many others stay on but perform at minimal levels for lack of better alternatives? One of the main reasons—Ken’s reason—can be all but invisible, because it’s so common in so many organizations: a systemwide failure to keep good people. Corporations should be concerned about employees like Ken. By investing in human capital, they may actually help reduce turnover, protect training investments, increase productivity, improve quality, and reap the benefits of innovative thinking and teamwork. Human resource professionals and managers can contribute to corporate success by encouraging employees’ empowerment, security, identity, “connectedness,” and competence. How? By recognizing the essential components of keeping their best people and by understanding what enhances and diminishes those components. Ken doubts that his company will ever change, but other organizations are taking positive steps to focus on and enhance employee retention. As a result, they’re reducing turnover, improving quality, increasing productivity, and protecting their training investments. 1. Do you think that Ken’s self-esteem had anything to do with his leaving the firm? 2. What do you think were Ken’s satisfaction with and commitment to the job and firm he is leaving? How does this relate to the research on the determinants and outcomes of satisfaction and commitment? 3. What lesson can this company learn from the case of Ken? What can and should it now do? Chapter Six Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications Learning Objectives • Define the motivation process. • Identify the primary and secondary needs. • Discuss the major theories of work motivation. • Present the motivational application of job design. • Describe the motivational application of goal setting. Motivation is a basic psychological process. Few would deny that it is the most important focus in the micro approach to organizational behavior. In fact, a data-based comprehensive analysis concluded that “America’s competitiveness problems appear to be largely motivational in nature.”1 Many people equate the causes of behavior with motivation; however, as evidenced in this book, the causes of organizational behavior are much broader and more complex than can be explained by motivation alone. Along with many other psychological constructs, motivation is presented here as a very important process in understanding behavior. Motivation interacts with and acts in conjunction with other mediating processes and the environment. It must also be remembered that, like the other cognitive processes, motivation cannot be seen. All that can be seen is behavior. Motivation is a hypothetical construct that is used to help explain behavior; it should not be equated with behavior. In fact, while recognizing the “central role of motivation,” many of today’s organizational behavior theorists “think it is important for the field to reemphasize behavior.”2 This chapter first presents motivation as a basic psychological process. The more applied aspects of motivation on job design and goal setting are covered in the last part of the chapter. The first section of this chapter clarifies the meaning of motivation by defining the relationship among its various parts. The need–drive–incentive cycle is defined and analyzed. The next section is devoted to an overview of the various types of needs, or motives: both primary and secondary. The next section of the chapter presents both the historical and more complex contemporary theories of work motivation. Finally, the two major motivation applications of job design and goal setting are given attention. 156 Chapter 6 Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications 157 FIGURE 6.1 NEEDS DRIVES INCENTIVES The Basic Motivation Process THE BASIC MOTIVATION PROCESS Today, virtually all people—practitioners and scholars—have their own definitions of motivation. Usually one or more of the following words are included: desires, wants, wishes, aims, goals, needs, drives, motives, and incentives. Technically, the term motivation can be traced to the Latin word movere, which means “to move.” This meaning is evident in the following comprehensive definition: motivation is a process that starts with a physiological or psychological deficiency or need that activates a behavior or a drive that is aimed at a goal or incentive. Thus, the key to understanding the process of motivation lies in the meaning of, and relationships among, needs, drives, and incentives. Figure 6.1 graphically depicts the motivation process. Needs set up drives aimed at goals or incentives; this is what the basic process of motivation is all about. In a systems sense, motivation consists of these three interacting and interdependent elements: 1. Needs. Needs are created whenever there is a physiological or psychological imbalance. For example, a need exists when cells in the body are deprived of food and water or when the personality is deprived of other people who serve as friends or companions. Although psychological needs may be based on a deficiency, sometimes they are not. For example, an individual with a strong need to get ahead may have a history of consistent success. 2. Drives. With a few exceptions,3 drives, or motives (the two terms are often used interchangeably), are set up to alleviate needs. A physiological drive can be simply defined as a deficiency with direction. Physiological and psychological drives are action oriented and provide an energizing thrust toward reaching an incentive. They are at the very heart of the motivational process. The examples of the needs for food and water are translated into the hunger and thirst drives, and the need for friends becomes a drive for affiliation. 3. Incentives. At the end of the motivation cycle is the incentive, defined as anything that will alleviate a need and reduce a drive. Thus, attaining an incentive will tend to restore physiological or psychological balance and will reduce or cut off the drive. Eating food, drinking water, and obtaining friends will tend to restore the balance and reduce the corresponding drives. Food, water, and friends are the incentives in these examples. These basic dimensions of the motivation process serve as a point of departure for the rest of the chapter. After discussion of primary and secondary motives, the work-motivation theories and applications that are more directly related to the study and application of organizational behavior and human resource management are examined. Primary Motives Psychologists do not totally agree on how to classify the various human motives, but they would acknowledge that some motives are unlearned and physiologically based. Such motives are variously called physiological, biological, unlearned, or primary. The last term is used here because it is more comprehensive than the others. However, the use of the term primary does not imply that these motives always take precedence over the learned secondary motives. Although the precedence of primary motives is implied in some motivation theories, there are many situations in which the secondary motives predominate over 158 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior primary motives. Common examples are celibacy among priests and fasting for a religious, social, or political cause. In both cases, learned secondary motives are stronger than unlearned primary motives. Two criteria must be met in order for a motive to be included in the primary classification: It must be unlearned, and it must be physiologically based. Thus defined, the most commonly recognized primary motives include hunger, thirst, sleep, avoidance of pain, sex, and maternal concern. Although these very basic physiological requirements have been equated with primary needs over the years, just like personality traits discussed in the last chapter, in recent years recognition is given to the role that the brain may play in people’s motives.4 The “hard-wiring” of emotional needs would meet the primary criteria of being unlearned and physiologically based. Neuropsychologists are just beginning to do research on the role the brain plays in motivation, but potential applications to the workplace are already being recognized. For example, Coffman and Gonzalez-Molina note: “What many organizations don’t see—and what many don’t want to understand—is that employee performance and its subsequent impact on customer engagement revolve around a motivating force that is determined in the brain and defines the specific talents and the emotional mechanisms everyone brings to their work.”5 However, even though the brain pathways will be developed in different ways and people develop different appetites for the various physiological motives because people have the same basic physiological makeup, they will all have essentially the same primary needs, but not the learned secondary needs. Secondary Motives Whereas the primary needs are vital for even survival, the secondary drives are unquestionably the most important to the study of organizational behavior. As a human society develops economically and becomes more complex, the primary drives give way to the learned secondary drives in motivating behavior. With some glaring exceptions that have yet to be eradicated, the motives of hunger and thirst are not dominant among people living in the economically developed world. This situation is obviously subject to change; for example, the “population bomb,” nuclear war, the greenhouse effect and even dire economic times as indicated in the accompanying OB in Action: Managing Amid Economic Uncertainty, may alter certain human needs. In addition, further breakthroughs in neuropsychology may receive more deserved attention.6 But for now, the learned secondary motives dominate the study and application of the field of organizational behavior. Secondary motives are closely tied to the learning concepts that are discussed in Chapter 12. In particular, the learning principle of reinforcement is conceptually and practically related to motivation. The relationship is obvious when reinforcement is divided into primary and secondary categories and is portrayed as incentives. Some discussions, however, regard reinforcement as simply a consequence serving to increase the motivation to perform the behavior again,7 and they are treated separately in this text. Once again, however, it should be emphasized that although the various behavioral concepts can be separated for study and analysis, in reality, concepts like reinforcement and motivation do not operate as separate entities in producing human behavior. The interactive effects are always present. A motive must be learned in order to be included in the secondary classification. Numerous important human motives meet this criterion. Some of the more important ones are power, achievement, and affiliation, or, as they are commonly referred to, n Pow, n Ach, and n Aff. In addition, especially in reference to organizational behavior, security and status are important secondary motives. Table 6.1 gives examples of each of these important secondary needs. OB in Action: Managing Amid Economic Uncertainty During the Internet bust a few years ago, I had lunch with a corporate HR leader. His company, a telecommunications giant, was in trouble. Every week, more layoffs were announced. People who could find better jobs were leaving in droves. I asked the HR fellow: “How are you dealing with employee morale?” “Oh, we don’t think about morale,” he chuckled. “We focus on Engagement with the Mission.” I was astounded by his reply, and I could all but hear the capitalized “E” and “M” in the phrase. Lots of HR people talk about engagement, and they also talk about missions. These are good things to talk about when half the workforce isn’t in fear of losing jobs at any moment. How does one get engaged with the organization’s lofty mission when one is preoccupied with job security, the threat of missing a mortgage payment, or worse? “Isn’t it tough to rally the troops around the mission when business conditions are so challenging?” I asked. I had just met a marketing director from this man’s company the night before at a networking event. “Yes, I took a job working for XYZ,” she told me, mentioning her employer by name with a shudder. “Don’t judge me for working there. I had to take the job. Any port in a storm.” Hollow Ring That’s how my lunchmate’s company brand was being publicly trashed by its own new management hires. Yet he clung to the notion that Engagement with the Mission would prevail. “We just have to keep talking about it, to keep the Mission uppermost in employees’ minds,” he said. My lunch partner was wrong in thinking that the most important issue then was Mission instead of morale, and the same holds true now. When employees are distracted by zooming foreclosure rates, the cost of fuel, the threat of job loss, and other real life concerns, our corporate mission is the last thing they want to hear about. We’re foolish if we don’t respond to our teams’ fears directly. Like any issue that can suck time and mental energy away from our work, employees’ economic concerns are an elephant in the room. Job One is to address those concerns forthrightly, and often. We can’t guarantee our employees a job for life, or even for the next 12 months. What we can and must do is level with them, with as much detail as possible, about what’s happening in our firms and what the future appears to hold. We need to talk about orders in the pipeline, the state of our customers’ business, the state of our competitors. We need to address the impact of the financial industry’s woes on our own business. If seniorleadership teams aren’t convening this week to craft an internal communications strategy dealing with these topof-mind and scary issues, they’re deluding themselves. When Basic Needs Are Threatened People won’t stick to their knitting when their own and their families’ stability and future are at risk. They can’t. They shouldn’t. Maslow’s famous pyramid shows us why. Next year’s new product launch is fun and exciting to think about when one’s housing, health care, nourishment, and other basic needs are well in hand. When a person is worried about his ability to take care of basic needs, his attention to lesser matters—the new product launch being one example—goes out the window. Who can blame him? Frequent and relevant employee communication is the name of the game during challenging economic times. And outbound communication is just half the battle. The other half is responding. For instance, employers who have been slow to accommodate employees’ telecommuting requests should delay no more. All employers should be stretching their views of what constitutes a day’s work right now, because fuel prices have increased employees’ household expenses dramatically. If people can accomplish their work from home one day a week, this is the time to let them do it. If you’ve looked at the flextime and flexplace concepts all summer without acting, there’s no more time for delay. Now is the time to listen to employees, and now is the time to act. The Whole Truth Nothing that we can invent to stimulate and reward employees—not a trip to Hawaii, not free flu shots, not even the promise of a hefty year-end bonus—can allay the fears of personal disruption or catastrophe that preoccupy our teams. No fun promotion, slogan, or contest that we dream up at a staff meeting will turn our teams’ attention away from their instinctive fears for their own economic stability—nothing except plain, unvarnished truth. Now’s the time to open the kimono and share the company’s plans for the next 12 or 18 months; now’s the time to talk frankly about hard choices that must be made, about the leadership team’s battle plan and the associated risks and opportunities. “Just keep working, and we’ll let you know if anything changes” will not cut it, not if we want people focused on their work instead of their plummeting home value and mutual funds. If ever there were a time to lose the corporate happy talk and be honest with employees, it’s now. Employers who speak to what’s real for their employees—the stock market, the firm’s fortunes, and the cost of getting through the day—will earn the privilege of talking about Engagement and Missions months down the road. Those who insist on sticking to the party line may look back and see their efforts to avoid tough conversations as an exercise in rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. 159 160 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior TABLE 6.1 Examples of Key Secondary Needs Source: Adapted from Gary Yukl, Skills for Managers and Leaders, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J., 1990, p 41. The examples of need for status were not covered by Yukl. Need for Achievement • Doing better than competitors • Attaining or surpassing a difficult goal • Solving a complex problem • Carrying out a challenging assignment successfully • Developing a better way to do something Need for Power • Influencing people to change their attitudes or behavior • Controlling people and activities • Being in a position of authority over others • Gaining control over information and resources • Defeating an opponent or enemy Need for Affiliation • Being liked by many people • Being accepted as part of a group or team • Working with people who are friendly and cooperative • Maintaining harmonious relationships and avoiding conflicts • Participating in pleasant social activities Need for Security • Having a secure job • Being protected against loss of income or economic disaster • Having protection against illness and disability • Being protected against physical harm or hazardous conditions • Avoiding tasks or decisions with a risk of failure and blame Need for Status • Having the right car and wearing the right clothes • Working for the right company in the right job • Having a degree from the right university • Living in the right neighborhood and belonging to the country club • Having executive privileges Intrinsic versus Extrinsic Motives Motives can be thought of as being generated not only by the primary and learned secondary needs, but also by two separate but interrelated sets of sources. One method to characterize these two sources is to label them as being either intrinsic or extrinsic motives. Extrinsic motives are tangible and visible to others. They are distributed by other people (or agents). In the workplace, extrinsic motivators include pay, benefits, and promotions. Chapter 4 covered these commonly recognized extrinsic motivators and, especially in tough economic times, low-or no-cost extrinsic alternatives include food (from doughnuts to gourmet meals), games (e.g., one CPA firm holds a “mini-Olympics” with games such as who can pack a suitcase to take to an audit assignment the fastest for a prize), or bring in someone to do manicures or atdesk massages.8 Extrinsic motives also include the drive to avoid punishment, such as termination or being transferred. In each situation, an external individual distributes these items. Further, extrinsic rewards are usually contingency based. That is, the extrinsic motivator is contingent on improved performance or performance that is superior to others in the same workplace. Extrinsic motivators are necessary to attract people into the organization and to keep them on the job. They are also often used to inspire workers to achieve at higher levels or to reach new goals, as additional payoffs are contingent on improved performance.9 They do not, however, explain every motivated effort made by an individual employee. There is growing research evidence on how to enhance intrinsic motivation (e.g., providing the individual with a choice).10 Another study found that when intrinsic motivation accompanies other types, for example, prosocial motivation, there will be a more positive impact on desired outcomes such as persistence, performance, and productivity.11 Intrinsic motives are internally generated. In other words, they are motivators that the person associates with the task or job itself. Intrinsic rewards include feelings of Chapter 6 Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications 161 responsibility, achievement, accomplishment, that something was learned from an experience, feelings of being challenged or competitive, or that something was an engaging task or goal. Performing meaningful work has long been associated with intrinsic motivation.12 As Manz and Neck noted, “Even if a task makes us feel more competent and more selfcontrolling, we still might have a difficult time naturally enjoying and being motivated by it if we do not believe in its worthiness. Most of us yearn for purpose and meaning.”13 It is important to remember that these two types of motivators are not completely distinct from one another. Many motivators have both intrinsic and extrinsic components. For example, a person who wins a sales contest receives the prize, which is the extrinsic motivator. At the same time, however, “winning” in a competitive situation may be the more powerful, yet internalized, motive. To further complicate any explanation of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, cognitive evaluation theory suggests a more intricate relationship. This theory proposes that a task may be intrinsically motivating, but that when an extrinsic motivator becomes associated with that task, the actual level of motivation may decrease.14 Consider the world of motion pictures, where an actor often strives for many years to simply be included in a film. The intrinsic motive of acting is enough to inspire the starving artist. Once, however, the same actor becomes a star, the extrinsic motivators of money and perks would, according to cognitive evaluation theory, cause the individual to put less effort into each performance. In other words, according to this theory, extrinsic motivators may actually undermine intrinsic motivation. This may seem like a confusing outcome, but there is some research that supports this theoretical position.15 However, as the meta-analytically based principle at the end of the chapter notes, there is considerable research evidence that extrinsic rewards may not detract from intrinsic motivation, and at least for interesting, challenging tasks, extrinsic rewards may even increase the level of intrinsic motivation (see the end of the chapter OB Principle).16 The seemingly contradictory findings make more sense when the concept of negative extrinsic motives is included. That is, threats, deadlines, directives, pressures, and imposed goals are likely to be key factors that diminish intrinsic motivation. For example, consider the difference between writing a book for fun versus writing a book that must be completed by a certain deadline in order to receive payment.17 There are also a series of criticisms of the cognitive evaluation theory, including that it was built on studies largely using students as subjects rather than workers in the workplace setting and that actual decrements in intrinsic motivation were relatively small when extrinsic rewards were introduced.18 Chapter 7 will extend this discussion into social cognitive variables such as self-efficacy, and Chapter 12 will use an extended reinforcement theory–based approach to behavioral performance management. WORK-MOTIVATION THEORIES So far, motivation has been presented as a basic psychological process consisting of primary, general, and secondary motives; drives such as the n Pow, n Aff, and n Ach motives; and intrinsic and extrinsic motivators. In order to understand organizational behavior, these basic motives must be recognized and studied. However, these serve as only background and foundation for the more directly relevant work-motivation theories. Figure 6.2 graphically summarizes the various theoretical streams for work motivation. In particular, the figure shows three historical streams. The content theories go as far back as the turn of the twentieth century, when pioneering scientific managers such as Frederick W. Taylor, Frank Gilbreth, and Henry L. Gantt proposed sophisticated wage incentive models to motivate workers. Next came the human relations movement, and then the content 162 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior FIGURE 6.2 The Theoretical Development of Work Motivation 1900 Scientific Management wage incentives Human Relations economic security, working conditions Lewin and Tolman expectancy concerns Maslow hierarchy of needs Vroom valence/expectancy Porter and Lawler performance-satisfaction Herzberg motivators and hygiene factors Alderfer ERG needs Present CONTENT THEORIES E Lawler P and P O expectancies Festinger and Homans cognitive dissonance/exchange Heider, de Charmes, and Bem cognitive evaluation/self-perception Adams equity/justice PROCESS THEORIES Kelley and Rotter attribution/locus of control CONTEMPORARY THEORIES WORK MOTIVATION theories of Maslow, Herzberg, and Alderfer. Following the content movement were the process theories. Based mainly on the cognitive concept of expectancy, the process theories are most closely associated with the work of pioneering social psychologists Kurt Lewin and Edward Tolman and then organizational behavior scholars Victor Vroom, Lyman Porter, and Ed Lawler. Finally, with roots in social psychology, equity and its derivative procedural/organizational justice, and attribution theories have received attention in work motivation. Figure 6.2 purposely shows that at present there is a lack of integration or synthesis of the various theories. In addition to the need for integration, a comprehensive assessment of the status of work-motivation theory also noted the need for contingency models and group/social processes.19 At present the content and process theories have become established explanations for work motivation, and there is continued research interest in equity and organizational justice theories, but no agreed-upon overall theory exists. Moreover, unlike most of the other constructs in organizational behavior, reviews conclude that there has been relatively little new theory-building and research in work motivation in recent years.20 As Steers concluded, “over the past decade little will be found focusing on genuine theoretical development in this area.”21 The rest of the chapter gives an overview of the widely recognized historical and contemporary theories of work motivation. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs: An Important Historical Contribution Although the first part of the chapter mentions the most important primary and secondary needs of humans, it does not relate them to a theoretical framework. Abraham Maslow, in a classic paper, outlined the elements of an overall theory of motivation.22 Drawing chiefly Chapter 6 Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications 163 FIGURE 6.3 Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs SELFACTUALIZATION ESTEEM NEEDS LOVE NEEDS SAFETY NEEDS PHYSIOLOGICAL NEEDS from humanistic psychology and his clinical experience, he thought that a person’s motivational needs could be arranged in a hierarchical manner. In essence, he believed that once a given level of need is satisfied, it no longer serves to motivate. The next higher level of need has to be activated in order to motivate the individual. Maslow identified five levels in his need hierarchy (see Figure 6.3). They are, in brief, the following: 1. Physiological needs. The most basic level in the hierarchy, the physiological needs, generally corresponds to the unlearned primary needs discussed earlier. The needs of hunger, thirst, sleep, and sex are some examples. According to the theory, once these basic needs are satisfied, they no longer motivate. For example, a starving person will strive to obtain a carrot that is within reach. However, after eating his or her fill of carrots, the person will not strive to obtain another one and will be motivated only by the next higher level of needs. 2. Safety needs. This second level of needs is roughly equivalent to the security need. Maslow stressed emotional as well as physical safety. The whole organism may become a safety-seeking mechanism. Yet, as is true of the physiological needs, once these safety needs are satisfied, they no longer motivate. 3. Love needs. This third, or intermediate, level of needs loosely corresponds to the affection and affiliation needs. Like Freud, Maslow seems guilty of poor choice of wording to identify his levels. His use of the word love has many misleading connotations, such as sex, which is actually a physiological need. Perhaps a more appropriate word describing this level would be belongingness or social needs. 4. Esteem needs. The esteem level represents the higher needs of humans. The needs for power, achievement, and status can be considered part of this level. Maslow carefully pointed out that the esteem level contains both self-esteem and esteem from others. 5. Needs for self-actualization. Maslow’s major contribution, he portrays this level as the culmination of all the lower, intermediate, and higher needs of humans. People who have become self-actualized are self-fulfilled and have realized all their potential. Selfactualization is closely related to the self-concepts discussed in Chapter 7. In effect, self-actualization is the person’s motivation to transform perception of self into reality. Maslow did not intend that his needs hierarchy be directly applied to work motivation. In fact, he did not delve into the motivating aspects of humans in organizations until about 20 years after he originally proposed his theory. Despite this lack of intent on Maslow’s part, others, such as Douglas McGregor in his widely read book The Human Side of 164 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior FIGURE 6.4 A Hierarchy of Work Motivation SELFACTUALIZATION Personal growth, realization of potential ESTEEM NEEDS Titles, status symbols, promotions, banquets SOCIAL NEEDS Formal and informal work groups or teams SECURITY NEEDS Seniority plans, union, health insurance, employee assistance plans, severance pay, pension BASIC NEEDS Pay Enterprise, popularized the Maslow theory in management literature. The needs hierarchy has tremendous intuitive appeal and is widely associated with work motivation. In a very rough manner, Maslow’s needs hierarchy theory can be converted into the content model of work motivation shown in Figure 6.4. If Maslow’s estimates are applied to an organization example, the lower-level needs of personnel would be generally satisfied, but only a minority of the social and esteem needs, and a small percent of the self-actualization needs, would be met. On the surface, the content model shown in Figure 6.4 and the estimated percentages given by Maslow seem logical and still largely applicable to the motivation of employees in today’s organizations. Maslow’s needs hierarchy has often been uncritically accepted by writers of management textbooks and by practitioners. Unfortunately, the limited research that has been conducted lends little empirical support to the theory. About a decade after publishing his original paper, Maslow did attempt to clarify his position by saying that gratifying the self-actualizing need of growth-motivated individuals can actually increase rather than decrease this need. He also hedged on some of his other original ideas, for example, that higher needs may emerge after lower needs that have been unfulfilled or suppressed for a long period are satisfied. He stressed that human behavior is multidetermined and multimotivated. Research findings indicate that Maslow’s is certainly not the final answer in work motivation. Yet the theory does make a significant contribution in terms of making management aware of the diverse needs of employees at work. As one comprehensive analysis concluded, “Indeed, the general ideas behind Maslow’s theory seem to be supported, such as the distinction between deficiency needs and growth needs.”23 However, the number and names of the levels are not so important, nor, as the studies show, is the hierarchical concept. What is important is the fact that employees in the workplace have diverse motives, some of which are “high level.” There is also empirical and experiential evidence supporting the importance of Maslow’s various needs (e.g., Gallup survey research clearly indicates that Maslow’s third level social needs are the single most important contribution to Chapter 6 Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications 165 satisfaction with life24 and a lot of, if not most, high-achieving people feel unfulfilled because they have not reached self-actualization25). In other words, such needs as social and self-actualization are important to the content of work motivation. The exact nature of these needs and how they relate to motivation are not clear. At the same time, what does become clear from contemporary research is that layoffs and terminations (i.e., downsizing) can reduce employees to have concerns about basic-level needs such as security. Organizations that endeavor to reduce fears and other strong emotional responses during these moments through severance pay programs and outplacement services may be able to lessen the impact of individual terminations and layoffs, especially for those who remain with the company.26 In recent years there has been a resurgence of interest in humanistic psychology27 and as will be discussed in the next chapter, positive psychology, of which Maslow was one of the pioneers. Throughout the years there have been attempts to revitalize and make his hierarchy of needs more directly applicable to work motivation. In particular, Herzberg’s twofactor theory covered next is based on Maslow’s concept, and a number of others use Maslow for constructing various hierarchies or pyramids. One example is Aon Consulting’s Performance Pyramid that starts with safety and security and moves up through rewards, affiliation, growth, and work and life harmony.28 There is little question that Maslow’s theory has stood the test of time and still makes a contribution to the study and application to work motivation. Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory of Motivation Another historically important contribution to work motivation is the content theory of Frederick Herzberg. Unlike Maslow, Herzberg many years ago conducted a widely reported motivational study on about 200 accountants and engineers employed by firms in and around Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. He used the critical incident method of obtaining data for analysis. The professional subjects in the study were essentially asked two questions: (1) When did you feel particularly good about your job—what turned you on; and (2) When did you feel exceptionally bad about your job—what turned you off? Responses obtained from this critical incident method were interesting and fairly consistent. Reported good feelings were generally associated with job experiences and job content. An example was the accounting supervisor who felt good about being given the job of installing new computer equipment. He took pride in his work and was gratified to know that the new equipment made a big difference in the overall functioning of his department. Reported bad feelings, on the other hand, were generally associated with the surrounding or peripheral aspects of the job—the job context. An example of these feelings was related by an engineer whose first job was routine record keeping and managing the office when the boss was gone. It turned out that his boss was always too busy to train him and became annoyed when he tried to ask questions. The engineer said that he was frustrated in this job context and that he felt like a flunky in a dead-end job. Tabulating these reported good and bad feelings, Herzberg concluded that job satisfiers are related to job content and that job dissatisfiers are allied to job context. Herzberg labeled the satisfiers motivators, and he called the dissatisfiers hygiene factors. The term hygiene refers (as it does in the health field) to factors that are preventive; in Herzberg’s theory the hygiene factors are those that prevent dissatisfaction. Taken together, the motivators and the hygiene factors have become known as Herzberg’s two-factor theory of motivation. Relation to Maslow’s Need Hierarchy Herzberg’s theory is closely related to Maslow’s need hierarchy. The hygiene factors are preventive and environmental in nature (see Table 6.2), and they are roughly equivalent to 166 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior TABLE 6.2 Herzberg’s TwoFactor Theory Hygiene Factors Motivators Company policy and administration Supervision, technical Salary Interpersonal relations, supervisor Working conditions Achievement Recognition Work itself Responsibility Advancement Maslow’s lower-level needs. These hygiene factors prevent dissatisfaction, but they do not lead to satisfaction. In effect, they bring motivation up to a theoretical zero level and are a necessary “floor” to prevent dissatisfaction, and they serve as a platform or takeoff point for motivation. By themselves, the hygiene factors do not motivate. Only the motivators, Herzberg asserted, motivate employees on the job. They are roughly equivalent to Maslow’s higher-level needs. According to Herzberg’s theory, an individual must have a job with a challenging content in order to be truly motivated. Contribution to Work Motivation Herzberg’s two-factor theory provided a new light on the content of work motivation. Up to this point, management had generally concentrated on the hygiene factors. When faced with a morale problem, the typical solution was higher pay, more fringe benefits, and better working conditions. However, as has been pointed out, this simplistic solution did not really work. Management are often perplexed because they are paying high wages and salaries, have an excellent fringe-benefit package, and provide great working conditions, but their employees are still not motivated. Herzberg’s theory offered an explanation for this problem. By concentrating only on the hygiene factors, management were not really motivating their personnel. There are probably very few workers or associates who do not feel that they deserve the raise they receive. On the other hand, there are many dissatisfied associates and managers who feel they do not get a large enough raise. This simple observation points out that the hygiene factors seem to be important in preventing dissatisfaction but do not lead to satisfaction. Herzberg would be the first to say that the hygiene factors are absolutely necessary to maintain the human resources of an organization. However, as in the Maslow sense, once “the belly is full” of hygiene factors, which is the case in most modern organizations, dangling any more in front of employees will not really motivate them. According to Herzberg’s theory, only a challenging job that has the opportunities for achievement, recognition, responsibility, advancement, and growth will motivate personnel. Critical Analysis of Herzberg’s Theory Herzberg’s two-factor theory remains important in a historical sense and a popular textbook explanation of work motivation and it still makes intuitive sense to practitioners. However, it also is true that from an academic perspective, Herzberg’s theory oversimplifies the complexities of work motivation. When researchers deviate from the critical incident methodology used by Herzberg, they do not get the two factors. Further, there is always a question regarding the samples used by Herzberg: Would he have obtained the results from low-complexity jobs such as truck drivers and third-shift factory workers or waitstaff personnel? Presumably both the hygiene factors and satisfiers could be substantially different when comparing these groups. Factors that affect research results include the age of the sample and other variables that are not held constant or under control. In international settings, older workers in an Israeli kibbutz preferred jobs that had better physical conditions and convenience. Also, Caribbean hotel workers reported being more Chapter 6 Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications 167 interested in wages, working conditions, and appreciation for their work as key motivators.29 These findings suggest that sample and setting may affect preferences for motivators and hygiene factors. Finally, there seem to be job factors such as pay that lead to both satisfaction and dissatisfaction. For example, pay can be dissatisfying if not high enough, but, as pointed out in Chapter 4, also satisfying as a form of achievement and recognition. These findings indicate that a strict interpretation of the two-factor theory is not warranted by the evidence. In spite of the obvious limitations, few would question that Herzberg has contributed substantially to the study of work motivation. He extended Maslow’s needs hierarchy concept and made it more applicable to work motivation. Herzberg also drew attention to the importance of job content factors in work motivation, which previously had been badly neglected and often totally overlooked. However, even the context can be made to better fit the jobholder. For example, many Internet businesses never have employees directly interact with customers so their dress, appearance, and work space can be highly informal and designed according to personal choice.30 The job design technique of job enrichment is also one of Herzberg’s contributions. Job enrichment is covered in the last part of the chapter. Overall, Herzberg added much to the better understanding of job content factors and satisfaction, but, like his predecessors, he fell short of a comprehensive theory of work motivation. His model describes only some of the content of work motivation; it does not adequately describe the complex motivation process of organizational participants that will now be given attention in the more complex theories of work motivation. The Porter-Lawler Expectancy Theory of Work Motivation Comments in Chapter 5 on job satisfaction refer to the controversy over the relationship between satisfaction and performance that has existed since the beginnings of the human relations movement. The Maslow and Herzberg content theories implicitly assume that satisfaction leads to improved performance and that dissatisfaction detracts from performance. In particular, the Herzberg model is really a theory of job satisfaction, but still it does not adequately deal with the relationship between satisfaction and performance. It was not until Porter and Lawler that the relationship between satisfaction and performance was dealt with directly by a motivation theory. They start with the premise that motivation (effort or force) does not equal satisfaction or performance. Motivation, satisfaction, and performance are all separate variables and relate in ways different from what was traditionally assumed. Figure 6.5 depicts the multivariable model used to explain the complex relationships that exist among motivation, performance, and satisfaction. As shown, boxes 1, 2, and 3 are basically drawn from earlier cognitive concepts from pioneering social psychologists such as Kurt Lewin and Edward Tolman and from the recognized seminal work motivation theory of Victor Vroom.31 It is important to note, however, that Porter and Lawler point out that effort (force or motivation) does not lead directly to performance. It is moderated by abilities and traits and by role perceptions. More important in the Porter-Lawler model is what happens after the performance. The rewards that follow and how these are perceived will determine satisfaction. In other words, the Porter-Lawler model suggests— and this is a significant turn of events from conventional wisdom—that performance leads to satisfaction. The model has had research support over the years. For example, a field study found that effort level and direction of effort are important in explaining individual performance in an organization.32 Also, a comprehensive review of research verifies the importance of rewards in the relationship between performance and satisfaction. Specifically, it was 168 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior FIGURE 6.5 The Porter-Lawler Motivation Model 1 4 Value of reward Perceived equitable rewards Abilities and traits Intrinsic rewards 9 Satisfaction Performance (accomplishment) Effort Extrinsic rewards Perceived 2 effort reward probability 7A 6 3 Role perceptions 8 7B 5 concluded that performance and satisfaction will be more strongly related when rewards are made contingent on performance than when they are not.33 Implications for Practice Although the Porter-Lawler model attempts to be more applications oriented than the earlier expectancy theories, it is still quite complex and has proved to be a difficult way to bridge the gap to actual human resource management practice. To Porter and Lawler’s credit, they were very conscientious of putting their theory and research into practice. They recommended that practicing managers go beyond traditional attitude measurement and attempt to measure variables such as the values of possible rewards, the perceptions of effort-reward probabilities, and role perceptions. These variables, of course, can help managers better understand what goes into employee effort and performance. Giving attention to the consequences of performance, Porter and Lawler also recommended that organizations critically reevaluate their current reward policies. They stressed that management should make a concentrated effort to measure how closely levels of satisfaction are related to levels of performance, and in a practitioner-oriented article emphasized that the accuracy of role perceptions may be the missing link in improving employee performance.34 The inference here is that employees need to better focus their efforts on high-impact behaviors and activities that result in higher performance. However, both studies35 and comprehensive analyses36 continue to point out the complex impact that the cognitive process has in relation to rewards and other outcomes in organizations. Contributions to Work Motivation The Porter and Lawler model has definitely made a significant contribution to the better understanding of work motivation and the relationship between performance and satisfaction, but has not had much impact on the actual practice of human resource management. Yet this expectancy theory provides certain guidelines that can be followed by human Chapter 6 Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications 169 resource management. For example, on the front end (the relationship between motivation and performance), it has been suggested that the following barriers must be overcome: 1. 2. 3. 4. Doubts about ability, skill, or knowledge The physical or practical possibility of the job The interdependence of the job with other people or activities Ambiguity surrounding the job requirements37 To overcome these barriers, it is helpful to understand the role other psychological variables such as self-efficacy (covered in the next chapter) play in effort-performance relationships. A series of successes combined with positive feedback build the employee’s sense of self-efficacy, which can, in turn, lead to a heightened sense that “I can do this.” Greater effort may often be the result.38 In addition to psychological constructs such as self-efficacy, there are also pragmatic considerations such as that the opportunity must be present to actually perform. For example, there are many second-string players in pro sports that have stepped in for an injured starter to take the team to the championship. The back-up probably had sufficient valance (pay plus the bonus check paid to the winners), instrumentality or effort-performance calculations (ability combined with self-efficacy), and expectancy or performance-reward calculations (the belief that goal achievement would result in additional pay and recognition), yet still could not succeed until he was allowed to play due to the injury of the first-string player. In addition, on the back end (the relationship between performance and satisfaction), guidelines such as the following have been suggested: 1. 2. 3. 4. Determine what rewards each employee values Define desired performance Make desired performance attainable Link valued rewards to performance39 The last point was given attention in Chapter 4 on the importance of pay for performance. At the same time, managers should be advised that an employee in a way calculates expectancies regarding future employment possibilities when seeking to leave an organization, and more importantly, often sees a connection between performance and reward that invites less effort in a group or team situation. The reduced value is based on the belief that the person’s own efforts are not sufficient to raise group performance levels, and that group incentives are less valuable than individualized rewards. Also brought out in Chapter 4, managers may also take advantage of this process motivational approach by considering the use of nonfinancial rewards for performance. Many times workers may be inspired by being given first choice in selecting weeks for vacation, being allowed to choose when they will go to lunch (ahead of lower performers), being awarded certificates or “employee of the month” parking spaces or, as the accompanying OB in Action: Nice Work If You Can Get It describes, new rewards such as sabbaticals. Recognition as a valence can be a powerful reward within the expectancy theory framework and was discussed in Chapter 4 and is given further detailed attention in Chapter 12. Equity Theory of Work Motivation Equity theory has been around just as long as the expectancy theories of work motivation. However, equity has received relatively more recent attention in the organizational behavior field. As Figure 6.2 indicates, its roots can be traced back to cognitive dissonance theory and exchange theory. As a theory of work motivation, credit for equity theory is usually given to social psychologist J. Stacy Adams. Simply put, the theory argues that a major OB in Action: Nice Work If You Can Get It Last winter, Intel Corp. paid Melanie Stagnitti to research and develop her tan. Fleeing the soggy dreariness of Hillsboro, Ore., the compensation and benefits manager and her stay-at-home husband, John, packed up their 5-year-old son and 31⁄2-year-old daughter in their Ford Explorer and, towing a trailer full of camping gear, sauntered down to Mexico’s sun-drenched Baja peninsula. For eight weeks, Stagnitti was utterly unplugged. She had no access to e-mail, voicemail, the Internet, or, for much of the time, electricity. Today she’s logging 50-hour workweeks again. But all that time lounging in a hammock helped make up for the long days. “The best part,” she says, “was seeing the kids outside every day, playing in the water and being free.” These days many companies view employees as profit sponges, particularly sitting-bull seniors who have received pay raises year after year. Paternalism is out; lean and mean is in. But across the economy, a stubborn minority of employers is treating workers like tenured professors, lavishing paid sabbaticals on them. Such generosity actually helps the bottom line, managers insist. Giving employees a periodic respite is an antidote to the world of networked, always-on careers that lead to information overload. Sabbaticals reduce turnover and retain wisdom otherwise lost when veteran employees burn out. A recent study in the Journal of Education for Business found that the benefits of sabbaticals outweigh the costs when a good understanding between employer and employee regarding expectations is involved. The study also found that employees return more committed and more energized. In fact, sabbaticals are so alluring that companies report that it’s almost impossible for competitors to poach anyone within a few years of his bonus vacation. The absences also give managers a chance to see how well others perform while filling in for their on-leave colleagues. The number of companies offering paid sabbaticals is small but steady. An annual survey by the Society for Human Resource Management finds that 5% of corporate respondents offer the perk. Another 18% offer unpaid sabbaticals, which are increasingly being used as an alternative to layoffs when demand slackens. But there is some flux. Cracking the whip, Steve Jobs nixed Apple Computer Inc.’s program after returning as chief executive in 1997. On the other hand, relative newcomers such as women’s clothing designer Eileen Fisher Inc,. have initiated sabbaticals, while McDonald’s Corp., where the perk dates back more than 40 years, is expanding the benefit in 2006 to every five years. “What it’s all about today is, how do you differentiate yourself as a company?” says Richard Floersch, McDonald’s chief human resources officer. “This gives us bragging rights.” Many HR managers argue that since sabbaticals encourage people to stick around, companies don’t have to spend as much on recruitment and training. Assigning temporary fill-ins can be a plus, too. While Intel’s Stagnitti was in Mexico, her supervisor tested someone else in her job. When she came back, that employee ended up staying on, and Stagnitti was promoted to a new job in HR. In addition, the generation just entering the workforce ranks time off as a top priority in survey after survey. Thus, offering sabbaticals should help attract young talent, says Hewitt consultant Raymond Baumruk. input into job performance and satisfaction is the degree of equity (or inequity) that people perceive in their work situation. In other words, it is another cognitively based motivation theory, and Adams depicts how this motivation occurs. Inequity occurs when a person perceives that the ratio of his or her outcomes to inputs and the ratio of a relevant other’s outcomes to inputs are unequal. Schematically, this is represented as follows: person’s outcomes other’s outcomes ᎏᎏ ⬍ ᎏᎏ person’s inputs other’sinputs person’s outcomes other’s outcomes ᎏᎏ ⬎ ᎏᎏ person’s inputs other’s inputs Equity occurs when person’s outcomes other’s outcomes ᎏᎏ ⫽ ᎏᎏ person’s inputs other’s inputs 170 Chapter 6 Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications 171 Both the inputs and the outputs of the person and the other are based on the person’s perceptions. Age, sex, education, social status, organizational position, qualifications, and how hard the person works are examples of perceived input variables. Outcomes consist primarily of rewards such as pay, status, promotion, and intrinsic interest in the job. In essence, the ratio is based on the person’s perception of what the person is giving (inputs) and receiving (outcomes) versus the ratio of what the relevant other is giving and receiving. This cognition may or may not be the same as someone else’s observation of the ratios or the same as the actual reality. There is also recent recognition that the cultural context may affect the entire equity process.40 Equity as an Explanation of Work Motivation If the person’s perceived ratio is not equal to the other’s, he or she will strive to restore the ratio to equity. This “striving” to restore equity is used as the explanation of work motivation. The strength of this motivation is in direct proportion to the perceived inequity that exists. Adams suggests that such motivation may be expressed in several forms. To restore equity, the person may alter the inputs or outcomes, cognitively distort the inputs or outcomes, leave the field, act on the other, or change the other. It is important to note that inequity does not come about only when the person feels cheated. For example, Adams has studied the impact that perceived overpayment has on equity. His findings suggest that workers prefer equitable payment to overpayment. Workers on a piece-rate incentive system who feel overpaid will reduce their productivity in order to restore equity. More common, however, is the case of people who feel underpaid (outcome) or overworked (input) in relation to others in the workplace. In the latter case, there would be motivation to restore equity in a way that may be dysfunctional from an organizational standpoint. For example, the owner of an appliance store in Oakland, California, allowed his employees to set their own wages. Interestingly, none of the employees took an increase in pay, and one service technician actually settled on lower pay because he did not want to work as hard as the others. Research Support for Equity in the Workplace To date, research that has specifically tested the validity of Adams’s equity theory has been fairly supportive. A comprehensive review found considerable laboratory research support for the “equity norm” (people review the inputs and outcomes of themselves and others, and if inequity is perceived, they strive to restore equity) but only limited support from more relevant field studies.41 One line of field research on equity theory used baseball players. In the first study, players who played out their option year, and thus felt they were inequitably paid, performed as the theory would predict.42 Their performance decreased in three of four categories (not batting average) during the option year, and when they were signed to a new contract, the performance was restored. However, a second study using the same type of sample, only larger, found the opposite of what equity theory would predict.43 Mainly, performance improved during the option year. The reason, of course, was that the players wanted to look especially good, even though they felt they were inequitably paid, in order to be in a stronger bargaining position for a new contract. In other words, individuals faced with undercompensation may choose to decrease performance, but only to the extent that doing so will not affect the potential to achieve future rewards.44 In any event, there are no easy answers nor is there 100 percent predictive power when applying a cognitive process theory such as equity. Despite some seeming inconsistencies, more recent studies using sophisticated statistical techniques to estimate pay equity among ballplayers45 and focusing more sharply on subsequent performance and other outcomes are more in line with equity theory predictions. 172 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior For example, one study found a significant relationship between losing final-offer salary arbitration and postarbitration performance decline. The ballplayers who were losers in arbitration were also significantly more likely to change teams or leave major league baseball.46 In another study of baseball and basketball players, it was found that the underrewarded players behaved less cooperatively.47 This type of equity theory development and research goes beyond expectancy theory as a cognitive explanation of work motivation and serves as a point of departure for more specialized areas of current interest such as organizational justice. The Relationship between Equity Theory and Organizational Justice Recent theory development specifies that equity theory can be extended into what is now commonly known as organizational justice.48 Although procedural justice has received the most attention, there is now research evidence that in addition there is conceptual and measurement independence (i.e., construct validity) for distributive, interpersonal, and informational justice dimensions as well.49 Equity theory serves as the foundation for the common thread of perceived fairness among these dimensions of justice. For example, equity theory explains conditions under which decision outcomes (pay levels, pay raises, promotions) are perceived as being fair or unfair. Persons engaged in this type of thinking examine the results as opposed to how those results were achieved. Equity theory supports a perception of distributive justice, which is an individual’s cognitive evaluation regarding whether or not the amounts and allocations of rewards in a social setting are fair. In simple terms, distributive justice is one’s belief that everyone should “get what they deserve.” Culturally, the Judeo-Christian ethic is based, in part, on the notion that divine rewards accrue to those who lead good lives and behave appropriately, even while here are on earth. This reflects the distributive justice and equity perspectives. Importantly, meta-analytic results have demonstrated that employee perceptions of distributive justice are related to desirable outcomes such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment, organizational citizenship behavior, turnover, and performance.50 Procedural justice is concerned with the fairness of the procedure used to make a decision. For example, a pay raise may be based on a sales representative selling more units of, for example, automobiles or houses. Some coworkers may consider this procedure to be unfair, believing management should instead base pay raises on dollar volume. This conclusion may be reached because selling 10 houses or cars for a low amount of money each contributes very little to company profits and they are, at the same time, easier to sell. Selling high-priced cars or houses may take much longer to finalize, but the profits garnered for the company are also higher. In this case it is not the outcome in dispute, which is the amount of the pay received. Instead, it is the perceived justice (fairness) of the procedure used to reach the outcome. Like distributive justice, employee perceptions of procedural justice have been shown through meta-analysis to be related to all the desirable organizational outcomes.51 Indeed, in another meta-analysis, procedural justice was found to be a better predictor of job performance than was distributive justice52 and procedural justice seems to be particularly important to successfully implementing organizational changes.53 Procedural justice can raise issues of equality as opposed to equity. Equality means that in a promotion situation, males and females and all races would have equal opportunities to be selected, and that the criteria used would not discriminate. Equity would mean that the actual choice was fair, and that the criteria were correctly applied and therefore the mostqualified individual was promoted. Unlike the traditional content and process theories of work motivation, research continues to refine and extend equity theory in general and procedural justice in particular. For example, in support of equity theory, a recent study found that managers who perceive Chapter 6 Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications 173 effort-reward fairness perform better and are more satisfied than those who feel underrewarded and unfairly treated.54 Another study used social exchange theory to differentiate interactional justice from procedural justice. Whereas procedural justice is the exchange between the employee and the employing organization, interactional justice is between individuals (e.g., the employee and the supervisor). The research supported the exchange theory predictions.55 There is also some evidence that such interactional justice may not be as predictive as other justice perceptions. For example, a recent study found that manager trustworthiness was more predictive of organizational citizenship behaviors (covered in the last chapter) than was interactional justice.56 Other recent studies focusing on procedural justice have found importance in being allowed the opportunity to voice an opinion on perceptions of fairness57 and in the effects of group membership and status (i.e., one’s social standing) on perceptions of fairness.58 In particular, it was found in this latter study that procedural injustice was not perceived by all who observed it (in this case judges and attorneys did not perceive bias against female attorneys). Finally, a recent study moved to the level of overall justice climate (procedural, informational, and interpersonal) and found it related to various work outcomes (commitment, satisfaction, and citizenship behaviors).59 In total, with equity theory serving as the foundation, the various dimensions of organizational justice play an important role in many dynamics and outcomes of organizational behavior. Organizational justice can help explain why employees retaliate against both inequitable outcomes and inappropriate processes. For example, retaliation in the form of theft, sabotage, forged time cards, and even violence toward the boss or owner can be explained using the principles of organizational justice.60 On a positive note, besides all the findings summarized above, a recent study found that there is a trickle-down effect from organizational justice. Employees’ perceptions of fairness not only positively affect their attitudes and performance, but also influence their fair treatment behaviors toward customers, which in turn cause the customers to react positively to both the employee and the organization.61 In other words, organizational justice pays off not only for employees, but also for customers and the bottom line. Attribution Theory Another contemporary theory of work motivation is attribution theory. Attribution refers simply to how people explain the cause of another’s or their own behavior. Like equity theory, it is the cognitive process by which people draw conclusions about the factors that influence, or make sense of, one another’s behavior.62 There are two general types of attributions that people make: dispositional attributions, which ascribe a person’s behavior to internal factors such as personality traits, motivation, or ability, and situational attributions, which attribute a person’s behavior to external factors such as equipment or social influence from others.63 In recent years, attribution theories have been playing an increasingly important role in organizational behavior and human resource management.64 An examination of the various theories, types, and errors of attribution can contribute to an understanding as work motivation and organizational behavior in general. An Overview of the Theory Attribution theory is concerned with the relationship between personal social perception (covered in the last chapter) and interpersonal behavior. There are a number of attribution theories, but they share the following assumptions: 1. We seek to make sense of our world. 2. We often attribute people’s actions either to internal or external causes. 3. We do so in fairly logical ways.65 174 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior Well-known social psychologist Harold Kelley stressed that attribution theory is concerned mainly with the cognitive processes by which an individual interprets behavior as being caused by (or attributed to) certain parts of the relevant environment. It is concerned with the “why” questions of work motivation and organizational behavior. Because most causes, attributes, and “whys” are not directly observable, the theory says that people must depend on cognitions, particularly perception. The attribution theorist assumes that humans are rational and are motivated to identify and understand the causal structure of their relevant environment. It is this search for attributes that characterizes attribution theory and helps explain work motivation. As shown earlier in Figure 6.2, attribution theory has its roots in all the pioneering cognitive theorists’ work (for example, that of Lewin and Festinger), in de Charmes’s ideas on cognitive evaluation, and in Bem’s notion of “self-perception,” the theory’s initiator is generally recognized to be Fritz Heider. Heider believed that both internal forces (personal attributes such as ability, effort, and fatigue) and external forces (environmental attributes such as rules and the weather) combine additively to determine behavior. He stressed that it is the perceived, not the actual, determinants that are important to behavior (see the discussion of perception in Chapter 5). People will behave differently if they perceive internal attributes than they will if they perceive external attributes. It is this concept of differential ascriptions that has very important implications for motivation and organizational behavior in general. Locus of Control Attributions Using locus of control, work behavior may be explained by whether employees perceive their outcomes as controlled internally or externally. Employees who perceive internal control feel that they personally can influence their outcomes through their own ability, skills, or effort. Employees who perceive external control feel that their outcomes are beyond their own control; they feel that external forces such as luck or task difficulty control their outcomes. This perceived locus of control may have a differential impact on their motivation to perform. For example, classic studies by well-known social psychologist Julian Rotter found that skill versus chance environments differentially affect behavior. In addition, a number of studies have been conducted over the years to test the attribution theorylocus-of-control model in work settings. One study found that internally controlled employees are generally more satisfied with their jobs, are more likely to be in managerial positions, and are more satisfied with a participatory management style than employees who perceive external control.66 Other studies have found that internally controlled managers are better performers,67 are more considerate of subordinates,68 tend not to burn out,69 follow a more strategic style of executive action,70 have improved attitudes over a long period of time following promotions,71 and present the most positive impression in a recruiting interview.72 In addition, the attribution process has been shown to play a role in coalition formation in the political process of organizations. In particular, coalition members made stronger internal attributions, such as ability and desire, and nonmembers made stronger external attributions, such as luck.73 The implication of these studies and many others is that internally controlled managers are somehow better than externally controlled managers. However, such generalizations are not yet warranted because there is some contradictory evidence. For example, one study concluded that the ideal manager may have an external orientation because the results indicated that externally controlled managers were perceived as initiating more structure and consideration than internally controlled managers.74 In addition to the implications for managerial behavior and performance, attribution theory has been shown to have relevance in explaining goal-setting behavior,75 group performance,76 leadership behavior,77 poor Chapter 6 Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications 175 employee performance,78 and employee interpretations of human resource practices that affect their satisfaction and commitment.79 However, like other constructs in organizational behavior, attribution is now undergoing considerable refinement in the research literature. For example, studies have found that (1) attributions about poor performance are mediated by how responsible the employee is judged to be and how much sympathy the evaluator feels,80 and (2) leaders providing feedback to poor performers is significantly affected by the performance attributions that are made.81 A review article concludes that locus of control is related to the performance and satisfaction of organization members and may moderate the relationship between motivation and incentives.82 In addition, attributions are related to organizational symbolism, which in effect says that in order to understand organizations, one must recognize their symbolic nature.83 Much of organization is based on attributions rather than physical or observed realities under this view.84 For example, research has found that symbols are a salient source of information used by people in forming their impressions of psychological climate.85 Other Attributions Attribution theory obviously contributes a great deal to the better understanding of work motivation and organizational behavior. However, other dimensions besides the internal and external locus of control also need to be accounted for and studied. Bernard Weiner, for example, suggested that a stability (fixed or variable) dimension must also be recognized.86 Experienced employees will probably have a stable internal attribution about their abilities but an unstable internal attribution concerning effort. By the same token, these employees may have a stable external attribution about task difficulty but an unstable external attribution about luck. Besides the stability dimension, Kelley suggests that dimensions such as consensus (do others act this way in this situation?), consistency (does this person act this way in this situation at other times?), and distinctiveness (does this person act differently in other situations?) will affect the type of attributions that are made.87 Figure 6.6 shows how this type of information affects the attributes that are made in evaluating employee behavior. To keep these dimensions straight, it can be remembered that consensus relates to other people, distinctiveness relates to other tasks, and consistency relates to time.88 As shown in Figure 6.6, if there is high consensus, low consistency, and high distinctiveness, then attribution to external or situational/environmental causes will probably be made. The external attribution may be that the task is too difficult or that outside pressures from home or coworkers are hindering performance. However, if there is low consensus, high consistency, and low distinctiveness, then attributions to internal or personal causes for the behavior will probably be made. The supervisor making an internal attribution may conclude that the associate just doesn’t have the ability, or is not giving the necessary effort, or does not have the motivation to perform well. There is some research evidence from field settings to directly support predictions from the Kelley model.89 In addition to Kelley, other well-known theorists, such as Weiner, use attribution theory to help explain achievement motivation and to predict subsequent changes in performance and how people feel about themselves.90 Some research findings from Weiner’s work include the following: 1. Bad-luck attributions (external) take the sting out of a negative outcome, but good-luck attributions (external) reduce the joy associated with success. 2. When individuals attribute their success to internal rather than external factors, they have higher expectations for future success, report a greater desire for achievement, and set higher performance goals.91 176 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior FIGURE 6.6 Kelley’s Model of Attribution Example of Organizational Behavior (poor performance of an associate) Type of Information/ Observation Coworkers are also performing poorly on this task. High consensus The associate does not do well on this task during only one time period. Low consistency The associate does well on other tasks, but not this one. High distinctiveness Coworkers are performing very well on this task. Low consensus The associate does not do well on this task at any time. High consistency The associate does poorly on other tasks as well as this one. Low distinctiveness Attribution Made External (situational or environmental factors) Internal (personal factors) Attribution Errors Social psychologists recognize two potent biases when people make attributions. The first is called the fundamental attribution error. Research has found that people tend to ignore powerful situational forces when explaining others’ behavior.92 People tend to attribute others’ behavior to personal factors (for example, intelligence, ability, motivation, attitudes, or personality), even when it is very clear that the situation or circumstances caused the person to behave the way he or she did. Another attribution bias that has emerged from the research is that people tend to present themselves favorably. This self-serving bias has been found in study after study; people readily accept credit when told they have succeeded (attributing the success to their ability and effort), yet often attribute failure to such external, situational factors as bad luck or the problem’s inherent “impossibility.93 For example, in explaining their victories, athletes commonly credit themselves, but they are more likely to attribute losses to something else—bad breaks, poor officiating, or the other team’s superior effort.94 Chapter 6 Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications 177 When something goes wrong in the workplace, there is a tendency for the manager to blame the problem on the inability or poor attitude of associates, but the situation is blamed as far as he or she personally is concerned. The reverse is true of associates. They blame the situation for their difficulties but make a personal attribution in terms of their manager. By the same token, if something goes well, the manager makes personal attributions for him- or herself and situational attributions for associates, and the associates make personal attributions for themselves but situational attributions for the manager. In other words, it is typical to have conflicting attributional biases among managers and associates in organizations.95 As a way of creating more productive relationships, theorists and researchers suggest that efforts must be made to reduce divergent perceptions and perspectives among the parties through increased interpersonal interaction, open communication channels and workshops, and team-building sessions devoted to reducing attributional errors.96 Although Martinko, in his book on Attribution Theory, demonstrates the validity and potential of attributional perspectives within an organizational context, theoretical, information processing, and situational factors all affect the attribution models of organizational behavior.97 Despite this complexity, attribution theory does seem to have considerable potential for application and relevance, instead of being a purely academic exercise in theory building. Other Work Motivation Theories: Control and Agency In addition to the micro-oriented expectancy and equity motivation theories coming out of cognitive psychology, there are other, more broad-based theories that have emerged in organizational behavior. Representatives of such theories are control theory and agency theory. One version of control theory, like the other theories discussed so far, is essentially a cognitive phenomenon relating to the degree that individuals perceive they are in control of their own lives, or are in control of their jobs. Recent studies have shown that those who believe they have such personal control tolerate unpleasant events and experience less stress on the job than those who do not perceive such control.98 There is also some evidence that perceived control will affect job satisfaction and absenteeism.99 Another version of control theory, which also has implications for organizational behavior, relates to the more traditional management function of control. Traditional guidelines for effective management have included controlling both the inputs and outputs of organizations, but research has also analyzed strategically controlling human resources as well.100 Especially relevant to today’s workplace environment is that a sense of control seems very helpful when increasing job demands are placed on the employee. Thus, persons who are given more work, but also the control to complete that work, may not feel as negatively about their new assignments. On the other hand, more peripheral aspects of work control, such as when they start or stop a task or arrange the work flow, seem less related to work motivation.101 Similar to control theory’s being taken from the traditional management literature, agency theory as applied to organizational behavior comes from the financial economics literature. As given attention in Chapter 4, an agency relationship involves one or more individuals (the principal) engaging another person or persons (the agent) to perform some service on their behalf.102 The key to agency theory is the assumption that the interests of principals and agents diverge or may be in conflict with one another. The implications for organizational behavior involve how the principals (owners, board members, or top management) can limit divergence from their interests or objectives by establishing appropriate rewards or incentives for the agents (subordinates, middle management, or operating employees) for appropriate outcomes. Although there was initial research evidence supporting an agency theory interpretation of areas in organizational behavior such as pay for performance,103 compensation contracts,104 foreign subsidiary compensation strategies,105 178 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior and variable pay compensation strategies,106 however, a recent meta-analysis of empirical ownership-performance studies found little overall support for agency theory.107 Yet, agency theory is often used to explain some of the excesses and ethical meltdowns that have occurred in organizations in recent years. For example, Don Hambrick recently observed the following: Today’s top executives, in America at least, are exceedingly obsessed with shareholder value, in ways that their predecessors were not. This obsession is due to the new “rules of the game” that the executives themselves face—rules that agency theorists applaud, even if they didn’t literally engineer them.108 Like the other cognitive-based theories, agency theory helps us better understand the motivation of managers in today’s organizations. However, because of the complexities involved, as was also noted in the other work motivation theories, agency theory obviously is not the final answer. One primary criticism of agency theory that has emerged is that, agency theory strongly emphasizes the roles that various forms of extrinsic motives play in shaping behaviors. Conversely, intrinsic motives, which may be quite powerful, are not accounted for in agency models. When combined with notions of control or the lack of control in a setting, the bias generated by an extrinsic-motive model may confuse any study or theoretical development.109 Yet, as one argument for employee ownership noted, firms indicated that 75 percent experienced increases in sales, profits, and stock price when employees became owners and another study indicated that companies with employee stock ownership plans had total shareholder returns about 7 percent greater than firms where employees did not have an opportunity for ownership.110 Recently, agency theory has been expanded to the macro level. It has been used to explain financing decisions in franchising operations111 and to study the various forms of control that limit the decision-making authority of professional service organizations.112 In the latter study, community control, bureaucratic control, and client control combined with the degree of self-control exhibited by the professional service agent to reduce decision-making autonomy. Thus, agency theory is also related to control theory and, for the future, theory development and research can contribute to the better understanding of work motivation. MOTIVATIONAL APPLICATION THROUGH JOB DESIGN Besides gaining an understanding of motivational needs and theoretical processes, the study of organizational behavior also focuses on motivational techniques of job design and goal setting. Job design may be defined as the methods that management uses to develop the content of a job, including all relevant tasks, as well as the processes by which jobs are constructed and revised. In light of the new environment, job design is an increasingly important application technique. Most importantly, the nature of work is changing because of advanced information technology and globalization. Consequently, two new developments have emerged. The first is a blurring of the distinction between on-work and off-work time. A person carrying a cell phone and/or PDA (personal digital assistant) and a home office containing a fax machine and Internet access is “at work” even when not in the office and is “on-call” practically every moment of the day. This includes drive time and time spent in airports or while flying across the world. The second development, which is tied to the first, is the rising number of telecommuting jobs or teleworking, in which the employee performs substantial amounts of work at home. An increasing number of organizations provide employees with advanced information technology for home use. These recent trends create new challenges for job design models, which are already based on an extensive and Chapter 6 Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications 179 growing theoretical and research base and are being widely applied to the actual practice of management. A summary of the major job design applications follows. Job Rotation The simplest form of job design involves moving employees from one relatively simple job to another after short time periods (one hour, half-days, every day). For example, at McDonald’s, an employee may cook French fries one day, fry hamburgers the next, wait on the front counter during the next shift, and draw soft drinks the next. This form of job rotation has several advantages. First, the odds of injury are reduced, as each worker must refocus on a new task throughout the workday. Further, the incidence of repetitive strain injuries (e.g., carpal tunnel syndrome) may also be reduced. Second, as employees learn sets of tasks, they are more flexible and able to cover for someone who is absent or who quits. Third, supervisors who are promoted from the ranks know more about how the entire operation works. A manager promoted from the ranks at McDonald’s after only six months on the job has probably been exposed to every production task performed at the unit. The primary disadvantage of job rotation is that each individual task eventually becomes as boring as the rest of the simple tasks. In other words, over the long term there is no substantial difference between cooking French fries and frying hamburgers. Consequently, job satisfaction and/or performance may decline. Rotation does, however, have some research evidence showing a positive impact,113 especially for cross-training and developing employees for broadened responsibilities.114 In any event, it is a better alternative to job design than doing nothing. Job Enlargement This job design process involves increasing the number of tasks each employee performs. A sales clerk who waits on customers, finalizes the sale, helps with credit applications, arranges merchandise, and reorders stock has an enlarged job, when compared to a checkout clerk or a shelf stocker at Wal-Mart. Workers in enlarged jobs are able to use more skills in performing their tasks. Many times, however, enlargement reduces the efficiency with which tasks are completed, thereby slowing work down. Imagine being waited on individually at Wal-Mart. The company’s competitive advantage for low labor costs compared to a full-service department store would be quickly and dramatically reduced. However, enlargement does not necessarily result in improved employee satisfaction and commitment. For example, one of the major by-products of recent downsizing is enlarged jobs assigned to the members of the organization who remain. The survivors with anxiety of “I’m next” and greatly enlarged jobs are less, rather than more, satisfied and committed to the organization. Job Enrichment Job enrichment represents an extension of the earlier, more simplified job rotation and job enlargement techniques of job design. Because it is a direct outgrowth of Herzberg’s twofactor theory of motivation (covered earlier in the chapter), the assumption is that in order to motivate personnel, the job must be designed to provide opportunities for achievement, recognition, responsibility, advancement, and growth. The technique entails “enriching” the job so that these factors are included. In particular, job enrichment is concerned with designing jobs that include a greater variety of work content; require a higher level of knowledge and skill; give workers more autonomy and responsibility in terms of planning, directing, and controlling their own performance; and provide the opportunity for personal growth and a meaningful work experience. As opposed to job rotation and job enlargement, which horizontally loads the job, job enrichment vertically loads the job; there are not 180 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior necessarily more tasks to perform, but more responsibility and accountability. For example, instead of having workers do a mundane, specialized task, then passing off to another worker doing another minute part of the task, and eventually having an inspector at the end, under job enrichment, the worker would be given a complete module of work to do (job enlargement) and, importantly, would inspect his or her own work (responsibility) and put a personal identifier on it (accountability). As with the other application techniques discussed in this text, job enrichment is not a panacea for all job design problems facing modern management. After noting that there are documented cases where this approach to job design did not work, Miner concluded that the biggest problem is that traditional job enrichment has little to say about when and why the failures can be expected to occur.115 Some of the explanations that have been suggested include that job enrichment is difficult to truly implement, that many employees simply prefer an old familiar job to an enriched job, and that employees in general and unions in particular are resistant to the change. Some employees have expressed preferences for higher pay rather than enriched jobs, and others enjoy their current patterns of on-the-job socialization and friendships more than they do increased responsibility and autonomy. Essentially, job enrichment in some situations may inhibit a person’s social life at work. Despite some potential limitations, job enrichment is still a viable approach, and research provides continuing evidence that it has mostly beneficial results (more employee satisfaction and customer service, less employee overload, and fewer employee errors).116 There is even a study that found employees were more creative when they worked in an enriching context of complex, challenging jobs and a supportive, noncontrolling supervisory climate.117 However, management must still use job enrichment selectively and give proper recognition to the complex human and situational variables.118 The job characteristics models of job enrichment are a step in this direction. The Job Characteristics Approach to Task Design To meet some of the limitations of the relatively simple Herzberg approach to job enrichment (which he prefers to call orthodox job enrichment, or OJE), a group of researchers began to concentrate on the relationship between certain job characteristics, or the job scope, and employee motivation. Richard Hackman and Greg Oldham developed the most widely recognized model of job characteristics,119 shown in Figure 6.7. This model recognizes that certain job characteristics contribute to certain psychological states and that the strength of employees’ need for growth has an important moderating effect. The core job characteristics can be summarized briefly as follows: FIGURE 6.7 The HackmanOldham job Characteristics Model of Work Motivation CORE JOB CHARACTERISTICS CRITICAL PSYCHOLOGICAL STATES Variety of skill Identity of the task Significance of the task Experienced meaningfulness of the work Autonomy Experienced responsibility for work outcomes Feedback Knowledge of results from work activities Moderated by employee growthneed strength PERSONAL AND WORK OUTCOMES High internal work motivation High-quality work performance High satisfaction with the work Low turnover and absenteeism Chapter 6 Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications 181 1. Skill variety refers to the extent to which the job requires the employee to draw from a number of different skills and abilities as well as on a range of knowledge. 2. Task identity refers to whether the job has an identifiable beginning and end. How complete a module of work does the employee perform? 3. Task significance involves the importance of the task. It involves both internal significance— how important is the task to the organization?—and external significance—how proud are employees to tell relatives, friends, and neighbors what they do and where they work? 4. Autonomy refers to job independence. How much freedom and control do employees have, for example, to schedule their own work, make decisions, or determine the means to accomplish objectives? 5. Feedback refers to objective information about progress and performance and can come from the job itself or from supervisors or an information system. The critical psychological states can be summarized as follows: 1. Meaningfulness. This cognitive state involves the degree to which employees perceive their work as making a valued contribution, as being important and worthwhile. 2. Responsibility. This state is concerned with the extent to which employees feel a sense of being personally responsible or accountable for the work being done. 3. Knowledge of results. Coming directly from the feedback, this psychological state involves the degree to which employees understand how they are performing in the job. In essence, this model says that certain job characteristics lead to critical psychological states. That is, skill variety, task identity, and task significance lead to experienced meaningfulness; autonomy leads to the feeling of responsibility; and feedback leads to knowledge of results. The more these three psychological states are present, the more employees will feel good about themselves when they perform well. Hackman states: “The model postulates that internal rewards are obtained by an individual when he learns (knowledge of results) that he personally (experienced responsibility) has performed well on a task that he cares about (experienced meaningfulness).”120 Hackman then points out that these internal rewards are reinforcing to employees, causing them to perform well. If they don’t perform well, they will try harder in order to get the internal rewards that good performance brings. He concludes: “The net result is a self-perpetuating cycle of positive work motivation powered by self-generated rewards. This cycle is predicted to continue until one or more of the three psychological states is no longer present, or until the individual no longer values the internal rewards that derive from good performance.”121 Not only did Hackman and Oldham provide original research supporting the existence of these relationships, but subsequent research has found strong support for the linkages between the core job dimensions and the critical psychological states, and between these states and the predicted outcomes.122 (Also see the OB Principle at the end of this chapter). An example of an enriched job, according to the Hackman-Oldham characteristics model, would be that of a surgeon. Surgeons must draw on a wide variety of skills and abilities; usually surgeons can readily identify the task because they handle patients from beginning to end (that is, they play a role in the diagnosis, perform the operation, and are responsible for postoperative care and follow-up); the job has life-and-death significance; there is a great deal of autonomy, as surgeons have the final word on all decisions concerning patients; and there is clear, direct feedback during the operation itself (real-time monitoring of the vital signs and the “scalpel”-”scalpel” type of feedback communication) and afterwards, because, of course, the patient’s recovery and subsequent health determine the 182 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior success of the operation. According to this explanation, these job characteristics determine the surgeon’s considerable motivation—not the needs developed while growing up or his or her valences, instrumentalities, and expectancies as postulated by the process theories discussed earlier. At the other extreme would be most traditional blue-collar and white-collar jobs. All five job characteristics would be relatively minimal or nonexistent in the perceptions of many such jobholders and thus can help explain the motivation problem with these low-level jobs. In other words, the job design, not just the person holding the job, helps explain the motivation to perform under this approach. Practical Guidelines for Redesigning Jobs Specific guidelines such as those found in Figure 6.8 are offered to redesign jobs. Such easily implementable guidelines make the job design area popular and practical for more effective high performance management. An actual example would be the application that was made in a large department store.123 In a training session format, the sales employees’ jobs were redesigned in the following manner: 1. Skill variety. The salespeople were asked to try to think of and use a. Different selling approaches b. New merchandise displays c. Better ways of recording sales and keeping records 2. Task identity. The salespeople were asked to a. Keep a personal record of daily sales volume in dollars b. Keep a record of number of sales/customers c. Mark off an individual display area that they considered their own and keep it complete and orderly 3. Task significance. The salespeople were reminded that a. Selling a product is the basic overall objective of the store b. The appearance of the display area is important to selling c. They are “the store” to customers; they were told that courtesy and pleasantness help build the store’s reputation and set the stage for future sales FIGURE 6.8 Specific Guidelines for Redesigning Jobs for the MoreEffective Practice of Human Resource Management Core Job Characteristics SKILL VARIETY TASK IDENTITY TASK SIGNIFICANCE AUTONOMY FEEDBACK Guidelines for Practice Provide cross-training Expand duties requiring more skills Give projects a deadline for completion Form self-contained work modules Communicate importance of the job Enhance image of the organization Empower to make decisions Give more responsibility and accountability Implement information systems Supervisors give objective, immediate information on how the employee is doing Chapter 6 Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications 183 4. Autonomy. The salespeople were a. Encouraged to develop and use their own unique approach and sales pitch b. Allowed freedom to select their own break and lunch times c. Encouraged to make suggestions for changes in all phases of the policy and operations 5. Feedback from the job itself. Salespeople were a. Encouraged to keep personal records of their own sales volume b. Encouraged to keep a sales/customer ratio c. Reminded that establishing a good rapport with customers is also a success; they were told that if the potential customer leaves with a good feeling about the store and its employees, the salesperson has been successful 6. Feedback from agents. Salespeople were encouraged to a. Observe and help each other with techniques of selling b. Seek out information from their boss and relevant departments on all phases of their jobs c. Invite customer reactions and thoughts concerning merchandise, service, and so forth Both the salespeople’s functional (conversing with customers, showing merchandise, handling returns, and so forth) and dysfunctional (socializing with coworkers or visitors, idly standing around, being gone for no legitimate reason) performance behaviors moved in the desired directions, and a subanalysis also indicated they were more satisfied. A control group of salespeople, with everything else the same except that they did not have their jobs redesigned, showed no change in their performance behaviors. Thus, this study provided evidence that the job characteristics approach can be practically applied with desirable performance and satisfaction results.124 Many well-known companies have actually implemented job design changes in accordance with the job characteristics model. For example, in terms of building in autonomy in jobs, well-known firms in the hospitality (e.g., Disney, Ritz Carlton) and retail industries allow their frontline employees to “make it right” for the “guest”/customer at any cost. For instance, at the very successful Container Stores, every salesperson has a key to the till in order to make any decision the customer needs. MOTIVATIONAL APPLICATION THROUGH GOAL SETTING As indicated, the other major motivational application technique besides job design is goal setting. Goal achievement is a factor that influences the success levels of individual employees, departments and business units, and the overall organization. A goal is a performance target that an individual or group seeks to accomplish at work. Goal setting is the process of motivating employees by establishing effective and meaningful performance targets. It is often given as an example of how the field of organizational behavior should progress from a sound theoretical foundation to sophisticated research to the actual application of more effective management practice. Theoretical Understanding of Goal Setting Although a paper by Locke is usually considered to be the seminal work on a theory of goal setting,125 he suggests that it really goes back to scientific management at the turn of the century. Locke credits its first proponent, Frederick W. Taylor, with being the “father of employee motivation theory,”126 and he says that Taylor’s use “of tasks was a forerunner of modern-day goal setting.”127 184 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior Although Locke argues that the expectancy theories of work motivation discussed earlier originally ignored goal setting and were nothing more than “cognitive hedonism,”128 his theoretical formulation for goal setting is very similar. He basically accepts the purposefulness of behavior, which comes out of Tolman’s pioneering cognitive theorizing, and the importance of values, or valence, and consequences. Thus, as in the expectancy theories of work motivation, values and value judgments, which are defined as the things the individual acts on to gain and/or to keep, are important cognitive determinants of behavior. Emotions or desires are the ways the person experiences these values. In addition to values, intentions or goals play an important role as cognitive determinants of behavior. It is here, of course, where Locke’s theory of goal setting goes beyond expectancy theories of work motivation, because people strive to attain goals in order to satisfy their emotions and desires. Goals provide a directional nature to people’s behavior and guide their thoughts and actions to one outcome rather than another. The individual then responds and performs according to these intentions or goals, even if the goals are not attained. Consequences, feedback, or reinforcement are the result of these responses. Research Evidence on the Impact of Goal Setting Locke’s theory has generated considerable research. In particular, a series of laboratory studies by Locke and his colleagues and a series of field studies by Locke’s frequent coauthor Gary Latham and other colleagues have been carried out to test the linkage between goal setting and performance.129 Over the past 15 years, numerous studies have been conducted to refine and extend goal-setting theory and practice. Recently, Locke and Latham summarized the 35-year work on goal setting and task motivation and performance as follows: With goal-setting theory, specific difficult goals have been shown to increase performance on well over 100 different tasks involving more than 40,000 participants in at least eight countries working in laboratory, simulation, and field settings. . . . The effects are applicable not only to the individual but to groups, organizational units, and entire organizations.130 Specifically, Locke and Latham relate goals to performance and satisfaction in the model shown in Figure 6.9. The following sections give more detail on this model and a FIGURE 6.9 Model for Relating Goals to Performance and Satisfaction Source: Adapted from Edwin A. Locke and Gary P. Latham, “Building a Practically Useful Theory of Goal Setting and Task Motivation,” American Psychologist, Vol. 57, No. 9, 2002, p. 714. Moderators Goal commitment Goal importance Self-efficacy Feedback Task complexity Core of Goals Specificity Difficulty Performance Mechanisms Choice/direction Effort Persistence Strategies Satisfaction OB in Action: Using Stretch Goals Goal setting is widely recognized as a technique to improve performance. However, there are a number of problems associated with the indiscriminate use of ambitious goals. Steven Kerr, a noted organizational behavior researcher and former chief learning officer at both General Electric and Goldman Sachs, has noted that many organizations fail to effectively use what he calls “stretch goals.” The goals are set very high, but the needed support to accomplish them is often missing. For example, top management may ask their people to increase output by 25% but fail to provide them with the knowledge, tools, and means to reach such ambitious goals. As a result, the only way that people can meet these new and demanding challenges is by working longer—often on their own time. In fact, notes Kerr, everywhere in America people are working evenings and weekends in order to meet the goals that the organization has set for them. This is not necessary, however, if the enterprise carefully examines what needs to be done and how it has to occur. Kerr recommends three rules that can help organizations create stretch goals and reach them without exhausting and burning out their human resources. These include (1) do not set goals that overly stress people; (2) if goals require people to stretch, do not punish them if they fail; and (3) if they are being asked to do things that they have never done before, give them whatever tools and help are available. How should goals be set? Kerr believes that easy goals are too simple and do not improve performance and that difficult goals may be so difficult that people cannot attain them—so they give up. Stretch goals force them to go beyond what they are accustomed to doing, and thus improve performance, but, importantly, they are also attainable. At the same time, the organization has to be willing to reward the personnel for attaining the stretch goals. How can this be done? One way is with money. Financial rewards are very direct and encourage individuals to continue their efforts. However, if management decide that they will give back to those involved onethird of the performance gain (i.e., gainsharing), they must stick to this and not back down when big gains are realized. If organizations follow these simple suggestions of using stretch goals and pay for performance, they can increase their productivity and employees can be challenged and rewarded for their efforts. summary of the extensive research that makes goal-setting theory and application a prototype evidence-based approach for the field of organizational behavior. The Importance of Specific Goals Specific goals have been found to be more effective than vague or general goals, such as “do your best,” as well as no goals at all. Specific goals result in higher levels of performance. For instance, salespeople should have goals in dollar amounts or units of volume, production departments should have targeted and defined goals in terms of numbers, percentages, and dates, and all other departments should incorporate measurable objectives or specific metrics and dates rather than things such as “try as hard as you can” or “try to do better than last year.” The Importance of Difficult and Challenging Goals Besides clearly stated goals, performance targets should also be challenging rather than easy or routine. At the same time, goals should be reachable and not so difficult that pursuing them becomes frustrating. The accompanying OB in Action: Using Stretch Goals gives some practical guidelines. Recent research indicates some moderators of the relationship between goal difficulty and subsequent performance. Two forms of feedback can enhance goal achievement: (1) process feedback and (2) outcome feedback. Process feedback is related to information as to how the individual or unit is proceeding in attempting to reach the goal, whereas outcome feedback is information related to and stated in terms of the actual goal itself.131 Other researchers have investigated the role that competition plays in moderating the goal difficulty–performance relationship, but results have been mixed. One study revealed that the lack of competition combined with difficult goals led to higher performance, whereas another found no effects related to competition.132 185 186 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior In still another research stream, perceived goal difficulty had negative effects on selfreports of job performance. In other words, an employee who thought a job was highly difficult reported performing at a lower level. However, goal difficulty, when combined with goal clarity, led to increased reports of effort, which in turn led to more positive self-reports of performance in the same study.133 Goal Acceptance, Participation, and Commitment Specific goals are most likely to affect performance when employees accept and are committed to them. This ownership and acceptance of goals are best accomplished through a participative process.134 Self-commitment can be given to assigned goals as well as to personal or self-set goals, especially when goals are equivocal. Commitment tends to run higher when goals are specific as opposed to general or broad. Monetary incentives can also increase commitment to goals if the goals are perceived as being achievable.135 Some of the mixed results and complexity on the moderating role of goal commitment may be due to measurement problems that recent research may help solve for the future.136 Self-efficacy and Goals As will be given detailed attention in Chapter 7, self-efficacy is the perception or belief of the individual that he or she can successfully accomplish a specific task, and it is associated with goal commitment.137 People exhibiting higher levels of self-efficacy tend to set more challenging personal goals and are more likely to achieve them, and commitment to selfset personal goals is normally also higher than commitment to goals set by others (imposed goals).138 Self-efficacy is also related to imposed goals. Some individuals may reject imposed goals, but if they have self-efficacy still maintain high personal goals. Further, if the imposed goal is impossible, personal goals and self-efficacy may be reduced, along with performance.139 Objective and Timely Feedback Studies have also found objective and timely feedback is preferable to no feedback and, as noted earlier, can be related to the process used to achieve a goal or the content (degree of achievement) of the goal. It is probably fair to say that feedback is a necessary but not sufficient condition for successful application of goal setting.140 In one research study it was found that daily feedback had positive influences on both productivity and employee satisfaction,141 and in another study feedback on progress toward individual and team goals greatly affected the decisions being made.142 “Just in time” information gathered through technology found in today’s “expert systems” can also be effectively used to provide timely feedback.143 Other Moderators in Goal Setting Although the application guidelines from goal-setting theory and research are probably as direct as any in the entire field of organizational behavior, there are still some other moderating variables. Besides commitment, importance, self-efficacy, and feedback shown in Figure 6.9 and discussed above, it should be noted that task complexity144 (also noted in the Locke and Latham model as indicated in Figure 6.9) and others are found in the literature, and there are some contradictory findings. For example, a study by Latham and Saari revealed that a supportive management style had an important moderating effect, and that, contrary to results in previous studies, specific goals did not lead to better performance than a generalized goal such as “do your best.”145 However, other studies have found a significant relationship between goal levels and performance.146 Leader style may also affect goal Chapter 6 Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications 187 commitment. Recent research revealed that an interaction between leader-member exchange and goal commitment accounted for a significant amount of variance in the performance level of a sales force.147 Another analysis indicated that there are also some unexplored areas, such as the distinction between quantity and quality goals,148 that may limit and make the application of goal setting more complex. A Word of Caution Regarding Goal Setting In the words of Ambrose and Kulik, who conducted a comprehensive review of goalsetting research, there are boundary conditions that surround the relationships between goal setting and performance that should be carefully noted for effective application.149 First, one study noted that goals can narrow an individual’s focus to perform only behaviors directly associated with goal attainment, at the cost of other desirable behaviors. This type of tunnel vision was revealed in a study in which students were given a specific goal of correcting the grammar on a recruiting brochure. They did so at the expense of improving the content of the brochure. Those with a more general goal (e.g., make it better) worked on both the content and the grammar.150 Furthermore, difficult goals increase the level of risk managers and employees are willing to take, and this increase may be counterproductive.151 Also, a study found that goals inhibited subjects from helping others who were requesting assistance, which has implications for teamwork.152 Other studies have found that difficult goals may lead to stress, put a perceptual ceiling on performance, cause the employees to ignore nongoal areas, and encourage short-range thinking, dishonesty, or cheating.153 However, Locke and Latham do provide specific guidelines of how these potential pitfalls can be overcome by better communication, rewards, and setting examples.154 Recently, the argument has been made for the value of learning goals versus performance outcome goals. Setting very ambitious “stretch goals” to increase the numbers without providing the means to attain these goals may lead to not only stress and burnout, but also unethical behavior. As Seijts and Latham point out, “in situations where primarily the acquisition of knowledge and skills rather than an increase in effort and persistence is required, a specific challenging learning rather than an outcome goal should be set.”155 On balance, however, there has been very impressive evidence for the positive impact of setting specific, difficult goals that are accepted and of providing feedback on progress toward goals. Other Performance Management Application Techniques Associated with Goal Setting Much of the discussion so far has been directly concerned with goal-setting theory, research findings, and application for performance improvement of an individual manager or work unit. Besides goal setting per se, because of its demonstrated relationship to performance, a related approach recently given attention is goal orientation, originally conceptualized by Carol Dweck through her research on children. She found a dispositional personality dimension related to pursuing goals in achievement situations that could be characterized as (1) learning goal orientation (those who want to develop competence by mastering challenging situations) and (2) performance goal orientation (those who want to demonstrate and validate competence by seeking favorable judgments).156 Although conventional wisdom would indicate the superiority of performance goal orientation, considerable recent research in the field of organizational behavior over the past decade indicates otherwise.157 A recent summary of this research concluded that a learning goal orientation has a positive impact on work-related behaviors and performance.158 This learning goal orientation is especially relevant to effective performance in today’s environment that 188 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior requires proactive, problem-solving responses to setbacks, creativity and openness to new ideas, and adaptation to new and changing situations.159 More recently Dweck has evolved the learning goal orientation into what she calls a “growth mindset” (people who have the belief that their basic qualities can be developed through their efforts) and the performance goal orientation into a “fixed mindset” (those who believe their qualities are set and have an urgency to prove themselves over and over).160 She uses infamous celebrity CEOs known for having a devastating effect on their firms such as “Chainsaw” Al Dunlop of Scott Paper and Sunbeam, Jerry Levin and Steve Case of AOL Time Warner, and Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling of Enron as examples of those having a fixed mindset. By contrast, those who led their firms to dramatically successful turnarounds such as Jack Welch, when he was at the pinnacle of General Electric, Lou Gerstner at IBM, and Anne Mulcahy at Xerox are good representatives of having a growth mindset. In concluding, Dweck observed, Jack, Lou and Anne—all believing in growth, all brimming with passion. And all believing that leadership is about growth and passion, not about brilliance. The fixed-mindset leaders were, in the end, full of bitterness, but the growth-minded leaders were full of gratitude. They called their workers the real heroes.161 Besides goal orientation or mindset, there are also other performance management techniques related to goal setting. One is benchmarking, which is a form of goal setting, though it is meant to be more inclusive and is often portrayed as part of total quality management. Benchmarking is the process of comparing work and service methods against the best practices and outcomes for the purpose of identifying changes stated as specific goals that will result in higher-quality output. Importantly, benchmarking incorporates the use of goal setting to set targets that are pursued, identified, and then used as the basis for future action. The benchmarking process involves looking both inside and outside the organization for ways of improving performance. With benchmarking, the idea is to enable the organization to learn from others and then to formulate specific change goals based on procedures and work assignments that have been observed in world-class organizations. Companies that have effectively used benchmarking include IBM and Magnavox. IBM benchmarked its efforts in comparison to Xerox, Motorola, 3M, Hewlett-Packard, and some Japanese firms that used just-in-time inventory controls. Magnavox benchmarked a series of HR practices, which they turned into 14 training measures that are now commonly called metrics, again with strong evidence of success. A stretch target or goal, discussed in the earlier OB in Action, is another currently popular technique associated with goal setting. Stretch targets may be defined as objectives or goals that force organizations to significantly alter their processes in ways that involve a whole new paradigm of operations.162 In a manner similar to benchmarking, stretch targets seek to integrate and align the internal operation and culture with external best practices. Examples of stretch targets include enhancing motivation, performance, and creative decision making through specific numbers, percentages, and dates. One area of application associated with goal setting with international implications is that of goal source. Questions remain as to how to implement goal-setting programs across cultures. During a goal-setting program, subordinates often receive information from a supervisor or leader. If that leader (the goal source) is distrusted, the message may be rejected. If the leader or goal source is trusted, goal acceptance and commitment and performance may be higher. One study conducted in England confirmed that English workers, who were more likely to trust a shop steward than a supervisor due to several key historical and cultural reasons, did indeed accept goals and perform at higher rates when the steward Chapter 6 Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications 189 helped deliver the goals.163 This goal source impact applied in a cross-cultural environment would suggest that, depending on cultural dimensions such as power distance, home country nationals involved in the goal-setting process may have more of an impact on home country employees than would expatriates or those from another country home office. Impact on the Psychological Contract Goal setting can be used to create psychological contracts with employees. In any exchange situation at work, there are both formal and informal expectations regarding what is given and what should be received in return. Imposing new goals may violate existing views of what is present in the psychological contract, creating either resistance to the program or a renegotiation of the rewards to be received. Note that any linkage between goals and performance has a psychological contract implied in the relationship. Organizations that routinely demand higher performances yet fail to respond with rewards to their people can expect increasingly negative responses and reactions.164 A number of other instances of contract violations may inhibit the success rates of goal setting. These violations include restructuring, downsizing, increased reliance on temporary workers, and globalization. Goal setting in part constructs a social role at work that is intertwined with other elements of a psychological contract.165 Consequently, successful applications of goal-setting programs must account for how resulting processes will affect existing psychological contracts of employees.166 Summary Motivation is probably more closely associated with the micro perspective of organizational behavior than is any other topic. A comprehensive understanding of motivation includes the need–drive–incentive sequence, or cycle. The basic process involves needs, which set drives in motion to accomplish incentives (anything that alleviates a need and reduces a drive). The drives, or motives, may be classified into primary and secondary categories. The primary motives are unlearned and physiologically based. Common primary motives are hunger, thirst, sleep, avoidance of pain, sex, and maternal concern. Secondary motives are learned and are most relevant to the study of organizational behavior. The needs for power, achievement, affiliation, security, and status are major motivating forces in the behavior of organizational participants. Besides the various needs, motivation can also be broken down into its source—extrinsic and intrinsic. Extrinsic motives are the visible consequences external to the individual (e.g., money), usually contingently administered by others, to motivate the individual. Intrinsic motives are internal to the individual, and are self-induced to learn, achieve, or in some way better oneself. When the theories are specifically focused on work motivation, there are both historically important and contemporary approaches. The older Maslow and Herzberg models attempt to identify specific content factors in the employee (in the case of Maslow) or in the job environment (in the case of Herzberg) that are motivating. Although such a content approach has surface logic, is easy to understand, and can be readily translated into practice, the research evidence points out some definite limitations. There is very little research support for these models’ theoretical basis and predictability. The trade-off for simplicity sacrifices true understanding of the complexity of work motivation. On the positive side, however, these historically important models have given emphasis to important content factors that were largely ignored by the human relationists. In addition, the Herzberg model is useful as an explanation for job satisfaction and as a point of departure for practical application to enrich jobs. The contemporary process theories provide a much sounder theoretical explanation of the complexity of work motivation. The expectancy model of Porter and Lawler help 190 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior explain the important cognitive variables and how they relate to one another in the process of work motivation. The Porter-Lawler model also gives specific attention to the important relationship between performance and satisfaction. Porter and Lawler propose that performance leads to satisfaction, instead of the human relations assumption of the reverse. The research literature is generally supportive of such expectancy models, but conceptual and methodological problems remain. Unlike the older content models, these expectancy models are relatively complex and difficult to translate into actual practice. Another contemporary approach to explaining work motivation is equity theory. This theory is based on perceived input–outcome ratios of oneself compared to relevant other(s). Like the expectancy models, equity theory can lead to increased understanding of the complex cognitive process of work motivation but also has the same limitation for prediction and control in the practice of human resource management. More recently, this equity theory has been applied to the analysis of organizational justice in the workplace. Other relevent cognitive understanding of motivation comes from attribution theory (i.e., internal versus external locus of control and stability, consensus, consistency, and distinctiveness attributions). Finally, control and agency theories, coming from other disciplines, are briefly discussed as representative of other approaches receiving research attention in organizational behavior. The last part of the chapter deals with two of the most important application areas of work motivation: job design and goal setting. Although the concern for designing jobs goes back to the scientific management movement at the turn of the twentieth century, the recent concern for human resource management as a competitive advantage has led to renewed interest in, and research on, job design. The older and simpler job enlargement and rotation approaches have given way to first a job enrichment approach and then a job characteristics approach that relates to psychological or motivational states leading to improved employee satisfaction and performance. Characteristics such as skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, and feedback have been found by research to be related to employee satisfaction and quality of work. The other major application technique for work motivation of goal setting has become a showcase for evidence-based management. Basing his approach on a cognitive perspective, Locke has a well-developed goalsetting theory of motivation. This theory emphasizes the important relationship between goals and performance. Laboratory and field studies have verified this relationship. In particular, the most effective performance seems to result when specific, difficult goals are accepted and when feedback on progress and results is provided. An alternative theoretical perspective is goal orientation (fixed and growth mindsets), and an extension and systematic application of the goal-setting approach are benchmarking and stretch targets. The chapter concludes with the impact that goal setting may have on the psychological contract. To be successful, the human resources must also benefit and receive a return (reward) in order to not breach the psychological contract. Ending with Meta-Analytic Research Findings OB PRINCIPLE FOR EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE On interesting, challenging tasks, providing extrinsic rewards can increase the level of intrinsic motivation. Chapter 6 Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications 191 Meta-Analysis Results: [13 studies; 729 participants; d = .34] On average, there is a 60 percent probability that administering extrinsic rewards such as money to employees performing interesting, challenging tasks will increase their level of intrinsic motivation more than those who do not receive extrinsic rewards. However, a moderator analysis revealed that in some cases extrinsic rewards can actually decrease employees’ intrinsic motivation by shifting the employee’s focus away from wanting to perform well on a task because it is intrinsically interesting or challenging, to the desire for an external reward. Moreover, it is suggested that the extrinsic-intrinsic relationship depends on how intrinsic motivation is measured. Conclusion: Although it is important that employees be genuinely interested and motivated to perform well, it is equally important that organizations reward people for their performance. However, the effects of combining extrinsic and intrinsic motivational techniques can be complex. Increasing levels of intrinsic motivation involves either increasing employees’ level of competence that they can perform tasks, enhancing their perceptions of control over their behavior, or providing challenges in the work environment. Although in many cases providing extrinsic rewards adds to intrinsic motivation, organizations must be careful that the extrinsic rewards do not interfere with key cognitive processes. For example, employees who receive money for a job well done may attribute their performance to their motive for money rather than to a genuine interest or need for achievement. The result may be a decrease in intrinsic motivation on future tasks. This is perhaps one reason why organizations are turning to alternatives to money to spark motivation. As this chapter indicates, work motivation is a complex process and there are no easy answers, but there is a probability that extrinsic rewards can increase intrinsic motivation on at least interesting and challenging tasks. Source: Adapted from Uco J. Wiersma, “The Effects of Extrinsic Rewards in Intrinsic Motivation: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 65, 1992, pp. 101–114. OB PRINCIPLE FOR EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE The more that employees perceive their work to be designed according to the characteristics in the job characteristics model (JCM), the more motivated and satisfied they will be. Meta-Analysis Results: [72 studies; over 18,000 participants; d = 1.6] On average, there is an 87 percent probability that for employees who perceive the characteristics found in the job characteristics model (JCM) to be high, the higher their internal work motivation and overall job satisfaction will be compared to those who do not perceive these job characteristics. Further analysis indicated that the critical psychological states of the JCM played a mediating role between job characteristics and outcomes. Conclusion: The well-researched job characteristics model posits that the five core job dimensions (task identity, task significance, skill variety, feedback, and autonomy) designed into a job influence the critical psychological states of experienced meaningfulness, knowledge of results, and experienced responsibility, which in turn will affect work outcomes. The five job characteristics are measured by the perceptions of the jobholder and are combined into a single index called a motivating potential score (MPS). This MPS reflects the 192 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior overall potential the job has to influence the employee’s motivation and satisfaction. Overall, the job characteristics model represents a way to predict employee motivation and satisfaction and hopefully organizational outcomes such as quality of work and absenteeism/turnover. Source: Adapted from Yitzhak Fried and Gerald R. Ferris, “The Validity of the Job Characteristics Model: A Review and Meta-Analysis,” Personnel Psychology, Vol. 40, 1987, pp. 287–322. OB PRINCIPLE FOR EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE Difficult, specific task goals will lead to a higher level of performance than routine, general goals such as “do your best.” Meta-Analysis Results: [Over 50 studies; over 5,800 participants; d range = .44 to .58] On average, there is a 62 to 66 percent probability that difficult and specific goals (if accepted) will lead to higher levels of task performance than easy or general “do-your-best” goals. The setting (laboratory versus field) was found to be a moderator of the relationship, with lab studies in general having stronger findings. Conclusion: Like job design (i.e., the JCM), goal setting has considerable research backup, but unlike the JCM, is a very commonly used motivational technique for enhancing human performance in today’s organizations. Goals help clarify the sense of purpose and mission that is essential to success in the workplace. As the listed principle indicates, goal difficulty and goal specificity have been found to be strongly related to task performance across a wide variety of tasks and settings. This is because specific and challenging goals serve to focus employees’ attention on exactly what is to be accomplished and to bring out their best performance. Moreover, as this chapter points out, goals must be specific and measurable so that employees know exactly what the goal is and can track their progress toward goal achievement. Goal setting as an indicator of performance represents one of the strongest and most consistent OB principles today. In addition, there are not many areas of the field of organizational behavior in which goal setting cannot play a role. For example, goal setting is widely recognized in areas such as cognitive motivation theories, self-efficacy, feedback-seeking behavior, job design, and behavioral management. In many ways, goal setting can be used as a prototype of how theory, research, and application should be done in organizational behavior. Source: Adapted from Anthony J. Mento, Robert P. Steel, and Ronald J. Karren, “A Meta-Analytic Study of the Effects of Goal Setting on Task Performance: 1966–1984,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 39, 1987, pp. 52–83. Questions for Discussion and Review 1. Briefly define the basic motivation process and the two types of needs. What are some examples of each type of need? 2. What is the difference between an intrinsic and an extrinsic motive? Can both operate at the same time? If so, how? 3. In your own words, briefly explain Maslow’s theory of motivation. Relate it to work motivation and Herzberg’s model. Chapter 6 Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications 193 4. What is the major criticism of Herzberg’s two-factor theory of motivation? Do you think it makes a contribution to the better understanding of motivation in the workplace? Defend your answer. 5. In your own words, briefly explain the Porter-Lawler model of motivation. How do performance and satisfaction relate to each other? 6. Briefly give an example of an inequity that a manager of a small business might experience. How would the manager strive to attain equity in the situation you describe? 7. How does equity theory relate to procedural justice? Why is this so important to today’s employees? 8. What is attribution theory? How can locus of control be applied to workers and managers? 9. What two major attribution errors or biases have surfaced? Give an example of each. 10. Briefly describe control theory and agency theory. What implications can these two theories have for work motivation? 11. What are the core job characteristics in the Hackman-Oldham model? How do you calculate the motivating potential of a job? How would a professor’s job and a janitor’s job measure up on these characteristics? Be specific in your answer. 12. In your own words, describe the theory behind goal setting. What has the research generally found in testing goal setting? 13. How does goal setting relate to goal orientation, benchmarking, stretch targets, and psychological contracts? Internet Exercises: What Types of Jobs Motivate You? Now that you have a foundation for understanding human motivation from the chapter, it is very useful to understand what motivates you. Go to the Web site http://company .monster.com/ and spend some time analyzing the jobs that they offer in your area of interest, and then answer the following questions. Internet Exercise: What Is the Motivation Potential of Jobs at Southwest Airlines? Many companies have employment opportunities listed on their Web site. Go to http://www .southwest.com/careers/ and look at the job openings at Southwest Airlines. Using the Hackman and Oldham job design model with identity, significance, skill variety, autonomy, and feedback, analyze the jobs listed according to each characteristic. 1. Select one of the jobs listed. What motivational theories explain why or why not you would be a good, motivated employee in this job? 2. Would this job provide you motivation in each of Maslow’s levels? How? How, if at all, would this job relate to Herzberg’s two factors? 3. Using this job as a reference point, as best as you can trace through each step (the boxes in Figure 6.5) in the Porter and Lawler expectancy model of motivation. 1. From a job design standpoint, which job would seem to have the most motivation potential? The least? 2. Of the jobs that you consider poorly designed, discuss some ways that they might be improved. 3. Compare these jobs to other companies that post jobs on their Web sites. Now go to company Web sites in manufacturing and the public sector in your local area that provide job openings and/or descriptions. Do you think some industries tend to have more motivating potential jobs than others? 194 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior Real Case: At UPS Managers Learn to Empathize with Their Employees At United Parcel Service Inc., rules are religion. Without them, UPS could never move millions of packages to their destinations on time each day. But a few years ago, Mark J. Colvard, a UPS manager in San Ramon, Calif., had to decide whether to buck the system. A driver needed time off to help an ailing family member, but under company rules he wasn’t eligible. If Colvard went by the book, the driver would probably take the days anyway and be fired. If Colvard gave him the time off, he would catch flak from his other drivers. Colvard wound up giving the driver two weeks, took some heat—and kept a valuable employee. Six months earlier, Colvard admits, he would have gone the other way. What changed his approach? A month he spent living among migrant farmers in McAllen, Tex., as part of a unusual UPS management training experience called the Community Internship Program (CIP). After building housing for the poor, collecting clothing for the Salvation Army, and working in a drug rehab center, Colvard said he was able to empathize with employees facing crises back home. And that, he says, has made him a better manager. “My goal was to make the numbers, and in some cases that meant not looking at the individual but looking at the bottom line,” says Colvard. “After that one-month stay, I immediately started reaching out to people in a different way.” CIP began in 1968 as the brainchild of UPS founder James Casey, who wanted to open up the eyes of UPS’s predominantly white managers to the poverty and inequality exploding into violence in many cities. By now, nearly 1,200 current and former middle managers have moved through the program. And it has evolved into an integral part of the UPS culture, teaching managers the crucial skill of flexibility at a company that is trying to fit a diverse base of employees into its rigid rules-based culture, which prescribes everything from how delivery people should carry their keys to how many steps they should take per second. UPS needs rules, but it also needs managers capable of bending them when necessary. “We’ve got 330,000 U.S. employees,” says Don B. Wofford, the CIP coordinator and a graduate of the program. “There are all kinds of personalities and all kinds of diversity. We need managers who can manage those individuals.” In New York this summer, eight managers visited the emergency room at Bellevue Hospital, tutored inmates at Sing Sing in interviewing skills, and provided meals to the homeless. The experience took them far outside their comfort zones in ways large and small—whether it was using public transportation for the first time in years or an initial encounter with violent crime such as the triple homicide that took place a few steps from the Henry Street Settlement, the community center where they lived. “A lot of rising stars going off to this program have gotten sure of themselves. That leads them to be quick with solutions,” says Jeffrey A. Sonnenfeld, an associate dean at Yale University’s School of Management who has studied UPS. After CIP, “instead of reacting, they would listen. They learn incredible skills of empathy.” Managers who have been through the UPS program say it made them more likely to search for unconventional solutions. Patti Hobbs, a division manager in Louisville who spent a month on New York’s Lower East Side, remembers being impressed by the creative ideas of uneducated addicts for steering teens away from drugs. Realizing that the best solutions sometimes come from those closest to the problem, she immediately started brainstorming with the entire staff instead of just senior managers. Says Hobbs: “You start to think there’s no one person, regardless of position, who has all the answers. The answers come from us all.” One month living among the poor won’t change the world. But it might help UPS managers see their employees as more than just a cog in a very efficient machine. 1. UPS through CIP (Community Internship Program) is trying to inject a new dimension into its corporate culture. What does this cultural change intend to look like and how can it affect the motivation of both managers and operating employees? 2. What motives can the CIP appeal to for the participating managers? What motivation theories could be used to explain the impact that the CIP may have on the participating managers? 3. UPS is known to pay their operating employees very high wages. Is this enough to motivate them? What from the case would support your answer? Chapter 6 Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications 195 Real Case: Making It a Nice Place to Work There are a number of ways in which organizations are trying to apply techniques to improve performance. For example, redesigning traditional, bureaucratic organizations and specialized jobs has emerged as a way to enhance employee satisfaction and performance. This can be done by restructuring the organization so that it is a more enjoyable, pleasant place in which to work. This is actually being accomplished in a number of different ways in the real world. At Inhale Therapeutic Systems, a small start-up company in northern California that focuses on novel drugdelivery technology, everyone, including the president of the company, sits in large cubicles (they call them “bullpens”) with four other people of various ranks and functions. There are no walls or barriers between any of them. This arrangement forces people to talk to each other, while limiting the amount of time they spend gossiping, and reduces the need to write memos and use email—as, in most cases, the people to whom these messages would be directed are sitting in the same bullpen. Every nine months the company reshuffles everyone and assigns new bullpen partners. This arrangement has seemed to promote teamwork and reduce office politics. At West Bend Mutual Insurance Company top management decided to make the workplace as comfortable as possible for people. Management put money where their mouth was by purchasing equipment that allows those in certain workstations to adjust the temperature, fresh air, and noise levels. Researchers from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute have studied the impact of these changes and concluded that those who are allowed to control their own climate are at least 3 percent more productive than those who are not. The company management believe that these productivity increases are even higher, probably more in the range of 5 to 10 percent. In addition, the novel workstations have become an asset in recruiting and retaining workers. Other companies are approaching the motivation challenge by asking: What else can we do to make the organization an enjoyable place to work? At Sun Microsystems, some members of top management are asking an even more radical question. Noting that many of their employees are never in the office because they are out in the field with clients or working from home, they ask: Why should we heat, cool, and clean offices when so few people ever use them? This has led management to consider reducing office space; if personnel who never come to the office need to get together for occasional meetings or face-to-face interactions, they can rent space at hotels or conference centers. Although this may not be the route Sun eventually takes, it does show that the old way of having everyone in their office from 9 to 5 may become a thing of the past. An interesting issue that is beginning to emerge concerns “too much of a good thing.” Is it possible that the new work arrangements such as those at Inhale Therapeutic Systems or West Bend Insurance will result in facilitating so much interaction that people become overstimulated or distracted? Moreover, the changes that are being made today may soon be outmoded by changes in tomorrow’s technology, resulting in the need to reorganize the workplace again. On the positive side, however, some work design experts note: The good news . . . is that those involved in forging the new workplace realize there is no ideal, no cookiecutter workplace template they can plop on top of organizations. And it’s a rare alternative-office space that doesn’t get adapted as trial runs reveal elements that don’t work or could work better. “One thing we’ve realized is that not only must we assess what’s possible but how far and how fast it can move.” That would seem to signal an end to the age of the corporate “edifice complex” and a new era of workspaces that work. 1. How does redesign of jobs lead to improved performance and job satisfaction? In your answer include a discussion of Figure 6.2. 2. How do the examples in this case relate to the job characteristics model as discussed in this chapter? 3. Are we likely to see more workplace redesign in the future? Why or why not? 196 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior Organizational Behavior Case: What Do They Want? Pat Riverer is vice president of manufacturing and operations of a medium-size pharmaceutical firm in the Midwest. Pat has a Ph.D. in chemistry but has not been directly involved in research and new-product development for 20 years. From the “school of hard knocks” when it comes to managing operations, Pat runs a “tight ship.” The company does not have a turnover problem, but it is obvious to Pat and other key management personnel that the hourly people are putting in only their eight hours a day. They are not working anywhere near their full potential. Pat is very upset with the situation because, with rising costs, the only way that the company can continue to prosper is to increase the productivity of its hourly people. Pat called the human resources manager, Carmen Lopez, and laid it on the line: “What is it with our people, anyway? Your wage surveys show that we pay near the top in this region, our conditions are tremendous, and our fringes choke a horse. Yet these people still are not motivated. What in the world do they want?” Carmen replied: “I have told you and the president time after time that money, conditions, and benefits are not enough. Employees also need other things to motivate them. Also, I have been conducting some random confidential interviews with some of our hourly people, and they tell me that they are very discouraged because, no matter how hard they work, they get the same pay and opportunities for advancement as their coworkers who are just scraping by.” Pat then replied: “Okay, you are the motivation expert; what do we do about it? We have to increase their performance.” 1. Explain the “motivation problem” in this organization in terms of the content models of Maslow and Herzberg. What are the “other things” that the human resources manager is referring to in speaking of things besides money, conditions, and fringe benefits that are needed to motivate employees? 2. Explain the motivation of the employees in this company in terms of one or more of the process models. On the basis of the responses during the confidential interviews, what would you guess are some of the expectancies, valences, and inequities of the employees in this company? How about Pat? 3. How would you respond to Pat’s last question and statement if you were the human resources manager in this company? Organizational Behavior Case: Tom, Dick, and Harry You are in charge of a small department and have three subordinates—Tom, Dick, and Harry. The key to the success of your department is to keep these employees as motivated as possible. Here is a brief summary profile on each of these subordinates. Tom is the type of employee who is hard to figure out. His absenteeism record is much higher than average. He greatly enjoys his family (a wife and three small children) and thinks they should be central to his life. The best way to describe Tom is to say that he is kind of a throwback to the hippie generation and believes deeply in the values of that culture. As a result, the things that the company can offer him really inspire him very little. He feels that the job is simply a means of financing his family’s basic needs and little else. Overall, Tom does an adequate job and is very conscientious, but all attempts to get him to do more have failed. He has charm and is friendly, but he is just not “gung-ho” for the company. He is pretty much allowed to “do his own thing” as long as he meets the minimal standards of performance. Dick is in many respects opposite from Tom. Like Tom, he is a likable guy, but unlike Tom, Dick responds well to the company’s rules and compensation schemes and has a high degree of personal loyalty to the company. The problem with Dick is that he will not do very much independently. He does well with what is assigned to him, but he is not very creative or even dependable when he is on his own. He also is a relatively shy person who is not very assertive when dealing with people outside the department. This hurts his performance to some degree because he cannot immediately sell himself or Chapter 6 Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications 197 the department to other departments in the company or to top management. Harry, on the other hand, is a very assertive person. He will work for money and would readily change jobs for more money. He really works hard for the company but expects the company also to work for him. In his present job, he feels no qualms about working a 60-hour week, if the money is there. Even though he has a family and is supporting his elderly father, he once quit a job cold when his employer didn’t give him a raise on the premise that he was already making too much. He is quite a driver. A manager at his last place of employ- ment indicated that, although Harry did do an excellent job for the company, his personality was so intense that they were glad to get rid of him. His former boss noted that Harry just seemed to be pushing all the time. If it wasn’t for more money, it was for better fringe benefits; he never seemed satisfied. 1. Can you explain Tom’s, Dick’s, and Harry’s motivations by one or more of the work-motivation models discussed in this chapter? 2. How, if at all, would equity theory apply to the analysis of the motivations of Tom, Dick, and Harry? Organizational Behavior Case: The Rubber Chicken Award Kelly Sellers is really fed up with his department’s performance. He knows that his people have a very boring job, and the way the technological process is set up leaves little latitude for what he has learned about vertically loading the job through job enrichment. Yet he is convinced that there must be some way to make it more interesting to do a dull job. “At least I want to find out for my people and improve their performance,” he thinks. The employees in Kelly’s department are involved in the assembly of small hair dryer motors. There are 25 to 30 steps in the assembly process, depending on the motor that is being assembled. The process is very simple, and currently each worker completes only one or two steps of the operation. Each employee has his or her own assigned workstation and stays at that particular place for the entire day. Kelly has decided to try a couple of things to improve performance. First, he has decided to organize the department into work teams. The members of each team would be able to move the workstations around as they desired. He has decided to allow each team to divide the tasks up as they see fit. Next, Kelly has decided to post each team’s performance on a daily basis and to reward the team with the highest performance by giving them a “rubber chicken” award that they can display at their workbenches. The production manager, after checking with engineering, has reluctantly agreed to Kelly’s proposal on a trial basis. 1. Do you think Kelly’s approach to job redesign will work? Rate the core job dimensions from the Hackman-Oldham model of Kelly’s employees before and after he redesigned their jobs. What could he do to improve these dimensions even more? 2. What will happen if this experiment does not work out and the production manager forces Kelly to return to the former task design? Organizational Behavior Case: Specific Goals for Human Service Jackie Jordan is the regional manager of a state human services agency that provides job training and rehabilitation programs for the hearing impaired. Her duties include supervising counselors as well as developing special programs. One of the difficulties that Jackie has had was with a project supervisor, Kathleen O’Shean. Kathleen is the coordinator of a three-year federal grant for a special project for the hearing impaired. Kathleen has direct responsibility for the funds and the goals of the project. The federal agency that made the grant made continuance of the three-year grant conditional on some “demonstrated progress” toward fulfilling the 198 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior purpose of the grant. Jackie’s problem with Kathleen was directly related to this proviso. She repeatedly requested that Kathleen develop some concrete goals for the grant project. Jackie wanted these goals written in a specific, observable, and measurable fashion. Kathleen continually gave Jackie very vague, nonmeasurable platitudes. Jackie, in turn, kept requesting greater clarification, but Kathleen’s response was that the work that was being done was meaningful enough and took all her time. To take away from the work itself by writing these specific goals would only defeat the purpose of the grant. Jackie finally gave up and didn’t push the issue further. One year later the grant was not renewed by the federal government because the program lacked “demonstrated progress.” 1. Do you think Jackie was right in requesting more specific goals from Kathleen? Why or why not? 2. Do you think the federal government would have been satisfied with the goal-setting approach that Jackie was pushing as a way to demonstrate progress? 3. Would you have handled the situation differently if you were Jackie? How? Chapter Seven Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital Learning Objectives • Frame the chapter in terms of the positive psychology movement. • Discuss the theory, research, and application of self-efficacy/confidence, optimism, hope, and resiliency as best POB criteria-meeting psychological resources and when in combination represent psychological capital (PsyCap). • Feature the theory, research, and development of psychological capital or PsyCap. • Present the theory, research, and application of happiness/subjective well-being (SWB) as another positive construct. • Present emotions, intelligence, and combined emotional intelligence (EI) as other positive constructs. Just as the overall field of organizational behavior has become more comprehensive (as reflected in the social cognitive theoretical framework for this text, given detailed attention in Chapter 1), there are a few important variables that have more recently emerged to help in both the better understanding and the effective application of organizational behavior. This new positive organizational behavior approach draws from the positive psychology movement. The term positive organizational behavior, or simply POB, was coined and defined by this author (Luthans) as “the study and application of positive oriented human resource strengths and psychological capacities that can be measured, developed, and effectively managed for performance improvement in today’s workplace.”1 Besides being positive2 and a psychological resource capacity, to be included as a POB construct, the following operational criteria must be met:3 1. Based on theory and research. This criterion separates POB from the atheoretical, no research back-up popular, positive, self-help literature such as Steven Covey’s Seven Habits or the best-seller Who Moved My Cheese? by Spencer Johnson. Like the positive psychology movement in general and the University of Michigan group’s positive organizational scholarship (known as POS),4 POB is based on constantly building theoretical grounding and continuing basic and applied research findings. 2. Valid measures. Related to the above criterion of needing a grounding in theory and research and to further differentiate from the popular self-development literature, to be included in POB, the construct must have reliable and valid measures. 199 200 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior 3. “Statelike” and thus open to development. This criterion is especially critical to POB because it differentiates the approach from much of positive psychology. This criterion says that in order to be included in POB the construct must be statelike (situationally based, open to learning, change, and development) as opposed to traitlike (dispositional, relatively fixed across situations and time). Although on a continuum rather than dichotomous, the statelike criterion says that the psychological capacity can be developed and trained, whereas most of the positive psychology variables like virtue and character are more traitlike and thus relatively fixed.5 The same is true of most of the mainstream organizational behavior constructs that come out of traitlike personality and motivation theories. 4. Managed for performance improvement. This criterion again separates POB from positive psychology. POB is concerned with the workplace and how the positive psychological resource capacity can be applied to improve human performance, that of both leaders/managers and human resources in general. The positive psychological capacities that have been determined to best meet these four criteria and that will be covered in this chapter are efficacy, optimism, hope, and resiliency. When combined, these four positive psychological resources have been demonstrated theoretically6 and empirically7 to be a higher-order core factor that Luthans and colleagues term as psychological capital or PsyCap.8 In addition, there are a number of other potential positive constructs that to varying degrees meet the above POB criteria9 and the two featured in this chapter are happiness/subjective well-being (SWB) and emotional intelligence. All texts to date give only very brief mention, if at all, to positive organizational behavior and psychological capital. However, there is now enough theory and research evidence on the linkage to desirable employee attitudes and effective performance in the workplace that they deserve special attention along with the established psychological constructs of personality, attitudes, and motivation. This chapter is framed in the positive psychology movement and then gives the theoretical background, research, and development of first efficacy, optimism, hope, and resiliency and then overall psychological capital. The balance of the chapter is devoted to the more widely recognized positive capacities of happiness (SWB) and emotional intelligence. POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY Mainly under the leadership of well-known psychologist Martin Seligman, the positive psychology movement emerged from a reaction to the almost exclusive preoccupation that psychology had given to the negative, pathological aspects of human functioning and behaving.10 Seligman and a few others11 became concerned several years ago that not enough attention was being given to the strengths and other positive features of people that make life worth living. Never claiming that they discovered the value of positivity, which has a very long and rich history, they simply wanted psychology to shift at least some of the emphasis away from just the worst things in life toward more of a balance to the study and understanding of some of the best things in life. The aim of positive psychology is to use scientific methodology to discover and promote the factors that allow individuals, groups, organizations, and communities to thrive. It is concerned with optimal human functioning instead of pathological human functioning. In identifying the domain, Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi summarize the three levels of positive psychology as follows:12 Chapter 7 Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital 201 1. Valued subjective experiences. Well-being, contentment, and satisfaction (in the past); hope and optimism (for the future); and flow and happiness (in the present). 2. Positive individual traits. The capacity for love and vocation, courage, interpersonal skill, aesthetic sensibility, perseverance, forgiveness, originality, future mindedness, spirituality, high talent, and wisdom. 3. Civic virtues and the institutions that move individuals toward better citizenship. Responsibility, nurturance, altruism, civility, moderation, tolerance, and work ethic. These very “positive” goals have obvious implications not only for therapy, well-being, education, family life, social relations, and society at large, but, importantly, also for organizational life and behavior. In fact, there is considerable research evidence13 that there is a significant (almost .3 average correlations in meta-analysis of numerous studies) correlation (also some causal evidence) between health (both physical and mental), relationships (both intimate and social) and work (both performance and satisfaction) or what could be called simply H-R-W well-being.14 In other words, analogous to Bandura’s triangular social cognitive model depicted in Chapter 1, the H-R-W model shown in Figure 7.1 indicates that there is an interactive, reciprocal determination between one’s health, relationships, and work (i.e., individuals’ health affects their relationships and their relationships affect their health, their health affects their work and their work affects their health, and so forth). Importantly, evidence has now grown to the point where research positive psychologists such as Sonja Lyubomirsky confidently conclude that one’s happiness (or level of positivity or H-R-W well-being) is determined as follows:15 1. About half can be attributed to a genetic, dispositional “hard-wiring” (but not immutable) set point. This seems like a lot, but as Lyubomirsky points out, “appreciate the fact that 50 percent is a long way from 100 percent, and that leaves ample room for improvement.”16 2. Surprisingly, only about 10 percent seems to be the result of life’s circumstances. As Lyubomirsky notes, “Although you may find it hard to believe, whether you drive to work in a Lexus hybrid or a battered truck, whether you’re young or old, or have had FIGURE 7.1 WORK PERFORMANCE from Psychological Capital (PsyCap) The H-R-W Model (The Interaction of Health, Relationship, and Work) Effective Positive Intentions Open to One’s Control and Development RELATIONSHIPS • Social Networks • Friends/Life Partner HEALTH • Physical • Mental 202 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior wrinkle-removing plastic surgery, whether you live in the frigid Midwest or the balmy West Coast, your chances of being happy and becoming happier are pretty much the same.”17 3. Most importantly, the remaining 40 percent of one’s happiness, positivity, or H-R-W well-being is determined by intentional activity. Knowing that such a large portion is under one’s own control “is to appreciate the promise of the great impact that you can make on your own life through intentional strategies that you can implement to remake yourself as a happier person.”18 It is from this relatively large 40 percent intentional component that positive organizational behavior in general and psychological capital in particular can have input and make an impact. Remembering the POB criterion of being statelike and open to development, the criteria-meeting POB positive psychological resources of efficacy, hope, optimism, and resiliency (and when combined into the core construct of psychological capital) can intentionally be used by one’s self or by leading human resources to directly impact work performance, and, in turn, relationships and health. Using this work done in positive psychology as the foundation and point of departure, the theory, research, and development of the four major POB constructs and overall PsyCap are now examined in depth. SELF-EFFICACY/CONFIDENCE The first and most theoretically developed and researched POB construct is self-efficacy. It may also be most relevant, at least for this particular text on organizational behavior, because as was presented in Chapter 1, social cognitive theory serves both as the conceptual framework for this text and the theory from which self-efficacy is derived. Largely due to the work of well-known psychologist Albert Bandura over the past three decades, self-efficacy has a widely acclaimed theoretical foundation,19 an extensive body of knowledge gathered through basic research,20 and proven effectiveness in a number of application areas, including the workplace.21 Unmatched by any of the constructs covered in this text, to date nine large-scale meta-analyses consistently demonstrate that efficacy beliefs contribute significantly to the level of motivation and performance.22 In POB, we tend to use the term self-efficacy interchangeably with confidence. We do this to recognize the rich theoretical and research foundation associated with self-efficacy, but also the more common and simplistic term of confidence more often used with application in business and sports.23 In this more academic discussion, the term efficacy will tend to be used. After the meaning, process, and impact are provided, the sources and development of efficacy are given attention, and, finally, its application to human performance in organizations. The Theoretical Background and Meaning of Efficacy Chapter 1 summarized Bandura’s social cognitive theory (SCT). SCT incorporates both social/environmental and cognitive elements and the behaviors themselves. SCT explains psychological functioning in terms of environmental events; internal personal factors in the form of cognitive, affective, and biological variables; and behavioral patterns. These three (environment, personal cognitions, and behavior) operate as interacting determinants that influence one another bidirectionally. Embedded within SCT, along with the human’s capabilities of symbolizing, forethought, and observational learning, is a self-theory including both self-regulation and self-reflection. It is the capability for self-reflection—people reflect back on their actions/experience with a specific event/task to then cognitively process how strongly they believe they can successfully accomplish this event/task in the future—that serves as the theoretical basis for self-efficacy.24 Chapter 7 Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital 203 Bandura strongly emphasizes that this self-efficacy is the most pervading and important of the psychological mechanisms of self-influence. He declares, “Unless people believe that they can produce desired effects and forestall undesired ones by their actions, they have little incentive to act. Whatever other factors may operate as motivators, they are rooted in the core belief that one has the power to produce desired results.”25 The formal definition of self-efficacy that is usually used is Bandura’s early statement of personal judgment or belief of “how well one can execute courses of action required to deal with prospective situations.”26 A somewhat broader, more workable definition for positive organizational behavior is provided by Stajkovic and Luthans: “Self-efficacy refers to an individual’s conviction (or confidence) about his or her abilities to mobilize the motivation, cognitive resources, and courses of action needed to successfully execute a specific task within a given context.”27 Notice that this definition deals with efficacy on a specific task and context. To further clarify the exact meaning of self-efficacy as it is used here in meeting the criteria of positive organizational behavior, specific versus general efficacy needs to be clarified. Earlier the differentiation between the various POB constructs was briefly discussed, but the difference between self-efficacy and closely related established organizational behavior constructs such as self-esteem, expectancy motivation, and attribution/ locus of control also needs to be addressed. Specific versus General Self-Efficacy Specific self-efficacy follows Bandura’s conceptualization and is widely recognized by almost all efficacy scholars and the psychology field as a whole.28 In recent years, however, general self-efficacy has been used as another dimension of self-efficacy by a few efficacy researchers.29 They suggest that in addition to specific self-efficacy, there is a generalized efficacy that reflects people’s belief in successfully accomplishing tasks across a wide variety of achievement situations. It should be recognized that this generalized efficacy is quite different from Bandura’s portrayal of self-efficacy. In particular, the accepted task-specific version of self-efficacy is statelike, and thus meets this important criterion for POB. Specific self-efficacy is highly variable depending on the specific task and is cognitively processed by the individual before any effort is expended. Bandura argues that self-efficacy represents a task-and situation-specific cognition.30 On the other hand, general efficacy is conceptually the opposite; it is traitlike. That is, general efficacy is relatively stable over time and across situations; in this regard it is like a personality trait.31 Bandura contends with his years of theory building and basic research that “an efficacy belief is not a decontextualized trait.”32 However, Bandura and others point out that even though self-efficacy is not traitlike, this does not mean that specific self-efficacy evaluations never generalize.33 Instead, although not necessarily stable across situations, efficacy judgments on one task may generalize to others depending on the situation, the task, and the person. In summary, as presented here as a POB construct, self-efficacy is statelike and therefore is aimed at specific tasks and open to training and development. For example, a systems analyst may have high self-efficacy on solving a particular programming problem, but low self-efficacy on writing up a report for the CIO (chief information officer) on how the problem was solved. Importantly for POB, this low efficacy can be raised through training and development, and the enhanced efficacy will result in improved performance. How Self-Efficacy Differs from Established Organizational Behavior Concepts At first glance self-efficacy appears very similar and is often confused with widely recognized organizational behavior concepts, in particular, self-esteem (Chapter 5) and expectancy motivation (Chapter 6). The same confusion also often surfaces with the well-known 204 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior construct of attribution/locus of control (covered in Chapter 6). A brief summary of the major differences will help clarify the exact meaning of self-efficacy.34 1. Self-efficacy vs. self-esteem. Following from the preceding discussion of specific versus general self-efficacy, there is no question that general self-efficacy is very similar to self-esteem, but the widely accepted specific self-efficacy as used here is quite different. The first difference is that self-esteem is a global construct of one’s evaluation and belief of overall worthiness, whereas self-efficacy is one’s belief about a task-and contextspecific capability. Second, self-esteem is stable and traitlike, whereas self-efficacy is changing over time as new information and task experiences are gained and developed and is statelike. Finally, self-esteem is aimed at any aspect of one’s current self, whereas self-efficacy is a current assessment of one’s future success at a task. 35 An example of the differences would be the salesperson who has high self-efficacy of selling a luxury item to low-income customers, but low self-esteem because he knows his career has been based on selling unneeded items to his customers and this takes away from their ability to buy some of the basic necessities for their families. 2. Self-efficacy vs. expectancy concepts. Chapter 6 briefly discussed under expectancy theories of motivation the effort-performance (sometimes called E1) and behavioroutcome (sometimes referred to as E2) expectancy relationships. Although E1 and self-efficacy would both say that effort leads to performance, self-efficacy involves much more. Self-efficacy beliefs also involve perceptions of ability, skill, knowledge, experience with the specific task, complexity of the task, and more. In addition, self-efficacy has psychomotor reactions such as emotions, stress, and physical fatigue. With the E2 (behavior-outcome expectancy) there are even more pronounced differences. The process is different—efficacy is a judgment of one’s ability to successfully execute a certain behavior pattern (i.e., “I believe I can successfully execute this task”), whereas the outcome expectancy is a judgment of the probable consequence such behavior will produce (i.e., “I believe that what I do will (or will not) lead to desired outcomes”). In other words, the individual’s self-efficacy evaluation will usually come before any behavior outcome expectancies are even considered.36 3. Self-efficacy vs. attribution/locus of control. The third close, but different, construct that is often confused with self-efficacy comes from attribution theory, specifically locus of control. Those who make internal attributions about their behavior and its consequences (success or failure) believe they are in control of their own fate (e.g., “It is my effort or ability that makes the difference”) and assume personal responsibility for the consequences of their behavior. Externals, on the other hand, make attributions to the circumstances (“The task was too hard”) or to luck and do not take personal responsibility for the consequences of their behavior. Bandura has argued that locus of control attributions are causal beliefs about action-outcome contingencies, whereas self-efficacy is an individual’s belief about his or her abilities and cognitive resources that can be marshaled together to successfully execute a specific task.37 Although the differences outlined above may seem quite technical, they must be pointed out to make sure that self-efficacy is indeed a valid, independent construct and help clarify its exact meaning. The Process and Impact of Self-Efficacy The self-efficacy process affects human functioning not only directly, but has an indirect impact on other determinants as well. Directly, the self-efficacy process starts before individuals select their choices and initiate their effort. First, people tend to weigh, evaluate, and integrate information about their perceived capabilities.38 Importantly, this initial stage Chapter 7 Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital 205 of the process has little to do with individuals’ abilities or resources per se, but rather how they perceive or believe they can use these abilities and resources to accomplish the given task in this context. This evaluation/perception then leads to the expectations of personal efficacy which, in turn, determines:39 1. The decision to perform the specific task in this context 2. The amount of effort that will be expended to accomplish the task 3. The level of persistence that will be forthcoming despite problems, disconfirming evidence, and adversity In other words, from the preceding it can be seen that self-efficacy can directly affect: 1. Choice behaviors (e.g., decisions will be made based on how efficacious the person feels toward the options in, say, work assignments or even a career field) 2. Motivational effort (e.g., people will try harder and give more effort on tasks where they have high self-efficacy than those where the efficacy judgment is low) 3. Perseverance (e.g., those with high self-efficacy will bounce back, be resilient when meeting problems or even failure, whereas those with low self-efficacy tend to give up when obstacles appear) In addition, there is research evidence that self-efficacy can also directly affect:40 4. Facilitative thought patterns (e.g., efficacy judgments influence self-talks such as those with high self-efficacy might say to themselves, “I know I can figure out how to solve this problem,” whereas those with low self-efficacy might say to themselves, “I knew I couldn’t do this, I don’t have this kind of ability”) 5. Vulnerability to stress (e.g., those with low self-efficacy tend to experience stress and burnout because they expect failure, whereas those with high self-efficacy enter into potential stressful situations with confidence and assurance and thus are able to resist stressful reactions) These examples of the direct impact of efficacy on human functioning are right in line with high-performing individuals. Perhaps the best profile of a high performer on a given task would be the highly efficacious individual who really gets into the task (welcomes it and looks at it as a challenge); gives whatever effort it takes to successfully accomplish the task; perseveres when meeting obstacles, frustrations, or setbacks; has positive selfthoughts and talks; and is resistant to stress and burnout. As if this high-performance profile is not enough, Bandura emphasizes that efficacy also plays a vital role in other important human performance determinants such as goal aspirations, the incentives in outcome expectations, and the perceived opportunities of a given project.41 What level of goal is selected, how much effort is expended to reach the selected goal, and how one reacts/perseveres when problems are encountered in progressing toward the goal all seem to be greatly affected by self-efficacy.42 So do the outcome incentives people anticipate. Those with high self-efficacy expect to succeed and gain favorable, positive outcome incentives, whereas those with low self-efficacy expect to fail and conjure up negative outcome disincentives (i.e., “I won’t get anything out of this anyway”). Especially relevant to strategy formulation, entrepreneurial start-ups, and struggling transitionary economies in developing countries,43 Bandura comments on the perceptions of opportunities as follows: People of high efficacy focus on the opportunities worth pursuing, and view obstacles as surmountable. Through ingenuity and perseverance they figure out ways of exercising some control even in environments of limited opportunities and many constraints. Those beset with 206 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior self-doubts dwell on impediments which they view as obstacles over which they can exert little control, and easily convince themselves of the futility of effort. They achieve limited success even in environments that provide many opportunities.44 Whether direct or indirect through other processes, high efficacy is strongly related and very predictive of high performance. The extensive research solidly supports this conclusion. Not only does Bandura’s seminal book on self-efficacy cite hundreds and hundreds of studies, but, as the introductory comments indicated, there are no less than nine metaanalyses (including ours reported in the section at the end of the chapter, Ending with Meta-Analytic Research Findings45) that consistently find a positive relationship between self-efficacy and performance in different spheres of functioning under laboratory and naturalistic conditions.46 Sources of Efficacy Because Bandura has provided such a comprehensive, rich theoretical understanding, backed by years of research, there is common agreement on the principal sources of selfefficacy. Shown in Figure 7.2, it must be remembered from social cognitive theory that these four sources of efficacy only provide the raw data. The individual must select out, cognitively process, and self-reflect in order to integrate and use this information to make self-efficacy perceptual judgments and form beliefs. For example, the major input into selfefficacy of performance attainments, Bandura notes, “may vary depending on their interpretive biases, the difficulty of the task, how hard they worked at it, how much help they received, the conditions under which they performed, their emotional and physical state at the time, their rate of improvement over time, and selective biases in how they monitor and recall their attainments.”47 In other words, successful performance does not automatically raise the level of efficacy. Rather, the efficacy depends on how the individual interprets and cognitively processes the success. In order of importance, the following briefly summarizes the major sources of information for self-efficacy: FIGURE 7.2 The Major Sources of Information for Self-Efficacy Mastery Experiences or Performance Attainments Vicarious Experiences or Modeling SELF-EFFICACY Social Persuasion Physiological and Psychological Arousal Chapter 7 Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital 207 1. Mastery experiences or performance attainments. This is potentially the most powerful for forming efficacy beliefs because it is direct information about success. However, once again, it should be emphasized that performance accomplishments do not directly equate with self-efficacy. Both situational (e.g., the complexity of the task) and cognitive processing (e.g., the perception of one’s ability) concerning the performance will affect the efficacy judgment and belief. Bandura also points out that mastery experiences gained through perseverant effort and ability to learn form a strong and resilient sense of efficacy, but efficacy built from successes that came easily will not be characterized by much perseverance when difficulties arise and will change more quickly.48 2. Vicarious experiences or modeling. Just as individuals do not need to directly experience reinforced personal behaviors in order to learn (they can vicariously learn by observing and modeling relevant others who are reinforced), the same is true of acquiring efficacy. As stated by Bandura, “If people see others like themselves succeed by sustained effort, they come to believe that they, too, have the capacity to succeed. Conversely, observing the failure of others instills doubts about one’s own ability to master similar activities.”49 It is important to emphasize that the more similar the model (e.g., demographics such as age, sex, physical characteristics, and education, as well as status and experience) and the more relevant the task being performed, the more effect there will be on the observer’s efficacy processing. This vicarious source of information is particularly important for those with little direct experience (e.g., a new assignment) and as a practical strategy to enhance people’s efficacy through training and development. 3. Social persuasion. Not as powerful a source of information as the previous two, and sometimes oversimplified as a “can-do” approach, people’s belief in their efficacy can be strengthened by respected, competent others persuading them that they “have what it takes” and providing positive feedback on progress being made on this particular task. On the other side of the coin, there is no question of the powerful impact that unkind words and negative feedback (e.g., “you can’t do that”) have in disabling and deflating one’s confidence. Too often, a small negative comment or even nonverbal gesture can have a big impact on one’s emotions and efficacy. Unfortunately, giving people positive feedback and pointing out their strengths for successfully accomplishing a task does not seem to be processed by most people with as much impact as the negative. However, by being genuine, providing objective information, and then taking follow-up actions to actually set up the individual for success and not failure, social persuasion can be selected and processed for building efficacy. Such social persuasion becomes more useful to fill in gaps when people begin to struggle or doubt themselves while pursuing a task than it is in trying to build one’s efficacy for a new task. 4. Physiological and psychological arousal. People often rely on how they feel, physically and emotionally, in order to assess their capabilities. More than the other sources of information, if these are negative (e.g., the person is very tired and/or not physically well or is particularly anxious/depressed and/or feels under a lot of pressure) this will generally greatly detract from efficacy. On the other hand, if these physical and mental states are well off, they don’t necessarily process as contributing much to the individual’s efficacy. On balance, however, if the individual is in excellent physical and mental condition, this can serve as a good point of departure to build efficacy in other ways and may even in and of itself arouse a person’s efficacy on a physically and/or psychologically demanding task. Importantly for organizational behavior and human resource management, each of these sources of efficacy are highly malleable and changeable. As discussed earlier, specific selfefficacy is a state, not a trait. In other words, self-efficacy can definitely be enhanced 208 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior TABLE 7.1 Implications of Self-Efficacy for Effective Training Source: Adapted from Robert F. Mager, “No Self-Efficacy, No Performance,” Training, April 1992, pp. 34–36. Key for Successful Training and Transfer to the Job Sources of Efficacy: 1. Mastery experience and performance attainment Trainees must learn they are the cause of their performance. 2. Vicarious experience and modeling Model(s) used should have similar demographic attributes, and the training being done should be similar to what the trainees will be doing back on the job. 3. Social persuasion All comments have impact, so feedback must be phrased positively to build trainee confidence. 4. Physical and psychological arousal Make sure trainees experiencing physical or psychological symptoms interpret them as the nature of the training task and not some personal inadequacy (i.e., lack of ability). Training Recommendations 1. Plenty of practice so mastery (as defined by the training objectives) is reached. 2. Break learning into series of obtainable endpoints to helpself-confirmation of skills. 3. Provide feedback on progress (not shortfalls) and contributions 1. Carefully select models used in the training to have similar characteristics as the trainees. 2. Set up training so that trainees perceive performance is due to the capability of the model and not other factors. 3. Models should take a taskdiagnostic perspective (i.e., focus on task and if mistake is made, interpret as way to learn rather than personal inadequacy). 1. Set trainees up for success so feedback comments can be very positive. 2. Trainers must be careful and sensitive to keep positive things that are said and done in the presence of the trainee. 1. Trainees must understand that the need to exert considerable physical (or psychological) effort does not mean a lack of personal capability. 2. Getting trainees physically and psychologically fit may help arouse motivation to learn and be successful. through training and development targeted at these four sources. For example, as shown in Table 7.1, training expert Robert Mager has pinpointed specific training implications for each of the sources of self-efficacy. In fact, developing self-efficacy in trainees may be a solution to the long-standing problem of transferring training to the job. As Mager notes, People need a strong sense of efficacy before they will try to apply what they have learned and before they will try to learn new things. Belief in their ability to perform makes them less vulnerable to on-the-job conditions that aren’t always supportive. It helps them to survive rejection. It helps them to persevere in the face of obstacles and setbacks.50 Chapter 7 Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital 209 Self-efficacy not only has these important implications for training, but also for many other areas of today’s workplace as well. Implications for Efficacy in the Workplace and POB Self-efficacy theory was first used over 30 years ago as a clinical framework “for analyzing changes achieved in fearful and avoidant behavior.”51 Psychotherapeutic treatments such as desensitization, symbolic modeling, and firsthand mastery experiences were clearly found to change behavior of clients through the common pathway of perceived self-efficacy. However, the scope of efficacy quickly broadened beyond this domain of clinical behavior change to be successfully applied in areas such as: (1) the promotion of health and recovery from physical setbacks, (2) the control of eating, (3) resistance to addictive substances, (4) educational achievement, (5) athletic performance, and, importantly, (6) for the study and application of organizational behavior and performance in work settings.52 Whereas the POB constructs discussed next have to date relatively few research studies in the workplace, efficacy has a very well-established body of knowledge as to its applicability and positive impact on work-related performance. Specifically, our (Stajkovic and Luthans) meta-analysis included 114 studies and 21,616 subjects.53 The results indicated a highly significant, .38 weighted average correlation between self-efficacy and work-related performance. When converted to the effect size estimate commonly used in meta-analysis, the transformed value represents a 28 percent increase in performance due to self-efficacy.54 By comparison, these results for self-efficacy in the workplace represent a greater average gain in performance than the results from the meta-analyses of other popular organizational behavior interventions such as goal setting (10.39%),55 feedback (13.6%),56 or organizational behavior modification (17%),57 and also seems to be a better predictor of workrelated performance than the personality traits (e.g., the “Big Five”) or relevant attitudes (e.g., job satisfaction or organizational commitment) commonly used in organizational behavior research.58 Also, a subanalysis of recent research on PsyCap indicated that the efficacy component by itself was significantly related to work performance and job satisfaction across different samples.59 Although the workplace is given considerable attention in Bandura’s widely recognized book, Self-Efficacy,60 more recently he provided a focused review of the growing research literature of the direct and indirect impact that self-efficacy has on work-related personal and organizational effectiveness.61 This research review of the impact of self-efficacy includes a wide range of organizational behavior topics such as career choice and development, new employee training, work design/job enrichment, supportive communication, teams (i.e., collective efficacy), innovation, entrepreneurship, leadership, and stress. He then devotes considerable attention to the strategies and principles for developing and strengthening beliefs of personal efficacy in the workplace. From this considerable body of theory and research on self-efficacy, the following sections offer some practical implications and specific guidelines for the more effective practice of managing human performance in today’s and future organizations. Selection of Human Resources In hiring for a particular job, making an assignment to a specific project, or promoting someone into an identifiable area of responsibility, assessing the person’s present magnitude and strength of self-efficacy could be valuable input into the selection decision. Magnitude measures the level of task difficulty that a person believes he or she is capable of executing, and strength indicates whether the magnitude is strong and likely to produce perseverance when difficulties are encountered.62 210 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior FIGURE 7.3 Number of Car Sales per month An Example of a Self-Efficacy Scale Developed for an Auto Sales Position I believe I can sell 2 Yes or No Strength of Certainty (0–100%) I believe I can sell 4 I believe I can sell 6 I believe I can sell 8 I believe I can sell 10 I believe I can sell 12 I believe I can sell 14 I believe I can sell 16 Totals Although most applicable to specific tasks within a job assignment or promotion, selfefficacy scales could be set up for each of the major tasks or for the overall domain of a given job. This scale would include, in ascending order, items that represent the increasing levels of difficulty. The respondent would check for each item yes or no (magnitude) and then next to it 0–100 percent probability of attainment (i.e., strength). Figure 7.3 shows such a scale. The efficacy scores are derived by getting a total of the probability strengths for each item with a yes. This so-called Composite I method of scoring has been shown to be a valid measure of self-efficacy and more reliable than other measures.63 If regular questionnaire item scales are developed, they should be tailor-made for each specific selection purpose. Bandura advises that the content of such scales “must represent beliefs about personal abilities to produce specified levels of performance, and must not include other characteristics.”64 Of course, people should not be selected only on the basis of their present self-efficacy assessment, but because it has been found to be such a good predictor of performance, self-efficacy could make a significant contribution to the selection process. This assessment could also be used as a training and development needs analysis. Training and Development As discussed previously (see Table 7.1), because self-efficacy is a state (rather than a stable trait) and the sources have been identified (see Figure 7.2 and accompanying discussion), efficacy training and development can have considerable impact for employee performance management. Training can be set up around each (and in combination) of the sources of efficacy listed in Table 7.1. Bandura recently categorized his approach to training and development into three areas.65 First is what he calls guided mastery, which includes instructive modeling to acquire a skill or competency, guided skill perfection, and then transferring the training back to the job to ensure self-directed success. Second is for the more complex—but increasingly common for all levels in the modern workplace—ways to enhance efficacy for decision making and problem solving. He calls this cognitive mastery modeling to learn thinking skills and how to apply them by observing the decision rules and reasoning strategies successful models use as they arrive at solutions to problems and make effective decisions. For example, one study taught managers how to generate ideas to improve the quality of organizational functioning and customer service by providing them guidelines and practice in innovative problem solving.66 Finally, he suggests the development of self-regulatory competencies (i.e., self-motivation or self-management). Chapter 7 Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital 211 The development of this increasingly important self-management involves a variety of interlinked self-referent processes such as self-monitoring, self-efficacy appraisal, personal goal setting, and use of self-motivating incentives.67 A meta-analysis (117 studies) evaluating the effects of behavioral modeling training (BMT) found:68 1. The largest effects of BMT were on learning outcomes, but BMT also had an impact on job behavior and results outcomes. 2. Although the BMT effects on knowledge decayed over time, the effects on skills and job behavior remained stable or even increased. 3. The greatest impact of BMT was when: a. both negative and positive models were presented; b. practice included trainee-generated scenarios; c. trainers were instructed to set goals; d. trainees’ supervisors were also trained; and e. rewards and sanctions were instituted in the trainees’ work environment. Whether using the more pragmatic training aimed at enhancing the four sources discussed earlier (Table 7.1 summarizes) or these more sophisticated approaches suggested by Bandura and others, there is proven effectiveness of this training and development of self-efficacy,69 and the potential for the future seems unlimited. For example, our research has found that training managers and employees in manufacturing, insurance, and the public sector using Bandura’s sources was able to significantly increase their efficacy beliefs of successfully coping with diversity initiatives.70 As part of a larger PsyCap study including efficacy (and the other positive capacities covered next), we were able to raise the level of efficacy as part of PsyCap in an experimental, control group study design,71 and also we have demonstrated the dollar utility impact on participants’ performance improvement.72 Other Applications Besides selection and training/development, self-efficacy also has implications for stress management (Chapter 9), self-managed teams (Chapter 11), job design and goal setting (Chapter 6), and leadership (Chapters 13 and 14). One applications approach backed by research has been to enhance self-efficacy to better cope with stress73 and facilitate productive teamwork74 and collective efficacy75 of self-managed teams. Another approach would be to use job designs that provide more responsibility, challenge, and empowered personal control over the work to enhance the jobholder’s perception of self-efficacy.76 In setting goals, goal difficulty and commitment will be affected by self-efficacy. By the same token, goal progress and attainment will in turn affect self-efficacy.77 In addition to these more established applications, a more recent study has shown that efficacy can be applied to the creative process in organizations. It was found that creative self-efficacy (employees’ beliefs that they can be creative in their work roles) predicted creative performance beyond the predictive effects of job self-efficacy.78 Perhaps at least potentially the most significant but still largely overlooked implication for application lies in leadership efficacy.79 Although the importance of a leader’s confidence has been recognized in the leadership literature over the years,80 to date there have been very few attempts to measure and research the proposition drawn from self-efficacy theory and research presented here,81 that leadership efficacy will have a strong positive impact on followers (e.g., the leader can serve as a model to enhance followers’ self-efficacy) and performance outcomes. As part of the POB theoretical foundation and the positive, authentic, approach to leadership, we do include confidence/efficacy,82 and this will be given attention in the leadership chapters. In addition, self-efficacy has implications for most of the remaining chapters in both Part Three, Dynamics of Organizational Behavior, and Part Four, Managing and Leading for High Performance. 212 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior OPTIMISM Optimism is a major construct in positive psychology and has long been recognized by both psychologists and people in general. The positive impact of optimism on physical and psychological health and the attendant characteristics of perseverance, achievement, and motivation leading to academic, athletic, political, and occupational success are well documented. By the same token, pessimism is known to lead to passivity, failure, social estrangement, and, in its extreme, depression and mortality. Not as well known, except for the psychological researchers in the area, is that optimism also can have drawbacks, dysfunctions, and costs. Well people tend to be optimistic about their future health and therefore often neglect needed nutritional and physical maintenance, or in an organization optimistic managers may become distracted from making the necessary action plans to attain goals or contingency plans for clearly impending problems. For example, one expert on the financial crisis at the end of 2008 observed: The recent recklessness of residential and commercial real-estate lending was in plain view, and a vocal minority wrote about it. But the financial and business communities dismissed all the warnings, insisting that any damage—should it ever arrive—would be contained to the subprime section. The folly was obvious. Even if decision makers had deemed the grim forecasts to be of low probability, the potential outcomes were so dire that they demanded contingency plans.83 The problem of unbridled optimism, especially in retrospect when things go wrong, does seem to be a bigger problem than the downside of the other positive constructs (e.g., overconfidence or false hope). However, optimism is receiving growing attention in psychology, but except for the general knowledge carryover, the field of organizational behavior has to date largely neglected optimism as an important concept and application in improving employee performance. In defining optimism, contemporary positive psychologists go far beyond the old adage of the “power of positive thinking” popularized by widely read and heard writers a number of years ago, such as Norman Vincent Peale and Dale Carnegie, in recent times Tony Robbins and Steven Covey, and political leaders such as Franklin Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan, and Barack Obama. Psychology treats optimism as a cognitive characteristic in terms of a generalized positive outcome expectancy (see Chapter 6) and/or a positive causal attribution. Optimism is also often used in relation to other positive constructs such as hope (covered next) and emotional intelligence. Emotional intelligence expert Daniel Goleman, for instance, devotes considerable attention to the role of optimism in his discussions of emotional intelligence and even at one point refers to optimism as an emotionally intelligent attitude.84 However, as positive psychologist Christopher Peterson points out in a comprehensive analysis, “Optimism is not simply cold cognition, and if we forget the emotional flavor that pervades optimism, we can make little sense of the fact that optimism is both motivated and motivating.”85 The Dimensions of Optimism Most psychologists treat optimism as human nature and/or an individual difference. Unfortunately, like other psychological and organizational behavior concepts, there are still many unresolved issues surrounding optimism. Optimism as Human Nature Both the early philosophers (Sophocles, Nietzsche) and psychologists/psychiatrists (Freud, Allport, Erikson, Menninger) were generally negative about optimism. They felt that optimism Chapter 7 Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital 213 was largely an illusion and that a more accurate perception of the hard facts of reality was more conducive to healthy psychological functioning. However, starting in the 1960s and 1970s, cognitive psychologists began to demonstrate that many people tend to have a more positive bias of themselves than cold reality, and that psychologically healthy people in particular have this positive bias. This positivity has gone all the way to being portrayed by some anthropologists, evolutionary psychologists, and neuropsychologists as inherent in the makeup of people—part of their basic human nature.86 Optimism as an Individual Difference More in tune with mainstream modern psychology is to treat optimism (as with other psychological constructs) as an individual difference; people have varying degrees of optimism. Treating optimism as an individual difference focuses on cognitively determined expectations and causal attributions. Most closely associated with the expectancy theoretical perspective are Carver and Scheier who simply state, “optimists are people who expect good things to happen to them; pessimists are people who expect bad things to happen to them.”87 Seligman, on the other hand, is associated with the attributional approach. He uses the term explanatory style to depict how an individual habitually attributes the causes of failure, misfortune, or bad events.88 This explanatory style is an outgrowth of Seligman’s earlier work on learned helplessness (also covered in Chapter 9 on stress and conflict). He had found that dogs and then humans, when continually experiencing uncontrollable, punishing, aversive events, eventually learn to be helpless. This helplessness generalized to the point that even when the animals or humans could subsequently control and escape the aversive conditions, they still acted in a helpless manner. Importantly, however, not all the subjects learned to be helpless. About a third resisted; they persevered and refused to give in and be helpless. Seligman extended this work on learned helplessness into generalized causal attributions or explanatory styles of optimism and pessimism. Here are the causal attributions or explanatory style pessimists and optimists tend to habitually use in interpreting personal bad events:89 1. Pessimists make internal (their own fault), stable (will last a long time), and global (will undermine everything they do) attributions. 2. Optimists make external (not their fault), unstable (temporary setback), and specific (problem only in this situation) attributions. Research continues on explanatory style, and it has been found that the internality attribution does not hold up as well as the stability or globality.90 Overall, however, no matter how optimism is measured, it has been shown to be significantly linked with desirable characteristics such as happiness, perseverance, achievement, and health.91 Again, under positive psychology, the emphasis shifted in both theory building and research from what can go wrong with people (e.g., learned helplessness, pessimism, and depression) to what can go right for people (e.g., optimism, health, and success).92 Some Unresolved Optimism Issues Even though there is considerably more research and definitive conclusions on optimism than, say, emotional intelligence, there is still much room for conceptual refinement and further research. Peterson identifies and summarizes three of the more important optimism issues as follows:93 1. Little vs. big optimism. The magnitude and level of optimism may function quite differently. Little optimism involves specific expectations about positive outcomes (e.g., I will finish my assignment by 5 o’clock so I can watch the ball game tonight), whereas big 214 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior optimism refers to more generic, larger expectations of positive outcomes (e.g., our firm can become the leader in the industry). Although there may be some relationship between little and big, there is also the distinct possibility of someone being a little optimist, but a big pessimist, or vice versa. There seems little question that the strategies, mechanisms, and pathways linking optimism to outcomes may differ (e.g., time management versus visionary leadership). 2. Optimism vs. pessimism. Although the assumption is often made that optimism and pessimism are mutually exclusive, they may not be. Some people expect both good outcomes (optimism) and bad outcomes (pessimism) to be plentiful. Interestingly, explanatory style derived from attributions about bad events are usually independent of explanatory style based on attributions about good events. In other words, attributions about bad events are identified as optimistic or pessimistic, but attributions about good events are not. It would seem that attributions about good events would be as, if not more, important to understanding optimism. 3. Learning and sustaining optimism. Although optimism is sometimes portrayed as a stable personality trait (e.g., Scheier and Carver’s dispositional optimism),94 Seligman has led the way in popularizing learned optimism. This says that anyone, including pessimists, can learn the skills to be an optimist.95 Of course, it is critical that this developable, statelike nature of optimism be included in POB. The social learning process of modeling (i.e., observing positive events and outcomes in one’s relevant, valued environment) can contribute to the learning of optimism. By the same token, as Chapter 9 on stress will indicate, reducing and coping with bad events and stress can also help sustain optimism. Overall, the past, present, and future of optimism as an exciting psychological construct for the better understanding and application of human functioning in general and for organizational behavior in particular seems very “optimistic.” Optimism in the Workplace As discussed, there is no question that optimism is both motivated and motivating; has the desirable characteristics of perseverance, achievement, and health; makes external, unstable, and specific attributions of personal bad events; and is linked with positive outcomes such as occupational success. Obviously by extrapolating this profile, optimism could be a very positive force in the workplace. For example, optimists may be motivated to work harder; be more satisfied and have high morale; have high levels of aspiration and set stretch goals; persevere in the face of obstacles and difficulties; make attributions of personal failures and setbacks as temporary, not as personal inadequacy, and view them as a one-time unique circumstance; and tend to feel good and invigorated both physically and mentally. The accompanying OB in Action: “Half-Empty” or “Half-Full” gives some realworld scenarios of such optimistic people in the workplace. There are some jobs and career fields where optimism would be especially valuable (e.g., sales, advertising, public relations, product design, customer service, and in the health and social services fields). The Downside of Optimism Despite the overwhelming anecdotal evidence of the positive power of optimism in the workplace, it must be remembered that the academic literature does warn that in certain cases optimism can lead to meaningless or dysfunctional outcomes. For example, Peterson notes that optimistically driven behavior may be aimed at pointless pursuits (e.g., finish in the top five of the company golf league) or unrealistic goals (e.g., striving to attain an unattainable sales goal that results in stress, exhaustion, and high blood pressure).96 Moreover, “realistic optimism” would result in more effective leadership than “false optimism.”97 OB in Action: “Half-Empty” or “Half-Full” Although to date there are not many research studies of the role of optimism in the workplace, it is nevertheless happening day to day in the way in which organizational participants interpret and react to events. Some people view the “glass” (everyday and important events) as half-full (optimists) and some as half-empty (pessimists). Here are some actual examples. 1. Take the case of two executives who were passed over for promotion because of negative evaluations from their boss. A. The “half-empty” exec reacted to the snub in a rage. He had fantasies of killing his boss, complained to anyone who would listen of his unfair treatment, and went on a drinking binge. He felt like his life was over. He avoided his boss and looked down when passing him in the hall. In an interview, however, he admitted “Even though I was angry and felt cheated, deep down I feared that he was right, that I was sort of worthless, that I had failed, and there was nothing I could do to change that.” B. The “half-full” exec who did not get the promotion was also stunned and upset. But instead of going into a rage, he reasoned to himself, “I can’t say I was surprised, really. He and I have such different ideas, and we’ve argued a lot.” Instead of sulking, he openly discussed the setback with his wife to determine what went wrong and what he could do to correct it. He realized that maybe he was not giving his all at work and resolved to talk to the boss. Here is how it went: “I had some discussions with him and things went very well. I guess he was troubled about what he had done, and I was troubled about not working up to potential. Since then, things have been better for both of us.” 2. Another “half-full” case is Anne Busquet of American Express. She was relieved of her duties as head of the Optima Card division when it was discovered that some of her employees had hidden millions of dollars in bad debt. Although not involved, she was held accountable and was devastated by the setback. However, instead of quitting, she was still confident in her abilities and took a lower position trying to save the company’s failing merchandising service division. She made a self-examination of what went wrong in the Optima Card division and concluded that maybe she was too strict and critical of her people. She reasoned that this style may have led her people to fear her to the point where they hid the losses. She resolved to soften her style and become more open, patient, and a better listener. Using this approach to manage the troubled merchandising service division, she saw it reach profitability within two years. 3. Perhaps the greatest “half-full” case is Arthur Blank, the founder of Home Depot. In 1978, after personality clashes with his boss at the hardware chain Handy Dan’s, he was fired. Instead of getting angry, he got even. He believed in his abilities and vision for this type of retailing. He did not give up after the setback at Handy Dan’s. When an investor approached him, he jumped at the chance to put his talents to work and founded Home Depot. The rest is history. The half-full optimists interpret bad events in terms of Seligman’s explanatory style, and, as the preceding three examples indicate, this can result in future positive outcomes. Whereas the half-empty pessimists tend to give up and go into a downward spiral after problems or failures, the half-fulls view setbacks as a lesson to be learned for future success. There are also certain jobs in which at least mild pessimism would be beneficial (e.g., some technical jobs such as safety engineering or jobs in financial control and accounting). Seligman’s Met Life Studies For studies of optimism in the workplace, Seligman again leads the way with his pioneering work at Metropolitan Life Insurance. After conferring with the president of this huge company, he was able to test the obvious hypothesis that optimism and its attendant motivation and perseverance were the keys to sales success. A shortened version of his theorybased Attributional Style Questionnaire (ASQ) was administered to 200 experienced Met Life sales agents. This open-ended version of the ASQ was designed to determine the habitual explanatory style by asking the respondents to interpret six good and six bad vignettes in terms of personalization, permanence, and pervasiveness. Importantly, this test has been 215 216 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior found to be very difficult to fake optimism; the right answers vary from test to test, and it does contain “lie scales” to identify those not telling the truth. Results were that agents who scored in the most optimistic half of the ASQ had sold 37 percent more insurance on average in their first two years than agents who scored in the pessimistic half. Agents who scored in the top 10 percent sold 88 percent more than the most pessimistic 10 percent.98 Despite the impressive findings from the initial study, Seligman was still not sure of the direction of causality from the correlational results (i.e., if the optimism caused the high performance or if the high performers became optimistic). He next conducted a pilot study on 104 new hires that took both the standard insurance industry selection test and the ASQ. Interestingly, he found that new insurance agents are more optimistic than any other group tested (e.g., car salespeople, commodity traders, West Point plebes, managers of Arby’s restaurants, baseball stars, or world-class swimmers). Optimistic scorers were much less likely to quit (a big problem in the insurance industry where about half turn over the first year) and did as well as the industry test in predicting performance. He next launched a full-blown study involving 15,000 applicants to Met Life taking both the industry test and the ASQ. One thousand were hired and, importantly, 129 more (called the “Special Force”) that had scored in the top half of those taking the ASQ but had failed the industry test were also hired. In the first year the optimists (those who scored in the top half of the ASQ) outsold the pessimists by only 8 percent, but in the second year by 31 percent. The “Special Force” (those who had flunked the industry test and would not have been hired except for scoring as optimists on the ASQ) outsold the hired pessimists in the regular force by 21 percent the first year and 57 percent the second. They sold about the same as the optimists in the regular force. Met Life, on the basis of Seligman’s studies, then adopted the ASQ as an important part of their selection process of new agents.99 Other Research and Application in the Workplace With the exception of the comprehensive Met Life study, to date there has been relatively little research to directly test the impact of optimism in the workplace. An older study did examine competent managers and found that they attribute their failures to a correctable mistake, and then they persevere (i.e., an optimistic explanatory style).100 As with the other positive resources, optimism has also been part of recent studies in POB. For example, one POB study found optimism was related to employee performance, job satisfaction and work happiness.101 This optimism-performance relationship was also found with workers in Chinese factories.102 Other work on optimism has been applied to leadership. For example, there has been recognition given in leadership theory to the importance of optimism,103 and a field study found the measured optimism of military cadets had a significant relationship with their military science professors’ rating of leadership potential.104 Another study of business leaders found that on average they were more optimistic than a sample of nonleaders, that those most effective in initiating change were less pessimistic, and that the more optimistic the leader, the more optimistic the followers.105 There also have been a few publicized applications of deliberate attempts to use optimism in human resource management (HRM) such as in the selection process. One example is the highly successful Men’s Wearhouse discount retailer, where an HRM executive stated: We don’t look for people with specific levels of education and experience. We look for one criterion for hiring: optimism. We look for passion, excitement, energy. We want people who enjoy life.106 Besides selection, another example is American Express Financial Advisors that reportedly uses optimism training with their associates.107 Chapter 7 Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital 217 HOPE In the positive psychology movement, optimism has received relatively more attention than hope, but in POB hope is a more central concept.108 Most people think of hope in terms of “hope for the best,” a bit of sunny, optimistic advice offered by friends, relatives, and counselors in times of trouble. In positive psychology, however, hope has taken on a specific meaning. Previously in clinical psychology, hope was largely portrayed as a unidimensional construct involving an overall perception that one can attain his or her goals.109 However, recently deceased positive psychologist C. Rick Snyder provided the now most widely recognized bidimensional definition of hope that we use in POB. Through extensive theory and research, he and colleagues precisely defined hope as: “A positive motivational state that is based on an interactively derived sense of successful (a) agency (goal-directed energy), and (b) pathways (planning to meet goals).”110 More simply, this meaning of hope consists of both the “willpower” (agency) and the “waypower” (pathways). Importantly, considerable research over the past several years indicates it has a very positive impact on academic achievement, athletic accomplishment, emotional health, the ability to cope with illness and other hardships.111 Although not yet part of the mainstream organizational behavior literature, hope does make a good fit with the POB criteria. Even though hope draws from each of the positive psychology constructs, there are some conceptually important differences. From the perspective of emotional intelligence, Goleman states that “having hope means that one will not give in to overwhelming anxiety, a defeatist attitude, or depression in the face of difficult challenges or setbacks.”112 In relation to optimism, Seligman states, “Whether or not we have hope depends on two dimensions of our explanatory style: pervasiveness and performance. Finding temporary and specific causes for misfortune is the art of hope.”113 Perhaps conceptually the term closest in meaning to hope is self-efficacy (covered in the last sections). However, Snyder114 and others115 demonstrated that efficacy (as well as other POB constructs) and hope are conceptually and psychometrically (measurement) distinct (i.e., hope has construct validity). Over the past decade, Snyder and his colleagues developed a brief self-report “State Hope Scale” with items such as “I energetically pursue my goals” and “There are lots of ways around any problem”116 and conducted a number of studies using this scale. This research finds a positive link between hope scores and work-related goal expectancies, perceived control, self-esteem, positive emotions, coping, and achievement.117 Although the considerable research base showing the positive impact of hope deals with academic, athletic, and mental and physical health, the carryover implications for the workplace seem quite clear. For example, there is research evidence that those with hope in stressful professions such as human services perform better118 and survive with the most satisfaction, are less emotionally exhausted, and are most likely to stay.119 There is also direct work-related research beginning to emerge. For example, Snyder and colleagues, in an ongoing survey of U.S. firms, have found that those with higher-hope human resources are more profitable, have higher retention rates, and have greater levels of employee satisfaction and commitment.120 Moreover, a field study we recently conducted found that managers with higher hope levels had correspondingly higher performing work units, better retention rates, and more satisfied employees.121 More recent POB studies have found employees’ level of hope related to their job satisfaction, organizational commitment, work happiness, and performance 122 and also, like optimism, there was a significant relationship between Chinese factory workers’ hope and their performance.123 Moreover, a recent comprehensive study focused on hope across different types of jobs and industries found more hopeful sales employees, mortgage brokers, and management executives had 218 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior higher job performance, and the management executives also produced more and better quality solutions to a work-related problem.124 Hope also seems to have a positive impact on the entrepreneurial process. We found that higher-hope entrepreneurs express greater satisfaction with business ownership and consider themselves relatively better compensated than their lower-hope peers.125 These initial studies indicate that hope may have as powerful of a positive impact in the workplace as it has demonstrated outside the workplace. In human resource management, hope may play an important role in selection, especially for certain types of jobs and because it is learned and statelike (can change) rather than a stable trait, it can be enhanced by training and development to improve on-the-job performance and retention of valuable employees.126 RESILIENCY Unlike the other criteria-meeting POB psychological resources, resiliency is reactive rather then proactive in nature. In positive psychology, resiliency is defined as “a class of phenomena characterized by patterns of positive adaptation in the context of significant adversity or risk.”127 As a component of positive organizational behavior, resiliency is viewed “as the capacity to rebound or bounce back from adversity, conflict, failure or even positive events, progress and increased responsibility.”128 This “bouncing back” capacity involves flexibility, adjustment, adaptability, and continuous responsiveness to change and uncertainty that can otherwise represent a source of psychological strain and challenge one’s well-being over the long term. Traditionally in clinical psychology, resiliency was portrayed as an exceptional capability that only a select few possess. More recent theory and research now conclude that resiliency comes “from the everyday magic of ordinary, normative human resources.”129 Moreover, resiliency is not just an outcome that people strive to achieve, nor is it only a valuable input that enhances their chances of success. It is a lifelong journey, an elaborate process in which competence is developed over time as people interact with their environment most often characterized by continuous change and uncertainty.130 Although the research on resiliency and adaptation originally focused on at-risk children and adolescents (a negative perspective), recent studies have emphasized the positive aspects of resiliency.131 Moreover, resiliency is increasingly being viewed not only as a desirable characteristic of humans in general, but also as an essential attribute of today’s employees,132 managers,133 organizations,134 and even countries,135 especially in light of recent troubling and tragic events related to economic and geopolitical problems both in the United States and abroad. Important in meeting the criteria of positive organizational behavior, resiliency has been shown to be statelike, that is, it is trainable and developable.136 This statelike conceptualization opens the door for proactive efforts to create and develop resilient individuals and organizations.137 Several instruments have been developed to measure resilience, for example the “Ego-Resiliency Scale (ER89)” includes items such as “I quickly get over and recover from being startled” and “I enjoy dealing with new and unusual situations.”138 Based on the established research of positive psychologist Ann Masten and her colleagues, resiliency has been found to be influenced and developed by three types of factors: assets, risks, and adaptational processes.139 Resiliency can be developed through enhancing the assets that a person possesses, through education, training, and nurturing social relationships, and in general by improving the quality of resources available for the person to draw upon. Risk factors can be managed through appropriate physical and Chapter 7 Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital 219 psychological health care. Adaptational processes can be enhanced through developing other positive psychological capacities such as self-efficacy, hope, and optimism, as well as through teaching people how to use effective coping, stress management, problem solving, and goal-setting strategies and practical techniques. In fact, resiliency may be more adversely impacted by the process that links risk conditions with specific dysfunctional outcomes than by the presence, number or frequency of risk factors, or lack of necessary assets.140 The overall profile of resilient people is that they are characterized by “a staunch acceptance of reality; a deep belief, often buttressed by strongly held values, that life is meaningful; and an uncanny ability to improvise.”141 As today’s employees face the risks and uncertainties associated with economic turbulence, global sourcing, technological change, downsizing, work-life balance, extensive customer-service orientation, stress, and burnout, resiliency is becoming an indispensable factor that can turn such threats into opportunities for growth, development, and sustainable adaptability to change.142 Resiliency is also a positive strength from which not only individual managers and employees can benefit, but also overall organizations can no longer afford to be without.143 Turbulence and instability have become the norm in today’s business environment, and only organizations that can rejuvenate their adaptational systems and bounce back to swiftly respond to their ever-changing environments are likely to improve or even survive. A strong and stable organizational mission, vision, and set of values create a sense of community, direction, and purpose, enhancing a resilient corporate culture.144 Strategic planning, teamwork, decentralization, employee involvement, and open communication channels can be used to build a resilient organization that aligns organizational, unit, and individual goals and objectives, and builds trust, commitment, and effective organizational learning and adaptational systems.145 Counter to conventional wisdom, organizational rules and regulations that seemingly introduce rigidity and hinder creativity may actually help as effective structuring tools that foster an organization’s resilience in times of turbulence.146 Whether at the individual or organizational level, this resiliency dimension of positive organizational behavior may have the most potential impact on development and sustainable performance in the current difficult times. Although theory-building and research on resiliency within the domain of positive organizational behavior is just getting started, the results to date are very encouraging.147 PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL (PSYCAP) Using positive psychology and POB in general, and the four criteria-meeting psychological resources of efficacy, optimism, hope, and resiliency, in particular, as the foundation and point of departure, as indicated in the introductory comments, Luthans and colleagues have theoretically148 and empirically149 demonstrated a higher-order core construct called psychological capital or PsyCap. This PsyCap goes beyond economic (what you have, physical and financial assets), social (who you know, network of friends), and human capital (knowledge, skills, abilities, experience), and is defined as: An individual’s positive psychological state of development that is characterized by: (1) having confidence (self-efficacy) to take on and put in the necessary effort to succeed at challenging tasks; (2) making a positive attribution (optimism) about succeeding now and in the future; (3) persevering toward goals and, when necessary, redirecting paths to goals (hope) in order to succeed; and (4) when beset by problems and adversity, sustaining and bouncing back and even beyond (resiliency) to attain success.150 220 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior Background and Research on PsyCap Each of the four psychological constructs or resources that currently make up PsyCap are commonly found in the positive psychology literature, but, perhaps with the exception of efficacy, have received relatively little, if any, attention in the organization behavior field. Luthans and colleagues’ intent in the 2004 published articles151 was to label these four resources that best met the established criteria (theory, research, valid measurement, statelike, and performance impact) when combined as “psychological capital” because to their knowledge the term had not been used before. We subsequently found that Csikszentmihalyi had mentioned the term a couple of times in a book152 that was not yet published when the first PsyCap articles were written and then came out a bit later in the journals. Also, a recent Google search found the term in an economics article on wages in 1997. As noted by Luthans and colleagues, “Our aim in labeling this as a type of ‘capital’ was also related to the idea that there is considerable attention in workplace research being given to economic, social, human and even intellectual capital, but to our knowledge the positive resources we associate with psychological capital had not yet received interest or inquiry. In using the term PsyCap, we suggested that there was a common conceptual thread running through the four components characterized as “a positive appraisal of circumstances and probability for success based on motivated effort and perseverance.”153 We firmly believed from the beginning and reiterated in a recent point/counterpoint article154 that the most important “Point” we would like to make about positive organizational behavior in general and PsyCap in particular was the important role that research (i.e., an evidenced-based approach) must play. We noted at the outset that the value of positivity has been recognized through the years in psychology and even more so in the field of organizational behavior, but in this new focus on POB and now PsyCap we wanted to make sure we were not associated with the nonresearched positive, Pollyannaish approach too often found in the popular leadership and management literature. Thus, our first major research project was to validate a measure called the PsyCap Questionnaire or PCQ, and provide beginning empirical evidence that PsyCap was a second-order core construct accounting for more variance in employee performance and satisfaction than each of the four individual positive constructs that make it up.155 Also, in this comprehensive basic research study we found that PsyCap was relatively less stable over time than were recognized personality traits, but not as unstable as positive emotions, thus providing empirical evidence for PsyCap meeting the state-like criterion.156 After the background and theory-building presented in our book (Luthans, Youssef, and Avolio, Psychological Capital, Oxford, 2007) and the first major research project outlined above, we (especially along with James Avey) have a stream of research to refine and expand PsyCap. The following is representative of the evidence-based facets of PsyCap to date. 1. PsyCap was found to be positively related to desired organizational citizenship behaviors (covered in Chapter 6) and negatively to undesired organization cynicism, intentions to quit, and counterproductive workplace behaviors. Importantly, PsyCap predicted unique variance in these attitudes and behaviors over and above their demographics (age, education, experience, etc.), core self-evaluation traits, personality traits, and person-organization and person-job fit.157 2. To determine if PsyCap held across cultures, an early preliminary study found that a sample of workers in Chinese factories (metallurgical products and shoe manufacturers) partially tested PsyCap related to their performance.158 A recent follow-up study with different samples of Chinese factory workers using the full PsyCap model and PCQ measure replicated these findings.159 Such evidence becomes very important to developing Chapter 7 Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital 221 countries such as China who need to leverage their still largely untapped wealth (in this case psychological capital) of their human (not just natural) resources for sustained growth and competitive advantage in the global economy. 3. Besides these studies relating PsyCap directly to attitudinal and performance outcomes, recent research indicates that PsyCap may also have implications for combating stress (there is a negative relationship);160 help facilitate positive organizational change (PsyCap is related to positive emotions that are in turn related to their attitudes and behaviors161 relevant to organization change); mediate the relationship between supportive organizational climate and employee performance;162 and be related to both employee creativity163 and employee well-being over time.164 4. Finally, PsyCap is also playing a role in our research on authentic leadership (covered in Chapter 13).165 For example, one recent study found that a leader’s level of PsyCap impacted followers’ perceived trust and evaluations of leader effectiveness166 and another found a positive relationship between a leaders’ level of PsyCap and followers’ level of PsyCap and performance.167 Other such research is at various stages and PsyCap also has an input into the theory building of positive leadership in general.168 PsyCap Development Besides theory/research, valid measurement, and performance impact, a key distinguishing feature is that PsyCap is statelike and open to development. As indicated, the first major research project provided empirical evidence of this statelike nature of PsyCap,169 and subsequent experimental research has indicated that PsyCap can indeed be developed in short (2 or 3 hours) training interventions.170 Importantly, since these were experimental designs, the randomly assigned control groups, who had the same characteristics but received a group dynamics training intervention instead of the PsyCap intervention, did not increase their level of PsyCap. In other words, armed with this evidence, we can be more confident that PsyCap can be developed in a short training intervention. There is also preliminary experimental evidence that such PsyCap training causes performance to improve.171 The PsyCap intervention (PCI) model is drawn from the positive (and clinical) psychology field for each of the four components and is shown in Figure 7.4 and a brief verbal summary description in Figure 7.5. As indicated, this training intervention has been conducted in one- to three-hour highly interactive, large and small face-to-face sessions and even online (downloading exercises, use of movie clips, etc.). Using widely recognized human resource management utility analysis techniques,172 on both publicly available corporate data and actual results from our studies, has yielded impressive results.173 For example, one such analysis indicated a 270 percent return on investment in developing the PsyCap of a sample of high-tech engineers (the dollar return minus the cost of the PsyCap training divided by the cost of the PsyCap training).174 The results of the research on PsyCap so far seems to indicate a bright future for its role not only in positive organizational behavior, but also as an effective evidenced-based approach to leadership and employee development and performance management. Research to meet the call for longitudinal studies175 has recently provided needed further evidence of the statelike nature of PsyCap and its causal impact on objective performance.176 There is also just completed group-level research indicating that a work team’s “collective PsyCap” is related to their citizenship behavior and performance.177 Finally, there is a need to recognize other positive constructs besides those reviewed so far. Two of the more established are happiness/subjective well-being and emotional intelligence to which the rest of this chapter is devoted. 222 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior FIGURE 7.4 Psychological Capital Intervention (PCI) Source:Adapted from F. Luthans, J. B. Avey, B. V. Avolio, S. M. Norman, and G. J. Combs, “Psychological Capital Development: Toward a Micro-Intervention,” Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 27, 2006, pp. 387–393. Developmental dimensions Proximal outcomes (Psychological Capital) Distal outcomes outcomes Distal Goals and pathways design Hope Implementing obstacle planning Building efficacy /Confidence Realistic optimism Developing positive expectancy Experiencing success/Modeling others Sustainable veritable performance impact Efficacy/ Confidence Persuasion and arousal Building assets/Avoid risks Resiliency Affecting the influence process Note: The PCI is intended to affect each state as well as the overall level of PsyCap for performance impact. OTHER POSITIVE CONSTRUCTS Although self-efficacy/confidence, optimism, hope, and resiliency have been determined to best meet the criteria established for inclusion in POB and PsyCap, as indicated, there are a number of other positive capacities that have potential for also being included.178 Examples would include constructs such as wisdom, gratitude, forgiveness, courage, and even spirituality. However, the two positive constructs that have received the most attention over the years that are especially applicable to the workplace, would be happiness/subjective well-being (SWB) and emotional intelligence (EI). Happiness or Subjective Well-Being (SWB) Both with the general public and academic psychology, the importance of happiness has been widely recognized. However, similar to the distinction that positive psychology makes with the common usage of the term hope, positive psychological theory and research prefers to use the more precise and operationally defined term subjective well-being, or Chapter 7 Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital 223 FIGURE 7.5 Summary Descriptions of the Psychological Capital Intervention (PCI) Model Source: Adapted from F. Luthans, J. B. Avey, B. J. Avolio, S. M. Norman, and G. Combs “Psychological Capital Development: Toward a Micro-intervention,” Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 27, 2006, pp. 387–393. Hope Development Hope was shown to be impacted and influenced by goals, pathways, and agency. Specifically, participants practiced generating work-related goals that were personally valuable and reasonably challenging and that included a clear beginning and end point. These goal characteristics generated sustained motivation, thus using goal components to increase agency. In addition, participants practiced generating multiple pathways to their work-related goals, and they identified obstacles that they should plan to encounter. After completing the exercise individually, each participant received feedback from the group on additional or alternative pathways that could be utilized and obstacles that could be expected. This practice increased each participant’s pathway-generating skill and ability to identify and plan for obstacles, thus reducing the negative impact of obstacles on agency. Optimism Development Building efficacy in pathway generation and obstacle planning provided a foundation for the development of generally positive expectations. When participants were confident that they could identify and plan to overcome obstacles, their expectations of achieving their goals increased. Negative expectations that goals would not be accomplished were challenged as individuals began to see pathways to success and options on how to overcome obstacles. Group feedback increased positive expectations as individuals saw other group members also expect and plan for success. As participants’ expectations of success increased, optimism both individually and within the group increased. Efficacy Development Participants practiced setting up stepwise techniques to accomplish goals. Then they explained each subgoal (each step) to the group, and they answered questions about how each was to be accomplished. Task mastery for designing and pursuing goals was thus attained. Vicarious learning took place as each participant saw peers work toward their goals and heard success stories about how goals were attained. This stage included emotional arousal, which was influenced by positive expectations of achieving goals as well as the social persuasion by the facilitator and group members by validating schedules and timelines, goals would be accomplished. Resiliency Development Resiliency was increased by building awareness of personal assets in the form of talents, skills, and social networks. Participants were asked what resources they could leverage to accomplish a given goal. After creating the list of resources, the facilitator and peer group members identified additional resources participants did not include on their list. Participants were then encouraged to leverage these resources as necessary. Similar to planning for obstacles, participants were encouraged to identify in advance obstacles that could impede their progress. Whereas in the hope exercise the focus was on making plans to overcome these obstacles, in this exercise, the focus was on making plans to avoid the obstacles or to prevent them from becoming legitimate concerns. Finally, the influence process was impacted by each participant becoming aware of his or her initial thoughts and feelings when faced with adversity (i.e., confidence or despair, etc.) and choosing to focus on resilient thoughts based on their assessment of their resources and options to overcome adversity. simply SWB, instead of happiness. As Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi recently noted: “In practice, subjective well-being is a more scientific-sounding term for what people usually mean by happiness.”179 Sometimes the terms are used interchangeably, but SWB is usually considered broader and is defined as people’s affective (moods and emotions) and cognitive evaluations of their lives.180 Under this psychological meaning, it is not necessarily what in reality happens to people that determines their happiness or subjective well-being; but instead how they emotionally interpret and cognitively process what happens to them is the key. Like hope, SWB has not been in the mainstream of the organizational behavior literature, and although it does not meet the POB criteria quite as directly as self-efficacy, optimism, hope, and resiliency, it is included here as part of POB and there have been some work-related studies in the SWB research literature. 224 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior The Background on SWB Positive psychologist Ed Diener’s work over the past three decades is most closely associated with SWB.181 As an important part of the positive psychology movement, SWB’s popularity and importance reflect societal trends valuing the good life and what makes people happy. Almost everyone seems to rate happiness over money (e.g., in a survey of 7,204 college students in 42 countries, only 6 percent rated money more important than happiness).182 Academically, Diener and his research group made a break from simple feelings of happiness and just the demographic characteristics that correlate with it. Most recently, the interest is more on the processes that underlie life satisfaction. Specifically, there has been a shift away from who is happy (i.e., the demographics) to when and why people are happy and on what the processes are that influence SWB.183 Specifically, in their recent book Diener and Biswas-Diener provide the following evidence- based conclusions:184 1. Happiness is a process, not a place. “Happiness is an ongoing process that requires a way of experienced life and the world that includes positive attitudes, meaning, and spirituality. Being truly rich is as much about the attitudes within us as the circumstances surrounding us.”185 2. There is actually an optimal level of happiness. Those “too happy” may perform less well at school and work, and even be less healthy (e.g., may ignore symptoms or required regiments). 3. Though not linear, happiness is clearly related to health and longevity, relationships, and effectiveness at work. As to the last point on happiness leading to a longer life, a now famous study on the order of nuns who entered convents as young adults between 1931 and 1943 is very interesting and revealing about the power of happiness.186 The researchers analyzed the autobiographies of the entering nuns as to their level of positivity and happiness. Since these nuns had almost identical food, activities, and circumstances (i.e., the environment was basically held constant or under control over their lifetime), the researchers could draw conclusions about the impact the nuns’ level of happiness/positivity had on their length of life. Amazingly, the most happy nuns (the top 25% in the ratings) lived on average ten years longer than the least (25%) happy nuns. To put these results in perspective, smoking a pack of cigarettes a day is estimated on average to take three plus years off of one’s life, regular exercise accounts for three to five extra years, statin drug therapy used to lower cholesterol levels 2.5 to 3.5 years, and even regular church attendance may add two to three additional years,187 but being happy and positive may on average have three times as much impact on longevity. Besides the relationship with health/longevity and relationships (e.g., Diener and Biswas-Diener note that “many studies show that happy people are more blessed with good families, friends, and supportive relationships”188) of interest here is the impact that SWB has on work outcomes. SWB in Work Although not included in organizational behavior or HRM textbooks, SWB researchers do give attention to work and the workplace as one of its domains, and there are a growing number of studies. In particular, SWB has demonstrated a direct correlation to job satisfaction (covered in Chapter 5). A meta-analysis of 34 studies found an average correlation of .44 between job satisfaction and life satisfaction.189 To determine whether job satisfaction leads to SWB or vice versa (i.e., the correlation studies do not yield the direction of Chapter 7 Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital 225 causality), Judge and colleagues used sophisticated statistical designs. It was found that SWB was a significant predictor of job satisfaction five years later, but not vice versa.190 Thus, it appears that people who are satisfied with their lives tend to find more satisfaction in their work.191 There is accumulating research evidence that happiness or SWB leads to desired outcomes beyond just job satisfaction in the workplace. Not only have happy employees been found to be more effective and productive,192 but after a search of the research literature it was also concluded that “on average, happy workers make more money, receive more promotions and better supervisor ratings, and are better citizens at work.”193 An increasing number of organizations are recognizing and using this value of happiness with their employees and customers. Organizations such as Toyota, the American Red Cross, Sprint Nextel, and David’s Bridal have launched training programs for their employees based on happiness principles. For example, at David’s, the largest chain of bridal stores, salespeople have been taught techniques such as focusing on things that bring them joy when dealing with stressed-out, anxious brides-to-be. Also, increasingly market research in general is focusing on how products and services can appeal to customers’ happiness. Similar to PsyCap, happiness (SWB) is open to change and development. Although there is definitely a set point (i.e., approximately the 50 percent “hard-wiring” noted at the beginning of the chapter), the role of intentional control and effective developmental guidelines are becoming recognized. As Lyubomirsky points out, “intentional, effortful activities have a powerful effect on how happy we are, over and above the effects of our set points and the circumstances in which we find ourselves.”194 She then prescribes the following guidelines and specific activities for developing and sustaining happiness:195 1. Practicing gratitude and positive thinking (expressing gratitude, cultivating optimism, and avoiding overthinking and social comparison); 2. Investing in social connections (practicing acts of kindness and nurturing social relationships); 3. Managing stress, hardship, and trauma (developing strategies for coping, learning to forgive); 4. Living in the present (increasing flow experiences, savoring life’s joys); 5. Committing to your goals; 6. Taking care of your body and soul (practicing religion and spirituality, meditation, physical exercise, and acting like a happy person). Although these are all very general, Lyubomirsky provides details on how to do each, and importantly, supporting research evidence that they work. For example, on the last point of “acting like a happy person,” citing published research196 she notes, “Remarkably, pretending that you’re happy—smiling, engaged, mimicking energy and enthusiasm—not only can earn you some of the benefits of happiness (returned smiles, strengthened friendships, successes at work and school) but can actually make you happier.”197 The future of the role that happiness may play in the workplace seems very bright. Emotional Intelligence (EI) Emotional intelligence (EI) predates the emergence of POB and is more widely known in popular management circles. However, EI has to date not been featured as a major part of POB because it has not yet met the criteria of POB.198 In particular, the major shortcoming in meeting the POB criteria has been the limited research support for a valid measure of EI and its relationship with performance outcomes. However, this is beginning to change somewhat199 and is why it is included here. This concluding section of the chapter first examines its two 226 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior conceptual components: emotion and intelligence. After these two important psychological constructs are examined separately, the synergy created by combining them into emotional intelligence becomes a potentially powerful positively oriented construct for the understanding and application approach to the study and application of organizational behavior. The Role of Emotion Over the years, emotion has been a major variable in psychology, and, compared to the other POB constructs, has received relatively more attention in the organizational behavior field.200 Similar to other psychological constructs, the exact definition and meaning of emotion are not totally agreed upon. However, most psychologists would agree that the best one word to describe emotion would be how a person feels about something. These emotional feelings are directed at someone or something, are not as broad as the meanings of the term affect (as used in the discussion of positive and negative affect in Chapter 5 on personality), and are more intense and specific than the definitions of the term mood. The specific differences between emotion, affect, and mood are summarized as follows: Emotions are reactions to an object, not a trait. They’re object specific. You show your emotions when you’re “happy about something, angry at someone, afraid of something.” Moods, on the other hand, aren’t directed at an object. Emotions can turn into moods when you lose focus on the contextual object. So when a work colleague criticizes you for the way you spoke to a client, you might become angry at him [emotion]. But later in the day, you might find yourself just generally dispirited. This affective state describes a mood.201 Emotional Processing How do emotional reactions come about, and what are the inputs into emotional processing? A very simple, layperson’s explanation of the process is that emotional feelings are in contrast with rational thinking. Put into popular terms, emotions come from the “heart” whereas rational thinking comes from the “head.” For example, a young manager given a choice between two assignments may undergo the following cognitive processing: “my ‘head’ tells me to get involved with Project A because it has the best chance of succeeding and helping my career, but my ‘heart’ says that Project B will be more fun, I like the people better, and I can take more pride in any results we achieve.” Obviously, such emotions often win out over rational thinking in what people decide, do, or how they behave. Traditionally in psychology, both personality traits (e.g., extraversion/neuroticism or conscientiousness) and mood states (either positive or negative) have separate influences or emotional processing. More recently, however, to represent the more realistic complexity involved, it is suggested that: (1) mood states interact with individual differences in emotionrelevant personality traits to influence emotional processing, and/or (2) personality traits predispose individuals to certain mood states, which then influence emotional processing.202 In other words, for (1) above, someone in a positive mood may have to have (or will be enhanced by) a personality trait such as conscientiousness in order to experience emotional happiness. For (2) above, the individual may have to have the personality trait such as extraversion in order to get into a positive mood state. This positive mood in turn will lead the person to experience emotional happiness. These moderation and meditation models of emotional processing help resolve some of the inconsistencies that have been found in the research using the separate influences of moods and personality traits for emotions.203 Types of Emotions Like the meaning of emotion, there is also not total agreement on the primary types of emotions. Table 7.2 summarizes the primary emotions and their descriptors most often Chapter 7 Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital 227 TABLE 7.2 Types of Emotions Source: Adapted from H. M. Weiss and R. Cropanzano, “Affective Events Theory,” in B. M. Staw and L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 18, JAI Press, Greenwich, Conn., 1996, pp. 20–22 and Daniel Goleman, Emotional Intelligence, Bantam Books, New York, 1995, pp. 289–290. Positive Primary Emotions: Love/affection Happiness/joy Surprise Negative Primary Emotions: Fear Sadness Anger Disgust Shame Other Descriptors Acceptance, adoration, longing, devotion, infatuation Cheerfulness, contentment, bliss, delight, amusement, enjoyment, enthrallment, thrill, euphoria, zest Amazement, wonder, astonishment, shock Other Descriptors Anxiety, alarm, apprehension, concern, qualm, dread, fright, terror Grief, disappointment, sorrow, gloom, despair, suffering, dejection Outrage, exasperation, wrath, indignation, hostility, irritability Contempt, disdain, abhorrence, revulsion, distaste Guilt, remorse, regret, embarrassment, humiliation mentioned in the psychology literature. Importantly, each of these emotions are very common in the workplace. For example: • Juan has grown to love his paramedic emergency team as they solve one life-threatening crisis after another. • Mary feels happy when her boss comments in front of the sales team that she just landed the biggest contract of the quarter. • Jami is surprised to hear that the firm’s stock price dropped two and one-half points today. • George fears the new technological process that he believes may replace him. • Trent feels sad for Alison because she does more than her share of the work, but gets no recognition from the supervisor. • Lane is angry because he was passed over for promotion for the second time. • Mark is disgusted with the favoritism shown to his colleague Steve when the regional sales manager assigns territories. • Kent has a sense of shame for claiming expense reimbursement for a trip he did not take. As shown by the preceding representative examples, the whole range of emotions are found in the workplace. In addition, it is probably not an exaggeration to state that most personal and many managerial/organizational decisions are based on emotional processes rather than rational thought processes. For example, career decisions are often based on emotions of happiness and affection or even fear, rather than on what is rationally best for one’s career.204 In fact, management decisions are often driven by negative emotions such as fear or anger rather than marginal costs, return on investment, or other criteria that the traditional rational economic/finance models would suggest.205 By the same token, there is important basic research coming from the positive psychology movement that the capacity to experience positive emotions may be a fundamental human strength central to the study of human flourishing,206 and positive emotions can also be applied to upward spirals in today’s organizations.207 For example, one of the most recognized breakthroughs in positive psychology that has particular relevance and understanding for POB and PsyCap is Barbara Fredrickson’s “Broaden and Build” theory.208 Supported by considerable research evidence,209 this theory says that experiencing positive emotions broadens (i.e., opens 228 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior people’s hearts and minds) and builds (i.e., allows people to develop new skills, relationships, knowledge and to become more effective overall). Emotional Categories and Continuum Besides identifying the different types of emotions, as shown in Table 7.2, they can be put into positive and negative categories. Whether a person feels a positive or negative emotion in the workplace has a lot to do with goal congruence (positive) or goal incongruence (negative).210 For example, if salespeople meet or exceed their quota, they feel happy, are relieved, and like their customers, but if they fall short they may feel sad, disgusted, guilty, anxious and may blame or be angry with their boss and/or customers. Emotions can also be conceptualized along a continuum. One classic emotional continuum is the following:211 Happiness—Surprise—Fear—Sadness—Anger—Disgust Table 7.2 is arranged in the same order except with the positive extreme of love/affection on the front end and the negative extreme of shame on the back end. The key is that the closer the primary emotions are related to one another, the more difficult it is for others to distinguish between them when expressed. For example, almost everyone can readily distinguish the facial expressions of positive versus negative categories of emotion, but may not readily interpret the differences within categories (e.g., between happiness and surprise or anger and disgust). Yet, based on the concept of emotional labor212 which refers to service personnel required to express false, not natural expression, positive emotions such as smiling, most seasoned customers can easily pick up the difference. For example most “Frequent Flyers” can tell the difference between a genuine, natural smile and “Have a nice day!” and a forced, false smile and insincere happy comment from an angry or disgusted reservationist or flight attendant. The nonverbal facial cues and tone of voice are usually a loud and clear indication of what real emotions are being expressed. Recent organizational communication research indicates that positive emotions, not just negative emotions, need to be displayed in prevailing socially acceptable ways, and the appropriate display of negative emotions typically means masking those emotions,213 that is, experience emotional labor. Emotional labor not only has dysfunctional consequences for the employees doing it (e.g., stress and burnout),214 but also detracts from effective customer service. World-class customer service firms such as Southwest Airlines recognize this by hiring only those with very positive personalities. As Herb Kelleher, the founder of Southwest, declared: “We want people who can do things well with laughter and grace.”215 By putting humor and happiness at the top of its hiring criteria, Southwest knows, and the academic literature would support,216 that its people will tend to express positive, genuine emotions (not emotional labor) in all their encounters with customers and coworkers. Most academics and practicing managers would agree with the systematic assessment that emotions permeate all of organizational life,217 but the reason emotions are singled out for special attention in this chapter is the popularity of emotional intelligence and its potential relevance to the study and application to positive organizational behavior. Emotionally intelligent people not only can read the expressed emotions of other people, but also have the maturity to hold their felt emotions in check and not display undesirable, immature negative emotions such as anger or disgust. This distinction between felt and displayed emotions,218 as well as the rest of the above discussion on the meaning, cognitive processing, and types/categories/continuum of emotions, when combined with the next section on intelligence, serve as the foundation and point of departure for the role that emotional intelligence may be able to play in positive organizational behavior. Chapter 7 Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital 229 The Role of Intelligence Intelligence has played a major role in psychology but a very minor role in organizational behavior. About a hundred years ago, Alfred Binet created a written test to measure the “intelligence quotient” or IQ of grade school children in Paris. Eventually the U.S. Army used the test with recruits in World War I, and then it was widely used in schools and businesses. IQ was assumed to be fixed at birth and went largely unchallenged as a predictor of school, job, and life success. However, just as in personality (covered in Chapter 5), in recent years there has been a renewed nurture versus nature debate on intelligence and the recognition of multiple intelligences. Nature versus Nurture Intelligence Again, similar to personality (see Chapter 5), recent breakthroughs in genetic and neuroscience research seem to provide added support for the nature (biological) argument of intelligence. For example, one study suggested that a variation in the gene for IGF2R, a receptor for a human growth factor, was associated with extremely high SAT scores, and other studies have shown that IQ scores are correlated with the amount of gray matter in certain brain regions.219 These types of findings receive a lot of popular press coverage, but often ignored are other facts such as the identified gene accounted for only about 2 percent of the variance in the SAT scores and that a follow-up study failed to even replicate the initial findings.220 On the nurture, developmental side of intelligence, there are also some recent interesting findings of support. For example, there is some theory and research suggesting that a “stereotype threat” may help explain the difference in average IQ scores between groups generalized on the basis of race, gender, age, and other social distinctions.221 One study, for instance, found that television commercials that depict stereotypical female behavior impair women’s performance on math tests and reduce their interest in pursuing quantitative careers.222 Also, cross-cultural research is clearly indicating that how intelligence is conceptualized and measured depends on learned cultural values and ways of thinking. For example, it has been found that people in Western cultures view intelligence as a means for individuals to devise categories and to engage in rational debate, while those in Eastern cultures see it as a way for members of a community to recognize contradiction and complexity.223 Moreover, “Many psychologists believe that the idea that a test can be completely absent of cultural bias—a recurrent hope of test developers in the twentieth century—is contradicted by the weight of the evidence.”224 Recognition of Multiple Intelligences The impetus for an expanded and positive perspective of intelligence in psychology and education is mostly attributed to Howard Gardner. Over 25 years ago he published his breakthrough book, Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences.225 Binet’s IQ basically measured two relatively narrow dimensions: mathematical/logical and verbal/ linguistic. As shown in Table 7.3, Gardner recognized these two plus five others. In developing these seven multiple intelligences or MIs, he found that intelligence was not entirely genetic and fixed at birth, but instead it could be nurtured and grown. To be considered an intelligence under Gardner’s well-known multiple approach, the following three criteria must be met: (1) measurable, (2) valued by the person’s culture, and (3) a strength that the person defaulted to when challenged to be creative or solve a problem. Gardner is careful to point out that his identified intelligences are: (1) a new kind of construct and should not be confused with a domain or discipline; (2) a capacity with component processes and should not be equated with a learning style, cognitive style, or working style; and (3) based wholly on empirical evidence that could be revised or added to on 230 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior TABLE 7.3 Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences Source: Adapted from Lou Russell, The Accelerated Learning Fieldbook, Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer, San Francisco, 1999, pp. 60–70. For the original work see: Howard Gardner, Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences, Basic Books, New York, 1983 and Howard Gardner, “Are There Additional Intelligences? The Case for Naturalist, Spiritual and Existential Intelligences,” Unpublished White Paper, 1996. It should be noted that emotional intelligence is not necessarily recognized as an MI by Gardner. Original Intelligences: 1. Logical/mathematical 2. Verbal/linguistic 3. Interpersonal 4. Intrapersonal 5. Visual/spatial 6. Musical 7. Bodily/kinesthetic ”New” Intelligences: 8. Naturalist 9. Existential 10. Emotional Characteristics Famous Examples Processes analytically, calculates, quantifies Thoughts through words, uses words to nurture Understands others, processes through interaction, empathizes, humor Thinks in quiet, likes to be alone, goal oriented, independent, perseveres Uses mental models, thinks three dimensionally, pictures how to get places or solve problems Sensitivity to pitch, melody, rhythm, found in both performers and listeners Physical movement, involves whole body, processes by jumping or dancing Scientist Albert Einstein Consultant Tom Peters Characteristics Famous Examples Needs to be with/survive in nature, strength in categorization in nature or urban world Not religion per se, knows why he or she is here, personal mission Emotionally mature, recognizes own anger, reacts to emotions of self and others Singer John Denver Entertainer Oprah Winfrey Business Tycoon Howard Hughes Architect Frank Lloyd Wright Composer Wolfgang Mozart Basketball Player Michael Jordan Civil Rights Leader Martin Luther King Pacifist Leader Mohandas Gandhi the basis of new empirical findings.226 Importantly, the MIs are equal in importance and most people are strong in three or four but, because they are not fixed, there is always room for improvement in the others. This expanded view of intelligence has had a dramatic impact on psychology, and many educators have used MI as a new paradigm for schools and classrooms.227 However, there have to date only been a very few applications of MI in the business world, mainly in training workshops such as at 3M, Coseco Insurance, and Northeast Utilities Service. MI has only recently been acknowledged in the organizational behavior literature. However, with the recent addition of emotional intelligence or EI to Gardner’s original seven (see Table 7.3), the recognition and theoretical foundation provided by Gardner’s work becomes relevant and necessary to the understanding and application of EI in the workplace. Intelligence as Cognitive Mental Ability Although the field of organizational behavior and human resource management has generally ignored multiple intelligences, there has been recognition and attention given over the years to the narrower concept of cognitive mental abilities. Applied to the workplace, ability refers to the aptitudes and learned capabilities needed to successfully accomplish a task. Both physical (e.g., manual dexterity, hand-eye coordination and body strength, stamina, and flexibility) and mental, intellectual, or cognitive abilities are recognized for jobs. However, with some obvious exceptions of jobs requiring considerable Chapter 7 Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital 231 TABLE 7.4 Cognitive Abilities Related to Job Performance Source: Adapted from M. D. Dunnette, “Aptitudes, Abilities, and Skills,” in M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Rand McNally, Skokie Ill., 1976, pp. 478–483. Mental Ability: Characteristics of Ability Examples of Job Task Verbal comprehension Comprehend what is read or heard, understand what words mean and the relationships to one another Make fast and accurate arithmetic computations Perceive spatial patterns, imagine how an object would look if position in space were changed Quickly identify visual similarities and differences, carry out tasks needing visual perception Rote memory, retain and recall past incidents/experiences Supervisors following organization policy on sexual harassment Numerical Spatial visualization Perceptual speed Memory Inductive reasoning Identify logical sequence from specific to general Auto salespeople calculating the sales tax and their commission A builder describing a change to a customer A quality control engineer noting a product defect A knowledge manager drawing from past experiences in the firm to advise a newly formed project team A scientist in the research department drawing from several independent studies to design an innovative product physical activity (e.g., in construction, manufacturing, repair services, sports or health clubs), the vast majority of jobs in today’s workplace are concerned more with cognitive abilities. Although some unique tasks require specific mental abilities (e.g., accounting tasks require numerical mental ability), most jobs, including those of an accountant or interior designer, require general mental ability (GMA). Over the years, psychologists have proposed numerous mental abilities, but those most widely recognized as underlying effective performance in jobs are summarized in Table 7.4 Importantly, there is considerable research evidence that GMA tests are a good personnel selection and job training program predictor of overall job performance. Specifically, Schmidt and Hunter summarized 85 years of research and based on metaanalytic findings concluded that the highest validities for predicting job performance were: (1) GMA plus a work sample test; (2) GMA plus an integrity test; and (3) GMA plus a structured interview.228 An additional advantage of (2) and (3) is that they can be highly predicative for both entry-level selection and selection of experienced employees. One further refinement is that GMA predictive validity is higher for more-complex jobs and lower for less-complex jobs. Emotional Intelligence As a point of departure for the important role that emotions have played in psychology over the years and Gardner’s recognition of multiple intelligences has been the recent academic interest and popular appeal of emotional intelligence. Although its roots are usually considered to go back many years to what was called social intelligence,229 at the beginning of the ’90s psychologists Peter Salovey and John Mayer are usually given credit for having the first comprehensive theory and definition of emotional intelligence. Taking off 232 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior TABLE 7.5 Goleman’s Dimensions of Emotional Intelligence in the Workplace Source: Adapted from Daniel Goleman, Emotional Intelligence, Bantam Books, New York, 1995, pp. 43–44, and Daniel Goleman, Working with Emotional Intelligence, Bantam Books, New York, 1998, p. 318. EI Dimensions: Characteristics Workplace Example Self-awareness Self-understanding; knowledge of true feelings at the moment Self-management Handle one’s emotions to facilitate rather than hinder the task at hand; shake off negative emotions and get back on constructive track for problem solution Stay the course toward desired goal; overcome negative emotional impulses and delay gratification to attain the desired outcome Understand and be sensitive to the feelings of others; being able to sense what others feel and want John recognizes that he is angry so he will wait to cool down and gather more information before making an important personnel decision. Amber holds back her impulse to become visibly upset and raise her voice at the customer’s unfair complaint and tries to get more facts of what happened. Pat persisted to successful project completion in spite of the many frustrations from the lack of resources and top management support. Because the head of the team knew her members were mentally if not physically exhausted, she took everyone bowling during an afternoon break and bought refreshments. Jeremy could tell from the nonverbal cues from his staff members that they were not buying into the new policy being presented, so after the meeting he visited with each of them to explain how they will all benefit. Self-motivation Empathy Social skills The ability to read social situations; smooth in interacting with others and forming networks; able to guide others’ emotions and the way they act from a foundation in the theory of emotion and multiple intelligence, Salovey and Mayer defined emotional intelligence as “the subset of social intelligence that involves the ability to monitor one’s own and others’ feelings and emotions, to discriminate among them, and to use this information to guide one’s thinking and actions.”230 However, it was the publication of the 1995 best-selling book Emotional Intelligence by psychologist/journalist Daniel Goleman that greatly popularized the construct. He defines emotional intelligence or EI as The capacity for recognizing our own feelings and those of others, for motivating ourselves, and for managing emotions well in ourselves and in our relationships.231 Table 7.5 summarizes the major EI dimensions that Goleman has determined to have the most relevant and biggest impact on understanding behavior in the workplace. As previously indicated, the major problem of EI not being considered to be a major construct of POB is that two streams have seemed to develop for EI. One is a very popular, applications-only approach stimulated and largely taken from Goleman’s best-selling book. Unfortunately, this applications approach has been judged to have questionable theory, research, and carefully developed measures applied to it232 as is being done more in the other stream in EI by theory- and research-oriented social psychologists such as Salovey and Mayer,233 and more recently in the organizational behavior field.234 As Mayer observed, “If you’re going to take the term ‘emotional intelligence’ seriously as an intelligence, it’s got to be about how one reasons about emotions and also about how emotions Chapter 7 Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital 233 help reasoning, and most of the field does not do that.”235 However, even though the quality of theory, research, and measures to date is mixed, since Goleman did base his popular book on some theory and research and progress seems being made to refine the construct and its measures,236 and its application in the field of organizational behavior (e.g., a recent study found that employees’ EI was related to performance and satisfaction237), it is included here in the discussion of other positive constructs. Importantly, Goleman, like Howard Gardner’s recognition of multiple intelligences before him, makes a clear distinction between IQ and EI. The EI (or sometimes called EQ as a takeoff from IQ) literature carefully points out that the two constructs are certainly not the same but also not necessarily opposite from one another. As one summary of the analysis of IQ and EQ notes, Some people are blessed with a lot of both, some with little of either. What researchers have been trying to understand is how they complement each other; how one’s ability to handle stress for instance, affects the ability to concentrate and put intelligence to use.238 Similar to the influence that neural activity and the brain play in IQ, Goleman also believes the brain pathways may help process EI. However, whereas IQ mostly is associated with the more recent (on the thousands-of-years-old evolutionary chain) neocortex (the thinking brain) located near the top of the brain, EI draws from the very early (in the evolution of the brain) inner subcortex more associated with emotional impulses. Importantly, however, unlike IQ, which has traditionally been considered largely inherited and fixed, Goleman also recognizes the role that personality and behavioral theories play in EI. Goleman provides a very comprehensive explanatory foundation for EI that includes the brain, but also suggests that learning seems to play an important role in EI. He states in his original book that Our genetic heritage endows each of us with a series of emotional set points that determines our temperament. But the brain circuitry involved is extraordinarily malleable; temperament is not destiny. The emotional lessons we learn as children at home and at school shape the emotional circuits, making us more adept—or inept—at the basics of emotional intelligence.239 In the second book, Working with Emotional Intelligence, he goes much further on the role of learning and the development of EI in maturing adults: Our level of emotional intelligence is not fixed genetically, nor does it develop only in early childhood. Unlike IQ, which changes little after our teen years, emotional intelligence seems to be largely learned, and it continues to develop as we go through life and learn from our experiences—our competence in it can keep growing. . . . There is an old-fashioned word for this growth in emotional intelligence: maturity.240 These seeming contradictions between the roles of genetic endowment, the brain, personality traits (that are pretty well set, see Chapter 5), and learning/development have drawn some criticism of Goleman’s approach to EI.241 However, there is recent research evidence that EI competencies can be developed in students working toward their masters of business administration.242 Goleman also cites “studies that have tracked people’s level of emotional intelligence through the years show that people get better and better in these capabilities as they grow more adept at handling their empathy and social adroitness.”243 In total, even though there remains some controversy and potential problems with the concept and operationalization of EI, it has such intuitive appeal and growing evidence for successful application to the workplace that it deserves further attention and research in the future of POB. 234 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior Summary This chapter presents the recent focus on positive organizational behavior (POB) and psychological capital (PsyCap). It is based on the recent positive psychology movement—looking for strengths and what is right with people instead of concentrating on dysfunctions and what is wrong with people. Besides the positivity, specific criteria must be met to be included in POB: (1) based on theory and research, (2) valid measures, (3) statelike and open to development, and (4) managed for performance improvement. The psychological capacities (or capital) that to date best meet these POB criteria and are covered in this chapter are efficacy, optimism, hope, resiliency, and, when combined, form the core construct of psychological capital or PsyCap. The other positive constructs covered include happiness/SWB, emotions, intelligence, and emotional intelligence (EI). Relatively most of the attention in the chapter is devoted to the theory, research, and application of the positive resource self-efficacy or confidence and overall psychological capital (PsyCap). Having the best fit with the POB criteria, social cognitive theory posits that environmental, behavioral, and personal cognitive dimensions are in interaction, and the self-reflective human capacity serves as the major theoretical underpinning of self-efficacy. Defined as the belief one has in his or her abilities to mobilize the motivation, cognitive resources, and courses of action necessary to successfully execute a specific task within a given context, self-efficacy is a state, not a trait. Through this theory building and extensive research of Bandura, four major sources of information to cognitively determine self-efficacy have been identified. These are, in order of importance, mastery experiences or performance attainments, vicarious experience or modeling, social persuasion, and physiological or psychological (emotional) arousal. Each of these can be used in training and development to enhance self-efficacy. Self-efficacy started off as a clinical technique to change client behavior, but soon was successfully applied to many other health, educational, and athletic pursuits. Unlike the other POB constructs, there is also a considerable research-derived body of knowledge on the strong positive relationship between self-efficacy and work-related performance. The Stajkovic and Luthans meta-analysis (114 studies, 21,616 subjects) found a highly significant .38 weighted average correlation that transforms to an impressive 28 percent gain in performance (higher than the results of meta-analyses of other popular organizational behavior constructs and techniques). With such substantial theory and research backup, there are important implications for effective practical applications of self-efficacy. Besides training and development to enhance self-efficacy and thus help the transfer of training to the job and increase performance, the measurement of self-efficacy could be used in the selection process. Self-efficacy can also be used to make job design, goal setting, teams, and stress management more effective. Besides efficacy/confidence, the other positive capacities that have been determined to best meet the POB criteria are optimism, hope, and resiliency. Although optimism has been around for a long time and is associated with many positive things in life, its use in a psychological and POB capacity applicable to the workplace is relatively recent. Both motivated and motivating, optimism has some evidence not only of being part of human nature, but also more support for contributing to individual differences. The pioneering work of Seligman treats optimism in terms of cognitively determined expectancies and causal attributions (i.e., explanatory style). Specifically, pessimists make internal, stable, and global attributions of bad events, whereas optimists make external, unstable, and specific attributions. Although there can be some dysfunctional consequences such as stress from pursuing unattainable goals and there are some cases where a mild pessimist may be needed in organizations (e.g., safety engineer or accountant), in general, realistic optimism is very beneficial in life and in the workplace. Research is just starting, but evidence from Chapter 7 Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital 235 Seligman’s widely recognized extensive work with sales agents at Metropolitan Life and more recent studies in POB indicate the very positive impact that optimism can have on human performance in organizations. Besides optimism, the closely related but conceptually and empirically distinct construct of hope also meets the POB criteria. As used in psychology and its potential applicability to organizational behavior, hope is more than the sunny advice of “hope for the best.” Although both Goleman and Seligman talk about hope in relation to EI and optimism respectively, the work of Snyder on hope is most recognized in positive psychology. He defines hope not only in terms of the person’s determination that goals can be achieved, but also as the beliefs that successful plans can be formulated, pathways identified, and selfmotivation exhibited in order to attain the goals. In simple terms, this meaning of hope includes both the willpower (agency) and the “waypower” (the alternate pathways). There has been such strong evidence of the relationship between hope and academic, athletic, and mental/physical health positive outcomes that the carryover to the workplace is also being demonstrated by initial research in POB and seems very promising for the future. The fourth major recognized positive capacity in POB is resiliency. Considerably different from the other POB variables, resiliency tends to be more reactive than proactive. Also with roots in clinical psychology, especially focused on at-risk children and adolescents, it has been characterized by positive adaptation to significant adversity or risk. In POB it is presented as the positive capacity to rebound or bounce back from adverse or even very good events. In recent years, such a resilient capacity is very relevant and desirable at the employee, manager, and organizational levels. Although studies in POB are just beginning, there appears to be unlimited potential for developing and managing resiliency as the environment becomes ever more uncertain and turbulent. When the four resources are combined into PsyCap, there is both theory and research evidence that it is a higher-order, core construct. A valid measure of PsyCap (the PCQ) has been developed and there is growing evidence that it is related to not only performance and job satisfaction, but to other desirable outcomes such as combating stress, facilitating positive organizational change, mediating the relationship between supportive organizational climate and employee performance, and both employee creativity and well-being. There is initial evidence that PsyCap is also related to effective leadership. Finally, being statelike, beginning research is demonstrating that PsyCap can be developed in relatively short training interventions with causal impact on performance and yields a very high return on the investment in PsyCap development. Because of meeting the established criteria, the lion’s share of attention in this chapter has been devoted to the four positive resource states of efficacy, optimism, hope, resiliency and overall PsyCap. Obviously, there are other positive constructs that have been and will be important to POB. The other positive constructs covered in this chapter are happiness or what some academics prefer to call subjective well-being or SWB and then emotions, intelligence, and when combined, emotional intelligence (EI). In particular, there have been considerable work-related studies in the SWB research literature. For example, the work of Diener is very relevant to POB. As with the other positive constructs in this chapter, he is concerned with the underlying processes that influence life satisfaction, satisfaction with important domains (including work satisfaction). In particular, Diener and Biswas-Diener point out that happiness is a process (not a place), has an optimal (not linear) level, and is related to health and longevity (the famous nun’s study results), relationships and work. Like PsyCap, there is evidence that happiness is related to desired outcomes in the workplace (and in life) and can be developed. Emotional intelligence or simply EI is first discussed in terms of its major components of emotion (feelings) and intelligence. Intelligence in particular has played a relatively 236 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior minor role in organizational behavior. In particular, the multiple intelligences, and specifically emotional intelligence, have only recently received attention. Broadly popularized by Goleman, EI is the capacity for understanding and managing one’s own and others’ emotions. Although there is still some controversy surrounding EI, the popularity, intuitive appeal, and growing supportive research on EI cannot be denied. There is increasing evidence that the characteristics of EI (e.g., self-awareness, self-motivation, empathy, and social skills) may be better than traditional IQ in predicting future life success, and in the future with continued theory-building and research may become a more accepted evidencebased positive construct in POB. Ending with Meta-Analytic Research Findings OB PRINCIPLE FOR EVIDENCED-BASED PRACTICE The higher employees’ self-efficacy on a specific task, the better they will perform. Meta-Analysis Results: [114 studies; 21,616 participants; d = .82] On average, there is a 72 percent probability that employees with high self-efficacy on a specific task will have better performance than those with low self-efficacy. The moderators found in the meta-analysis were task complexity and the setting for the study. Specifically, it was found that the more complex the task, the less, but still highly significant, impact self-efficacy will have on performance. Also, self-efficacy had a bigger impact in the studies conducted in laboratory settings than those in the field. Conclusion: Although the POB constructs are becoming increasingly popular and important in the study and application of organizational behavior, to date, only self-efficacy has enough research to conduct a meta-analysis applicable to the workplace. There seems little question that self-efficacy has become one of the very best predictors of human performance. In today’s work environment characterized by uncertainty, change, and complex undertakings, organizations will be challenged to do their part in increasing employees’ beliefs in their personal competence so that organizational performance goals can be realized. In addition to self-efficacy, each of the other major POB constructs of optimism, hope, resilency, and when combined into psychological capital (PsyCap), show considerable promise for the understanding and effective application of organizational behavior. Source: Adapted from Alexander D. Stajkovic and Fred Luthans, “The Relationship between SelfEfficacy and Work-Related Performance: A Meta-Analysis,” Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 124, No. 2, 1998, pp. 240–261. Questions for Discussion and Review 1. How does positive psychology differ from regular psychology? 2. What are the four criteria for positive organizational behavior? How do the various POB constructs measure up to these criteria? 3. What is self-efficacy? Why is it important to make the distinction that self-efficacy is a state rather than a trait? What implications does this have for the workplace? Chapter 7 Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital 237 4. Defend or argue against the statement that the characteristics of a highly efficacious employee may be “the best profile of a high performer.” Describe this profile and give an example of this in the workplace. 5. What are the four widely recognized sources of self-efficacy? How could each be used to enhance employee efficacy to increase performance? 6. How does optimism in positive psychology go beyond the old “power of positive thinking”? Give an example of where “little optimism” may be different from “big optimism.” Besides sales, give an example of where optimism may be very beneficial to work performance. 7. In positive psychology, how does the concept of hope go beyond “sunny advice”? Why may hope be particularly relevant to entrepreneurship and international human resource management? 8. Why is resiliency so important in recent times? Give a real example. 9. What is psychological capital (PsyCap)? Briefly summarize the research to date on PsyCap and why might this provide competitive advantage to an organization? 10. What is subjective well-being (SWB)? What were some of the defining characteristics about happiness and how can it be developed and attained? 11. What is an emotion? How do emotions differ from moods? Identify some primary emotions, and give examples of how they may be expressed in the workplace. 12. What are Gardner’s original seven intelligences? Which two are the most closely associated with traditional IQ? What are the three “new” intelligences? Which of the 10 do you feel are most relevant and important to an effective manager? 13. Very simply, what is emotional intelligence (EI)? What are the major dimensions of EI that are particularly relevant to the workplace? Why do you think EI may be more important than IQ for an effective manager? 14. Of the POB constructs that are covered in the chapter, which one do you think has the most potential for impacting employee performance? Why? Internet Exercise: What Is Your IQ and EQ? A good way to understand the value and the power of positive organizational behavior variables is to first understand yourself. By first understanding yourself, you can better understand others. For example, to compare and contrast your IQ with your EQ, there are a few such tests on the Web. Remembering that these are not scientifically valid and that you should only take them as interesting information and not too seriously, go to http://www.queendom.com for some cognitive exercises including an IQ test. To assess your happiness, visit http://www.authentichappiness.com. Also visit http://www.positivepsychology.org for a comprehensive site on positive psychology and http://www.bus.umich.edu/Positive for background and updates on positive organizational scholarship and http://www.gli.unl.edu for updates on positive organizational behavior. 1. Did the results of your IQ test surprise you? Considering that EQ can be learned, are there any areas you should try to improve on? 2. How do you think your close coworkers and/or friends would respond to these tests? Does that help you understand their behaviors better? 3. Do you agree that EQ (EI) may be more important than IQ and may be applicable to effective interpersonal relations and performance in the workplace? Why? 4. What impact does authentic happiness and/or positive organizational scholarship and behavior have on applications to the workplace? 238 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior Real Case: High Tech—High Fear Both the popular and academic press proclaim how wonderful advanced technology is for today’s organizations. For example, B2B (business to business) processes can dramatically cut a firm’s costs. The other side, the dark side of this high-tech revolution, however, is seldom mentioned. Although young employees who grew up with computers in their schools and homes may be adaptable and open to IT changes in the workplace, and certainly some middle-age and older employees at all levels welcome and are excited by the IT challenges, a significant number of today’s employees of all ages are not only resistant, but downright terrified. With the dramatic changes brought on by the new technological environment, today’s employees have been thrust into a whole range of emotional reactions, from surprise to fear to anger to even shame. Competent, secure employees who were very optimistic and efficacious about their job duties in the old economy have become pessimistic and questioning of their abilities and cognitive resources necessary to be successful in this new high-tech environment. Here is a recent list of human problems associated with the advent of advanced technology in today’s organizations: 1. Feelings of being overwhelmed, intimidated, and ashamed of not being able to keep up with job demands. 2. Some employees’ belief that they are actually being enslaved, not empowered, by new technology. 3. Fears of appearing inept, unintelligent, or resistant to change. 4. A diminished ability to solve problems, fostering a sense of hopelessness and worry. 5. Loss of respect by the boss, peers, and subordinates. 6. Physiological disturbances brought on by longer hours, time pressures, and even hormone shifts brought on by being physically isolated. 7. Mood swings, depression, exhaustion, and attention deficits. Obviously, these feelings, beliefs, fears, and physical/ mental dysfunctions are taking their toll on the people affected, but there also may be an impact on quality, productivity, and retention. 1. What are the trade-offs in today’s organizations between the positives and negatives of advanced technology? Does it really matter if some of the older employees are having a hard time adjusting; aren’t they on their way out anyway and they can be replaced by the technology? On balance, what do you feel about the impact of technology? 2. In the “dark side” of IT presented in this case, there are many implications for self-efficacy, optimism, hope, resilency, and psychological capital. Describe a specific example of each of these POB constructs. 3. In general, how can the understanding of the POB constructs help overcome the list of problems presented in the case? How can the manager of a unit consisting of mostly older, computer anxious, if not illiterate, employees who were very effective under the old system use positive resources to make a more successful transition to a new, technologically sophisticated operating system? Organizational Behavior Case: People Problems at HEI After graduating with honors with a management major from State University, Ashley James accepted an entrylevel position in the Human Resources Department of Hospital Equipment Inc. (HEI), a medium-sized manufacturer of hospital beds and metal furniture (bedstands, tables, cabinets, etc.). This hospital room product line has been a “cash cow” for HEI since the founding of the firm 35 years ago by James Robinson, Sr. In recent years, however, HEI’s market share has become eroded by some of the big office furniture firms, both in the United States and abroad, who are starting to diversify into the health institution market. Mr. Robinson has been easing into retirement the last couple of years. His only child, Rob, was made CEO Chapter 7 Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital 239 three months ago. Rob came up through product engineering for two years and then headed up operations for the past four years. Rob had been a three-sport star athlete and student body president in high school. He then went on to State University where he graduated near the top of his class in mechanical engineering. In his new leadership role at HEI, Rob’s vision is to take the firm from being a low-tech bed and metal furniture manufacturer that is going downhill to become a high-tech medical equipment manufacturer. Rob is convinced that even though this would be a dramatic change for HEI, there is enough of a foundation and culture in place to at least start a new division focused initially on operating room equipment. Rob’s marketing manager had commissioned a study with a marketing research firm that concluded operating room equipment supply was not keeping up with demand and was way behind the rest of the health care supply industry in terms of innovative technology for patient comfort and care. The marketing manager, armed with this information, enthusiastically supported Rob’s vision for the future of HEI. The finance and operations people are another story. The finance manager is very pessimistic. HEI is already under a cash flow strain because of decreasing revenues from their existing product line and, although they currently have very little long-term debt, with Robinson Senior retiring, his contacts and long-term friends in the local lending community were gone. Only the big corporate banks with decision makers in other cities are left. The new head of operations, who has been very close to Robinson Senior over the years and had basically run the show for Rob the past four years, is also very pessimistic. In a recent executive committee meeting where Rob had asked for input on his vision for HEI, this operations head angrily blurted out, “I know we have to do something! But medical equipment? I have absolutely no hope that our engineers or operating people have the capacity to move in this direction. As you know, almost all of our people have been with us at least 15 to 20 years. They are too set in their ways, and the only way we could start a new medical equipment division would be from scratch, and I certainly don’t see the funding for that!” After weighing his senior management team’s advice, consulting with his dad, doing some research on his own, and tapping his network of friends in and outside the industry, Rob decided to go ahead with the planning of a new medical equipment division. He also decided that this new division would have to be run by present people and he would seek no outside funding. At this point, he called in the young Ashley James from the HR department and gave her the following assignment: Ashley, I know you haven’t been around here very long, but I think you can handle the challenge that I am going to give you. As you probably know by now, HEI is having some difficulties, and I have decided we need to move in a new direction with a medical equipment division. As I see it, we have some real people problems to overcome before this will be a success. Having worked in operations the past several years, I am convinced we have enough raw talent in both engineering and at the operating level to make the transition and pull this off successfully. But I need your help. Did you come across anything in your program at State U. that had to do with getting people to be more positive, more optimistic, and confident? I really think this is the problem, starting with management and going right down the line. I want you to take a week to think about this, talk to everyone involved, do some research, and come back with a specific proposal of what HR can do to help me out on this. The very survival of HEI may depend on what you come up with. 1. On the basis of the limited information in this case, how would you assess the efficacy, optimism, hope, resilency, and overall psychological capital of Rob? Of the operations manager? Give some specifics to back your assessment. What implications do these assessments have for the future of HEI? 2. What’s your reaction to the finance manager’s pessimism? What about the market manager’s optimism? What implications does this have for Rob and the company? 3. Do you agree with Rob’s decision? Would you like to work for him? Why or why not? 4. If you were Ashley, what specific proposal would you make to Rob? How would you implement such a proposal? 240 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior Experiential Exercises for Part Two EXERCISE: Self-Perception and Development of the Self-Concept* Goals: 1. To enable the students to consider their own self-concepts and to compare this with how they feel they are perceived by others. 2. To explore how the self-concept in personality is formed largely on the basis of feedback received from others (the reality that we “mirror ourselves in others”). 3. To stimulate student thinking about how management of human resources may involve perception and personality. Implementation: 1. The students take out a sheet of paper and fold it in half from top to bottom. 2. The students write “How I See Myself ” and “How I Think Others See Me.” 3. The students write down 5 one-word descriptions (adjectives) under each designation that, in their opinion, best describe how they perceive themselves and how others perceive them. 4. The students then share their two lists with their classmates (in dyads, triads, or the whole class) and discuss briefly. Each person may communicate what he or she is most proud of. 5. The instructor may participate in the exercise by sharing his or her list of adjectives. *The exercise “Self-Perception and Development of the Self-Concept” was suggested by Philip Van Auken and is used with his permission. EXERCISE: Job Design Survey* Goals: 1. To experience firsthand the job characteristics approach to job design, in this case through the Hackman-Oldham Job Diagnostic Survey (JDS). 2. To get personal feedback on the motivating potential of your present or past job and to identify and compare its critical characteristics. Implementation: 1. Please describe your present job (or a job you have held in the past) as objectively as you can. Circle the number that best reflects the job. *Source: The “Job Design Survey” is drawn from J. R. Hackman and G. R. Oldham, “Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey,” Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 60, 1975, pp. 159–170. Chapter 7 Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital 241 a. How much variety is there in your job? That is, to what extent does the job require you to do many things at work, using a variety of your skills and talents? 1- - - - - - - - -2- - - - - - - - -3- - - - - - - - - -4- - - - - - - - - -5- - - - - - - - - -6- - - - - - - - -7 Very little; the job requires me to do the same routine things over and over again. Moderate variety. Very much; the job requires me to do many different things, using a number of different skills and talents. b. To what extent does your job involve doing a “whole” and identifiable piece of work? That is, is the job a complete piece of work that has an obvious beginning and end, or is it only a small part of the overall piece of work, which is finished by other people or by machines? 1- - - - - - - - -2- - - - - - - - -3- - - - - - - - - -4- - - - - - - - - -5- - - - - - - - - -6- - - - - - - - -7 My job is only a tiny part of the overall piece of work; the results of my activities cannot be seen in the final product or service. My job is a moderatesized “chunk” of the overall piece of work; my own contribution can be seen in the final outcome. My job involves doing the whole piece of work, from start to finish; the results of my activities are easily seen in the final product or service. c. In general, how significant or important is your job? That is, are the results of your work likely to significantly affect the lives or well-being of other people? 1- - - - - - - - -2- - - - - - - - -3- - - - - - - - - -4- - - - - - - - - -5- - - - - - - - - -6- - - - - - - - -7 Not very significant; the outcomes of my work are not likely to have important effects on other people. Moderately significant. Highly significant; the outcomes of my work can affect other people in very important ways. d. How much autonomy is there in your job? That is, to what extent does your job permit you to decide on your own how to go about doing the work? 1- - - - - - - - -2- - - - - - - - -3- - - - - - - - - -4- - - - - - - - - -5- - - - - - - - - -6- - - - - - - - -7 Very little; the job gives me almost no personal “say” about how and when the work is done. Moderate autonomy; many things are standardized and not under my control, but I can make some decisions. Very much; the job gives me almost complete responsibility for deciding how and when the work is done. e. To what extent does doing the job itself provide you with information about your work performance? That is, does the actual work itself provide clues about how well you are doing—aside from any feedback coworkers or supervisors may provide? 1- - - - - - - - -2- - - - - - - - -3- - - - - - - - - -4- - - - - - - - - -5- - - - - - - - - -6- - - - - - - - -7 Very little; the job itself is set up so that I could work here forever without finding out how well I am doing. Moderately; sometimes doing the job provides feedback to me; sometimes it does not. Very much; the job is set up so that I get almost constant feedback as I work about how well I am doing. 2. The five questions above measure your perceived skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, and feedback in your job. The complete JDS uses several questions to Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior measure these dimensions. But to get some idea of the motivating potential, use your scores (1 to 7) for each job dimension and calculate as follows: MPS = skill variety + task identity + task significance 3 + autonomy + feedback Next, plot your job design profile and mps score on the following graphs. These show the national averages for all jobs. Analyze how you compare and suggest ways to redesign your job. High 7 320 280 6 Moderate 242 240 5 200 4 National average for all jobs 3 160 National average for all jobs 120 80 2 Low 1 40 Skill variety Task identity Task significance Autonomy Feedback from the job 0 Motivating potential scores EXERCISE: Motivation Questionnaire* Goals: 1. To experience firsthand the concepts of one of the work-motivation theories—in this case, the popular Maslow hierarchy of needs. 2. To get personal feedback on your opinions of the use of motivational techniques in human resource management. Implementation: The following questions for the Motivation Questionnaire on the next page have seven possible responses: 1. Please mark one of the seven responses by circling the number that corresponds to the response that fits your opinion. For example, if you “strongly agree,” circle the number “+3.” 2. Complete every item. You have about 10 minutes to do so. *The “Motivation Questionnaire” is reprinted from “Motivation: A Feedback Exercise,” in John E. Jones and J. William Pfeiffer (Eds.), The Annual Handbook for Group Facilitators, University Associates, San Diego, Calif., 1973, pp. 43–45, and is used with permission. 1. Special wage increases should be given to employees who do their jobs very well. 2. Better job descriptions would be helpful so that employees will know exactly what is expected of them. 3. Employees need to be reminded that their jobs are dependent on the company’s ability to compete effectively. 4. Supervisors should give a good deal of attention to the physical working conditions of their employees. 5. Supervisors ought to work hard to develop a friendly working atmosphere among their people. 6. Individual recognition for above-standard performance means a lot to employees. 7. Indifferent supervision can often bruise feelings. 8. Employees want to feel that their real skills and capacities are put to use on their jobs. 9. The company retirement benefits and stock programs are important factors in keeping employees on their jobs. 10. Almost every job can be made more stimulating and challenging. 11. Many employees want to give their best in everything they do. 12. Management could show more interest in the employees by sponsoring social events after hours. 13. Pride in one’s work is actually an important reward. 14. Employees want to be able to think of themselves as “the best” at their own jobs. 15. The quality of the relationships in the informal work group is quite important. 16. Individual incentive bonuses would improve the performance of employees. 17. Visibility with upper management is important to employees. 18. Employees generally like to schedule their own work and to make job-related decisions with a minimum of supervision. 19. Job security is important to employees. 20. Having good equipment to work with is important to employees. Strongly Agree Agree Slightly Agree Don’t Know Slightly Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree ⴙ3 ⫹3 ⴙ2 ⫹2 ⴙ1 ⫹1 0 0 ⴚ1 ⫺1 ⴚ2 ⫺2 ⴚ3 ⫺3 ⫹3 ⫹2 ⫹1 0 ⫺1 ⫺2 ⫺3 ⫹3 ⫹2 ⫹1 0 ⫺1 ⫺2 ⫺3 ⫹3 ⫹2 ⫹1 0 ⫺1 ⫺2 ⫺3 ⫹3 ⫹2 ⫹1 0 ⫺1 ⫺2 ⫺3 ⫹3 ⫹2 ⫹1 0 ⫺1 ⫺2 ⫺3 ⫹3 ⫹3 ⫹2 ⫹2 ⫹1 ⫹1 0 0 ⫺1 ⫺1 ⫺2 ⫺2 ⫺3 ⫺3 ⫹3 ⫹2 ⫹1 0 ⫺1 ⫺2 ⫺3 ⫹3 ⫹2 ⫹1 0 ⫺1 ⫺2 ⫺3 ⫹3 ⫹3 ⫹2 ⫹2 ⫹1 ⫹1 0 0 ⫺1 ⫺1 ⫺2 ⫺2 ⫺3 ⫺3 ⫹3 ⫹3 ⫹2 ⫹2 ⫹1 ⫹1 0 0 ⫺1 ⫺1 ⫺2 ⫺2 ⫺3 ⫺3 ⫹3 ⫹2 ⫹1 0 ⫺1 ⫺2 ⫺3 ⫹3 ⫹2 ⫹1 0 ⫺1 ⫺2 ⫺3 ⫹3 ⫹3 ⫹2 ⫹2 ⫹1 ⫹1 0 0 ⫺1 ⫺1 ⫺2 ⫺2 ⫺3 ⫺3 ⫹3 ⫹3 ⫹2 ⫹2 ⫹1 ⫹1 0 0 ⫺1 ⫺1 ⫺2 ⫺2 ⫺3 ⫺3 243 244 Part Two Cognitive Processes of Organizational Behavior Scoring: 1. Transfer the numbers you circled in the questionnaire to the appropriate places in the following chart. Statement No. Score 10 11 13 18 Total (Self-actualization needs) 6 8 14 17 Total (Esteem needs) 5 7 12 15 Total (Belongingness needs) Statement No. ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ Score 2 3 9 19 Total (Safety needs) 1 4 16 20 Total (Basic needs) ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ 2. Record your total scores in the following chart by marking an X in each row below the number of your total score for that area of needs motivation. ⫺12 ⫺10 ⫺8 ⫺6 ⫺4 ⫺2 0 ⫹2 ⫹4 ⫹6 ⫹8 ⫹10 ⫹12 Self-actualization Esteem Belongingness Safety Basic Low use High use By examining the chart, you can see the relative strength you attach to each of the needs in Maslow’s hierarchy. There are no right answers here, but most work-motivation theorists imply that most people are concerned mainly with the upper-level needs (that is, belongingness, esteem, and self-actualization). Part Three Dynamics of Organizational Behavior 8. 9. 10. 11. Communication and Decision Making Stress and Conflict Power and Politics Groups and Teams 247 277 312 339 Evidence-Based Consulting Practices GALLUP’S APPROACH TO THE DYNAMICS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR: THE USE OF TALENT OF TEAM For Gallup, the first issue for the dynamics of organizational behavior is that the team be led by an individual who has the right talent for the role. Certain individuals have this knack, or talent, to put people together so that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. There is an essential leadership talent issue at the center of a truly successful team practice. The best teams are created when the unique talents of each individual are brought together for the desired outcome. Teams are not always more productive than individuals working separately. In Gallup’s approach, the best teams are paradoxically related to the right way to handle individuals. To have a great team, each member of the team needs to have a self-awareness of their own best contribution to the team and an assurance that others know that their primary contributions are related to these talents. In this way, each member is attentive to his or her best contribution to and for the team. It is also true that team members do not labor under inappropriate expectations derived from the leader, teammates, or self. Put another way, people expect the best from me and the best for me, and in this way one is best positioned to respond in a successful manner. 246 Part Three Dynamics of Organizational Behavior Gallup has found that great team leaders encourage employees to spend most of their time building their top talents into strengths by adding knowledge, skills, and experience. The remainder of their time is spent managing their weaknesses through building complimentary partnerships with other team members, developing support systems, or using their strengths to make their weaknesses irrelevant. Great team leaders pay attention to the difference in the talents that individuals bring to the table. Some people love to get things started. These same people frequently are bored with things long before they are finished. Their joy in life is “making things happen.” Often these individuals are less interested in “permission” than “action.” Often seen as “fire starters,” they can be used well by moving them from team to team, timing their arrival at the point where the “analytical types” have things well in hand and are about to pass over into the paralysis of reanalyzing the analysis. Let the high-focus, detail people do cleanup operations. Such organizational behavior dynamics are talent based and create the greatest positive effect when people are encouraged to utilize their impact, rather than ignoring or actually seeking to thwart such inclinations. Great team leaders will ask questions such as: “What are the talents of each of the members of my team? What experience, skills, and knowledge could I provide my team members to help them develop their themes of talent into strengths? Are my team’s performance problems caused by a lack of skills and knowledge, which can be developed through training and experience? Are the performance problems caused by a lack of talent, in which case training will have a minimal impact? Is my team missing any talents that could make it more balanced? Likewise, when they follow the strengths-based approach, team members will start to ask themselves questions such as: “How does this role draw out my greatest talents? What can I do to further develop my talents into strengths? How can working from my areas of greatest strength impact my performance and the performance of our team? Who on my team has a talent that would make them a great complementary partner for me?” In summary, Gallup’s position is that great teams are those where individuals are set up for success according to their strengths. Chapter Eight Communication and Decision Making Learning Objectives • Relate the perspective, historical background, and meaning of the communication process in organizations. • Identify the dimensions of nonverbal communication. • Discuss the specific dimensions of interpersonal and interactive communication processes. • Describe the decision-making process and behavioral decision making. • Present the styles and techniques of decision making. • Explore the creative process. Communication and decision making are frequently discussed dynamics in organizational behavior, but they are seldom clearly understood. Both are basic prerequisites for the attainment of organizational strategies and effective human resource management, but they remain big problems facing modern management. Both are extremely broad topics and of course are not restricted to the organizational behavior field. Both take up a lot of an active human being’s life, and even higher proportions of a typical manager’s time. The comprehensive study reported in Chapter 14, that directly observed a wide cross section of what were called “Real Managers” in their day-to-day behaviors, found that they devote about a third of their activities to routine communication—exchanging and processing routine information and over 10 percent in decision making.1 More important, however, is the finding that the communication activity made the biggest relative contribution to effective managers and decision making accounts for a smaller but still critical input. Figure 8.1 summarizes these findings. In other words, there seems little doubt that communication and decision making play an important role in managerial and organizational effectiveness. First, the background of the role of communication in management and organizational behavior is briefly discussed. This discussion is followed by a precise definition of communication and presentation of nonverbal communication. Next, the heart of the chapter is concerned with interpersonal and interactive communication. An interpersonal process, as opposed to a linear information flow perspective of communication, is taken throughout. The balance of the chapter is concerned with the decision-making process with particular attention given to behaviorally oriented styles and techniques. 247 248 Part Three Dynamics of Organizational Behavior FIGURE 8.1 Activities of Real Managers’ Effectiveness Source: Fred Luthans, Richard M. Hodgetts, and Stuart A. Rosenkrantz, Real Managers, Ballinger, Cambridge, Mass., 1988, p. 68. (Used with permission.) LUTHANS ET AL. STUDY OF REAL MANAGERS' EFFECTIVENESS (N = 178, drawn from participant observation data related to combined effectiveness measure of unit performance and subordinate satisfaction and commitment) Networking (11%) Routine communication (44%) Traditional management (planning, decision making, and controlling) (19%) Human resources management (26%) BACKGROUND OF THE ROLE OF COMMUNICATION Early discussions of management gave very little emphasis to communication. Although communication was implicit in the managerial function of command and the structural principle of hierarchy, the early theorists never fully developed or integrated it into management theory. At the same time, they did generally recognize the role of informal communication in relation to the problem of supplementing the formal, hierarchical channels. But the pioneering theorist Chester Barnard, in his classic Functions of the Executive, was the first to develop the idea of the central, important role communication plays in the organization. Since the original contributions by Barnard before WWII, the dynamics of communication have been one of the central concerns of organizational behavior and management theorists and especially practitioners. There has been a deluge of books and articles that deal specifically with interpersonal and organizational communication. Unfortunately, practically all this vast literature gives only a surface treatment of the subject and is seldom an evidence-based approach. For example, there have been complaints about an uncritical acceptance of the effectiveness of open communication, when a contingency perspective would be more in line with the evidence.2 One exception was the “Real Managers Study,” reported in Chapter 14 and mentioned in the introductory comments of this chapter. One part of this study combined direct observation of managers in their natural setting with self-report measures to try to determine how they communicated.3 The model shown in Figure 8.2 gives the results. The first dimension of the managerial communication model represents a continuum ranging from the humanistic interactor (who frequently interacts both up and down the organization system and exhibits human-oriented activities) to the mechanistic isolate (who communicates very little, except on a formal basis). The other dimension describes a continuum from the informal developer (who communicates spontaneously in all directions and exhibits activities related to developing his or her people) to the formal controller (who uses formally scheduled communication interaction and exhibits monitoring/controlling activities).4 This empirically derived model describes two major dimensions of managerial communication. It provides a framework for how managers communicate on a day-to-day basis and can be Chapter 8 Communication and Decision Making FIGURE 8.2 Humanistic interactor Managerial Communication Model: How Managers Communicate Source: Fred Luthans and Janet K. Larsen, “How Managers Really Communicate,” Human Relations, Vol. 39, No. 2, 1986, p. 175. 249 Informal developer Formal controller Mechanistic isolate used as a point of departure for formally defining communication and the interpersonal processes of communication in today’s organizations. The Definition of Communication The term communication is freely used by everyone in modern society, including members of the general public, organizational behavior scholars, and management practitioners. In addition, the term is employed to explain a multitude of sins both in the society as a whole and in work organizations. Despite this widespread usage, very few members of the general public—and not a great many more management people—can precisely define the term. Part of the problem is that communication experts have not agreed on a definition themselves. Most definitions of communication used in organizational behavior literature stress the use of symbols to transfer the meaning of information. For example, one analysis stresses that communication is the understanding not of the visible but of the invisible and hidden. These hidden and symbolic elements embedded in the culture give meaning to the visible communication process.5 Of equal, if not more, importance, however, is the fact that communication is a personal process that involves the exchange of behaviors and information. Today, of course, this personal process is not just face-to-face, but is increasingly carried out electronically through Facebook, MySpace, blogs, wikis, texting, mobile phones, and e-mail.6 Although associated with emerging Web 2.0 technologies, the still personal aspects have been noted in no uncertain terms by most organizational behavior scholars. For example, Ivancevich and Matteson noted that “communication among people does not depend on technology but rather on forces in people and their surroundings. It is a process that occurs within people.”7 This personal perspective of communication has been made particularly clear by Nickerson, who has found that many people tend to assume that the other person has the same knowledge that they do, and they communicate on this basis.8 The result is often communication breakdown. In addition to being a personal process, communication has other implications. A communication expert emphasizes the behavioral implications of communication by pointing out that “the only means by which one person can influence another is by the behaviors he performs—that is, the communicative exchanges between people provide the sole method by which influence or effects can be achieved.”9 In other words, the behaviors that occur in an organization are vital to the communication process. This personal and behavioral exchange view of communication takes many forms. 250 Part Three Dynamics of Organizational Behavior FIGURE 8.3 The Continuum of Communication in Organizational Behavior Electronic media and information technology Interpersonal communication (electronic and face-to-face) Nonverbal communication The continuum in Figure 8.3 can be used to identify the major categories of communication that are especially relevant to the study of organizational behavior. On the one extreme is the increasingly important electronic (i.e., Internet) communication media and information technology, and on the other extreme is relatively simple nonverbal communication. The middle ground is occupied by interpersonal approaches (both electronically mediated and face-to-face), which represent the personal perspective taken in this chapter. The growing importance of the role that electronic media and information technology10 plays in communication is certainly recognized by organizational behavior research and application. For example, the accompanying OB in Action: Go Ahead, Use Facebook points out the importance of social networking via the Internet to today’s especially younger employees. There is also considerable research interest in areas such as virtual teams.11 However, more directly relevant to the personal perspective taken here are the areas of nonverbal and interpersonal communication. NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION The opposite end of the continuum from the tangible, often sophisticated electronic media and information technology is nonverbal communication. Although verbal communication has long been recognized as being important, nonverbal communication is particularly relevant to the study of organizational behavior. Sometimes called the “silent language,” nonverbal communication can be defined as “nonword human responses (such as gestures, facial expressions) and the perceived characteristics of the environment through which the human verbal and nonverbal messages are transmitted.”12 Thus, whether a person says something or, equally important, does not say anything, communication still can take place. Body Language and Paralanguage There are many forms of nonverbal communication. Probably the most widely recognized is body language. Body movements convey meanings and messages. This form of communication includes facial expressions and what people do with their eyes, feet, hands, and posture. For example, good salespeople, advertisers, and even poker players capitalize on their knowledge of people’s eyes. As explained by Preston: when an individual is excited or aroused, the pupils of the eyes will dilate. When haggling over a price, the buyer will unconsciously signal an alert seller that a particular price is acceptable. . . . Some colors or shapes cause more excitement than others, and the reaction registers in the shopper’s eyes. With this research information, marketing people redesign their products to better appeal to buyers in a competitive environment. Good poker players watch the eyes of their fellow players as new cards are dealt. The pupil dilation very often will show if the card being dealt improves the player’s hand.13 Besides the obvious meanings attached to things such as a firm handshake or touching the other person when making an important point, at least one communication expert believes that what the person does with the lower limbs is the key to body language. He explains: That is where the tension and anxiety show. The person may claim to be relaxed, yet the legs are crossed tightly, and one foot thrusts so rigidly in the air that it appears to be on the verge OB in Action: Go Ahead, Use Facebook Unilever Tries Bridging the Tech Divide Wendy Wilkes was giving a presentation about Unilever’s information technology to 30 new hires— most of them barely out of school—and they were not happy. They didn’t like the company-issued mobile phones and laptops (or lack thereof). The employee Web site was so 1990s it didn’t have interactive features, such as Facebook. And they couldn’t download iTunes or instant-messaging software to communicate with people outside the company. Wilkes can certainly identify with their gripes. The 27-year-old manager also joined the maker of such consumer staples as Lipton, Slim-Fast, and Vaseline right out of college. In school, she was accustomed to using her Hotmail account from any computer. But from her desktop at work she had access to corporate e-mail only. Not to mention that instant messaging—the foundation of her social life in college—was forbidden with anyone outside the company. “It was the amount of lockdown that surprised me the most,” she says. For anyone born after 1985, entering the workforce is a technological shock. Raised on MySpace.com and Wikipedia, these workers can’t comprehend why they should have to wait 18 months for a company to build corporate software when they can download what they need instantly. “Technology is an important thing in my personal and work life, and I think the two of them should be connected,” says Amy Johannigman, a 22-yearold college senior who worked at a company one summer where the use of social-networking sites was discouraged, camera phones verboten, and the interns were told to limit personal e-mails. REVOLT IN THE RANKS Corporate policy isn’t stopping Johannigman’s contemporaries. Sure, there are official policies against using gear the tech department hasn’t sanctioned, but the sheer number of workers who are flouting the rules makes enforcement nearly impossible. Consulting firm Forrester Research even coined a term for workers ignoring corporate policy and taking technology into their own hands: Technology Populism. At Unilever, half of the desktop software and services used by employees comes from outside the company, and a lot of it shouldn’t be there—Skype and iTunes, to name just a couple. ”We can’t stop them,” says Chris Turner, Unilever’s chief technology officer. ‘’They’re not accepting no as an answer.” Neither did Wilkes. She joined Unilever with a degree in information management and soon became a member of the marketing department’s support team, where she experienced Unilever’s rigid rules firsthand. So Wilkes put together some ideas about how employees could be more productive using consumer technology and sent her thoughts to Turner. About six months ago, Turner offered Wilkes a new job, basically, in her words, to “get involved in trying to make a difference.” Now Wilkes is one of 13 so-called consumerization architects whose job is to spread the use of popular—and in many cases free—technology. For example, Wilkes is looking into letting employees install Webcams so they can confer by videoconference and cut down on travel time. Unilever is still testing how to give employees more digital freedom. It may move users outside the corporate firewall and allow them to connect via their own computers, provided they’re using certain security technologies. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the savings could be millions of dollars. “We see this as a real opportunity to start altering the cost model to deliver IT,” says Turner. Turner’s ideas are unpopular with some people in his own department. But, as he points out, the social and economic forces are overwhelming. of breaking off. Insight: People concentrate on hiding their tension from the waist up. Their real state is revealed in their legs and feet.14 Even a person’s clothing can become important in body language. In addition to dressing for success, physical appearance in general seems important. From her research with clients, one consultant concluded that physical attractiveness is “the single most important quality in determining your success at every stage in your life. People who are attractive are judged to be nicer people, more intelligent, more capable, more desirable mates and better employees.”15 Besides the truly silent dimensions of nonverbal communication such as body language, time (for example, being late or early), or space (for example, how close one gets during a conversation or seating arrangements in a committee meeting), there are also ways in which people verbalize what are an important dimension of nonverbal communication. Sometimes 251 252 Part Three Dynamics of Organizational Behavior called paralanguage, these include things such as voice quality, tone, volume, speech rate, pitch, nonfluencies (saying “ah,” “um,” or “uh”), laughing, and yawning. For example, tone of voice (genuine or fake) is important in customer service. Also, who says a word (for example, whether the boss or a coworker asks for “volunteers”) and in what environmental context it is said (for example, in the boss’s office or out on the golf course) make a difference. Improving Nonverbal Effectiveness The study of those with high emotional intelligence, or EI (discussed in Chapter 7), reveals that one of the key characteristics of these successful, effective people is their ability to read the nonverbal cues and react accordingly in a social situation.16 Although EI is developed over time, as with other forms of communication, there are specific guidelines that can be used to increase the accuracy of interpreting others’ nonverbal behavior. Here are some specific suggestions to improve nonverbal communication: 1. Look at what is happening in the situation. When nonverbal behavior is an emotional response, it reflects what is going on at the moment and can be used to better understand the person’s nonverbal behavior. 2. Consider the discrepancies between the nonverbal behavior and the verbal statements. If there is a mismatch, then this should be a signal for closer examination of what is going on. Sometimes the nonverbal signals are more accurate than the verbal ones. 3. Watch for subtleties in the nonverbal behavior. For example, the difference between a real smile and a fake one can usually be detected.17 Cultural differences must also be recognized in nonverbal communication. For example, in the first of the author’s numerous trips to Albania starting almost 20 years ago to assist this small Eastern European country in the transformation to a market economy,18 the audience responded to talks on the importance of human resource management by shaking their heads from side to side. I interpreted this as: “Oh, wow, they don’t agree with me. I have a problem here.” However, at the end of my talk, the Albanians enthusiastically cheered and gave one of the warmest and most heartfelt receptions I have ever received. Later, when I expressed my puzzlement to some of them, saying that they didn’t seem to be agreeing with me during the talk, I learned that in Albania shaking the head from side to side means “yes, I agree” and shaking it up and down means “no, I don’t agree.” This one nonverbal gesture, with a completely opposite meaning in this culture, had a huge impact on my reading the other person—especially when they then became inconsistent because they sometimes remembered that Americans had a different meaning for the direction of head shakes. The following are a few guidelines affecting communication in various cultures: expect more physical closeness in Latin America; the use of “thumbs up” is fine almost anywhere except Australia; and take your hands out of your pockets when meeting a Japanese person. The accompanying OB in Action: Nonverbal and Verbal Communication gives some further guidelines for both nonverbal and verbal communication in European cultures. Overall, nonverbal dimensions are extremely important to interpersonal communication and must be given as much recognition as the mounting attention given to electronic media and information technology. INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION As was shown in the continuum in Figure 8.3, interpersonal communication represents the middle ground between electronic media and information technology on the one extreme and nonverbal communication on the other. At the heart of the study of organizational behavior is interpersonal communication. OB in Action: Nonverbal and Verbal Communication One of the best ways of coping with different cultures and customs is to be careful in the use of both verbal and nonverbal communication. This means saying and doing the right things and, perhaps even more important, not saying or doing the wrong things. Here are some guidelines that U.S. managers are finding useful in treading their way through the intercultural maze of foreign countries: 1. In Europe, act as if you are calling on a rich old aunt. Dress well, do not chew gum, do not smoke without first seeking permission, do not use first names unless invited to do so by the other party, be punctual to meetings, and, if you are unsure of the proper dress, err on the side of conservatism. 2. When in France, speak English to your hosts. They know how to speak English and typically are appalled at the performance of foreigners trying to communicate in their tongue. Stick to the language you know best. Also, be on time for all engagements. The French are sticklers for promptness. 3. Remember that Germans differ from the French in a number of ways. One of these is that they are even bigger sticklers for promptness. Also, remember that gentlemen walk and sit to the left of all women and men of senior business rank. Do not get on the wrong side. 4. In Britain, social events are not used for discussing business. This is left at the office. Also, remember that the British religiously keep engagement calendars, so if you are inviting some people to lunch or dinner, send your invitation well in advance or you are likely to find that date already filled in your prospective guest’s calendar. If you are attending a formal dinner, it is common to toast Her Majesty’s health after the main course. This is the signal that you may now smoke. Do not light up prior to this time. Also, remember that although promptness is valued, if you are invited to dinner at 8 P.M., you may show up five or ten minutes late, but it is not good manners to show up early. 5. In Italy, it is common to shake hands with everyone. However, do not expect them to remember your name. No one does on the first introduction. Also, get in the habit of calling people by their title. For example, university graduates often prefer to be addressed as such, and there are different titles depending on the individual’s field of study. 6. In Spain, punctuality is taken seriously only when attending a bullfight. Most offices and shops close for siesta from 1:30 P.M. to 4:30 P.M., and restaurants do not usually reopen until after 9 P.M. or get into full swing before 11 P.M. An early dinner in Spain often ends around midnight; a late dinner goes into the wee hours of the morning. If you are invited to dinner and are unaccustomed to late hours, take an afternoon nap. You are going to need it if you hope to last through dessert. In interpersonal communication, the major emphasis is on transferring information from one person to another. Communication is looked on as a basic method of effecting behavioral change, and it incorporates the psychological processes (perception, learning, and motivation) on the one hand and language on the other. However, it must be noted that the explosion of advanced information technology is also having an impact on this human interaction process. For example, in a University of Southern California commencement address by Disney’s Michael Eisner, he noted: As any drama coach can tell you, when accompanied by varied intonation and facial expressions, identical words can come across completely differently. If a person says “you dope” with a smile over the dinner table, it can be endearing. But, in the hard, cold cathode-ray light of e-mail, the same two words stand there starkly and accusingly. I’m afraid that spell check does not check for anger, emotion, inflection or subtext. As an academic analysis noted: “Human communication has always been central to organizational action. Today, the introduction of various sophisticated electronic communication technologies and the demand for faster and better forms of interaction are visibly influencing the nature of [interpersonal] communication.”19 Thus, listening sensitivity and nonverbal communications are also closely associated with interpersonal communication. For example, Bill Marriott, Jr., of the highly successful hotel chain, spent nearly half his time listening and talking to frontline employees. It is important to note that he listened and then talked to his people. 253 254 Part Three Dynamics of Organizational Behavior Importance of How to Talk to Others In interpersonal communication, knowing how to talk to others can be very useful. One communication expert noted that when communicating with the boss, it is important to understand his or her preferred communication style. Here are some examples:20 1. The Director. This person has a short attention span, processes information very quickly, and is interested only in the bottom line. So it is best to present this type of manager with a bulleted list of conclusions and forget all of the background information. 2. The Free Spirit. This manager is a creative, big-picture type of person who likes to consider alternative approaches to doing things, but is not very good on follow-through. In communicating with this type of manager it is important to be patient and to be prepared for changes in direction. The manager often likes to assimilate what he or she is being told and to consider several alternatives before making a decision. 3. The Humanist. This manager likes everyone to be happy and is very concerned with the feelings of others. So any suggestions or recommendations that are given to him or her will be passed around the entire department for full consensus before any action is taken. In dealing with this type of manager, patience and tact are very important. 4. The Historian. This manager likes to know the whole picture and thrives on details. This individual wants to be given a thorough analysis and background information, especially if it is presented in linear fashion. This type of manager does not jump from subject to subject, but instead remains focused on the topic under consideration until it has been exhaustively reviewed and a decision is made. In addition to these hints on how to talk with one’s boss is the whole upward communication process, which is generally inhibited in traditional hierarchically structured organizations. The Importance of Feedback The often posed philosophical question—Is there a noise in the forest if a tree crashes to the ground but no one is there to hear it?—demonstrates some of the important aspects of interpersonal communication. From a communications perspective, the answer is no. There are sound waves but no noise because no one perceives it. There must be both a sender and a receiver in order for interpersonal communication to take place. The sender is obviously important to communication, but so is the neglected receiver who gives feedback to the sender and becomes an important component of the upward process. The importance of feedback cannot be overemphasized because effective interpersonal communication is highly dependent on it. Proper follow-up and feedback require establishing an informal and formal mechanism by which the sender can check on how the message was actually interpreted. There is even research evidence that a graphical feedback format has a more positive impact on performance than does a strictly tabular, numerical feedback format.21 In general, feedback makes communication a two-way process and is a big problem with much of e-mail that turns out to be only one-way. As electronic communication becomes more interactive, such problems can be overcome. There is continuing research evidence that feedback not only improves communication but also, in turn, leads to more effective manager and organizational performance.22 For example, when businesses have secret salaries so that no one knows what anyone else is earning, or family-owned enterprises do not tell the employees how well the company is doing, many people believe that they are being paid less than they should.23 On the other hand, when information is shared, even though this means giving up some control, the results are often well worth the effort.24 Chapter 8 Communication and Decision Making TABLE 8.1 Luthans and Martinko’s Characteristics of Feedback for Effective and Ineffective Interpersonal Communication in Human Resource Management Effective Feedback Ineffective Feedback 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Intended to help the employee Specific Descriptive Useful Timely Considers employee readiness for feedback Clear Valid 255 Intended to belittle the employee General Evaluative Inappropriate Untimely Makes the employee defensive Not understandable Inaccurate Table 8.1 summarizes some characteristics of effective and ineffective feedback for employee performance. The following list explains these characteristics in more detail: 1. Intention. Effective feedback is directed toward improving job performance and making the employee a more valuable asset. It is not a personal attack and should not compromise the individual’s feeling of self-worth or image. Rather, effective feedback is directed toward aspects of the job. 2. Specificity. Effective feedback is designed to provide recipients with specific information so that they know what must be done to correct the situation. Ineffective feedback is general and leaves questions in the recipients’ minds. For example, telling an employee that he or she is doing a poor job is too general and will leave the recipient frustrated in seeking ways to correct the problem. 3. Description. Effective feedback can also be characterized as descriptive rather than evaluative. It tells the employee what he or she has done in objective terms, rather than presenting a value judgment. 4. Usefulness. Effective feedback is information that an employee can use to improve performance. It serves no purpose to berate employees for their lack of skill if they do not have the ability or training to perform properly. Thus, the guideline is that if it is not something the employee can correct, it is not worth mentioning. 5. Timeliness. There are also considerations in timing feedback properly. As a rule, the more immediate the feedback, the better. This way the employee has a better chance of knowing what the supervisor is talking about and can take corrective action. 6. Readiness. In order for feedback to be effective, employees must be ready to receive it. When feedback is imposed or forced on employees, it is much less effective. 7. Clarity. Effective feedback must be clearly understood by the recipient. A good way of checking this is to ask the recipient to restate the major points of the discussion. Also, supervisors can observe facial expressions as indicators of understanding and acceptance. 8. Validity. In order for feedback to be effective, it must be reliable and valid. Of course, when the information is incorrect, the employee will feel that the supervisor is unnecessarily biased or the employee may take corrective action that is inappropriate and only compounds the problem. In recent years, multisource 360-degree feedback has received increasing attention as a process to communicate to a target manager about strengths and weaknesses. The multiple sources include peers (coworkers), managers, direct reports, and sometimes even customers (thus the term 360 degrees). This 360-degree feedback approach draws its conceptual roots from several different areas. One is the traditional organizational development 256 Part Three Dynamics of Organizational Behavior technique of using surveys to assess employees’ perceptions. These surveys measure items such as satisfaction with management, supervisors, pay, work procedures, or formal policies of the organization. The survey information is then fed back to those that generated it, with the goal of developing an action plan to improve the organization. Another area in which 360-degree feedback has strong conceptual roots is the performance appraisal literature. Today’s environment has forced organizations to provide much more information than the traditional performance review, thus spawning such creative efforts as 360-degree feedback.25 It is now recognized that managers can improve their performance through increased multisource information.26 Social cognitive theory (see Chapter 1), in particular the dimension of self-awareness, can also be used as an explanation.27 Specifically, social cognitive theory posits that humans have the ability to assess their own capabilities and skills, and they often evaluate themselves quite differently than others do. Therefore, the 360-degree feedback provides managers with an external source of information designed to increase their self-awareness.28 This enhanced self-awareness may improve managerial effectiveness by providing individuals with another source of outside information regarding what others expect of him or her. A recent study found that self-awareness from 360-degree feedback (closing the discrepancy between self and others’ ratings) can be improved through combining the feedback with systematic coaching.29 Other Important Variables in Interpersonal Communication Besides feedback, other variables, such as trust, expectations, values, status, and compatibility, greatly influence the interpersonal aspects of communication. If the subordinate does not trust the boss, there will be ineffective communication.30 The same is true of the other variables mentioned. People perceive only what they expect to perceive; the unexpected may not be perceived at all. The growing generation gap can play havoc with interpersonal communication. For example, here are some guidelines to communicate better with Generation X (those born between 1965 and 1980) and Generation Y (those born between 1981 and 1994):31 1. In terms of technology, for Gen X keep it up-to-date and motivating (music at work, BlackBerrys, and fast computers) and Gen Y (learn from them). 2. In terms of collaboration, for Gen X limit face-to-face meetings and offer alternatives such as conference calls, video, and Web conferencing and for Gen Y try to leverage social networks to encourage team collaboration and knowledge sharing. 3. In terms of the work ethic, for Gen X trust them and offer flexibility to telecommute and for Gen Y accept their expectations of new rules (e.g., productivity not hours at their desk). 4. In terms of socializing, for Gen X invite but do not push them to participate and for Gen Y appeal to their career goals to attend a networking event. Giving attention to, and doing something about, these interpersonal variables such as trust and recognizing age differences can spell the difference between effective and ineffective communication. INTERACTIVE COMMUNICATION IN ORGANIZATIONS Although closely related, interpersonal communication discussed above is more at the micro, individual level, whereas interactive communication is more at the macro, organizational level. The classical hierarchical organizational structure discussed in Chapter 8 Communication and Decision Making 257 Chapter 3 gave formal recognition only to vertical communication. Nevertheless, most of the classical theorists saw the need to supplement the vertical with some form of horizontal system. Horizontal communication is required to make a coordinated, crossfunctional effort in achieving organizational goals. The horizontal requirement becomes more apparent as the organization becomes larger, more complex, and more subject to the flattening and networking of structures, covered in Chapter 3. Wellknown companies such as General Electric, DuPont, Motorola, and Xerox have moved to such a horizontal model of organization. These and other modern network and team designs, formally incorporate horizontal flows into the structure. However, as is the case with vertical (downward and upward) flows in the organization structure, the real key to horizontal communication is still found in people and behaviors. Because of the dynamic, interpersonal aspects of communication, the interactive form seems more appropriate than just the horizontal form. The horizontal flows of information (even in a horizontal structure) are only part of the communication process that takes place across an organization. The Extent and Implications of Interactive Communication Most management experts today stress the important but often overlooked role that interactive communication plays in today’s organizations. In most cases the vertical communication process still overshadows the horizontal. For example, the study of “Real Managers” reported at the beginning of the chapter found that approximately 100 interactions per week reportedly occurred between managers and their employees (both to them and from them). “While there was far more communication downward (between managers and their employees) than upward (between managers and top managers above them in the organization), there were no specific differences determined by initiation of interaction.”32 The horizontal communication in this study was mainly represented by the networking activity (socializing/politicking and interacting with outsiders) that was shown to be related to successful managers (those promoted relatively fast) more than any other activity.33 Other studies have also found a relationship, although complex, between communication activities and leadership.34 Just as in other aspects of organizational communication, there are many behavioral implications contained in the interactive process.35 Communication with peers, that is, with persons of relatively equal status on the same level of an organization, provides needed social support for an individual. People can more comfortably turn to a peer for social support than they can to those above or below them. The result can be good or bad for the organization. If the support is couched in terms of task coordination to achieve overall goals, interactive communication can be good for the organization. On the other hand, “if there are no problems of task coordination left to a group of peers, the content of their communication can take forms which are irrelevant to or destructive of organizational functioning.”36 In addition, interactive communication among peers may be at the sacrifice of vertical communication. Persons at each level, giving social support to one another, may freely communicate among themselves but fail to communicate upward or downward. In fact, in the study of “Real Managers,” Figure 8.1 showed that networking had the least-relative relationship with effective managers (those with satisfied and committed employees and high-performing units), but routine communication activities (exchanging and processing information) had the highest.37 The Purposes and Methods of Interactive Communication Just as there are several purposes of vertical communication in an organization, there are also various reasons for the need for interactive communication. Basing his inquiry on 258 Part Three Dynamics of Organizational Behavior several research studies, a communications scholar has summarized four of the most important purposes of interactive communication: 1. Task coordination. The department heads may meet monthly to discuss how each department is contributing to the system’s goals. 2. Problem solving. The members of a department may assemble to discuss how they will handle a threatened budget cut; they may employ brainstorming techniques. 3. Information sharing. The members of one department may meet with the members of another department to give them some new data. 4. Conflict resolution. The members of one department may meet to discuss a conflict inherent in the department or between departments.38 The examples for each of the major purposes of interactive communication traditionally have been departmental or interdepartmental meetings, but in recent years they include teams and videoconferencing. Such meetings and teams that exist in most organizations have been the major methods of interactive communication. In addition, most organizations’ procedures require written reports to be distributed across departments and to teams. The quantity, quality, and human implications discussed in relation to the vertical communication process are also inherent in interactive communication. The Role of the Informal Organization Because of the failure of the classical structures to meet the needs of interactive communication, not only have new organizational forms emerged, but the informal organization and groups have also been used to fill the void. Informal contacts with others on the same level are a primary means of interactive communication. The informal system of communication can be used to spread false rumors and destructive information, or it can effectively supplement the formal channels of communication. For example, communication experts recognize that the hallways of an organization encourage creative, open-ended interactions because of two reasons: (1) the hallway takes away some of the sense of hierarchy, making the participants seem more equal and (2) the hallway invites multiple perspectives—anyone who wanders by can join in, adding their ideas to the mix.39 In today’s digital world, with increasing numbers of employees at all levels having less face-to-face interaction in “hallways,” the same advantages apply to those who now commonly interact on chat rooms, blogs, PDAs, and e-mail. Face-to-face or electronically, the informal system can quickly disseminate pertinent information that assists the formal systems to attain goals. However, whether the informal system has negative or positive functions for the organization depends largely on the goals of the person doing the communicating. As in any communication system, the entire informal system has a highly personal orientation, and, as has been pointed out earlier, personal goals may or may not be compatible with organizational goals. The degree of compatibility that does exist will have a major impact on the effect that the grapevine or rumor mill has on organizational goal attainment. Some organizational theorists are critical of the grapevine because its speed makes control of false rumors and information difficult to manage. By the same token, however, this speed factor may work to the advantage of the organization. Because the informal system is so personally based and directed, it tends to be much faster than the formal downward system of information flow. Important relevant information that requires quick responsive action by lower-level personnel may be more effectively handled by the informal system than by the formal system. Thus, the informal system is a major way that interactive communication is accomplished. The formal horizontal and upward systems are often either inadequate or completely ineffective. The informal system is generally relied on to coordinate the units horizontally on a given level. Chapter 8 Communication and Decision Making 259 THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS Both communication and decision making are important dynamic, personal processes relevant to the social cognitive framework for this text (see Chapter 1) and the study of organizational behavior. After defining decision making, particular attention is given to behavioral (as opposed to economic or financial) decision making and then the styles and techniques of decision making most relevant to organizational behavior understanding and application. Decision making is almost universally defined as choosing between alternatives. It is closely related to all the traditional management functions. For example, when a manager plans, organizes, and controls, he or she is making decisions. The classical theorists, however, did not generally present decision making this way. Pioneering management theorists such as Fayol and Urwick were concerned with the decision-making process only to the extent that it affects delegation and authority, whereas the father of scientific management, Frederick W. Taylor, alluded to the scientific method only as an ideal approach to making decisions. Like most other aspects of modern organization theory, the beginning of a meaningful analysis of the decision-making process can be traced to Chester Barnard. In The Functions of the Executive, Barnard gave a comprehensive analytical treatment of decision making and noted: “The processes of decision . . . are largely techniques for narrowing choice.”40 Most discussions of the decision-making process break it down into a series of steps. For the most part, the logic can be traced to the ideas developed by Herbert A. Simon