MPW Finals (1) PDF

Week 1 In-Class: - What is OB? Scientific study of behaviours and mental processes of individuals and groups in organisations. - Hawthorne Studies: These studies are important because they demonstrated for the first time that worker behaviour could be influenced by f...

Week 1 In-Class: - What is OB? Scientific study of behaviours and mental processes of individuals and groups in organisations. - Hawthorne Studies: These studies are important because they demonstrated for the first time that worker behaviour could be influenced by factors other than the physical work environment and monetary incentives. - Hawthorne Effect: A change in behavior following the onset of a novel treatment, with a gradual return to the previous gradual return to the previous level of behavior as the effect of the novelty wears off. Review Qs: - What happened in the Hawthorne studies when researchers turned up the temperature in the room compared to when they turned it down? Employees became more productive - Why are the Hawthorne studies important to OB? Because it was the first study that predicted that work behaviour was influenced by factors beyond physical environment and monetary incentives. Week 2 Video - The info in the textbook researches are more general across cultures despite being conducted in a western context. 1. Hypothesis can be null or alternative. If it is alternative then it can be directional or non directional. - When designing a research study 2 main considerations are: External validity [naturalness] (are the results generalizable), External validity [control] (whether the other variable in the study are controlled to rule out alternate results) 2. 4 research designs: - Case Studies: Study 1 or more individuals/organisations in great detail in different aspects (eg: interview), advantage: you have a lot of information to derive hypotheses for other studies, disadvantage: its only 1 entity so you don’t know how reliable it might be and how much that info can be generalised. - Naturalistic observation: watching and recording the behaviour of individuals in a natural environment without the researcher intervening, advantage: high external validity (aka more generalizable), disadvantage: it's beyond our control so low external validity, Observer bias - the researcher only sees what they want/hope to see (to avoid this the person taking notes can like not know the hypothesis to avoid the bias). - Survey methods: using questionnaires or interviews to gather specific information of subjects’ attributes, advantages: cheap, quick, more direct as you can ask exact questions about the info needed, disadvantages: social desirabilitiy bias: people give you the answer that you want to hear (giving responses that are socially acceptable so to overcome this you can make the survey anonymous or emphasise the importance of the survey by asking them to be honest), Wording effects: the answers change depending on how the Q is worded (eg: there is a 90% chance that you’ll survive vs you have a 10% chance you won’t survive, to overcome this the same Qs are asked again by doing changing the wording a bit to see whether the response changes), Response set tendency: a tendency to respond to the Qs without really answering it and not paying attention to the question (to overcome this can use attention checks), low response rates: this is not always a problem if the sample is representative (to use incentives to encourage people to answer the surveys). - Experimental Methods: researcher manipulates one or more factors (prolly the independent variable) to observe (the dependent variable) their effects on the behavior/mental process while controlling these factors (external factors), advantage: high internal validity by controlling the stuff, you can draw cause and effect relationships, disadvantage: it doesn’t fit most questions that need to be answered. 3. Measuring the variables:  - Constructs (job performance, love, productivity etc) are measured using operational definitions (the process by which the construct is measured) - Population vs Sample - When measuring the variables the data should be reliable (consistent), and validity (accuracy). - Reliability is checked using errors of measurement (a constant error like the watch always being 5 mins ahead of the time or the weighing scale being 200 grams off) and reliability only assess random error (weighing scale showing a diff weight each time when using) not constant error. Longer tests can be more reliable as the error can cancel out because of constant testing. - How is validity related to reliability, how reliable the construct is vs how accurately it is measured. - When measuring validity u can use face validity on the surface it appears to be measuring the construct, but then you don't use face validity. Content validity is asking experts about the area in which they are experts at. Criterion-related validity: whether the items accurately relate to a criterion variable. 4. Correlation: how two variables are related. 2 properties are magnitude (strength of the relationship 0 - none and 1 - perfect) and direction (positive - proportional or negative - non proportional). Coefficient of determination: square of the correlation (how to predict one variable by other based on the variation in %) - Moderation: basically the role of a moderator between 2 variables. Review Qs Article: - Which research design is predominantly used in OBHR research and why? Surveys because they directly give us the answers to the questions we have. - What are some potential limitations of surveys? Low response rate, Social Desirability bias, wording effects. - What is meant by the reliability of your measurement? How reliable the data is. - Why do we often use multiple items to measure a single construct? Very often - What is meant by the validity of your measurement? How accurate the info is Often, in which type of validity are we most interested? Criterion-related validity - How are reliability and validity related? In the below case this whole thing can entirely be invalid as the person can have 10 pens, but as there are three 4s, then that’s reliable hence the closest to being valid/accurate. E.g., 4, 4, 8, 9, 4 - Is a larger or smaller sample better? It depends on how representative that sample is in relation to the population, but in general a larger sample is better as there is a higher chance of a larger sample being more representative. - What does a correlation of r = -.60 mean? There is a negative moderate correlation between two variables. In-Class - How do we know managers often do not use the scientific evidence?  - Survey of HR professionals indicated that, on average, they read less than one scientific article per year. - Examination of organisational practices. - Studies of managers indicating that their beliefs are inconsistent with existing research. - Policy-capturing study indicated that more weight was placed on competencies that were measured in unstructured interviews rather than with paper-and-pencil assessments - Extraversion > Cognitive ability: when Extraversion was assessed with unstructured interview and cognitive ability with a standardized assessment. - Cognitive ability > Extraversion: when cognitive ability was assessed with unstructured interview and extraversion with a standardized assessment. - Evidence Based Management - How to start an ‘evidence-based management movement’ - Demand Evidence: Whenever someone makes a seemingly compelling claim, ask for supporting data. - Examine Logic: Parse the logic behind evidence presented to you, looking for faulty cause-and-effect reasoning. - Encourage Experimentation: Invite managers to conduct small experiments to test the viability of proposed strategies. - Reinforce Continuous Learning: When managers constantly expand their knowledge, they acquire more reliable evidence to make decisions. Encourage use of inquiry and observation to gather evidence about causes and potential cures for business problems. - Why is an evidence-based approach difficult for managers? - Evidence is weak (is it?): the data at hand is not exactly applicable for the case. - Everyone claims to be an expert: people trust their expertise and prior experience more than research. - Organizations/situations differ widely: - There is a lot of evidence: There is too much info for an individual to consume and recommendations about management practices are seldom integrated in a way that’s accessible or memorable. - The evidence is inconsistent: One article might be in favour of something while the other won’t so how do u know which one to use? - Everyone is trying to persuade you: in a sense the diff articles with diff stuff is trying to mislead you to accept their recommendation so as a manager it is very difficult to prioritise one specific thing. - Undermines one’s authority - How to avoid not being an evidence based manager?  - Stop treating old ideas as if they were brand-new: people who spread ideas ought to acknowledge key sources and encourage writers and managers to build on and blend with what’s come before. - Be suspicious of “breakthrough” ideas and studies: Unfortunately, “big” ideas/innovation rarely happens. Close examination of so-called breakthroughs nearly always reveals that they’re preceded by the painstaking, incremental work of others. - Celebrate and develop collective brilliance: instead of relying on the teachings of one guru who has great business acumen, you implement practices, execute strategy, and accomplish organizational change all require the coordinated actions of many people, whose commitment to an idea is greatest when they feel ownership. - Emphasize drawbacks as well as virtues: basically being transparent about the good and bad and letting the ppl know the possible risks and good stuff. - Use success (and failure) stories to illustrate sound practices, but not in place of a valid research method. - Adopt a neutral stance toward ideologies and theories: not to overtly rely on ideologies or theories. - Examine logic: Simply asking for backup research on proposals is insufficient to foster a true organizational commitment to evidence- based management. - Treat the organization as an unfinished prototype: Companies that want to promote more evidence-based management should get in the habit of running trial programs, pilot studies, and small experiments, and thinking about the inferences that can be drawn from them. Reviews Meta Analysis Reviews are typically qualitative reviews Meta-analyses quantitatively combine the that summarize and integrate existing results (data) from existing primary studies. research and theories. - Why Meta Analysis Good? - Because some studies may overestimate and some studies may underestimate effects, these estimation errors may cancel out when combined thereby providing better estimates. - Meta-analyses often investigate bivariate relations (the relations between 2 variables). - Measuring, Perceiving, and Predicting Behavior - Personnel Selection - Choice of predictors: Variability matters - Choice of criteria: Variability matters - Quality of measurement - Considerations when choosing predictors? - Reliability - Job-relatedness (Criterion-related Validity) - Cost - Ease of Administration - Fairness - Applicant Reactions - Ethics - Confidentiality - Invasion of privacy - Threats to self-esteem, etc. Week 3: individual differences Review Qs: - Explain why variability is important in the criterion and the predictor. What does a restricted range due to an observed correlation? Video - Validity coefficients: the correlation coefficient between the predictor and the criterion (cognitive ability vs overall job performance) - Background info as predictor: - references (recommendation letters): its a negative selection tool - highlight the negative candidates and why you shouldn't hire someone. Ppl refuse to write LOR because they don’t want to slander/ say bad things by mistake. Letters in which applicants waive their rights to see it are usually less favourable. Length of the letter is a better predictor of the writers’ attitude than the content. Problems: a letter from one person to many would seem the same, the focus of the LOR might be different from what’s needed. LOR has validity of 0.26*0.26 = 0.068, one can explain 6.8% of the LOR. - A restricted range would lower the correlation; lower the observed correlation. - biodata - Cognitive Ability as Predictor - Timed tests. - Is intelligence/cognitive ability uni or multidimensional? Conduct a factor analysis (categorising like objects with each other). So, its uni dimensional so if one is smart in one thing then they are usually smarter in the other also, the relationship about this is 0.51*0.51 = 25%, if you know a person is smart then you can 25% predict their job performance. - Advantages: best predictor across jobs and cultures and like can give form anywhere cause online - Disadvantages: it might be copyrighted so has to be paid, there might not be enough group differences (diversity and representation) - Personality as a Predictor - The big 5: Conscientiousness, Agreeableness, Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to Experience. There can be 2 more factors: Honesty/humility and Religiosity - Conscientiousness (r = 0.31) and Emotional Stability (r = 0.17) (opp of neuroticism) are the most important - Extraversion with managerial performance (r = 0.21), agreeableness with teamwork (r = 0.27), openness to experience with training performance (r = 0.33) - Big 5 correlation r^2 with - Leadership: 0.48 - Job satisfaction: 0.41 - Work motivation: 0.49  - Narrower Traits: locus of control, self monitoring, self esteem, positive and negative affectivity, proactive personality. - Narcissism: positive self view, very self important, excessive admiration of self, lack empathy, sense of entitlement, tends to be exploitative, manipulative and arrogant. - Are narcissistic people more likely to be leaders? Yes, they emerge as leaders because they often have charisma, charm, humour and are extroverted. Extraversion is one of the key factors. - Are narcissistic people more effective? If you ask them then they would self report effectiveness as positive, but if you ask others to rate them then there is no relationship with effectiveness. - There is a moderator for the above Q which is how closely the followers worked with the leader, so the more you observe the leader the more you think the leader is less effective. Curvilinear relation exists suggesting that the midrange value of narcissism is optimal for effectiveness. - Is ambition (a a middle level/narrow trait) good or bad? It's good as it motivates you. But if you always are striving for something then you always want more and are not satisfied with what you have. But generally ambition is good. - Is personality correlated with cognitive ability? No, it's not highly correlated, which is good as they don’t make these two redundant. - You can increase the validity of personality scores by using frame of references. For eg: by using the tag ‘at-work’ you can contextualise the traits and can increase the validity by 5% Article Purpose This study investigates the relationship between cognitive ability and workplace victimization, proposing that high cognitive ability might increase susceptibility to being a victim. It also explores how two interpersonal personality traits, agency and communion, moderate this relationship. Hypotheses 1. High cognitive ability is positively related to workplace victimization. 2. High agency is positively related to victimization. 3. High communion is negatively related to victimization. 4. Agency strengthens the positive relationship between cognitive ability and victimization. 5. Communion weakens the positive relationship between cognitive ability and victimization. Methods - Participants: 217 healthcare workers (final sample size: 133). - Measurements: - Cognitive Ability: Assessed using the Wonderlic Personnel Test. - Victimization: Measured via the Aggressive Experiences Scale.  - Personality Traits: Assessed using scales linked to agency (dominance) and communion (communal behaviors). Results 1. Cognitive Ability: - Positively associated with victimization. 2. Agency: - Directly increases victimization risk. - Amplifies the victimization risk for high-cognitive individuals. 3. Communion: - Weakens the victimization risk for high-cognitive individuals. Key Takeaways/Application 1. Findings: - High cognitive ability, while usually advantageous, can provoke victimization due to envy or perceived threat. - Personality traits influence this dynamic: - Agency traits exacerbate victimization. - Communion traits mitigate it. 2. Practical Implications: - Organizations should be aware of the risks faced by high-cognitive-ability employees and create supportive work environments. - Managers can foster positive reciprocity norms to minimize workplace aggression. 3. Future Research: - Further exploration is needed in diverse occupational contexts to generalize findings. - Development of robust measures for agency and communion traits could enhance research accuracy. Review Qs Article: - What does a validity coefficient of VC=.4 mean? You can like predict a variable and understand it by 0.4*0.4 = 16% - Do you want your predictors to be correlated? No - What predictor of job performance is usually the best? Cognitive ability - Is cognitive ability uni- or multi-dimensional? Uni dimensional - Why do narcissistic individuals emerge as leaders? Are they more effective? Because of traits like charisma, humour and extraversion but they are not more effective - Which personality traits predict job performance across jobs and situations? Cognitive ability - Can people fake on personality inventories? Does it matter? Yes people can fake personality inventories, but when using personality as a predictor for job performance and when you fake then it is more desirable so it generalises the job, and now if you are very introverted but your job asks you to be extroverted then you would say well if you are actually a 2/10 you would say you are 4/10 and respectively a 4/10 would  say they are a 6/10 so as all fake then well the collective change cancels the faking effect. Predictors - integrity Assessments - Overt Items - Do you think most people would cheat if they thought they could get away with it? - Are most people too honest to steal? - Have you ever stolen anything? - Do you think most people think much about stealing? - Covert Items - Do you like to take chances? - Would you rather go to a party than read a newspaper? - Do you like to create excitement? - Do you think taking chances makes life more interesting? - Did you ever charge anything knowing you did not have enough money in your account? - Do you almost always make your bed? - Application Blank - Should employers ask about the following? - Favorite subjects - Childcare arrangements - Age - Gender - Reasons for leaving previous job - Grades - Do grades predict performance? - Does educational attainment promote job satisfaction? - Is cognitive ability related to victimization? - Does personality (agency and communion) interact with personality to predict victimization? Week 4 -Cultural Values, Work Values and Job Attitudes (Job Satisfaction) Video - Individualism: extent to which people emphasize personal vs group goals. Culture in SG is rapidly changing but usually it doesn’t change a lot. SG is lower on individualism and higher on collectivism. - Power Distance: extent to which members of a culture tolerate inequality. SG is very high in power distance. Power distance ↑ = collectivism ↑ - Achievement orientation (Masculinity): Extent to which cultures differentiate gender roles, and stress materialism/competition vs caring for others and quality of life. SG is in neutral for this (48/100) - Uncertainty avoidance: extent to which people tolerate ambiguous and uncertain situations. SG is very low on ambiguity (8/100). - Future Orientation: extent to which a culture values persistence, thrift and perseverance. SG is very future oriented (72/100). - Indulgence vs restraint: extent to which people try to control their desires and impulses. SG is pretty neutral on this (46/100). Country Power Distance - Power distance is the most important value to understand how people work together in an organization. - Positively relates to: - Conformity: you conform to higher ups more with more power distance. - Corruption: the more the higher ups have power then the higher the probability for corruption generally (NOT the case for SG). - Neuroticism: people of a higher power distance organisation have high neuroticism because of locus of control as when an individual has less power then when they have less control then they become more neurotic. More neuroticism causes a lack of control. - Negatively relates to:  - Wealth: is low - Gender and income inequality: people in power want all resources so they don’t care about this. - Life satisfaction: higher neuroticism you are less happy so lower life satisfaction. Social progress in a high power distance society is low so there is lower life satisfaction. Cultural value can be measured at group/societal level or at individual level. If it’s measured at the individual level then they are called orientations. - Values predict more strongly for: - older, male and more educated people. - Primary (collected) data rather than secondary (assigned country scores) data. - Outcome is more proximal (predicting attitudes vs behaviours) - Culture is considered tight (all have the same values) rather than loose (all people don’t have same values). Why are cultural values important to our understanding of organizational behaviour? It influences work values, in turn influences our attitudes and behaviours. Work Values 4 Primary Values: - Honesty - Fairness - Concern for Others - Achievement The difference between how you rank the above values and how you view the organisation with respect to these values is called Person-Environment Fit. How important is the fit with the values? Higher the fit - increases job satisfaction, commitment, work adjustment and decreased job stressors. How does fit impact job performance and turnover? They are more weakly predicting these two. Fit indirectly affects performance and turnover via attitudes. Are there generational differences in work values? Yes (some people argue), as a younger person would value more work-life balance, promotions compared to an older person. Can be measured by asking the people or studying how the values change over time. But it is difficult to study as you don’t know whether it is because of a generational difference or just mere age; a younger person now when becoming old would value those values more. Job Attitudes They’re fairly stable evaluative tendencies to respond consistently to a stimulus. Attitudes have a more specific target but values have more broad tendencies. Do attitudes guide actions? Yes, as the attitudes are about specific targets so it does have a moderate correlation of 38%. Attitudes are better predictors of behaviour when the outside influences are minimal. Do actions affect our attitudes? Yes, you work towards the good of something then you feel positive towards it but if you work towards the negative of something then you feel negative about it. The reason our action influences attitudes is because of cognitive dissonance; tension causes when our thoughts and behaviours do not coincide. Eg: rationalising your decision by changing your attitude when you do something bad. Does acting contrary to one’s attitudes always bring about change? Even if you say something that’s against what you believe it will cause a small and often temporary change in your attitude. What influences this change is the effort justification; the amount of reward or justification for acting contrary to one’s beliefs influences the amount of dissonance experienced. Job satisfaction: most widely studied dependent variable. What factors relate to one’s job satisfaction? Job satisfaction Theories: - (Social) Information Processing Theory: People process information by looking at their peers and surroundings to understand how they should feel. - Social Comparison Theory/Adam’s Equity Theory: Comparing the input and output of yours to others. Eg: So how much do you get for the job you do vs how much does someone else get for the same job. You compare yourself with other people who you deem similar/slightly better. - Herzberg’s 2 Factor Theory: Hygiene factors: safe work environment and pay, things that you need to maintain sanity in job (bare minimum). Motivators: power, title and prestige. High motivators = satisfied, low motivators = neutral. Are most people satisfied with their jobs? Yes, 80% of people are satisfied with their job. This is because either they actually life their job otherwise because of cognitive dissonance (i am doing this job sm then I need to tell myself i actually like my job), rationalisation (if I am working in a job for so long then I need to like my job), impression management (giving socially desirable answers). Measuring Job Satisfaction  - Faces Scale: (advantage: fast and easy) - Job Descriptive Index: Widely used facet level measure. it takes into account - Pay, Promotion Opportunities, Coworkers, Supervision, work itself. Advantages: it is widely used, highly researched still, valid and reliable. Gender and Job Satisfaction - Are men or women more satisfied? Men are supposed to be more satisfied as they usually have more access to the primary 5 facets described in the JDI. However research shows - singapore shows no difference, and often there is little to no difference or women are slightly more satisfied. This is the reason because of role theory (men are the primary breadwinner and women are more for household stuff stereotypically so women have lower expectations from the job, and also because women expect discrimination so you just accept whatever happens and move on) Job Satisfaction Correlation - Absence/Turnover: stronger correlation with turnover than absenteeism because absenteeism could be due to multiple reasons but then the reason one would leave the job should usually be because of low job satisfaction. - OCB (Organizational Citizenship Behaviour): there is a high correlation between this and job satisfaction. - Is a happier worker more productive? It's debatable because there is no relationship between job satisfaction and performance. But it's not that strong. What moderates this; in what condition does job satisfaction predict performance - Job autonomy has a positive effect on job satisfaction and predicts performance, Job complexity as more complex jobs has higher job autonomy. Reward Administration - in a merit based system there is higher correlation with job satisfaction or vice versa and this usually gives mixed results. Cognitive consistency that is affective has a higher satisfaction-performance relationship. - Does job satisfaction relate to customer satisfaction? Yes, they are more happy so they will give better service and the lesser you’re likely to quit then you have more experience so better job performance and lastly, customer satisfaction due to better relationships with employees as they dont quit. - Does customer satisfaction relate to organizational profitability? Yes, as they will have higher brand loyalty. - Do customers know when employees fake their satisfaction? - Are job and life satisfaction related? - Spillover Hypothesis: yes, you are happier at work then you’re happier at home  - Compensation Hypothesis: if you are not happier in one then you compensate in the other by being happy. Bad marriages want to escape home and go to work. - Segmentation Hypothesis: there is no correlation being predicted. - Does paying employees make them more satisfied? According to JDI, yes as it is a facet of job satisfaction. - Is Happiness related to IQ? No - Is physical attractiveness related to happiness? No - Is health related to happiness? Yes - Is work related to happiness? Yes, due to the spillover hypothesis - Is personality related to happiness? Yes, but negatively related, as higher neuroticism means lower happiness. - Is age related to happiness? No - Ted talk to watch at end? - Article Purpose: The study investigates how power distance orientation moderates the effects of abusive supervision on subordinate behavior. It predicts that high power distance individuals tolerate abusive supervision but mimic the behavior when it comes to interpersonal deviance. Hypotheses 1. High power distance individuals are less likely to perceive abusive supervision as unfair. 2. High power distance individuals are more likely to engage in interpersonal deviance modeled by abusive supervisors. 3. Abusive supervision leads high power distance individuals to believe that deviant behavior is likely to be rewarded, mediating their behavior. Methods - Participants: Diverse samples recruited from online and offline settings, including workers from various industries. - Design: - Study 1: Self-reported interpersonal deviance and justice perceptions. - Study 2: Peer-reported interpersonal deviance to address self-report bias. - Study 3: Mediated moderation model testing social learning mechanisms. - Key Measures: - Abusive supervision (Tepper's scale). - Power distance orientation (Dorfman & Howell's scale). - Interpersonal deviance (Bennett & Robinson's scale). Results - Study 1: - High power distance mitigates the perception of unfairness but exacerbates interpersonal deviance. - Study 2:  - Replicates findings using peer ratings to confirm interpersonal deviance outcomes. - Study 3: - Confirms that social learning mediates the relationship. High power distance individuals are more likely to mimic abusive supervisors, believing such behavior is rewarded. Key Takeaways/Application 1. Findings: - Power distance orientation moderates the impact of abusive supervision differently based on the outcome (perceived fairness vs. deviant behavior). 2. Practical Implications: - Train supervisors to avoid abusive behaviors. - Establish clear norms and consequences to counteract modeling of deviance. 3. Future Research: - Extend to other cultural orientations and industries. - Explore interventions to disrupt the social learning of abusive behaviors. Review Qs: - Are country-level cultural values important? Yes - Why are people from higher power distance cultures less happy and more neurotic, on average, than those from lower power distance cultures? Because of locus of control - What are the primary work values? When do values predict more strongly? Why? Primary work values are Honesty, Fairness, Concern for Others, Achievement. Some values predict more strongly than others depending on how you personally rank them as the fit. - Do behaviors affect attitudes? Explain. Yes behaviours do affect attitudes because of cognitive dissonance. - Do most people report being happy with their jobs? Yes most people report being happy with their job due to cognitive dissonance, rationalisation and impression management. - Should managers care about one’s job satisfaction? Yes, due to the spillover hypothesis. - Is job satisfaction related to performance? It depends on the moderators. - What makes a good life? - From video, the questions posed were: Can most people tell whether a - Is the person faking smiles? Does it matter, in general? In-Class Conceptual Definitions  - Abusive supervision (AS): Sustained display of hostile verbal and nonverbal behaviors excluding physical contact. My supervisor reminds me of my past mistakes. - Power distance: The degree to which individuals accept and believe power should be distributed unequally. Employees should not disagree with management decisions. - Supervisory interpersonal justice: Degree to which your supervisor treats you with dignity, respect, and politeness. Has your supervisor treated you with dignity? - Interpersonal Deviance: Voluntary counter-normative behaviors that threatens the well-being of members. How frequently have you made fun of someone at work? Does power distance exacerbate or mitigate the effects of abusive supervision? Social learning theory may explain why individuals higher on power distance orientation are more likely to act interpersonally deviantly when abusive supervision is higher. alternative explanations: Depleted resources, Displaced aggression. Mediators: - Likelihood of rewards (social learning) - Ego depletion (depleted resources) - Intrusion (depleted resources) - Deviance outside of work (displaced aggression) Other Job Attitudes - Commitment - Trust - Engagement - Involvement - Others Organisational Commitment - Affective – “want to stay” - Interesting work - Enriched jobs - Autonomy - Continuance – “need to stay” - Pension funds - Rapid promotions - Embeddedness - Normative – “ought to stay” - Tuition reimbursement - Important work - vision - Do their results indicate integrated attitudes predict this behavioral construct? Yes, strongly (r =.59) and over time. - Emotions:  - Discrete Emotions: Happiness, surprise, anger, sadness, fear, disgust, and contempt. - Emotional Labor: The expression of emotions as part of the work role - EMOTIONAL LABOR STRATEGIES: - Deep Acting: Change Experience - Surface Acting: Change Expression - Positive correlates: - Emotional Exhaustion - Psychological Strain - Job Dissatisfaction - Depersonalization - Psychosomatic Complaints - Personal Accomplishments - Organizational detachment - Emotional Intelligence - What can be done to decrease the negative effects of emotional labour? - Pay sufficiently - Hire those best suited for the job - Give breaks – replenish resources - Have employees consider positive aspects of their jobs: Keep a diary or reflect on good aspects of your day - Support employees (the customer is not always right; job autonomy helped buffer labour's negative effect with angry customers) - Mayer, Salovey, Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) ask test takers to understand: Identify, Generate, Understand, Manage. Conclusion: - Emotional labor impacts performance and other outcomes. - Emotional intelligence is an individual difference variable that some argue can be learned, to some extent. The research evidence pertaining to EQ is not well established, in part, because of difficulty in measurement (from my perspective). Week 5: Decision Making Video - What are some factors other than rationality that affect our decisions? - Bounded Rationality; want to make rational decisions but there are constraints cognitively - Information Constraints: Problems of Attention, Memory, Comprehension and Communication - Time Constraints - Politics and External Considerations - To cope with informational constraints: limited cognitive resources Decision Making Styles (usually change the style depending on the situation) - Intuition: relying on intuition to make decisions - Satisficing: satisfying the bare minimum - Advice seeking: other people making decisions for you - Indecisiveness: when there are a lot of options you don’t know how to make a decision but with fewer options then you can make decisions much more easily - Heuristics: Oh I always eat pasta and there is pasta in the restaurant so I should eat pasta here as it is more reliable to order. Is risk taking a desirable trait? - Risk as value hypothesis: if risk is considered as valuable by yourself then you would rate groups that you associate yourself with as risk taking. - Risk neutral: when you are not familiar with a group then you just rate them as neutral. - Risk-stereotype hypothesis: Some groups are stereotyped as more risk taking than others; often moderated by whether the society is market (free-market/capitalist/USA) or hierarchical (higher power distance). Both Americans and Chinese thought Americans are risk taking. However, Chinese are more risk taking than Americans (supported by value hypothesis in pov of Americans and by stereotype hypothesis in pov of Chinese). - This is the case because of the cushion hypothesis in a financial context; in collectivist societies in Asia even when you are taking a risk the close social network acts as a ‘cushion’ in case the gamble fails, however there is no perception of a ‘cushion’ in individualistic societies like the USA. - only in a financial scenario not risk taking in all contexts. Another hypothesis is situational-economic hypothesis: countries with rapidly developing economies have more business opportunities so they are more likely to take risks. - Can understand risk of a country form proverbs and folklore also. Other factors influencing risk: Dispositions (a person does more risky activities like skydiving so they are more risk taking), Affect (emotions influencing risk taking), Context (people around us being more risk taking, chinese people being more risk taking on CNY because considered lucky?), Object of Risk (medical, financial etc), Perceived Risk (higher you perceive the risk then higher risk taking), Social Exclusion (negative affect, worser sense of time so you actually have a higher chance of taking risks). Which culture should have more proverbs advocating for risk? Collectivist societies because of the cushion hypothesis Which culture should have more proverbs about social risks and social networks? More collectivist cultures. Which country should have more proverbs applicable to financial risk? No difference between individualistic or collectivist cultures as financial matters are of importance to each culture. - Risk taking can be deeply rooted in culture. Escalation of Commitment To continue investing resources in a failing decision/action. People escalate commitment because: - Self justification: rationalising the decision to yourself - Gambler’s fallacy: oh it has been bad for so long that it has to get better at some point - Perceptual Blinders: you think you know better than someone else. - Closing Costs: you have already lost money so you don’t want that to be in vain even if you will lose more in future if you continue investing - Norm of Consistency: if you are already investing in a bad decision, you have a commitment to the decision so you wanna be consistent and continue investing in the bad decision. - Search for additional information: You hire a person because of a LOR but they don’t work properly but you are continuing to invest in them to figure out why they are not working properly Article-1: Purpose: Investigates the influence of extraneous factors (e.g., food breaks) on judicial decisions in parole cases. Hypothesis: Judges are more likely to make favorable decisions immediately after food breaks due to replenished mental resources. Methods: 1. Data: Analysis of 1,112 rulings from Israeli parole boards over 50 days. 2. Key Variables: - Favorable rulings (granting parole). - Decision timing within daily sessions.  - Break periods (morning snack, lunch). 3. Procedure: Cases were sequentially analyzed to observe decision patterns across three daily decision sessions. Results: - Judges’ likelihood of favorable rulings drops steadily as sessions progress but increases sharply after food breaks. - Key Finding: Favorable rulings decrease from ~65% to nearly 0% before breaks and jump back to ~65% after breaks. - Mental fatigue influences decisions, with judges defaulting to the easier status quo (denying parole). Implications: - Judicial decisions are influenced by extraneous factors, challenging the assumption of purely rational decision-making. - Highlights the importance of rest breaks for improving decision quality in high-stakes environments. Future Research: - Investigate similar effects in other decision-making contexts (e.g., medical, financial). Takeaways: - Judges are susceptible to mental depletion, and their decisions reflect biases introduced by timing and physical state. - Rest periods may mitigate such biases, emphasizing the need for structured breaks in decision-making workflows. Article-2 Purpose: Explores the relationship between CEOs’ facial width-to-height ratio (WHR) and firm performance. Hypothesis: - CEOs with higher WHR achieve superior financial performance. - The cognitive complexity of leadership teams moderates the WHR-performance relationship. Methods: 1. Data: 55 publicly traded Fortune 500 firms. 2. Measures: - CEO WHR: Measured from publicly available photographs. - Cognitive Complexity: Analyzed through team language in shareholder letters. - Firm Performance: Measured via return on assets (ROA). 3. Procedure: Regression analyses tested the impact of CEO WHR and leadership team cognitive complexity on firm performance. Results: - Firms with high-WHR CEOs had higher financial performance. - The relationship between WHR and performance was stronger in firms with low-cognitive-complexity leadership teams. - WHR accounted for ~7% of the variance in performance, moderated by team dynamics. Implications: - Suggests that physical traits influence perceptions and effectiveness in leadership. - Leadership team dynamics can amplify or mitigate individual traits’ effects on organizational outcomes. Future Research: - Explore interactions between physical traits, team dynamics, and subjective perceptions in leadership success. Takeaways: - CEOs’ facial WHR is a measurable predictor of firm performance, moderated by leadership team dynamics. - Highlights the role of non-verbal cues and team composition in organizational success. Review Qs: - Which decision-making style do you use most often and explain why? Provide an example. Bounded Rationality? - In the reviewed study, did Chinese or Americans take more risks? Why? Explain the mediated relationship observed in this study. Chinese were more risk taking due to the cushion hypothesis but purely only focusing on the financial context. - Why did researchers study proverbs to understand risk taking? What did the results indicate? Because proverbs can represent the culture of a country and the results indicated that more risk taking proverbs are from collectivist cultures. - Generate examples of escalation of commitment that you may have encountered. Continuing to be friends with a person who is more and more bad. - Which potential reason regarding why individuals escalate commitment do you think is most probable, and why? Personal justification. - As a manager, how might you reduce the risk of escalation of commitment? In-Class Prospect Theory - Provides us a framework for understanding how people make choice decisions. - Describes the decision processes involved when people make comparisons between options. Subjective Value Function - Any choice is associated with a subjective value from a neutral reference point that follows an S function. - Subjectively is the gain/loss large or small? - The reference point is neutral and serves as a comparison point. - As gains or losses increase (away from the neutral point), the effect on one’s subjective value decreases. - The function is significantly steeper for losses than for gains. Frame of Reference: Positive frames lower reference points and negative frames raise reference points. Decoy Effect: When an inferior choice alternative (i.e., decoy) influences choice between superior alternatives. - Dominance heuristic: choosing the dominating candidate allows the decision maker to avoid difficult trade-offs and allows one to justify choices to oneself and others. - Context-dependent weighting: the dimension on which both the decoy and target candidate excel is given more weight in the final choice. Anchoring and Adjustment - By just having a particular number in mind, the associative property of intuition causes our judgment to change. - When making an evaluation, we let initial information (even irrelevant information) serve as a starting point (anchor) from which we then adjust when new information is provided. - Although our final evaluation might not be the same as the anchor, it has a significant impact on the evaluation. Week 6: Leadership Video - What is leadership? exerting influence on the goal achievement of others in an organisational context. - Are leaders born or made? Probably both. - Traits that predict leader effectiveness: - Intelligence - Energy - Self-Confidence - Dominance - Extraversion (strongest predictor) - Honesty - Sociability - Need for achievement - Motivation to lead - Does intelligence predict leadership? Yes - Is there an optimal level of intelligence for leadership effectiveness? It is curvilinear and you want leaders to be smart but you don’t want them to be too smart. - Do traits predict leadership? Yes they do predict but traits are more related to affective/rational outcomes than performance outcomes - Consideration (being kind) predicts affective reactions and initiation of structure strongly predicts performance. Leadership Theories - House’s Path-Goal Theory: Motivates the employees by making the path to the gaol clearer - Participative Leadership: Involving the participants in the decision making process. - Transactional leadership: you work 5 hrs and you get paid $50. Works with external motivators - Transformational leadership: you internalise the cultures in the employees and try to transform the employees to be leaders. Works with internal motivators. - A mix of transactional and transformational leadership is needed. - Ethical Leadership: being an ethical leader - Servant leadership: empathise with the employees and put your employees before the organisation; leaders are there to serve their followers and not the other way round. - Green’s Leader-Member Exchange (LMX): leaders create exchanges with followers and the way this exchange is conducted is by respect, affect, contribution and loyalty. It's a back and forth exchange of these 4 values. - Is leader differentiation good or bad? Theories say leadership differentiation is good. Most theories say treating your followers uniquely is good as it optimises your resources. But according to one study by a doctorate student, people don’t want to be treated differently and don’t like it. Review Qs: - What are some characteristics of the subjective value function as described by Prospect Theory? - Provide an example of when you might present information using large or small numbers to your advantage. - What is an incidental anchor? - Are traits useful in predicting leader emergence? Effectiveness? - Is intelligence related to leader effectiveness? How so? - What behaviors do leaders do? - Are transactional or transformational leaders more effective? - What is leader differentiation? Is it good or bad? Are voluntary programs more effective than mandatory? - Voluntary attendance increases transfer but decreases organizational results. Explain. Transfer is increased because of motivation, butTransfer is increased because of motivation, but because fewer people attend training, organizational results are lowered. Are temporally spaced sessions more effective than massed training sessions? - Spacing does not affect learning, but spaced training is better for transfer and results downstream. - Are training programmes more effective for low-Are training programmes more effective for low-level or high-level leaders? Both benefit in terms of results. Are self-administered programmes less/more effective than those administered by the organisation or outside the organization? - All types are effective but self-administered programmes are less effective than the other two types. Is there a difference between training on-site or off-site? - Both work but larger effects for on-site (perhaps more people attend). Is face-to-face or virtual training better? - Face-to-face is better for transfer of learning but no difference for learning. Are hard skills (e.g., data analysis, monitoring budgets) or soft skills (e.g., interpersonal competencies) more easily trained? - Hard skills are learned and transferred more easily but soft skills affect subordinate and organizational outcomes more. Barriers to Women Leadership Work-family Issues - Women have more domestic responsibilities, especially if they have children. - This is changing slightly and there are cultural differences. Discrimination and Prejudice - Women are provided fewer opportunities. Leader Stereotypes - Women are more communal (e.g., interpersonally sensitive; concerned with others’ welfare; kind; helpful) - Men are more agentic (e.g., self-interested; task oriented; dominant; competent; decisive). - In general, people believe better leaders are agentic. - Incompatible beliefs between what it takes to be a good leader and what it takes to be a woman. Hence, there is a lack of fit. - Men who act pushy and fit the stereotype are perceived favorably but women who act the exact same way are not.who act the exact same way are not. Organizational Barriers - Long hours and Relocation - Masculine Organisational Culture - Barriers to Building Social Capital - “Old Men’s Network” which typically concentrates power with men. - Challenges of Obtaining Desirable Assignments Are there gender differences in leadership aspirations? - Men have slightly higher aspirations. This difference has not narrowed over time. if the organization had work-life balance initiatives women were more likely to aspire to leadership roles than if there were not initiatives. Are men or women more likely to emerge as leaders? Why? - Men were more likely to emerge as leaders. This difference decreased over time (i.e., with more recent studies) but still remains. - Men are more agentic, women are more communal Do men and women lead (behave) differently? - Women are more transformational, more transactional in providing rewards, and more likely to mentor and develop followers. - Men are more likely to emphasize mistakes and failures, to wait until the problem is severe before intervening, and more likely to shirk responsibility for managing. Conclusion: - Women are significantly more communal. E.g., ethical, individualized consideration, intellectual stimulation, consideration, participative. - Women significantly higher on contingent reward, and task- orientation. - Men higher on passive leadership. Are men or women more effective leaders? - Overall, men and women do not differ in perceived leader effectiveness. - When only investigating other-ratings, women are rated more effectively than men. - When only self-ratings are examined, men rate themselves more as being more effective than women rate themselves. - Time: No differences with more recent studies.  - Organization: Men were perceived as more effective in male-dominate organisations. - Level: Women were seen as more effective than men in middle management; with no differences in low-or upper-level management. Does female representation on corporate boards affect financial performance? - Evidence is mixed: null to positive effects observed. Summary: - Who is more likely to be a leader? - Who aspires more to be a leader? - Who emerges more as a leader? - How do leader behaviors differ by gender? - Who is more effective as a leader? - Can leaders be trained? Review Qs: - What do leader traits predict? Relate more strongly to affective/relational outcomes than to performance, but both. Traits predict leader emergence. - We discussed gender gaps in leadership aspects. - What has happened to the gender gap with regard to leadership aspirations? - Communion? - Agency? - Propensity to negotiate? - Emergence - Are men or women better leaders? - Which leadership style is most effective? - What do leaders do? - Do leader development training programmes work? Week 7: Motivation Video - Need theories (biological theories): - Maslow’s hierarchy of needs: Physiological, Safety, Belongingness, Esteem, Self-Actualisation. However, it is not empirically supported, but you can understand that employees have different needs. - ERG (existence-relatedness-growth): physiological, safety - existence, belongingness - relatedness, self-actualization - growth. - People have diff needs and are motivated by diff factors. - Be attentive to intrinsic motivation or higher-order needs. - There needs to be a mix of extrinsic and intrinsic motivators. - Psychological Needs - Self Determination Theory: it’s not sufficient to offer employees extrinsic rewards, they need to be intrinsically motivated. - Three basic, universal psychological needs: - Autonomy - Competence - Relatedness - Equity Theory (social theory) - Adam’s Equity Theory: motivation has a social basis than biological. Based on the equity, input and output you put in the work in comparison to other people who are similar to you or slightly better than you. People desire fair and equitable situations. One is motivated to restore equity. - Gender and Equity: Women tend to compare themselves with other women and would justify their underpayment to themselves. - Based on economic outcomes and strongly supportive of underpayment compared to overpayment. - Implications: You focus on perceptions and social comparisons and provide explanations or information to improve perceptions. - Why do employees steal? - Moral laxity - Financial pressure - Opportunities - Norms for tolerating theft - Job dissatisfaction  - Perceived inequalities or unfairness - What improves perceptions of fairness? - Assured that higher authorities understand them - Fair decision making - Decisions are applied consistently - Decisions are justifies based on information - Decision makers communicate information honestly - People influenced by decision were treated with respect - Those above help employees realise things could have been worse - Types of justice - Distributive justice: outcome fairness - Procedure justice: process fairness - Interactional justice: the interactions between people are just - Informational justice: do all have equal access to information? VIE/Expectancy Theory (cognitive theory) - V: Valence, I: Instrumentality, E: Expectancy - Will effort lead to performance? = high expectations - Will performance lead to a reward? = High instrumentality - How much the outcome is valued = high valence Which theory of leadership basically states that good leaders motivate their followers according to VIE theory? Path goal theory. Goal Setting - Set goals that are motivating - Specific - Difficult but achievable - Public - Accepted/Commitment - Accompanies with specific feedback Must goals be participative? Not always as goals can be assigned and don’t need to involve employees in goal setting. Must goals have rewards? Not necessary but if there are rewards it can increase the commitment towards the goal. Is punishment a motivator? It can reduce the probability of a response. It also increases aggressiveness, creates fear and anger and other bad things. Other motivators: - Job enrichment - Job rotation - Flex time: less absenteeism, increased performance, and improves favourable attitude.  - Compressed work week: improves satisfaction but no effect on absenteeism or performance. Article Purpose: This article investigates the discrepancies between self-reported and actual behaviors regarding the importance of pay as a motivator, highlighting its underestimated motivational potential. Hypothesis: - Pay is more important in behavior than in self-reports. - Pay’s motivational impact depends on individual and situational factors. - Performance-based pay is especially effective for high achievers and competitive individuals. Methods: 1. Data: - Surveys on pay importance (self-reports). - Meta-analyses and experimental studies on productivity and behavior. 2. Findings: - Self-reports rank pay fifth to eighth in importance, while behavioral studies show pay as the top motivator. - Performance-contingent pay systems increase productivity significantly. Results: - Self-reports undervalue pay's importance due to social desirability bias. - Behavioral studies show pay is the most effective motivator compared to alternatives like job enrichment or feedback. - Pay’s impact varies with individual traits (e.g., extroversion, high achievement orientation) and situational factors (e.g., economic conditions, pay variability). Implications: - Managers underestimate pay’s motivational potential due to reliance on flawed self-reports. - Effective pay systems require alignment with performance, transparency, and variability. - Mismanagement of pay (e.g., across-the-board raises) weakens its motivational effect. Future Research: - Explore cross-cultural differences in pay’s motivational impact. - Investigate pay’s role in team dynamics and organizational performance. Takeaways: - Pay is often undervalued as a motivator in surveys but proves critical in behavior. - High performers prefer pay systems tied to individual performance.  - Social and economic factors shape how pay is perceived and its effectiveness. Review Article - Is pay important to people? What do self-reports vs choices indicate? Pay is highly important, but self-reports undervalue it due to social desirability, whereas behavioral evidence shows pay as the top motivator. - Where does pay rank? In self-reports, pay ranks 5th to 8th; in behavioral studies, it consistently ranks as the most effective motivator. - Why the discrepancy? Social desirability bias, lack of awareness, and cultural norms undervalue extrinsic motivators like pay in self-reports. - What are some individual and situational factors that affect how important pay is to someone? Individual: Extroversion, achievement orientation, gender, and leadership experience. Situational: Economic context, pay variability, job choice vs. retention, and fairness perceptions. In Class Motivational Theories - Need Theories (Maslow and ERG) - Self-determination Theory - Equity Theory - Expectancy Theory - Operant Conditioning (Reward and Punishment) - Goal-setting Theory Article review - Is extrinsic or intrinsic motivation more useful for influencing behavior? - Would difficult goals decrease motivation? VIE Theory versus Goal-setting Theory - Which theory of leadership basically states that good leaders motivate their followers according to VIE theory? Why is pay so important to us? - Satisfies needs. - Gives us status. Importance of Pay - Individual Differences - High academic achievers - High self-efficacy - High needs for achievements - Extroverts: These are the employees we want to hire and state that pay is more important than to those low on these attributes. - Situational Factors - Pay more important in job choice than quit decisions - Under market pay has larger effects than over market pay - Pay must be contingent on performance Review Qs: - Which theories of motivation have the most empirical support? - Why do managers think that pay-for-performance does not work? - Does pay-for performance relate to performance? How do you know? - Explain self-determination theory Week 9: Persuasion Article Purpose: Investigates the relationship between emotion regulation ability, well-being, and financial success, using laboratory measures to assess individual differences in implementing emotion regulation strategies. Hypothesis: - Higher ability to down-regulate emotions is associated with greater well-being. - Higher ability to up-regulate emotions is associated with greater well-being and financial success. - Emotion regulation abilities positively correlate with indicators of socioeconomic success. Methods: 1. Data: - Study 1: 239 undergraduate students. - Study 2: 47 participants (younger and older adults). 2. Procedure: - Study 1: Participants suppressed emotional reactions to loud acoustic startles. - Study 2: Participants amplified emotional reactions to emotionally evocative films. 3. Measures: - Emotion regulation ability was assessed through laboratory-coded emotional responses. - Outcomes included self-reported well-being, disposable income, and socioeconomic status. Results: - Study 1: Individuals who effectively down-regulated emotional reactions to startle stimuli had higher levels of well-being. - Study 2: Effective up-regulation of emotional responses to film stimuli correlated with higher well-being, disposable income, and socioeconomic status. Implications: - Emotion regulation ability is a critical factor for personal and professional success. - Training in emotion regulation could enhance well-being and socioeconomic outcomes. Future Research: - Explore longitudinal impacts of emotion regulation ability. - Examine the influence of other types of emotion regulation (e.g., cognitive reappraisal). Takeaways:  - Emotion regulation ability, measured in controlled settings, translates into real-life benefits in well-being and socioeconomic success. - Both down-regulating and up-regulating emotions are important for achieving these outcomes. In-Class Persuasion: Cialdini - Reciprocity - Authority - Commitment/Consistency - Scarcity - Liking - Social Proof - Unity (Shared Social Identity - beyond surface similarity): Please note that often when persuading someone, several of these principles are being used simultaneously. The magnetic Middle: Normative data should pull everyone toward the norm. - People have more affection for names that are easy to pronounce Review Qs: - To maximize your future persuasive potential, when someone says “thank you” what should you say? - Why do rhymes seem to work (e.g., persuade people)? - When restaurants require a deposit for a reservation, what principle(s) of persuasion might they be using for people to adhere to the reservation? - Why do people like things that are familiar? - In general, what is conservation of resources theory? What does this theory suggest about persuasion? Provide an example to support your claims. - Provide an example of reciprocity of concessions. Week 11: Negotiation Video - What causes conflict? Anything that frustrates the ability to attain a goal. - Factor that can cause conflicts: - Group identification and intergroup bias - Interdependence - Difference in power, status and culture - Ambiguity in goals or jurisdictions - Scarce resources - What happens when there is a conflict? Winning becomes more important than finding a good solution, conceal or distort information, polarise and increase cohesion of groups, restricted interaction with other groups, increase group identification and enhance group image, emergent leaders are more aggressive. - How to resolve conflict? Avoidance, Accomodation, Compete, Compromise, Collaborate and Negotiate. - Stages of Negotiations: - Preparation - Relationship building - Information gathering and using - Bidding - Closing the deal - Implementing the deal - Target Point: the point at which you wanna end the deal - Resistance point: point at which you won't go beyond the; point where you wont accept any less - Starting point: point at which you begin to negotiate - Bargaining zone: spread between resistance points - BATNA: best alternative to a negotiated agreement - First offer becomes the anchor; the higher the first offer the higher the final offer. 10 strategies for distributive negotiation - Assess you BATNA - Determine your resistance point (should not reveal the resistance point) - Research the other party’s BATNA and resistance point - Set high aspirations (target point) - Make the first offer; anchor the first price point - Immediately re-anchor if the other party makes the first offer - Plan your concessions - Pattern: offer only one at a time - Magnitude: few early concession with more generous concessions later are more effective - Timing: gradual, rather than immediate, concession results in more satisfaction than the other negotiator.  - Use an objective-appearing rationale to support your offers, justify why you’re lowballing - Appeal to norms of fairness - Do not fall for the ‘even split’ ploy Article-1 Purpose: Investigates how agreeableness affects income and career advancement, focusing on gender differences. Hypothesis: - Agreeable men earn less than disagreeable men, due to societal expectations. - Gender stereotypes moderate the impact of agreeableness on income. Methods: 1. Data: - Employed individuals from various datasets. 2. Procedure: - Surveys assessed agreeableness, income, and career progression. 3. Measures: - Personality: Big Five dimensions. - Income: Self-reported earnings. - Advancement: Managerial recommendations. Results: - Agreeable men earn significantly less than disagreeable men, with a larger wage gap compared to women. - Disagreeable women earn slightly more than agreeable women, but the effect is less pronounced. - Agreeableness negatively affects career advancement for both genders. Implications: - Gender stereotypes penalize agreeable men more severely, framing them as less assertive and unsuitable for leadership roles. - Organizations may need to reevaluate performance assessments and reward systems to mitigate biases. Future Research: - Explore cultural differences in the agreeableness-income relationship. Takeaways: - Disagreeableness is linked to higher earnings and faster career advancement, particularly for men. - Gender norms strongly influence workplace outcomes for personality traits. Article-2 Purpose: Explores how cultural norms influence the effectiveness of expressing anger during negotiations. Hypothesis: - Anger leads to larger concessions from Western negotiators. - Anger leads to smaller concessions from East Asian negotiators due to perceived inappropriateness. Methods: 1. Data: - Students of European and East Asian ethnicities. 2. Procedure: - Study 1: Hypothetical scenarios measuring concession likelihood. - Study 2: Computer-mediated negotiations recording actual concessions. - Study 3: Manipulated anger appropriateness to test cultural effects. 3. Measures: - Concessions: Likelihood of agreeing to counterpart demands. Results: - Western negotiators made larger concessions to angry opponents. - East Asian negotiators made smaller concessions when anger was displayed. - Explicitly framing anger as appropriate/inappropriate moderated these cultural differences. Implications: - Cultural norms about emotional expression shape negotiation strategies and outcomes. - Displaying anger can backfire in collectivist cultures emphasizing harmony. Future Research: - Examine other emotions (e.g., happiness) and their cultural relevance in negotiations. Takeaways: - Anger is a double-edged sword in negotiations, effective in Western but not East Asian contexts. - Appropriateness of emotional displays is a critical factor in cross-cultural interactions. Review What single word can strengthen your persuasion attempts? Because Recording Review Which step of the negotiation process likely is the most important but often neglected? - Should you make the initial offer, why or why not? - What if the other makes the initial offer? - Quickly counter offer or shift the conversation or shift the conversation to other topics (e.g.,to other topics (e.g., interests, concerns) and then eventually bring it back to YOUR numbers. How, if at all, should you give concessions? - Pattern, Magnitude: Timing Pattern, Magnitude, Timing Is appealing to the fairness of the deal an effective strategy? Why or why. - Belief in a just world; equity theory; norms of fairness What is the “even split ploy”? What should you do? What is the difference between a distributive and integrative negotiation? Should you disclose significant information about your circumstances (e.g., your target or resistance point)? If you have other options, should you tell the other party? Is developing rapport with the other party important? If so, how might you do this? - Have coffee, use small talk (similarity), try to match the formality of their talk, compliment the person (increase liking). What should you do if the other side’s offer is incredibly unreasonable? - Maybe joke about it: “Right, and there are 500 hours in a day. Now let’s get serious. - State that the offer is clearly out of the range and shift to issues (e.g., size of apartment, contents in the apartment). - State the offer is clearly out of range and that a deal is unlikely. Winner’s curse” – after a deal, one feels that more Winner’s curse” – after a deal, one feels that more could have been obtained.could have been obtained.