Organizational Behavior: Perception

Food Survey

Last month, a world-wide survey was conducted by the UN. The only question asked was... : "Would you please give your honest opinion about solutions to the food shortage in the rest of the world?" The survey was a huge failure because...: In Africa they didn't know what "food" means. In Eastern Europe they didn't know what "honest" means. In Western Europe they didn't know what "shortage" means. In China they didn't know what "opinion" means. In the Middle East they didn't know what "solution" means. In South America they didn't know what "please" means. In the USA they didn't know what "the rest of the world" means

Perceptual Process ModelEnvironmental Stimuli

Perception: A Social Information Processing ModelCompetingenvironmentalstimuli:* People* Events* ObjectsInterpretationandcategorizationStage 1Selective Attention/ComprehensionStage 2Encodingand SimplificationACFABCDEFMemoryJudgments anddecisionsStage 3Storage andRetentionStage 4Retrievaland ResponseC

Social Information ProcessingModel of PerceptionStage 1: Selective Attention/Comprehension - Attention is the process of becoming aware of something or someone - People pay attention to salient stimuli Stage 2: Encoding and Simplification - Encoding is the process of interpreting environmental stimuli by using information contained in cognitive categories and schemata - The same information can be interpreted differently by people due to individual differencesStage 3: Storage and Retention - Encoded information or stimuli is sent to long- term memory - Long-term memory is composed of three compartments containing categories of information about events, semantic materials, and peopleStage 4: Retrieval and Response - Information is retrieved from memory when people make judgments and decisions

Factors That Influence PerceptionCharacteristics of the PerceiverValues and attitudesMotivesInterestsExperienceExpectations Characteristics of the TargetStructural beautyNovelty and FamiliarityMotion and ChangeRepetitionIntensitySoundsSizeContrast and BackgroundProximity Perceptual contextTimeWork settingSocial settingPerception

Attribution ProcessInternal AttributionPerception that outcomes are due to motivation/ability rather than situation or fateExternal AttributionPerception that outcomes are due to situation or fate rather than the person

Kelleys Model of AttributionConsensus: Involves comparing an individuals behavior with that of his or her peers. Low consensus indicates an individual is different from peers.Basic Premise: An attribution is based on the consensus, distinctiveness, and consistency of the observed behavior.Distinctiveness: Involves comparing a persons behavior or accomplishments on one task with the behavior or accomplishments from other tasks. Highly distinctive behavior or results represents a situation where the current behavior or result is significantly different from typical behavior or results on other tasks. Consistency: Involves comparing a persons behavior or accomplishments on a given task over time. - High consistency implies that a person performs a certain task the same, time after time.Predictions: Internal or personal attributions are made when a behavior is associated with low consensus and distinctiveness, and high consistency. - External or environmental attributions are made when a behavior is related with high consensus and distinctiveness, and low consistency.

ConsensusPeopleIndividual PerformanceABCDEPeopleIndividual PerformanceABCDELowHighSource: KA Brown, Explaining Group Poor Performance: an Attributional Analysis, Academy of Management Review, January 1984, p 56. Used with permission.

DistinctivenessTasksIndividual PerformanceABCDETasksIndividual PerformanceABCDELowHighSource: KA Brown, Explaining Group Poor Performance: an Attributional Analysis, Academy of Management Review, January 1984, p 56. Used with permission.

ConsistencyTimeIndividual PerformanceTimeIndividual PerformanceLowHighSource: KA Brown, Explaining Group Poor Performance: an Attributional Analysis, Academy of Management Review, January 1984, p. 56. Used with permission.

Attribution ErrorsFundamental Attribution ErrorAttributing behavior of other people to internal factors (their motivation/ability)Self-Serving BiasAttributing our successes to internal factors and our failures to external factors

Self-Fulfilling Prophecy CycleSupervisorformsexpectationsExpectationsaffect supervisorsbehaviorSupervisorsbehavior affectsemployeeEmployeesbehavior matchesexpectations

Identity: Who Am I?

Social IdentityOrganizational IdentityPersonal Identity

Perceptual Biases and Errors in Decision Making

Stereotype : A stereotype is an individuals set of beliefs about the characteristics of a group of people.Halo: A rater forms an overall impression about an object and then uses the impression to bias ratings about the object.Leniency: A personal characteristic that leads an individual to consistently evaluate other people or objects in an extremely positive fashion.Central Tendency: The tendency to avoid all extreme judgments and rate people and objects as average or neutral.Recency Effects: The tendency to remember recent information. Most recent information dominates perceptions, If the recent information is negative, the person or object is evaluated negatively.Contrast Effects: The tendency to evaluate people or objects by comparing them with characteristics of recently observed people or objects.Primacy: First impressionsProjection: Believing other people are similar to you

Perceptual Biases and Errors in Decision MakingOverconfidence Error Availability HeuristicRepresentative HeuristicEscalation of Commitment ErrorAnchoring and Adjustment HeuristicConfirmation BiasRandomness BiasHindsight Bias

The Stereotyping ProcessProfessors areabsent-mindedOur instructoris a professorOur instructor isabsent-mindedDevelop categoriesand assign traits

Improving Perceptual AccuracyImprovingPerceptualAccuracyDiversityInitiativesEmpathizeWith OthersPostponeImpressionFormationKnowYourselfComparePerceptionsWith Others

Know Yourself (Johari Window)Joseph Luft and Harry InghamKnown to SelfUnknown to SelfKnownto OthersUnknownto Others

Applications in OrganizationsEmployment InterviewPerformance ExpectationsPerformance EvaluationOrganizational CommunicationEmployee EffortEmployee Loyalty

Link Between Perception and Individual Decision Making

Rational Model of Decision Making

Chapter 6

Assumptions of the ModelOne:Problem ClarityFour:Constant PreferencesFive:No Constraints Two:Known OptionsThree:Clear PreferencesSix:Maximum Payoff

Chapter 6

A Model of Bounded RationalityAscertainthe Need for a DecisionSimplifythe ProblemSetSatisficingCriteriaIdentify aLimited Set of AlternativesCompareAlternativesAgainst CriteriaExpandSearch forAlternativesSelect theFirst GoodEnough ChoiceA SatisficingAlternativeExistsYesNo

Chapter 6

The Role ofIntuitionUncertaintyLimited Facts and DataTimeLess Scientific Predictability

Chapter 6

Chapter 6

OrganizationalConstraintsPerformanceEvaluationsRewardSystemsHistoricalConstraintsTimeConstraintsFormal Regulations

Chapter 6

CulturalDifferencesProblemIdentificationThe Value ofRationalityTimeOrientationGroups orIndividuals

Chapter 6

Decision-Making and Ethics

Chapter 6

An optimizing decision maker is rational and makes consistent, value-maximizing choices within specific constraints. The six-step model supports the decision-making process.1.Define the problem.2.Identify decision criteria.3.Weigh the criteria.4.Generate alternatives.5.Rate each alternative on each criterion.6.Compute the optimal decision.

The model contains six assumptions. Problem clarity means the problem is clear and unambiguous. Known options mean that all relevant criteria and viable alternatives can be identified. Clear preferences show that criteria and alternatives have been ranked and weighted. Constant preferences reflect constant criteria and stable weights over time. No time or cost constraints allow for full information about criteria and alternatives. Maximum payoff means a decision maker will pick the alternative with the highest yield.

When confronted by a complex problem, most people will reduce the problem to its simplest level and satisfice by seeking solutions that are satisfactory and sufficient. Eschewing full rationality, they operate within bounded rationality and construct simplified models to extract the essential features of the problem and then behave rationally within the limits of the simple model. Here is how the bounded rationality typically operates.Once a problem is identified, the search for criteria and alternatives begins. But the list of criteria is likely to be far from exhaustive. The decision maker will identify a limited list made up of choices that are easy to find or highly visible. In most cases, they will represent familiar criteria and tried-and-true solutions. Once this limited set of alternatives is identified, the decision maker will begin reviewing them. But the review will not be comprehensive--not all alternatives will be evaluated carefully. Instead, the decision maker will begin with alternatives that differ only to a small degree from the choice currently in effect. Following along familiar and well-worn paths, the decision maker will review alternatives only until one that is good enough (that meets acceptable levels of performance) can be found. The first alternative that meets the good enough criterion ends the search. So the final solution represents a satisficing choice rather than an optimizing one.

When decision makers face simple problems with few alternatives and the cost of evaluating alternatives is low, the rational model is relatively accurate. Instead of following the rational model, however, most significant, real-world decisions are made by judgment, rather than by a defined prescriptive model.Managers often use intuition when solving problems, and it can improve decision making. Intuition can be defined as an unconscious process created out of distilled experience. It does not necessarily operate independently of rational analysis; rather, the two complement each other. The expert recognizes a situation, draws upon experience, and reaches a decision fast, even with limited information.

Personality and individual differences affect our decisions. Two of these variables are particularly relevant to organizational decisions: the individuals decision-making style and level of moral development. The decision-styles model above identifies four approaches to decision making. The model illustrates that people differ along two dimensions: in their thinking styles (some are logical and rational, others intuitive and creative); in their tolerance for ambiguity. People using the directive style dislike ambiguity and prefer rationality. Those using the analytic style confront ambiguity by demanding more alternatives. Individuals using the conceptual style consider the big picture and seek multiple alternatives. Those using a behavioral style work well with others and are receptive to suggestions.Previous decisions by the organization constrain current decisions. Performance Evaluation. Managers often consider evaluation criteria when making decisions. Reward Systems. How managers are rewarded will influence their decisions.System-Imposed Time Constraints. Deadlines pressure managers to make decisions.Historical Precedents. Decisions are made contextually and are points in a stream of decisions.

Even though the rational model does not acknowledge cultural differences, the cultural background of a manager can significantly influence the selection of problems, depth of analysis, importance placed on logic and rationality, the importance of groups or individuals in decision making, time orientation, and belief in the ability of people to solve problems.Differences in time orientation help us understand why managers in Egypt will make decisions more slowly and deliberately than American mangers. While rationality is valued in North America, it is not valued everywhere in the world. Some cultures--the United States is one--emphasize solving problems; others, such as Thailand or Indonesia, focus on accepting situations as they are. Decision making by Japanese mangers is much more group-oriented than in the United states.

An individual can use three criteria in making ethical choices. The first is the utilitarian criterion, in which decisions are made solely on the basis of their outcomes or consequences. The goal of utilitarianism is to provide the greatest good for the greatest number. It is consistent with goals like efficiency, high profits, and productivity. Therefore, laying off 15 percent of employees in order to cut costs and maximize profits could be justified because it will secure the greatest good for the largest number of people--the 85 percent who are left and the stockholders. Another criterion focuses on rights. This calls on individuals to make decisions consistent with fundamental rights and liberties as set forth in documents like the Bill of Rights. The use of this criterion, for example, would protect the free speech rights of employees who report the unethical or illegal actions of their employers. A third criterion focuses on justice. This requires that individuals impose and enforce rules fairly and impartially so there is an equitable distribution of benefits and costs. Union members typically favor this view because it justifies paying people the same wage for a given job, regardless of performance, and it uses seniority as the primary determinant in making layoff decisions.