Mullins L.J. Management and organisational behaviour, Seventh edition

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

Your own perspectives on problems are important

when thinking about the many perspectives and

views understood by all of the other people in the

organization. Indeed, they are often your only and

best guides. With personally different

backgrounds, ethnicity, gender and socialization,

no one can expect all individuals to view one

event in the same way.

Bob Hamlin, Jane Keep and Ken Ash

Organization Change and Development: A Reflective Guide for Managers, Trainers

and Developers, Financial Times Prentice Hall, (2001)

Individuals have different abilities,

personalities, learning experiences and

attitudes. It is not surprising that they perceive

work in different ways. Differences between

individuals can be a source of developing

creativity or the root of conflict and frustration.

The skill of management is to be able to match

the needs of the individual with the needs of

the organisation so goals can be met and

satisfaction achieved. Emphasising individual

differences and valuing diversity is a key driver

in the search for equality at work.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

After completing this chapter you should be able to:

 focus on the changing relationships at work and the

significance of valuing difference and diversity;

 outline the importance of the individual’s contribution

to the organisation and factors affecting behaviour and

performance;

 examine the major difficulties of studying personality

and apply the key issues of personality studies to the

work organisation;

 explain how differences in ability are identified and

measured, and how psychological tests are used in the

workplace;

 detail the significance of attitudes, their functions,

change and measurement;

 apply the principles of attitude change to the workplace;

 examine the importance of gender research and

organisational behaviour, and women’s position and

status.

INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES

Linda Hicks

Photo: Bluestone/Science Photo Library

Are organisations moving into a mature multi-cultural phase? Is there sensitivity within

organisations to tackle issues of racism, sexism, and ageism? Are managers able to cope

with the changes in structure, culture, work attitudes and expectations? Managing rela-

tionships at work has always been a key skill, but in the twenty-first century there are

new demands for an unpredictable future. The speed at which organisations are under-

going change places continuous pressure on individuals at work. The paradox that

‘change is now a constant feature’ in organisational life has become a key feature in aca-

demic journals. Being able to manage the process of change is a necessity for all

managers regardless of the size, type and nature of the organisation.

Although hierarchy and bureaucracy still exist in many organisations, the trend

towards flatter, matrix-based structures has grown. It is commonplace for employees to

work in project teams, to work at home, to communicate informally to colleagues and

to cope with the juggling of family demands and work. Managers require skills that

facilitate achievement through working with colleagues rather than dictating to subor-

dinates. They need sensitivity to the work climate and they require skills, which will

enable them to effect changes that foster well-being and satisfaction.

Future demographic patterns may also present new challenges for managers. Equality

Direct

predicts that by the year 2010, 40 per cent of the labour force will be over 45

years of age. Alterations to the identity that individuals hold have also been apparent

over the last decade. Devolution and regionalisation have increased and paradoxically

so too has the trend towards greater integration into multinational groupings (in terms

of both company mergers and political agendas). A complex range of possible identi-

ties and affiliations results. Consider a Scottish national living in the United States,

working for a Japanese company and directing European markets: such a manager will

have a diverse set of allegiances which may in turn affect motivation and morale. The

growth of the portfolio worker and contract worker results in an employment relation-

ship which is short term, instrumental and driven by outcomes and performance.

Loyalty to the organisation and commitment to mission statements does not enter

into such a partnership. The rise of consumerism in and out of the workplace has led

to greater understanding and expectations of ‘rights’ and redress of perceived injustice.

It is not only morally and socially acceptable to treat all people fairly in the workplace;

legislation insists that managers do so.

The government is committed to protect individuals at work against discrimination

in employment on the basis of sex, disability or race. Under the Race Relations

Amendment Act 2000 there is a positive duty on public authorities to promote racial

equality in the provision of services and to improve equal opportunities in employ-

ment. One of the specific duties required by public authorities is to prepare and publish

a race equality scheme and assess, monitor and control functions and policies that have

a bearing on race equality. Encouraging a diverse workforce is high on the government’s

agenda and the reluctant employer is having its hand forced by statutory obligations.

All these changes amount to a picture in which the white males will no longer domi-

nate. Instead, we can anticipate a complex pattern where, ideally, individual

differences will be valued and celebrated and, at the very least, equal opportunities

practice will be observed. Personal qualities and characteristics that may have been

downgraded, ignored or regarded as nuisance factors will be perceived as adding value.

Organisations which embrace difference and diversity as opposed to those which are

merely compliant will, it is claimed, succeed in a fiercely competitive climate. As J. M.

Barry Gibson, Chief Executive of Littlewoods, has stated:

336

PART 4 THE INDIVIDUAL

THE CHANGING NATURE AND SCOPE OF MANAGING INDIVIDUALS

AT WORK

Managing

relationships

in the twenty-

first century

Equal

opportunities

to managing

diversity

The business

case

The fact is that if we effectively exclude women, ethnic minorities and disabled people we are

fishing in a smaller pool for the best possible talent. As a service organisation, we ought to

reflect the style, taste and opinions of our consumers, who of course represent sexes, all colours

and creeds, all ages and disabilities. The main point is that cultural diversity will strengthen the

quality of the company and will make us much more outward-looking.

However, Kirton and Greene

believe that the ‘business case’ should be broadened to

include wider issues of social justice and social responsibility. Liff and Cameron

argue

that organisational culture needs to radically shift to win the ‘hearts and minds rather

than just achieve reluctant compliance’. In their article, which uses women as their

illustration, they assert that there are real dangers in conventional equality measures.

Focusing on women as having special problems requiring special treatment results in

resentment and defensive attitudes from managers. They believe that one of the first

essential stages to enact change is to consider the organisational culture and the way in

which it could move to an equality culture. Further examination of equality practices

will be discussed at the end of this chapter.

Defining diversity

Valuing differences is easier said than done. It means relating and working with people

who hold different perspectives and views; bringing different qualities to the work-

place; having different aspirations and having different customs and traditions.

Differences are challenging; they challenge people’s views, perceptions and attitudes

and require individuals to see things from a different frame of reference. Managing

diversity does not mean that managers champion their own values and try and shift

other people’s values to conform and match their own! For Kandola and Fullerton diver-

sity is defined as:

The basic concept of managing diversity accepts that the workforce consists of a diverse popula-

tion of people. The diversity consists of visible and non-visible differences which will include sex,

age, background, race, disability, personality and workstyle. It is founded on the premise that

harnessing these differences will create a productive environment in which everybody feels

valued, where their talents are being fully utilised, and in which organisational goals are met.

Encouraging individuality and at the same time expecting group co-operation and

teamwork are potential triggers for tension. It requires managers to have greater

reserves of emotional intelligence if they are to be successful managers of diversity. In

turn this suggests that managers need to have an awareness of, and be able to get in

touch with, their own attitudes, values and beliefs – what they are and where they

come from. Clements and Jones recognise that the process can be uncomfortable:

A model of good diversity training will recognize that when people engage in an exploration of

their attitudes, values, beliefs and prejudices, this may be an uncomfortable process. Some will

find out things about themselves that will cause them emotional pain, and often the tension in

learners will relate to how they should respond.

Recognising and understanding the implications of emotions and being able to accu-

rately self-assess one’s inner resources, abilities and limits are key to becoming an

emotionally intelligent leader. Being able to read the emotional currents are important

skills for managers to develop and employ. It requires them to know and understand the

individuals within their teams and the way in which the individuals relate and interact.

At no time is this more important that when selecting a new member to join the

team. Recruiting and selecting committed company staff who offer valuable individ-

uality is a key to an organisation’s health and effectiveness. The criteria used to reject

or accept applicants are a major indicator of an organisation’s values and beliefs. The

selection process has been described as a ‘cultural sieve’

and as an important

CHAPTER 9 INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES

337

Significance of

emotional

intelligence

method of control.

Indeed Tom Peters

has suggested that organisations need to

review their selection requirements and, instead of checking that every minute of

every day is accounted for when appointing applicants, they should consider appli-

cants who have ‘broken out’ from the mould, rebelled from the system and thus

demonstrated original thought. Peters regards such personal qualities as key attrib-

utes for leading-edge organisations.

However, this individualistic approach contrasts with the notion that organisations

need team players who will be co-operative. As soon as the new recruits begin their

employment a ‘psychological contract’ is struck which forms the basis for obedience

and conformity expected of the employees by the company. The manager’s responsibil-

ity is to ensure that the socialisation process enables the new recruits to quickly learn

the rules of the system. Rewards, if given at this stage, for correct behaviour and atti-

tudes, will promote conformity and provide further incentives for the individuals to

match the organisation’s needs. (The recruitment and selection of staff is discussed in

Chapter 20.)

Recognition of good performers and performance is an essential part of the process of

management. Managing people in organisations requires not only an understanding of

the employees, but also a recognition of the culture of the organisation; for some

organisations, creativity and individuality may be the last thing they would want to

see between 9 and 5, but for others these characteristics are essential.

A discussion of individual behaviour in organisations is therefore riddled with com-

plexity and contradictions! Managers are required to be competent at selecting the

individuals who will be valuable to the organisation. They need to be observant about

the individuals who are performing well and have the potential to develop within the

organisation. They also need to be able to value difference and be sensitive to contrast-

ing needs. Finally managers need to know themselves and understand their own

uniqueness and the impact their personality has on others.

Sensitivity to individual needs and differences especially in terms of their resilience

becomes significant when organisations embark on change initiatives. Even when the

change appears to be relatively straightforward (e.g. introduction of a new computer

system) the reality is more likely to be messy and complex. When organisations are

working through change and when change appears to be externally imposed, the man-

agement of people takes on a different dimension in terms of the sensitivity required.

In this situation there is an implicit requirement of changes in attitudes and beliefs.

Such changes may lead to new mind-sets, new attitudes and new perceptions which

enable people to cope and adjust to the different world. At these times effective man-

agement is vital; managers will be expected to understand the strains that their

employees feel during times of change, but at the same time be able to deal with their

own stress levels.

This part of the book addresses the ways in which it is possible to differentiate

between individuals. Personality, the heart of individual differences, is explored first in

this chapter. The emotional demands required by organisations of their employees are

identified and discussed. There then follows an examination of the importance and

functions of attitudes. This leads to a discussion where we focus on the gender dimen-

sion in organisations. In addition to analysing the historical, psychological and societal

context we will also consider issues related to the implementation of equality practices.

An understanding of the ways in which people learn is fundamental to an appreciation

of individual differences and is considered in Chapter 10. The process of perception

and the impact of gender differences are examined in Chapter 11.

338

PART 4 THE INDIVIDUAL

Recognition of

individuality

Organisation

change and

individual

differences

Our sense of self is shaped by our inherited characteristics and by influences in our

social environment. The process of growing up – such as the impact of our early family

life, the country in which we live – has a significant part to play in our identity. Most

social scientists would agree that both inherited and environmental factors are impor-

tant in our development, and it is the way in which these factors interact which is the

key to our adult personality. However, scientists differ with regard to the weight they

place on these factors – some believing that our personality is heavily influenced by

our inherited characteristics and will never change, with others believing the reverse.

This section of the chapter will unpack the major theories of personality and will

look at the implications for organisations and managing people. Using psychometric

instruments to measure personality will be reviewed towards the end of the section.

But first, how do individuals differ?

■ Ethnic origin

■ Physique

■ Gender

■ Early family experiences

■ Social and cultural factors

■ National culture

■ Motivation

■ Attitudes

■ Personality traits and types

■ Intelligence and abilities

■ Perception

Some of these characteristics are shared with others, for example individuals who are

from the same ethnic group, or who have the same ability levels or who share similar

physical attributes such as short-sightedness. But our uniqueness stems from the

dynamic ways in which these inherited and environmental factors combine and inter-

act with each other.

What is meant by the term personality?

Psychologists have defined it as consisting of stable characteristics which explain why

a person behaves in a particular way. So for instance, independence, conscientiousness,

agreeableness, self-control would be examples of these personality characteristics.

However, it is only when we see/hear a person that we can gain an understanding of

their personality. So for instance a person who is independent may show that charac-

teristic by showing a strong sense of self-sufficiency. We would expect him or her to

take initiative and not to depend on other people. Furthermore, if the characteristic is

‘stable’ we can rely on this being a consistent part of the person’s behaviour. We would

be surprised if the person on one day demonstrated autonomy and initiative and on

the next withdrew and delayed any decisions. We anticipate that individuals are gener-

ally consistent in the way in which they respond to situations.

There are times when we might be surprised by somebody’s behaviour and we may

feel they are ‘acting out of character’. Of course this would only be known if we had an

understanding of their ‘typical behaviour’ in the first place. Individuals may exaggerate

CHAPTER 9 INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES

PERSONALITY

339

or suppress certain personality traits if they are under stress or influenced by

drink/drugs. It is self-evident that managers should have a keen interest in the charac-

teristics and behaviour of their team and should be able to discern when a team

member is behaving inconsistently.

Psychological research into personality can develop the manager’s skills in observing

and assessing personality and behaviour. Psychologists tend to specialise and focus

their research on one of the features listed above. Clearly, this is essential for scientific

enquiry but, when applying theories to people at work, it is important to remember

that a holistic view should be taken which takes into account the dynamic processes. If

we consider the interaction of a person with a high intelligence score and a strong

sense of honesty, the dynamics will result in a completely different set of behaviour

patterns to someone with high intelligence and a tendency towards dishonesty. We

could predict a very different set of attitudes too. To have a ‘whole’ understanding of

the individual at work, we must take into account the ways in which an individual’s

traits interact. We must go beyond the study of pure psychology and evaluate the

extent to which their studies can be applied in practice.

The application of theory to the world of work is not always easy and some students

find the process confusing when the theory does not match with their own experi-

ences. Psychological investigations emphasise the complexity and variety of individual

behaviour and insist that simple answers and explanations are generally inadequate.

Students may therefore have to adjust their attitudes and perceptions about the world

and for some this experience may be uncomfortable. The study of personality provides

an excellent example of some of the complexities involved in applying psychological

theory in practice.

Let us consider two individuals who share similar characteristics. They are both 24

years old, and have lived in the same area; both have a first class honours degree in

engineering and they have identical personality assessment profiles. However, we

would still predict differences with regard to their attitude and performance in the

workplace. In addition, differences would be predicted in the ways that they interacted

with others and in the ways that others interacted with them. If one of the engineers

was female and/or Asian, a further set of assumptions might start to appear. It is not

only the features themselves which identify individuals as being different but it is also

their interaction which leads to a unique pattern of behaviour. The complexities of the

process pose a number of interesting questions which psychologists have tried to solve

and in this context it is not surprising perhaps that differing theories and ideas have

evolved. (See Tables 9.1 and 9.2.)

340

PART 4 THE INDIVIDUAL

Dynamics –

the key to

understanding

personality

To what extent is our personality constant throughout life?

Solution (a) – Adaptable Solution (b) – Constant

If we consider the two young engineers described above, Perhaps the young engineers have a core-inherited part

it could be argued that the personality of each is a of their personality which has remained resistant to

culmination of experiences. Their personalities have been change. The way in which they have responded to the

shaped by the people around them from their very world has remained consistent with their true ‘self’.

earliest years. Early family life – the relationship between

family members, the size of the family, the rewards and

punishments exercised by parents – would have had an

influence on the type of person each is now. In other

words, the environment and early learning experiences

have contributed to their personality development.

Table 9.1 Dilemma 1 – The role of early experiences

Figure 9.1 identifies the links between the dynamics of personality and life’s

experiences.

The dilemmas described in Tables 9.1 and 9.2 focus on two major issues of prime

importance in the study of personality. First, is personality a constant throughout our

lifetime, which remains resistant to change and circumstances? Second, to what extent

can we measure and compare individuals on the basis of their personality? This second

question assumes that it is possible to distinguish personality characteristics in the first

place. Psychologists have produced various theories to solve both these dilemmas and

one of the ways of making sense of these theories is to see them working at different

levels. (See Table 9.3.)

CHAPTER 9 INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES

341

Is it possible to ‘measure’ an individual’s personality?

Solution (a) Yes, there are identifiable traits. Solution (b) No, personality is unique.

Identifying an individual’s personality typically refers to Do people always reveal their true ‘self’? Is it possible

distinguishing traits or types. For instance, Joe is an that circumstances may force them to behave in a way

introvert (type); he is placid, quiet and reflective. John, that is unlike their ‘typical’ behaviour? Or do people

however, is an extrovert (type); he is excitable, sociable choose to act in a certain way because they think it is

and loud. Personality traits are usually identified by appropriate? Is it possible to measure the ‘strength’ of a

what people do, the behaviour they exhibit. This is the trait? Can people reliably report on their own behaviour

way that all of us would normally describe another’s or is there a real difference between what people say

personality. Some psychologists, instead of watching and what people do? Instead of requiring individuals to

behaviour, ask questions about behaviour which the respond to set questions, it may be more appropriate to

individual answers on a paper questionnaire. They use open-ended techniques. This ensures that

would assert that asking a person to report on the way individuals use their own definitions, and allows for

they feel or behave is a legitimate way of assessing greater understanding about their motivations and

personality. These self-reporting questionnaires would causes of behaviour.

then be subject to quantitative methods. Thus,

psychologists have made it possible to quantify the

strength of a person’s trait and to enable comparisons

to be made with others. Such information then becomes

a basis for prediction. For example, if a person has a

high score on extroversion, it would be possible to

predict the way in which the individual might behave in

a given situation. These measuring techniques are

subject to some controversy.

Table 9.2 Dilemma 2 – Assessment of personality

Figure 9.1 To what extent does our personality remain constant?

Uniqueness

and

similarities

In a work context we tend to be more interested in understanding ‘what’ the person-

ality is like, rather than why it is as it is. Furthermore it is important to understand

how various personality characteristics relate to performance at work. The nomothetic

approach described next explores the ‘what’ of personality and the idiographic

approach enriches our understanding of ‘why’.

Broadly speaking, personality studies can be divided into two main approaches which

have been labelled nomothetic and idiographic.

Nomothetic approaches are primarily concerned with the collection of group data. This

means that such theorists accumulate evidence with regard to the identification of per-

sonality traits and produce effective measurements of the traits in order to draw

comparisons between individuals. Being able to predict behaviour is a major aim and

outcome of this approach. Researchers closely align themselves to studies which are

‘scientific’ in a positivistic sense. (The term positivism refers to the branch of science

which is exclusively based on the objective collection of observable data – data which

are beyond question.) Such an approach transfers methods used in natural sciences to

the social world.

Nomothetic approaches tend to view environmental and social influences as mini-

mal and view personality as consistent, largely inherited and resistant to change.

Although they would not diminish the difficulties that measuring personality brings,

nomothetic approaches would claim that it is possible to measure and predict the ways

in which personality types would behave given certain circumstances.

Nomothetic approaches would:

■ solve dilemma 1 with solution (b) in Table 9.1;

■ solve dilemma 2 with solution (a) in Table 9.2; and

■ focus on level 2 as described in Table 9.3.

Idiographic approaches are concerned with understanding the uniqueness of individuals

and the development of the self concept. They regard personality development as a

process which is open to change. They regard individuals as responding to the environ-

ment and people around them, and see the dynamics of the interactions as playing a

critical part in shaping personality. The measurement of traits is seen as largely inap-

342

PART 4 THE INDIVIDUAL

Level Psychologists’ research interests

Level 3

Common human aspirations

Universal human features

LEVEL 2

Identification, measurements,

Some shared features – gender; ability comparison (nomothetic)

LEVEL 1

‘Self’ – Unique interaction with

Unique combination of features the world (idiographic)

Table 9.3 Different levels of personality research

Roles

Wki i

NOMOTHETIC AND IDIOGRAPHIC APPROACHES

Nomothetic

approaches

Idiographic

approaches

propriate in that one person’s responses may not be comparable to another’s. They sug-

gest that personality assessment is not a valid method of understanding the unique

ways in which a person understands and responds to the world. The depth and rich-

ness of a person’s personality cannot be revealed in superficial paper-and-pencil

questionnaires. Furthermore, the categories defined by psychologists are too narrow in

scope and depth.

Idiographic approaches would:

■ solve dilemma 1 with solution (a) in Table 9.1;

■ solve dilemma 2 with solution (b) in Table 9.2; and

■ focus on level 1 as described in Table 9.3.

Some researchers do not fit easily into either of these two broad approaches. Freud, for

instance, is idiographic in the sense that he is interested in the self and its development,

but his theory does not allow for personality growth and change after childhood.

Kelly’s Personal Construct Theory also bridges the two approaches.

His theory will be

explored later in this chapter.

The approaches can be seen as complementary; indeed, it could be argued that dif-

ferent foci are important in understanding the many complicated facets of personality.

The two main theories discussed under this approach are:

■ Eysenck’s theory of main personality types; and

■ Cattell’s identification of personality traits.

Eysenck

Hans Eysenck followed a tradition of writers by applying the four basic types introduced

by Hippocrates: melancholic; sanguine; phlegmatic; and choleric. Eysenck’s approach

was influenced by the positivistic tradition; his aim was to produce objective evidence

of personality differences using large samples of the population. By investigating 700

servicemen, he was able to use rigorous statistical data to test his hypotheses.

His

findings supported the notion that there were two major differences which could be

measured: extroversion and stability (see Figure 9.2).

Individuals in Eysenck’s theory could, therefore, be one of four main personality

types. The type would lead to a predisposition of traits which would, itself, lead to the

likelihood of certain behaviours. For instance, a person typed as an extrovert would be

responsive and outgoing and in a new social situation s/he would predictably initiate

conversation among a group of strangers. Eysenck’s theory and his subsequent

Personality Inventory allowed identification of a personality type. From this description,

CHAPTER 9 INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES

343

Complementary

approaches

THEORETICAL APPROACHES: NOMOTHETIC

Figure 9.2 Eysenck’s personality types

it was possible to predict likely behaviours. Eysenck had a clear view about the constancy

of personality. He believed that personality was largely inherited and that introverts and

extroverts are born with differing physiological tendencies. Furthermore, he argued that

the personality we are born with is largely unalterable by environmental influences.

Although it could be argued that Eysenck’s theory is too simplistic in terms of the

number and range of types proposed, his theory has an impressive amount of support-

ing research evidence. His approach has immediate appeal to managers in organisations

who are concerned with predicting the future behaviour of their employees, either for

selection or promotion.

Furnham surmises whether personality changes if an individual is in a job that is ill-

suited to his/her personality. He cites research, which indicates that personality scores

change as a result of being exposed to a different and challenging environment.

Given the evidence that personality is a useful predictor of behaviour it is not surpris-

ing that the use of psychometric tests has grown substantially over the past decade and

that the majority of large companies use occupational tests.

(Further information

about testing is given later in this chapter.)

Cattell

Cattell’s work resembles Eysenck’s in the methods used to study personality. He used

quantitative, objective techniques in order to analyse his data (although he used a dif-

ferent factor analytic measure), and followed traditional scientific procedures in order

to understand the basic dimensions of personality.

Cattell used three main sources

for the collection of personality data.

1 L-data (life record data) – ratings by trained observers.

2 Q-data (self-rating questionnaire) – responses to a questionnaire which measured

personality traits (Cattell 16PF Questionnaire).

3 T-data (test data) – observations collected in specific situation tests.

The data collected were factor-analysed by Cattell resulting in the identification of two

main types of personality traits:

■ surface traits – which seem to cluster together consistently; and

■ source traits – which seem to underlie and determine the traits which are likely to

‘surface’ into behaviour.

Cattell identified 16 personality factors (or source traits). (See Table 9.4.)

Unlike Eysenck, he did not ‘type’ individuals but used ‘traits’ as his main personality

descriptor (although there is much similarity between Cattell’s second-order factors

and Eysenck’s ‘types’). They also differed with regard to the determinants of personal-

ity: Eysenck viewed the inherited physiological basis as the main determinant, whereas

Cattell was more interested in taking social factors into account when understanding

an individual’s personality. Both theorists have contributed to a lively debate about

personality structure and its measurement, and in doing so have advanced the selec-

tion techniques available to managers.

The Big Five

Identifying the personality traits, which seem to be particularly dominant in distin-

guishing individuals, has been the dominant subject of personality research in UK and

344

PART 4 THE INDIVIDUAL

Supporting

research

evidence

Personality

factors