MGS 3400 Chapter Notes
MGS 3400 Chapter Notes MGS 3400
Popular in MANAGING PEOPLE IN ORGS
Popular in Managerial Science
This 6 page Study Guide was uploaded by Vraj Patel on Thursday September 29, 2016. The Study Guide belongs to MGS 3400 at Georgia State University taught by forestor in Fall 2016. Since its upload, it has received 9 views. For similar materials see MANAGING PEOPLE IN ORGS in Managerial Science at Georgia State University.
Reviews for MGS 3400 Chapter Notes
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 09/29/16
CHAPTER 5 Stress 137 A third type of nonwork hindrance stressor financial uncertainty . This type of stressor refers to conditions that create uncertainties with regard to the loss of livelihood, savings, or the ability to pay expenses. This type of stressor is highly relevant during recessions or economic MGS 3400 Chapter 5 downturns. When people have concerns about losing their jobs, homes, and life savings because of economic factors that are beyond their control, it’s understandable why nearly half39f the respondents to a recent survey indicated that stress was making it hard for them to do their jobs. NONWORK CHALLENGE STRESSORS. Of course, the nonwork domain can be a source Ø Stresof challenge stressors as wellFamily time demands refer to the time that a person commits too A psychological response to demands where there is something at stake and examples of family time demands include time spent involved in family pursuits such as traveling, attending social events and organized activities, hosting parties, and planning and making home improvements. Examples of personal development activities include participation in formal education pro- resources Ø Work Stressors c lessons, sports-related training, hobby-related self-education, participation in local government, or volunteer work. Finally, Table 5-2 includes sopositive life eventthat are 5.3 soo Challenge stressors enge stressors. For example, marriage, the addition of a new family How do individuals cope member, and graduating from school are stressful in their own way. However, each is associatewith stress? with more po§itivTime pressure negative, emotions. § Work complexity HOW DO PEOPLE COPE WITH STRESSORS? § Work responsibility According to the transactional theory of stress, after people appraise a stressful demand, they ask tho Hindrance stressors I do?” and “Whatcan I do?” to deal with this situation. These ques- tions, which refer to tsecondary appraisal shown in Figure 5-1, center on the issue of how people cope with the various stressors they facCoping refers to the behaviors and thoughts that people §se tRole ambiguity he stressful demands they face and the emotions associated with those stressful demands.2As Table 5-3 illustrates, coping can involve many different types of activities, and these activities can be grouped into four broad categories based on two dimen- sions.3The first dimension refers to the method of coping (behavioral versus cognitive), and the second dimension refers to the focus of coping (problem solving versus regulation of emotions). Ø Family Stressors part of our coping definition highlights the idea that methods of coping can be cat- egorized on the basis of whether they involve behaviors or thoBehavioral coping involves the set of physical activities that are used to deal with a stressful In one example of behavioral coping, a person who is confronted with a lot of time pressure at work might choose to cope by working faster. In another example, an employee who has several daily hassles might cope by avoiding work—coming in late, leaving early, or even staying home.As a final example, employees often cope with the stress of an international assignment by returning home from the assignment prematurely. As ouOB Internationally feature illustrates, international assign- ments are becoming increasingly prevalent, and the costs of these early returns to organizations o Hindrance stressors can be signi§icanWork-family conflict § Financial uncertainty TABLE 5-3 Examples of Coping Strategies § Negative life events PROBLEM-FOCUSED EMOTION-FOCUSED Behavioral Methods • Working harder • Engaging in alternative activities • Seeking assistance • Seeking support • Acquiring additional • Venting anger resources Cognitive Methods • Strategizing • Avoiding, distancing, and ignoring • Self-motivation • Looking for the positive in the • Changing priorities negative • Reappraising Ø Role Conflict : Conflict within one job. S.J. Havlovic, “Coping with Job Stress: A Conceptual Evaluation Framework for Coping Measures,” Journal of Organization13 (1992), pp. 479–508. Ø Role overload: overworked, too much on your plate Ø Daily hassles: inconvenience, hassles that come with the job (ex : for a truck driver would experience traffic) ccooll22993355xx__cchh0055__112288--116611..iinndddd 113377 2222//110PM/1111 1111::0011 P Ø Accounting for Individuals o People differ in their ability to cope with stressors, as a function of § Social support • Instrumental support • Emotional support § Type A Behavior Pattern Confirming Pages Ø Consequences of Stress o Physiological strains: Illness, high blood pressure, coronary artery disease, headaches, back pains, stomachaches 146 CHAPTER 5 o Psychological strains: Depression, anxiety, irritability, forgetfulness, inability to think clearly, reduced confidence, burnout o Behavioral Strains: Alcohol, and drug use, teeth grinding, compulsive behaviors FIGURE 5-5 oEffects of Challenge Stressors on Performance and Commitment Ø Challenge Job Stressors Performance Challenge stressors have a weak positive relationship with job performance. People who experience higher levels of challenge stressors tend to have higher levels of task performance. Not much is known about the impact of challenge stressors on Citizenship Behavior and Counterproductive Behavior . Challenge Organizational Stressors Commitment Challenge stressors have a moderate positive relationship with Organizational Commitment. People who experience higher levels of challenge stressors tend to have higher levels of Affective Commitment and Normative Commitment. Relationships with Continuance Commitment are weaker. Represents a strong correlation (around .50 in magnitude). Represents a moderate correlation (around .30 in magnitude). Represents a weak correlation (around .10 in magnitude). Ø Sabbatical: allow employees to take up to 6 months to pursue personal growth Sources: J.A. LePine, N.P. Podsakoff, and M.A. LePine, “A Meta-Analytic Test of the Challenge Stressor–Hindrance amework: An Explanation for Inconsistent RelationshipsAmong Stressors and PerformaAcademy of Management Journal 48 (2005), pp. 764–75; N.P. Podsakoff, J.A. LePine, and M.A. LePine,Ø Relaxation techniques: meditation taking walks journaling deep breathing ttitudes, Turnover Intentions, Turnover, and Withdrawal Behavior: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92 (2007), pp. 438–54. Ø Health and wellness program: onsite fitness centers/programs, nutrition programs bike borrowing marathons or walks Chapter 6 coping strategies, and engagement outweigh the costs of the added strain, meaning that challenge Motivation stressors tend to be beneficial to employee performance and commitment when both the posi- tives and negatives are considered. 82These positive effects of challenge stressors have been dem- 83 84 85 onstrated for executives, employees in lower-leva el djoebvse,n studeIntt’ss. important to Ø Motivation point out, however, that high levels of challenge stressors may have negative consequences that o A set of energetic forces that originate within and outside an employee that with challenge stressors experience strains that can result in illness, but because they tend to be more satisfied, commit- initiates work-related effort and determines its direction, intensity, and ted, and engaged with their jobs, they come to work anyway.This phenomenon, which is referred persto as presenteeism, can result in prolonged illness, as well as the spread of illness, and ultimately a downward spiral of impaired performance and employee health. 86In fact, it may surprise you § Direction - What do you do? t§ leaIntensity - How hard do you do it? ity that result from presenteeism are even larger than reductions in productivity that result from employee absenteeism. 87 § Persistence - How long do you do it? Ø Theories of Motivation o Several theories attempt to summarize the key factors that foster high APPLICATION: STRESS MANAGEMENT motivation: o ExpectancyPreviously, we described how employee stress results in strains that cost organizations in terms of reduced employee performance and commitment. However, there are other important costs to consider that relate to employee health. Most organizations provide some sort of health care benefits for their employees, 88and all but the smallest organizations pay worker’s compensation insurance, the rates for which are determined, in part, by the nature of the job and the organiza- tion’s history of work-related injuries and illnesses. So what role does stress play in these costs? o Goal setting theory o Equity theory o Psychological empowerment Ø Expectancy Theory o Motivation is fostered when the employee believes three things: § That effort will result in performance § That performance will result in outcomes § That those outcomes will be valuable Ø Expectancy o Effort → Performance § Can be hindered by: § Lack of necessary resources § Lack of supportive leadership § Low self-efficacy Ø Instrumentality o Performance → Outcomes § Can be hindered by: • Poor methods for measuring performance, as Instrumentality could actually be rewritten to be Performance → Evaluation → Outcomes • Inadequate budget to provide outcomes, even when performance is high • Use of policies that reward things besides performance, such as attendance or seniority • Time delays in doling out rewards Ø Valence o Anticipated value of outcomes Ø Why does pay have such a high valence? o The meaning of money o Achievement o Respect o Freedom Ø Expectancy Theory o Motivation = (E→P) x Σ[(P→O) x V] o Key aspect: multiplicative effects § Motivation is zero if either expectancy, instrumentality, or valence is zero Ø Goal Setting Theory o Motivation is fostered when employees are given specific and difficult goals § Rather than no goals, easy goals, or “do your best” goals Ø Equity Theory o Motivation is maximized when an employee’s ratio of “outcomes” to “inputs” matches those of some “comparison other” o Thus motivation also depends on the outcomes received by other employees Ø Psychological Empowerment Confirming Pages o An intrinsic form of motivation derived from the belief that one’s work tasks are contributing to some larger purpose o Fostered by four beliefs: Confirming Pages CHAPTER 6 Motivation § Meaningfulness 184 CHAPTER 6 Motivation § Self-Determination § Competence FIGURE 6-8 Effects of Motivation on Performance and Commitment FIGURE 6-7 Why Are Some Employees More Motivated Than Others? § Impact MOTIVATING FORCES Valence E O P Motivation Job Expectancy Instrumentality Performance Motivation has a strong positive effect on Job Performance. People who experience higher levels of motivation tend to have higher levels of Task Performance. Those effects are strongest EFFORT for self-efﬁcacy/competence, followed by goal difﬁculty, the valence-instrumentality-expectancy and Difﬁcult Self-Set combination, and equity. Less is known about the effects of motivation on Citizenship and AsGoaled Goal Counterproductive Behavior, though equity has a moderate positive effect on the former and a Dof Effort moderate negative effect on the latter. of Effort Motivation Organizational Commitment Outcomes Outcomess Persistence of Effort = Inputs OInputss Less is known about the effects of Motivation on Organizational Commitment. However, equity has a moderate positive effect. People who experience higher levels of equity tend to feel higher levels of Affective Commitment and higher levels of Normative Commitment. Effects on Meaningfulness Continuance Commitment are weaker. Determination Represents a strong correlation (around .50 in magnitude). Empowermental Represents a moderate correlation (around .30 in magnitude). Competence Represents a weak correlation (around .10 in magnitude). Impact Sources: Y. Cohen-Charash and P.E. Spector, “The Role of Justice in OrgaOnrgiaznaiztaitoionnsa:l A Meta-Analysis,” Chapter 7 Behavior and Human Decision Processes 86 (2001), pp. 287–321; J.A. Colquitt, D.E. Conlon, M.J. Wesson, C.O.L.H. Porter,andK.Y.Ng,“JusticeattheMillennium:AMeta-AnalyticReviewof25YearsofOrganizationalJusticeResearch,” Trust, Justice, Ethics Journal of Applied Psychology 86 (2001), pp. 425–45; J.P. Meyer, D.J. Stanley, L. Herscovitch, and L. Topolnytsky, “Affective, Continuance, and Normative Commitment to the Organization: A Meta-Analysis of Antecedents, Correlates, Ø Trust: The willingness to be vulnerable to an authority based on positive expectations avior 61 (2002), pp. 20–52;A.D. Stajkovic and F. Luthans, “Self-Efficacy and Work-Related Performance: A Meta-Analysis,” Psychological Bulletin 124 (1998), pp. 240–61; W. Van Eerde and ccooll229933118844cchh0066__116622--119977..iinndddduthority’s actions and intenH. Thierry, “Vroom’s E111188::1166 PPMMand Work-Related Criteria: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Applied Psychology 81 (1996), pp. 575–86; and R.E. Wood, A.J. Mento, and E.A. Locke, “Task Complexity as a Moderator of Goal Effects: o Trust = willing to be vulnerable A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Applied Psychology 72 (1987), pp. 416–25. o Risk = actually becoming vulnerable Ø Disposition-Based Trust: New Relationships those actions themselves require extra effort. The best evidence in support of that claim comes from research on equity. Specifically, employees who feel a sense of equity on the job are more o Trust Propensity: A general expectation that the words, promises, and likely to engage in citizenship behaviors, particularly when those behaviors aid the organiza- tion.07 T h e s a m e e m p l oy e e s a r e l e s s l i ke l y t o e n g a g e i n c o u n t e r p r o d u c t ive b e h av i o r s , b e c a u s e statements of individuals asuch behaviors often serve as a retaliation against perceived inequities.8 Ø Cognition-Based Trust: Most Relationships A s w i t h c i t i z e n s h i p b e h av i o r s , t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n m o t iva t i o n a n d o rg a n i z a t i o n a l c o m - mitment seems straightforward. After all, the psychological and physical forms of withdrawal o Trustworthiness: that characterize less committed employees are themselves evidence of low levels of motivation. § Ability – KSA’s that enable an authority to be successful in a specific area. ing longer breaks are struggling to put forth consistently high levels of work effort. Research on equity and organizational com- § Benevolence – prmitment offers the clearest insights into the motivation–commitment relationship. Specifically, employees who feel a sense of equity are more emotionally attached to their firms and feel a § Integrity – Adheres to set of agreed upon values and pr109iples stronger sense of obligation to remain. Ø Affect-Based Trust: Few Relationships Ø Ø Justice: Trustworthiness can sometimes be difficult to judge, especially early in work relationships o Distributive justice ccooll22993355xx__cchh0066__116622--119977..iinndddd 118855 208 CHAPTER 7 Trust, Justice, and Ethics 208 CHAPTER 7 Trust, Justice, and Ethics o Procedural justice o Interpersonal justice o Informational justice TABLE 7-2 The Four Dimensions of Justice Ø Distributive and Procedural Justice TABLE 7-2 The Four Dimensions of Justice DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE RULES DESCRIPTION Equity vs. equality vs. need Are rewards allocated according to the proper norm? Equity vs. equality vs. need Are rewards allocated according to the proper PROCEDURAL JUSTICE RULES norm? Voice Do employees get to provide input into PROCEDURAL JUSTICE RULES Correctability procedures? Voicestency Do pDo employees get to provide input intoals? Bias Suppression Are procedures consistent across people and time? Correctability procedures? Representativeness Are procedures neutral and unbiased? Accuracyncy Do procedures consider the needs of all groups?ls? Bias Suppression Are procedures consistent across people and time? Are procedures based on accurate information? Representativeness Are procedures neutral and unbiased? AccuracySONAL JUSTICE RULES Do procedures consider the needs of all groups? Ø Interpersonal & Informational Justice Respect Do authorities treat employees with sincerity?on? INTERPERSONAL JUSTICE RULES Do authorities refrain from improper remarks? INFORMATIONAL JUSTICE RULES Respect Do authorities treat employees with sincerity? Justification Do authorities explain procedures thoroughly?rks? Truthfulness Are those explanations honest? INFORMATIONAL JUSTICE RULES Justification Do authorities explain procedures thoroughly? Sources: J.S. Adams, “Inequity in Social Exchange,” in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 2, ed. L. Berkowitz (New Y214: AcadCHAPTER 7s, 196Trust, Justice, and Ethicsand J.F. Moag, “Interactional Justice: Commu- nication Criteria of Fairness,” in Research on Negotiations in Organizations, Vol. 1, eds. R.J. Lewicki, B.H. Sheppard, and Ø Ethics:rm nThe degree to which the behaviors of an authority are in accordance with bution of Rewards and Resourcegenerally accepted moral norms in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 9, eds. L. Berkowitz and W. Walster (New York: Academic Press, 1976), pp. 91–131; G.S. Leventhal, “What Should Be Done with Equity. Theory? NewApproaches to the Study of Fairness in Social Relationships,” in Social Exchange: Advances in Theory and nication Criteria of Fairness,” in Research on Negotiations in Organizations, Vol. 1, eds. R.J. Lewicki, B.H. Sheppard, Research, eds. K. Gergen, M. Greenberg, and R. Willis (NewYork: Plenu(Good vs. Bad Apples)7–55; and J. Thibaut and L. Walker, Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1975).tribution of Rewards and Resources in Grobehavior rganizations,” in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 9, eds. L. Berkowitz and W. Walsto “Especially Academic Press, 1976), pp. 91–131; G.S. Leventhal, “What Should Be Done with Equity Theory? NewApproaches to the Study of Fairness in Social Relationships,” in Social Exchange: Advances in Theory and interpersonal justice, and informational justice. Research, eds. Kbehavior M. Greenberg, anMoralWillis (NewYork: PMoral Press, 1980), pp.Moral5; and J. Thibaut and L. Walker, Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1975). Intent DISTØ The Four Component tributive justice reflects the perceived fairness of decision- making oModel s. 44 E m p l o y e e s g a u g e d i s t r i bu t ive j u s t i c e b y a s k i n g w h e t h e r d e c i s i o n o u t c o m e s , 7.4 of an authority’s decision making along four dimensions: distributive justice, procedural justice, What dimensions can norms. I most business situations, the proper norm is equity, with more outcomes allocated interpersonal justice, and informational justice. be used to describe the to those who contribute more inputs (see Chapter 6 on Motivation for more discussion of such fairness of an authority’s issues). The equity norm is typically judged to be the fairest choice in situations in which the decision making? (Good vs. Bad Barrels) making outcomes.ize the prodE m p l o y e e s g a u g e d i s t r i bu t iv e j u s t i c e b y a s k i n g w h e t h e r d e c i s i o n o u t c o m e s , 7.4 Source: Adapted from J.R. RMoral Development: Advances in Research and T(NewYork: Praeger, 1986). such as pay, rewards, evaluations, promotions, and work assignments, are allocated using proper critical. In team-based7.5rk, building harmony and solidarity in work groups can become just as morally sensitive. What dimensions can norms. In most business situations, the proper unethically simply because they don’t perceive that moral issues are relevant in a given situation, be used to describe the to those who contribute more inputs (see Chapter 6 on Motivation for more discussion of suchnever debated. For example, let’s say you own a clothing fairness of an authority’s that all team membdecision making?same amount of relevant rewards. The equality norm is typi-tyles at low prices. You know that Diane von Furst- Confirming Pages Ø The Four Component Model o Moral Awareness § Recognize that a moral issue exists 222 CHAPTER 7 Truso Moral judgment hics § Process people use to determine weather a particular course of action is ethical o Moral intent FIGURE 7-8 Effects of Trust on Performance and Commitment § Degree of commitment to the moral course of action o Ethical Behavior Job Trust Performance Trust has a moderate positive effect on Performance. Employees who are willing to be vulnerable to authorities tend to have higher levels of Task Performance. They are also more likely to engage in Citizenship Behavior and less likely to engage in Counterproductive Behavior. Organizational Trust Commitment Trust has a strong positive effect on Commitment. Employees who are willing to be vulnerable to authorities tend to have higher levels of Affective Commitment and higher levels of Normative Commitment. Trust has no effect on Continuance Commitment. Represents a strong correlation (around .50 in magnitude). Represents a moderate correlation (around .30 in magnitude). Represents a weak correlation (around .10 in magnitude). Sources: K.T. Dirks and D.L. Ferrin, “Trust in Leadership: Meta-Analytic Findings and Implications for Research and Practice,”Journal ofApplied Psychology 87 (2002), pp. 611–28; and J.A. Colquitt, B.A. Scott, and J.A. LePine, “Trust, Trustworthiness, and Trust Propensity: A Meta-Analytic Test of their Unique Relationships with Risk Taking and Job Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92 (2007), pp. 909–27. Tr u s t a l s o i n f l u e n c e s c i t i z e n s h i p b e h av i o r a n d c o u n t e r p r o d u c t iv e b e h av i o r. W h y ? O n e r e a s o n is that the willingness to accept vulnerability changes the nature of the employee–employer rela- tionship. Employees who don’t trust their authorities have economic exchange relationships that are based on narrowly defined, quid pro quo obligations that are specified in advance and have 124 an explicit repayment schedule. Economic exchanges are impersonal and resemble contractual agreements, such that employees agree to fulfill the duties in their job description in exchange for financial compensation. As trust increases, social exchange relationships develop that are based on vaguely defined obligations that are open-ended and long term in their repayment 125 schedule. Social exchanges are characterized by mutual investment, such that employees agree to go above and beyond their duties in exchange for fair and proper treatment by authorities. In social exchange contexts, employees are willing to engage in beneficial behaviors because they
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'