OB Exam 2

Decision Making

the process of making choices among alternative

Rational Choice paradigm

use pure logical and all available information to a)identify problems/opportunities b) generate all possible alternative, and c) choose the alternative with the highest value

decision heuristics paradigm

use cognitive shortcuts or mental “rule of thumb” to make decisions

Framing heuristic (Prospect Theory)

tendency to evaluate risk differently depending on how a decision is presented (or framed)

sure gain = risk averse, take the gain

sure loss = risk-seeking, gamble

availability heuristic

the tendency to estimate the probability of something occurring by how easily we can recall those events

representativeness heuristic

make decisions or judgements based on how people or situations match a particular prototype of stereotype (even when better info about probabilities is available)

maximizing

getting the best possible outcome

satisfising

taking the “good enough” option

Creative Process Model

Preparation

Incubation

Illumination

Verification

Preparation

gathering information, training, etc.

Incubation

walking away and taking a break to maintain minimum awareness of project or information while doing something else

letting the project/info “marinate”

Illumination

getting the idea or solution for a problem or project

Verification

testing if the new ideas actually work

Types of teams

formal team

departmental teams

production teams

self-directed teams

task force (project teams)

virtual teams

formal team

established by management to help the organization achieve its goals

departmental teams

members have similar skills

production teams

assembly-line type of interdependence

self-directed teams

have great autonomy, require little supervision

task force

temporarily organized to complete an assignment

virtual team

members operate across space, time, and organizational boundaries

task force vs. self-direct team

task force is short-term team formed to work on a specific project or problem

self-directed teams are more permanent and work on a variety of projects

Forms of interdependence

low to high:

pooled

sequential

reciprocal

pooled interdependence

have a pool of different resources, but everyone works separately

low level of interdependence

sequential interdependence

tasks are completed one after another, with later tasks building on the work of earlier tasks

mid-level of interdependence

reciprocal interdependence

everything is connected, everything is exchanged

high level of interdependence

Levels of trust in teams

calculus based

knowledge based

identification based

calculus based trust

based on deterrence

knowledge based trust

based on predictability and competence

identification based trust

based on mutual understanding and common values

comes from a very long-term relationship

Stages of team development

forming

storming

norming

performing

adjourning

listed sequentially, but at any point in time can return to a previous stage of the process

forming

the coming together/formation of the team

stage 1

storming

the period of time where there is conflict and internal conflict and disagreement within the team

stage 2

norming

setting goals, expectations, norms, etc.

role assignment happens here

stage 3

performing

task-oriented stage

getting tasks and work done

stage 4

adjourning

team disbanding

stage 5

Constraints of team decision making

time constraints

evaluation apprehension

peer pressure to conform

groupthink

time constraints

require extra time to organize/coordinate

production blocking undermines idea generation

evaluation apprehension

belief that others are silently evaluating you

peer pressure to conform

adjusting one’s behavior so it aligns with that of the team

groupthink

tendency in highly cohesive teams to value consensus at the price of decision quality

Types of Conflict

constructive (task-oriented) conflict

relationship (socioemotional) conflict

task oriented conflict

parties focus on the issue while maintaining respect for people having other points of view

try to understand the logic and assumptions of each position

relationship conflict

parties focus on adversary rather than the issue as the source of conflict

try to undermine each other’s worth/competence

accompanies by strong negative emotions (drive to defend)

Sources of conflict in the workplace

incompatible goals

differentiation

interdependence

scarce resources

ambiguous rules

communication problems

incompatible goals

one party’s goals perceived to interfere with other’s goals

differentiation

different values/beliefs

same goal but different approach

interdependence

greater chance that parties will disrupt or interfere with each other based on how connected they are

scarce resources

motivates competition because of lack of resources

ambiguous rules

creates uncertainty, encourages political tactics

communication problems

increase stereotyping, escalate conflict

conflict handling strategies

forcing

avoiding

yielding

compromising

problem-solving

forcing

insisting upon your way

best when: you have a strong conviction about your position and there’s a quick resolution required

problem: relationship conflict, damages long-term relationship

avoiding

not dealing with the conflict at all

best when conflict is emotionally-charged (relationship conflict) as conflict resolution cost is higher than benefits

problem: doesn’t resolve conflict and could lead to frustration

yielding

giving in to the other person

best when the other party has much more power and the issue is less important to you than the other party

problem: increases other’s expectations

compromising

both give something up and get something in return

best when: parties have equal power, parties lack trust/openness, and a quick solution is required

problem: sub-optimal solution where mutual gains are possible

problem solving

coming to the best possible solution that maximizes satisfaction for all parties

best when: interests aren’t perfectly opposing, parties have trust/openness, and issues are complex

problem: it can take a lot of time and be very costly

negotiation techniques

distributive

integrative

distributive negotiation

is a win/lost situation, you search for solutions that meet your own needs

conceal information or use it selectively and strategically

it is competitive

you have a short-term relationship

integrative negotiation

is a win/win situation that searches for solutions that meet both parties’ needs

information is more openly shared

cooperative problem-solving

long-term relationship

distributive negotiation strategies

managing first offers through anchoring and reanchoring

manage time to apply pressure or prolong the process

manage concessions by giving yourself room to be flexible and give things up

integrative negotiation strategies

building a relationship

share information selectively by starting small and seeing how it’s received, and then adjusting to share more information

discover the priorities of the other parties involved

pros of using emails

now preferred way to coordinate work

tends to increase communication volume

significantly alters communication flow

reduces some stereotype biases

cons of using emails

communicates emotions poorly

reduces politeness and respect (flaming)

inefficient for ambiguous, complex, or novel situations

increases information overload

criteria for choosing communication channel

social acceptance

information complexity

social acceptance criteria

do people support the use of that specific communication channel for that purpose?

depends on:

norms for using that channel, individual preference for using that channel, and symbolic meaning of the channel

information complexity channel

does the channel support conveying novel or ambiguous information?

depends on the media richness or the channel’s data carrying capacity

high richness when channel:

conveys multiple cues, allows timely feedback, and allows customized message

active listening principles

empathizing

clarifying

responding

empathizing - active listening

acknowledging the other person’s feelings

clarifying - active listening

asking for clarification

listening carefully

responding - active listening

paraphrasing what you heard

ask the other person if that is what they meant