MGT 310 Final

Reducing the identification with targets of harmful acts (moral disengagement)

Dehumanization Attribution of blame: occurs when you try to find fault in the victim of your actions (they deserved it bc...)

Group technique (decision-making)

Democratic: team votes on a decision Use mathematical techniques Use structured decision techniques: Take each individual on your team and place them where they are most useful in the decision-making chain

Preparing for conflicts- team maintenance

Develop approaches to identify conflicts early on Support constructive controversy Psychologically safe environment for disagreements and conflict Develop cooperation and trust building Develop team contracts Develop norms

Obscuring or distorting consequences (moral disengagement)

Reducing the amount of consequences/ minimize the severity of a single consequence

Gain Sharing

one department, or one group, does very well and therefore gets a bonus (only those responsible for positive effect) Ex: the sales team exceeds their goals one quarter, and they get bonuses as a reward

Compromise

moderate assertiveness and cooperativeness "give a little, get a little"

punitive feedback

negative affect tone, high intensity potential decrease in targeted (bad) behavior

Obligatory feedback

negative affective tone, low intensity likely little to no change in behavior

Factors that increase creativity

Culture that is open to creative/constructive conflict Moderate familiarity with your team members Diversity of perspectives Variations of brainstorming

Groupthink

Decision making flaws caused by the group's desire to maintain good relations rather than to make the best decision Antecedent conditions: Group members are friends and want to stay that way Structural issues w/in the team (i.e. domineering leader) External issues (i.e. stress, time pressure) Don't want to add to stress so just go along w group

Bad apples and bad barrels

barrel= organization; bad barrel= unethical org. bad apples looks at the individual and why they are engaging in unethical behavior

Social cognitive theory

behavioral, cognitive, and environmental factors are what determines human motivation and behavior

Escalation of commitment

"Throwing good money after bad" "sunk cost" Feeling like you've already wasted resources on something so you continue down the path despite no success

Moral disengagement

A set of cognitive mechanisms that disengage an individual's moral self-regulatory processes. after disengagement occurs, an individual may subsequently make unethical decisions without having guilty feelings 4 categories

Confirmation bias

Absorbing info that you already believe to be true (this can also apply to surrounding yourself w similar people to you) Combat w: Playing devil's advocate (elect someone to do this) Setting up anonymity (to pitch ideas)

Benefits to cooperation

All members are motivated Supportive communication Improved coordination, satisfaction, performance Less tension and fewer conflicts Greater cohesion

Methods to restore balance when there is equity distress

Alter the ratio: change your inputs or outcomes Cognitive distortion: change perception of self or others (More common w overrewarded inequity) Change your comparison other

Anchoring effect

Anchor yourself to one initial piece of info Often occurs in group settings

Observational learning

Attention Retention Initiation: the capability to model the behavior Motivation

Psychological safety

Being able to express yourself w/in your team w/o fear of adverse judgment from team members Even if the majority of the team feels completely safe, if there are any that don't feel that way, it is not psychologically safe at the team level

Survivorship bias

Concentrating on the people or things that "survived" some process and inadvertently overlooking those that didn't because of their lack of visibility. ex: a nurse thinks that helmets aren't actually helpful b/c ppl come in and are very injured, but if they weren't wearing a helmet, they might not even make it to the ER

Sherif (1966)

Conducted a study that looked at boys @ summer camp (ages 12-15) Wanted to study how a team develops identity, cohesion Arbitrarily split kids into teams- but kids thought they were put on a team for a reason and instantly developed an identity

Entrepreneurial team processes

Conflict Pwr and politics Communication

Defensive avoidance

Conflict is uncomfortable for you. Criticism (received or given) is uncomfortable

Problems w cooperation

Conformity (Resistance to change and outside influence) Unhealthy agreement

Full participation (decision-making)

Consensus: discussion of issues until all members agree Takes a long time

Minimization of role (moral disengagement)

Displacement of responsibility: "It's not my fault, my boss told me to do it" (placing the responsibility on someone else) Diffusion of responsibility: occurs when an individual is less likely to take responsibility for action or inaction when others are present (ex: when there are multiple ppl around for an emergency, it takes longer for someone to help)

Redundancy

Due to cohesiveness, all team members may basically say the same thing

Emotional intelligence

Four facets: Self-awareness Ability to identify, understand, and discuss your emotions Empathy Ability to identify and understand the emotions of others Emotional regulation Ability to control your emotions and emotional expression Relationship management How you are able to show respect and concern for someone you're in a relationship with

External environment

Growth market vs stagnant market Stable vs turbulent Type of industry

Cognitive interference

Happens when you're waiting (for your turn to speak, to share idea), and by the time it's your turn, you forget the idea Struggling to start some creative task

Collaboration

High assertiveness; high cooperativeness "we win"

Confrontation

High assertiveness; low cooperativeness "I win, you lose"

Entrepreneurial team composition

Homogenous vs heterogeneous teams Surface-level characteristics Deep-level characteristics

Social identity theory

In group biases→ feeling like your group is better than others

Equity distress

Internal tension that can be alleviated by restoring balance to the ratios

Leader oriented decision-making

Leader decides or leader assigns expert Consultative: one person has the authority to make decisions, but he/she may ask for advice and comments from team members b/4 deciding

Contingency (leadership approach)

Link traits or behaviors to situations Combine trait, behavioral, and situational approaches to leadership We don't always use this approach b/c practically speaking it is very difficult (hardest to study)

Cognitive misconstrual (moral disengagement)

Moral justification: justifying a behavior so you don't feel guilt Euphemistic labeling: sanitizing labeling (stealing vs borrowing) Advantageous comparison: comparing your actions to someone's whose are worse

Motivation- Equity Theory

Motivation is maximized when an employee's ratio of "outcomes" to "inputs" matches those of some "comparison other" Thus motivation also depends on the outcomes received by other employees, such as team members.

Normative vs informative influences

Normative influence = ppl shift their position to match what everyone else is doing Informative influence = changing your mind based on info

Reciprocity bias

Occurs when you alter your feedback in the moment to match the feedback you just received (can reciprocate either positive or negative)

Profit sharing

Occurs when your whole org. is doing well (very profitable) so everyone gets some sort of bonus Ex: it's Christmas time and the company is doing really well, so everyone gets a bonus.

Process mapping

Outlines the individual steps within a process Creates a shared mental model Facilitates communication

Dunning-Kruger effect

Ppl who are experts in a field tend to underestimate their knowledge, and ppl who are not an expert, tend to overestimate their knowledge

Implicit prejudices

Prejudices that we have, but are hard for us to recognize

Mind guards

Prevent the leader from receiving info about what happened with a decision (probably b/c group made a poor decision)

Risk aversion

Realm of gains Hot hand fallacy The notion that you're "on fire" and because you're doing well your next action will lead to more gains Recent successes Gamblers fallacy Feel like we're on a roll, but you know the luck is bound to run out

Transactional model of communication (Barlund, 1970)

Sender:Encodes message, then transmits message through a channel (words, text, etc) Receiver: Receives message, then decodes message, then gives feedback to sender (can be subconscious) Noise: external distractors Reciprocal influence :Not just the sender influencing the receiver, it goes both ways

Integrative agreements

Separate ppl from the problem Focus on the shared interests of all parties Develop many options to solve the problem Evaluate the options using objective criteria Try again

Satisficing

Settling for a solution that is not the optimal solution

Self-managing teams

Shift responsibility to team members Empowers employees production/service better suited than professional and project teams

Team halo effect

The idea that you feel like your team is so great and nothing that your team does that is bad, performance-wise, is their fault

managing virtual team conflict

Stop using electronic messages to advocate opinions or express emotions Leader intervention Face-to-face meeting

Factors inhibiting creativity

Stuck in one's own paradigms (Being used to your routine so you don't branch out) Extrinsic rewards (you might not want to branch out too much and risk the reward) Evaluation apprehension (I feel uncomfortable about someone looking at my work. Worried that they might judge)

False dichotomies

Tendency to force a decision between two extremes Combat w: Questioning absolute statements Using provisional language (Words like seldom, often, rarely; instead of words like always, never, etc.)

Shared leadership

The notion that leadership functions can be shared or performed by various members of a team focused on: Participative decision making Developing social relations and support Empowerment May have positive effects on both task and social aspects of the team Detriments include: it requires more coordination, and can cause confusion about accountability

Technology transfer

The process through which a new invention or innovation is turned into products and commercialized

Roadblocks: TTO offices

They might not believe in the technology They might not have the right industry connections They might take a long time They might ask for more money from licensing and patenting than the inventor agrees to

Inflation bias

This occurs more in face-to-face feedback When giving feedback, to eliminate discomfort for yourself, you boost the feedback so it's more positive

Behavioral (leadership approach)

Train ppl to be good leaders Leadership is a set of appropriate behaviors Decision-making style Task vs social focus Leaders can be trained

Multiple linkage models (Yukl, 1989)

Try and use a contingency approach to unpack factors that can effect leadership If you have zero of one factor, your leadership performance metrics will also be zero Factors: member effort, member ability, resources, teamwork ability, task organization, external support

Situational (leadership approach)

Understand substitutes for leadership Adjust leadership style relative to: Readiness of team, Characteristics of job, Team structure and organization

Trait or personality (leadership approach)

Uses tests to select good leaders Leaders possess certain traits that make them good leaders 'Big 5' personality characteristics

Salience bias

We are aware or scared about things that are apparent and we're attached to them in an emotional way, different than other things, Ex: you're more likely to die from sickness, insect bite, etc. than a bear, but we're more fearful of bears. OR someone is wearing a red dress in a room of people dressed in black. We're more likely to focus on the person dressed in red, even if they're not the most important person.

Process loss

When coordination and social issues take away time from completing tasks Communication problems Failure to pool knowledge Especially in person (can get distracted and talk ab irrelevant things)

Group polarization

When group discussions lead to a final decision that is more extreme than that average position of its members Risky shift phenomenon (when people change their decisions or opinions to become more extreme and risky when acting as part of a group)

Process gain

When interactions b/t team members lead to the formation of new ideas that no single member would have produced Higher quality decisions Motivational effects

Vicarious reinforcement

Witnessing someone's action and the consequence of that action, which influences your behavior

Overrewarded inequity

Your inputs are equal, but you are getting paid more than your referent other Your inputs are much less than your referent other, but the outcomes are the same

Underrewarded inequity

Your inputs are more than your referent other but the outcomes are the same Your inputs are equal, but they are getting paid a lot more

Bypassing

a communication problem that arises when the same words mean different things to different people

patent

doc that shows that you made something that nobody else did Involves the right to exclude others from making using or selling an invention

accommodation

low assertiveness, high cooperativeness "I give in"

Avoidance

low assertiveness, low cooperativeness "leave me alone"

Formative Feedback

positive affective tone, high intensity potential decrease in targeted (bad) behavior Controlling (change-oriented) feedback

Permissive Feedback

positive affective tone, low intensity potential increase in targeted (bad) behavior

Factors that alter the effectiveness of reinforcement

satiation/ deprivation Immediacy Contingency Size

Operant conditioning

skinners box Pos reinforcement: engage in a desired behavior, get something that you want Neg reinforcement: when you engage in desired behavior an adverse stimulus goes away

Licensing

someone else taking what you've made/patented and commercializing it

Emotional labor

state when what you're expressing doesn't match what you're feeling

Abilene paradox

three friends want to go on vacation, one wants Cali, one wants Florida, and one wants mexico. They agree that it's only fair to go to the place directly in the middle: Abilene, texas. Had one member spoken up, they might have gone to a beach like they all wanted (unhealthy agreement)