Perception (Part 2 of 2) Organizational Behavior PDF

Welcome to Today’s Class Topic: Perception (Part 2 of 2) Course: Organizational Behaviour (BUSI2311) Instructor: Dr. Joe Krasman 1  Agenda and Announcements In today’s class, we will cover Perception (Part 2 of 2)....

Welcome to Today’s Class Topic: Perception (Part 2 of 2) Course: Organizational Behaviour (BUSI2311) Instructor: Dr. Joe Krasman 1  Agenda and Announcements In today’s class, we will cover Perception (Part 2 of 2). 2  Course Schedule Date Topic Wed. Sep. What Is Organizational Behaviour (Part 1 of 2)? 4 Mon. Sep. What Is Organizational Behaviour (Part 2 of 2)? 9 Wed. Sep. History of Organizational Behaviour 11 Mon. Sep. Attitudes (Part 1 of 3) 16 Wed. Sep. Attitudes (Part 2 of 3) 18 Mon. Sep. Attitudes (Part 3 of 3) 23 Wed. Sep. Perception (Part 1 of 2) 25 Mon. Sep. Test 1 30 Wed. Oct. Perception (Part 2 of 2) 2 Mon. Oct. Personality 7 Wed. Oct. Values and Affect 9 Mon. Oct. Fall Study Week – No Class 14 Wed. Oct. Fall Study Week – No Class 16 3 Mon. Oct. Motivation (Part 1 of 2)  Consider Majoring in OBHRM When you major in OBHRM, you complete all the coursework necessary to earn your Certified Human Resources Leader (CHRL) professional designation. Your Name, BCom, CHRL 4  Consider Majoring in OBHRM A career in OBHRM can be very exciting and rewarding! Look at some of the over 500 BCom alumni who majored in OBHRM. 5  Consider Majoring in OBHRM You Can Major, Minor, or Take Electives in OBHRM Courses OBHRM 1. Organizational Behaviour (BUSI2311). To Major in OBHRM: 2. Human Resources Management (BUSI2312). Take 1 and 2. 3. Recruitment and Selection (BUSI3305). And take 3 to 8. 4. Industrial and Labour Relations (BUSI3312). And take any two courses from 9 to 15. 5. Human Resources Planning (BUSI3340). 6. Occupational Health and Safety (BUSI3360). To Minor in OBHRM: 7. Compensation and Benefits (BUSI3380). Take 1 and 2. 8. Training and Development (BUSI3390). And take any four courses from 3 to 15. 9. Negotiation Theory and Behaviour (BUSI3315). To Take Electives in OBHRM: 10. The Management of Change (BUSI3330). Take 1. 11. Developing Management Skills (BUSI2350). And take any courses from 2 to 15. 12. Employment and Labour Laws (BUSI3370). 13. Managing Team Dynamics (BUSI2330). For the CHRL Professional Designation: 14. Special Topics in OBHRM (BUSI4390). Take 1. to 8. 15. Independent Study in OBHRM (BUSI4399). And take Introduction to Financial Accounting (BUSI1130). And take Introduction to Managerial 6 Accounting (BUSI2180).  Join the HRA (Human Resources Student Association) 7 8 9 Which way is the person facing? 10 Are the lines straight or crooked? 11  What Is Perceptual Bias? Perceptual bias: Inaccuracy in our perception. We will look at eight major perceptual biases: Fundamental attribution error. Self serving bias. Selective perception. Similar to me effect. First impression error. Halo/Horn effect. Contrast effect. 12  Fundamental Attribution Error Fundamental attribution error: When judging the cause of another person’s behaviour, the tendency to make an internal attribution instead of an external attribution; that is, attribute the cause of the other person’s behaviour to the person instead of to outside factors. For example: If another person makes more sales than usual – that is, successful behaviour – we are more likely to think the person put in high effort and/or has high ability – that is, make an internal attribution – than think demand was high or the person got lucky – that is, make an external attribution. If another person makes less sales than usual – that is, 13  Fundamental Attribution Error One of the reasons we make this error is that when making an attribution about the cause of another person’s behaviour – for example, Suzy is late for her meeting today – it takes less mental effort to just blame the person – for example, Suzy is lazy – than come up with all the possible outside factors – for example, there was traffic. 14  Fundamental Attribution Error The following study provides support for the bias: When graders were told that students could choose to write either a pro Castro essay or an anti Castro essay, graders rated students who wrote pro Castro essays as being genuinely pro Castro and students who wrote anti Castro essays as being genuinely anti Castro. When graders were told that students had to write a pro Castro essay, graders still rated students as being genuinely pro Castro. When graders were told that students had to write an anti Castro essay, graders still rated students as being genuinely anti Castro. Anti Castro 10 ------------------------------------------------------------- 70 Pro 15  Self Serving Bias Self serving bias: When judging the cause of one’s own behaviour, the tendency to make an internal attribution instead of an external attribution when one’s behaviour is successful – that is, attribute the cause of one’s behaviour to oneself instead of to outside factors – and the tendency to make an external attribution instead of an internal attribution when one’s behaviour is unsuccessful – that is, attribute the cause of one’s behaviour to outside factors instead of to oneself. 16  Self Serving Bias Continued from the previous slide. For example: If I make more sales than usual – that is, successful behaviour – I am more likely to think I put in high effort and/or have high ability – that is, make an internal attribution – than think demand was high or I got lucky – that is, make an external attribution. If I make less sales than usual – that is, unsuccessful behaviour – I am more likely to think demand was low or I got unlucky – that is, make an external attribution – than think I put in low effort and/or have low ability – that is, make an internal attribution. 17  Self Serving Bias Usually demonstrated by having one person teach another person how to perform a task, then informing the person that the other person performed the task well or poorly, then seeing what attribution the person makes about his/her own teaching. 18 Selective Perception 19 20  Selective Perception Selective perception: The tendency for our perception to be limited by our unique background, knowledge, and experience. For example: The six blind men in the poem who each perceived the elephant differently depending on the part they touched. See the previous two slides. Jack perceives his company’s successes and failures are related to staffing because his education and experience is in human resources. Jill perceives her company’s successes and failures are related to advertising because her education and experience is in marketing. 21  Selective Perception The following study provides support for the bias: People were given the same case to analyze. Results showed strong similarities between the department people worked in and the problem they saw in the case. For example, most of the sales people saw the problem as sales whereas most of the production people saw the problem as clarify organization. See below. 22  Selective Perception A historical example: In 1908, Henry Ford introduced the Model T car and sold more than 15 million units. In 1927, he stopped producing the Model T and temporarily shut down his factories to prepare for producing the Model A, the Model T’s successor. During this time, Chrysler and General Motors creeped in and seized the market leadership. Why? Because Ford, based on his engineering background, only saw a car as basic transportation. For example, his favorite slogan about the Model T was “it takes you there and brings you back”. He thus only offered the car in black with limited options. He failed to see that a car is also part of a person’s identity and people want to tailor its features. 23  Similar to Me Effect Similar to me effect: The tendency to perceive a person more positively, the more similar he/she is to oneself. Research has shown that the basis of similarity could be just about anything. 24  Similar to Me Effect The following study provides support for the bias: Supervisors rated: How similar they and their subordinate are. Their subordinate’s performance, conformance, dependability, personal adjustment, and general satisfactoriness. See the left side of the next slide. Subordinates rated: How similar they are their supervisor are. Their supervisor’s support, interaction facilitation, goal emphasis, and work facilitation. See the right side of the next slide. 25  Similar to Me Effect My subordinate and I are similar kinds My supervisor and I are similar kinds of people. of people. Performance – The subordinate’s Support – Behavior that enhances a promotability and the quality and subordinate’s feeling of worth and quantity of work. importance. Conformance – How well the Interaction facilitation – Behavior that subordinate gets along with the facilitates developing close, mutually supervisor and co-workers, as well as satisfying relationships within the his or her observance or rules and group. regulations. Goal emphasis – Behavior that Dependability – The frequency of stimulates enthusiasm within the work disciplinary problems created by the group for meeting goals and achieving subordinate. excellent performance. Personal adjustment – The Work facilitation – Behavior that helps subordinate’s emotional health and each subordinate achieve goal 26  Similar to Me Effect Continued from the previous slide. Results showed that: The more similar supervisors perceived themselves and their subordinate to be, the more positively they rated their subordinate. The more similar subordinates perceived themselves and their supervisor to be, the more positively they rated their supervisor. 27  First Impression Error First impression error: The tendency for our first perception of a person to influence our later perception of that person. 28  First Impression Error The following study provides support for the bias: Before interviewing applicants, people read applicants’ application forms and test scores and rated them from 1 = very low to 9 = very high. The interviews were videorecorded and analyzed. Results showed that the higher people rated applicants before the interview, the more positively they behaved toward applicants during the interview. For example, they had a more positive style, they showed a more favourable orientation toward the offer, they had a more positive vocal style, they did more selling of the company/job, they provided more job information, and they asked less total questions, less closed questions, less initial questions, and less follow-up/probing 29 30  Halo/Horn Effect Halo effect: The tendency to develop an overall positive perception of a person based on knowledge of one positive aspect of that person and then to use that overall perception to judge all other aspects of the person positively as well. For example, I see an employee stay late at work so I decide that employee is all good and then I judge him/her more positively on everything else. Horn effect: The tendency to develop an overall negative perception of a person based on knowledge of one negative aspect of that person and then to use that overall perception to judge all other aspects of the person negatively as well. For example, I see an employee leave early from work so I 31  Halo Effect and Horn Effect The following study provides support for the bias: People were asked to imagine either a warm person or a cold person and then to rate 18 characteristics of that person. See the next slide. Results showed that: Participants who were asked to imagine a warm person rated their person’s characteristics more positively. Participants who were asked to imagine a cold person rated their person’s characteristics more negatively. See the right side of the next slide. 32  Halo Effect and Horn Effect “I shall read to you a number of characteristics that belong to a particular person. Please listen to them carefully and try to form an impression of the kind of person described.” Intelligent, Skillful, Industrious, Warm, Determined, Practical, Cautious. Intelligent, Skillful, Industrious, Cold, Determined, Practical, 33  Contrast Effect Contrast effect: The tendency for our perception of a person to be influenced by our perception of previous persons. The following study provides support for the bias: Videos were made of candidates performing good, bad, and average in their interview for medical school. People rated three candidates in a row. See the column “Condition” on the slide after next. 34  Contrast Effect Continued from the previous slide. Results showed that: People rated a good candidate lower after two good candidates (5.5/9) than after two bad candidates (7.0/9). People rated an average candidate lower after two good candidates (3.5/9) than after two bad candidates (5.6/9). People rated a bad candidate lower after two good candidates (2.1/9) than after two bad candidates (2.8/9). See the column “Mean Rating” on the next slide. 35 Contrast Effect 36  Self Fulfilling Prophecy Self fulfilling prophecy: The tendency for a person to behave in line with our perception of him/her. There are two types of self fulfilling prophecies: Pygmalion effect: Our perception of a person is positive and then the person behaves positive. For example, Jack, a subordinate, is an average performer but because Jill, his supervisor, perceives he is an above average performer, Jack performs above average. Golem effect: Our perception of a person is negative and then the person behaves negative. For example, Jack, a subordinate, is an average performer but because Jill, his supervisor, perceives he 37  Self Fulfilling Prophecy The following study provides support for the bias: Soldiers who entered basic training and were all equal on their pretests were split into three groups: High group: The training officer was told that his/her soldiers scored above average on their pretests. Regular group: The training officer was told that his/her soldiers scored average on their pretests. Unknown group: The training officer was not told anything about how his/her soldiers scored on their pretests. See the column “Instructor expectancy” on the slide after next. 38  Self Fulfilling Prophecy Continued from the previous slide. Results showed that soldiers in the high group: Performed the best of the three groups. See the row “Trainee performance” on the next slide. Enjoyed their training the most of the three groups. See the row “Trainee attitudes” on the next slide. Rated their training officer the highest of the three groups. See the row “Instructor leadership” on the next slide. 39 Self Fulfilling Prophecy 40  Self Fulfilling Prophecy How do self fulfilling prophecies happen? How does our perception of a person cause the person to behave in line with that perception? The process occurs as follows: Pygmalion effect: I perceive you have high potential regardless of whether you actually do. This then prompts me to give you more leadership. This then prompts you to believe more in yourself. This then prompts you to be more motivated. This then prompts you to perform at a high level exactly in line with my perception of you. Golem effect: I perceive you have low potential regardless of whether you actually do. This then prompts me to give you less leadership. This then prompts you to believe less in yourself. This then prompts you to be less motivated. This 41  To Sum Up Key concepts covered in today’s class: What is perceptual bias? Fundamental attribution error. Self serving bias. Selective perception. Similar to me effect. First impression error. Halo/Horn effect. Contrast effect. Self fulfilling prophecy. 42  To Sum Up After today’s class, you should: Review what was covered and make sure you understand everything. If anything is unclear, speak with a classmate or the instructor. Make study notes and self-test questions to prepare yourself for the upcoming test. 43 See You Next Class 44  Sample Test Questions 1. The tendency for our first perception of a person to influence our later perception of that person. Which perceptual bias is this: A. First impression error. B. Contrast effect. C. Halo effect. D. None of the choices. 45  Sample Test Questions 2. Jack, a subordinate, is an average performer but because Jill, his supervisor, perceives he is an above average performer, Jack performs above average. Which perceptual bias is this an example of: A. Pygmalion effect. B. First impression error. C. Halo effect. D. None of the choices. 46  References Fundamental attribution error Greenberg, J. (2011). Behavior in Organizations. Jones, E., Harris, V. (1967). “The attribution of attitudes”. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 3(1). 1-24. Ross, L. (1977). “The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process”. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. 10. 173-220. Self serving bias Miller, D., Ross, M. (1975). “Self-serving biases in the attribution of causality: Fact or fiction?”. Psychological Bulletin. 82(2). 213-225. Selective perception Dearborn, D., Simon, H. (1958). “Selective perception: A 47  References Selective perception (continued) Tedlow, R. (2008). “Leaders in denial”. Harvard Business Review. 86(7/8). 18-19. Similar to me effect Pulakos, E., Wexley, K. (1983). “The relationship among perceptual similarity, sex, and performance ratings in manager-subordinate dyads”. Academy of Management Journal. 26(1). 129-139. Contrast effect Kopelman, M. (1975). “The contrast effect in the selection interview.” British Journal of Educational Psychology. 45(3). 333-336. 48  References First impression error Dougherty, T., Turban, D., Callender, J. (1994). “Confirming first impressions in the employment interview: A field study of interviewer behavior”. Journal of Applied Psychology. 79(5). 659-665. Halo/Horn effect Asch, S. (1946). “Forming impressions of personality”. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 41(3). 258-290. Thorndike, E. “A constant error in psychological ratings”. Journal of Applied Psychology. 4(1). 25-29. Self fulfilling prophecy Babad, E., Inbar, J., Rosenthal, R. (1982). “Pygmalion, galatea, and the golem: Investigations of biased and 49  References Self fulfilling prophecy (continued) Eden, D. (1984). “Self-fulfilling prophecy as a management tool: Harnessing Pygmalion”. Academy of Management Review. 9(1). 64-73. Eden, D., Shani, A. (1982). “Pygmalion goes to boot camp: Expectancy, leadership, and trainee performance”. Journal of Applied Psychology. 67(2). 194-199. Merton, R. (1948). “The self-fulfilling prophecy”. The Antioch Review. 8(2). 193-210. Rosenthal, R., Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the Classroom: Teacher Expectation and Pupils’ Intellectual Development. 50