Richard L. Daft - Management. 9th ed., 2010

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

PART 4 ORGANIZING370

Lawrence Otis Graham, 1.

Prover-

sity: Getting Past Face Values and

Finding the Soul of People (New

York: John Wiley & Sons, 1997).

Russ Wiles, “Businesses Encour-2.

age Employees to Learn Spanish,”

USA Today, December 7, 2007

http://www.usatoday.com/money/

workplace/2007-12-08-spanish_n

.htm?loc=interstitialskip (accessed

March 17, 2008).

Susan Caminiti, “The Diversity 3.

Factor,” Fortune (October 19, 2007):

95–105.

Gail Robinson and Kathleen 4.

Dechant, Academy of Management

Executive 11, no. 3 (1997): 26.

Michael L. Wheeler, “Diversity: The 5.

Performance Factor,” Harvard Busi-

ness Review (March 2005): S1–S7.

Ibid.6.

Caminiti, “The Diversity Factor.” 7.

M. Fine, F. Johnson, and M. S. 8.

Ryan, “Cultural Diversity in the

Workforce,” Public Personnel Man-

agement 19 (1990): 305–319.

Taylor H. Cox, “Managing Cul-9.

tural Diversity: Implications for

Organizational Competitive-

ness,” Academy of Management

Executive 5, no. 3 (1991): 45–56;

and Faye Rice, “How to Make

Diversity Pay,” Fortune (August 8,

1994): 78–86.

U.S. Department of Labor, Report 10.

of the Taskforce on the Aging of

the American Workforce, Febru-

ary, 2008, http://www.bls.gov

(accessed March 13, 2008).

The Bureau of Labor Statistics.11.

Ibid. 12.

Kimberly L. Allers with Nadira A. 13.

Hira, “The Diversity List,” Fortune

(August 22, 2005); Elizabeth

Wasserman, “A Race for Proﬁ ts,”

MBA Jungle (March–April 2003):

40–41; Amy Aronson, “Getting

Results: Corporate Diversity,

Integration, and Market Penetra-

tion,” special advertising section,

BusinessWeek (October 20, 2003).

Immigrant statistics from the 14.

U.S. Census Bureau reported

in “Census Numbers Show

Education Divide Among Im-

migrant Groups,” USA Today

(September 27, 2007), http://

www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/26/

census.immigrants.ap/index.

html?loc=interstitialskip (ac-

cessed August 25, 2008).

Joseph Daniel McCool, “Diversity 15.

Pledges Ring Hollow,” Business-

Week, February 28, 2008, http://

search.businessweek.com/Search?

searchTerm=diversity+pledges+

ring+hollow&resultsPerPage=20

(accessed March 11, 2008).

“On Diversity, America Isn’t Put-16.

ting Its Money Where Its Mouth

Is,” The Wall Street Journal, Febru-

ary 25, 2008.

Helen Bloom, “Can the U.S. 17.

Export Diversity?” Across the Board

(March/April 2002): 47–51.

Richard L. Daft, 18. The Leadership

Experience, (Cincinnati, OH:

Cengage Learning, 2008), p. 340.

Honeywell Web site, http://www19.

.honeywell.com (accessed March

4, 2008).

Michael L. Wheeler, “Diversity: 20.

Business Rationale and Strate-

gies,” The Conference Board, Re-

port No. 1130-95-RR, 1995, p. 14.

Ibid. 21.

Anthony Oshiotse and Rich-22.

ard O’Leary, “Corning Creates

an Inclusive Culture to Drive

Technology Innovation and

Performance,” Wiley InterScience

Global Business and Or

ganiza-

tional Excellence, 26 no. 3 (March/

April 2007): 10.

Elizabeth D. Macgillivray, H. 23.

Juanita M. Beecher, and Deirdre

Golden, “Legal Developments—

Religion at Work,” Wiley Inter-

Science (November/December

2007): 67.

UPS Web site, http://www.ups24.

.com/pressroom/us/awards/

citizenship (accessed March 6,

2008).

Taylor Cox, Jr., and Ruby L. Beale, 25.

Developing Competency to Manage

Diversity (San Francisco: Berrett-

Koehler Publishers, Inc., 1997),

p. 2.

Gail Robinson and Kathleen 26.

Dechant, “Building a Business

Case for Diversity,” Academy of

Management Executive 11, no. 3

(1997): 22.

Sonie Alleyne and Nicole Marie 27.

Richardson, “The 40 Best Compa-

nies for Diversity,” Black Enterprise

36, no. 12 (July 2006): 15.

Robinson and Dechant, “Building 28.

a Business Case for Diversity,” 27.

Ibid., 22.29.

Carol Hymowitz, “Coaching Men 30.

on Mentoring Women Is Ernst

& Young Partner’s Mission,” The

Wall Street Journal Online, June 14,

2007, www.wsj.com (accessed July

9, 2007).

Kris Maher, “Lockheed Settles 31.

Racial-Discrimination Suits,”

The Wall Street Journal Online,

January 3, 2008, http://

online.wsj.com/article_print/

SB119932555019663957.html

(accessed March 11, 2008).

“Diversity in the Federal Govern-32.

ment,” report of a roundtable dis-

cussion on “Addressing Diversity

Issues in the Government,” July

10, 2003, moderated by Omar

Wasow, executive director of

BlackPlanet.com, reported in

The New York Times Magazine

(September 14, 2003): 95–99.

Norma Carr-Rufﬁ no, 33. Managing

Diversity: People Skills for a

Multicultural Workplace (Tucson,

AZ: Thomson Executive Press,

1996), p. 92.

Roy Harris, “The Illusion of Inclu-34.

sion,” CFO (May 2001): 42–50.

Stephanie N. Mehta, “What 35.

Minority Employees Really Want,”

Fortune (June 10, 2000): 181–186.

Vivek Wadhwa, “The True Cost of 36.

Discrimination,” BusinessWeek,

June 6, 2006 http://www

.businessweek.com/smallbiz/

content/jun2006 (accessed

March 7, 2008).

Carr-Rufﬁ no, 37. Managing Diversity:

People Skills for a Multicultural

Workplace, pp. 98–99.

Cox and Beale, “Developing Com-38.

petency to Manage Diversity,”

p. 79.

Ibid, pp. 80–81.39.

Loriann Roberson and Carol T. 40.

Kulik, “Stereotype Threat at Work,”

Academy of Management Perspectives

21, no. 2 (May 2007): 25–27.

Ibid., 26.41.

ch12

ENDNOTES

CHAPTER 12 MANAGING DIVERSITY 371

Organizing

Robert Doktor, Rosalie Tung, and 42.

Mary Ann von Glinow, “Future

Directions for Management

Theory Development,” Academy

of Management Review 16 (1991):

362–365; and Mary Munter,

“Cross-Cultural Communication

for Managers,” Business Horizons

(May–June 1993): 69–78.

Renee Blank and Sandra Slipp, 43.

“The White Male: An Endangered

Species?” Management Review

(September 1994): 27–32; Michael

S. Kimmel, “What Do Men Want?”

Harvard Business Review

(November–December 1993):

50–63; and Sharon Nelton, “Nur-

turing Diversity,” Nation’s Business

(June 1995): 25–27.

Jim Carlton, “Dig In,” 44. The Wall

Street Journal (November 14,

2005); Tony DiRomualdo, “Is

Google’s Cafeteria a Competitive

Weapon?” Wisconsin Technology

Network (August 30, 2005), http://

wistechnology.com/article

.php?id=2190; Marc Ramirez, “Tray

Chic: At Work, Cool Cafeterias,

Imaginative Menus,” The Seattle

Times, November 21, 2005, http://

seattletimes.nwsource.com/

html/living/2002634266_cafes21

.html?pageid=display-in-the-

news.module&pageregion=itn-

body.

Marianne Bertrand and Sendhil 45.

Mullainathan, “Are Emily and

Greg More Employable than

Lakisha and Jamal?” National

Bureau of Economic Research re-

port, as reported in L. A. Johnson,

“What’s in a Name: When Emily

Gets the Job Over Lakisha,” The

Tennessean, January 4, 2004.

Marie Valla, “France Seeks Path 46.

to Workplace Diversity,” The Wall

Street Journal, January 3, 2007.

Alice H. Eagly and Linda L. Carli, 47.

“Leadership,” Harvard Business

Review (September, 2007): 64.

Sheila Wellington, Marcia Brumit 48.

Kropf, and Paulette R. Gerkovich,

“What’s Holding Women Back?”

Harvard Business Review (June

2003): 18–19.

Julie Amparano Lopez, “Study 49.

Says Women Face Glass Walls as

Well as Ceilings,” The Wall Street

Journal, March 3, 1992; Ida L.

Castro, “Q: Should Women Be

Worried About the Glass Ceiling

in the Workplace?” Insight

(February 10, 1997): 24–27; Debra

E. Meyerson and Joyce K. Fletcher,

“A Modest Manifesto for Shat-

tering the Glass Ceiling,” Harvard

Business Review (January–February

2000): 127–136; and Wellington,

Brumit Kropf, and Gerkovich,

“What’s Holding Women Back?”;

Annie Finnigan, “Different

Strokes,” Working Woman (April

2001): 42–48.

Catalyst survey results reported 50.

in Jason Forsythe, “Winning with

Diversity,” The New York Times

Magazine (March 28, 2004): 65–72.

Eagly and Carli, “Leadership,” 64.51.

Jory Des Jardins, “I Am Woman 52.

(I Think),” Fast Company (May

2005): 25–26; Lisa Belkin, “The

Opt-Out Revolution,” The New

York Times Magazine (October 26,

2003): 43–47, 58; Finnigan,

“Different Strokes,” 42–48; and

Meyerson and Fletcher, “A Mod-

est Manifesto for Shattering the

Glass Ceiling.”

Statistics from the U.S. Census 53.

Bureau, Current Population Sur-

vey, 2004 Annual Social and Eco-

nomic Supplement, as reported in

“2003 Median Annual Earnings

by Race and Sex,” http://www

.infoplease.com/ipa/A0197814.

html; and “The Economics of

Gender and Race: Examining the

Wage Gap in the United States,”

The Feminist Majority Founda-

tion Choices Campus Campaign,

http://www.feministcampus.org.

Cliff Edwards, “Coming Out in 54.

Corporate America,” BusinessWeek

(December 15, 2003): 64–72; Belle

Rose Ragins, John M. Cornwell,

and Janice S. Miller, “Heterosex-

ism in the Workplace: Do Race

and Gender Matter?” Group &

Organization Management 28, no. 1

(March 2003): 45–74.

Sylvia Ann Hewlett and Carolyn 55.

Buck Luce, “Off-Ramps and On-

Ramps; Keeping Talented Women

on the Road to Success,” Harvard

Business Review (March 2005):

43–54.

Belkin, “The Opt-Out Revolution.”56.

C. J. Prince, “Media Myths: The 57.

Truth About the Opt-Out Hype,”

NAFE Magazine (Second Quar-

ter 2004): 14–18; Patricia Sellers,

“Power: Do Women Really Want

It?” Fortune (October 13, 2003):

80–100.

Jia Lynn Yang, “Goodbye to All 58.

That,” Fortune (November 14,

2005): 169–170.

Sheila Wellington, Marcia Brumit 59.

Kropf, and Paulette R. Gerkovich,

“What’s Holding Women Back?”

Harvard Business Review (June

2003): 18–19.

The Leader’s Edge/Executive 60.

Women Research 2002 survey,

reported in “Why Women Leave,”

Executive Female (Summer

2003): 4.

Barbara Reinhold, “Smashing 61.

Glass Ceilings: Why Women

Still Find It Tough to Advance to

the Executive Suite,” Journal of

Organizational Excellence (Sum-

mer 2005): 43–55; Des Jardins, “I

Am Woman (I Think)”; and Alice

H. Eagly and Linda L. Carli, “The

Female Leadership Advantage:

An Evaluation of the Evidence,”

The Leadership Quarterly 14

(2003): 807–834.

Claudia H. Deutsch, “Behind the 62.

Exodus of Executive Women:

Boredom,” USA Today, May 2,

2005.

Eagly and Carli, “The Female 63.

Leadership Advantage”;

Reinhold, “Smashing Glass

Ceilings”; Sally Helgesen, The

Female Advantage: Women’s Ways

of Leadership (New York: Double-

day Currency, 1990); Rochelle

Sharpe, “As Leaders, Women Rule:

New Studies Find that Female

Managers Outshine Their Male

Counterparts in Almost Every

Measure,” BusinessWeek (Novem-

ber 20, 2000): 5ff; and Del Jones,

“2003: Year of the Woman Among

the Fortune 500?” (December 30,

2003): 1B.

Tamar Lewin, “At Colleges, 64.

Women Are Leaving Men in

the Dust,” The New York Times

Online, July 9, 2006, http://

www.nytimes.com/2006/07/09/

education/09college.html?_

r=1&scp=1&sq=at%20colleges,

%20women%20are%20leav-

ing%20men%20in%20the%20

dust&st=cse&oref=slogin

(accessed March 13, 2008).

Alex Kingsbury, “Admittedly Un-65.

equal,” U.S. News & World Report

(June 25, 2007): 50.

PART 4 ORGANIZING372

Michelle Conlin, “The New Gen-66.

der Gap,” and Michelle Conlin, “A

Better Education Equals Higher

Pay,” BusinessWeek (May 26, 2003):

74–82.

Quoted in Conlin, “The New 67.

Gender Gap.”

Kathryn M. Bartol, David C. 68.

Martin, and Julie A. Kromkowski,

“Leadership and the Glass Ceil-

ing: Gender and Ethnic Group

Inﬂ uences on Leader Behaviors at

Middle and Executive Managerial

Levels,” The Journal of Leadership

and Organizational Studies 9, no. 3

(2003): 8–19; Bernard M. Bass and

Bruce J. Avolio, “Shatter the Glass

Ceiling: Women May Make Better

Managers,” Human Resource Man-

agement 33, no. 4 (Winter 1994):

549–560; and Rochelle Sharpe, “As

Leaders, Women Rule,” 75–84.

Dwight D. Frink, Robert K. 69.

Robinson, Brian Reithel, Michelle

M. Arthur, Anthony P. Ammeter,

Gerald R. Ferris, David M. Kaplan,

and Hubert S. Morrisette, “Gender

Demography and Organiza-

tion Performance: A Two-Study

Investigation with Convergence,”

Group & Organization Management

28, no. 1 (March 2003): 127–147;

Catalyst research project cited in

Reinhold, “Smashing Glass

Ceilings.”

Mercedes Martin and Billy Vaughn 70.

(2007), Strategic Diversity & Inclu-

sion Management, pp. 31–36.

Ann M. Morrison, 71. The New Lead-

ers: Guidelines on Leadership

Diversity in America (San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers,

1992), p. 235.

Michael L. Wheeler, “Diversity: 72.

Business Rationale and Strate-

gies,” The Conference Board, Re-

port No. 1130-95-RR, 1995, p. 25.

Alleyne and Richardson, “The 40 73.

Best Companies for Diversity,”

100.

Morrison, “74. The New Leaders.”

Reported in “Strength Through 75.

Diversity for Bottom-Line Suc-

cess,” Working Woman (March

1999).

Finnigan, “Different Strokes.”76.

“Diversity in an Afﬁ liated Com-77.

pany,” cited in Vanessa J. Weaver,

“Winning with Diversity,” Busi-

nessWeek (September 10, 2001).

Melanie Trottman, “A Helping 78.

Hand,” The Wall Street Journal,

November 14, 2005; B. Ragins,

“Barriers to Mentoring: The

Female Manager’s Dilemma,”

Human Relations 42, no. 1 (1989):

1–22; and Belle Rose Ragins,

Bickley Townsend, and Mary

Mattis, “Gender Gap in the Ex-

ecutive Suite: CEOs and Female

Executives Report on Breaking

the Glass Ceiling,” Academy of

Management Executive 12, no. 1

(1998): 28–42.

Trottman, “A Helping Hand.”79.

David A. Thomas, “The Truth 80.

About Mentoring Minorities—

Race Matters,” Harvard Business

Review (April 2001): 99–107.

Mary Zey, “A Mentor for All,” 81.

Personnel Journal (January 1988):

46–51.

Joanne Sujansky, “Lead a Multi-82.

Generational Workforce,” The

Business Journal of Tri-Cities,

Tennessee–Virginia (February 2004):

21–23.

“Keeping Your Edge: Managing 83.

a Diverse Corporate Culture,”

Fortune (June 3, 2001).

Kimberly L. Allers, “Won’t It Be 84.

Grand When We Don’t Need

Diversity Lists?” Fortune (August

22, 2005): 101.

J. Black and M. Mendenhall, 85.

“Cross-Cultural Training Ef-

fectiveness: A Review and a

Theoretical Framework for Future

Research,” Academy of Manage-

ment Review 15 (1990): 113–136.

Laura Egodigwe, “Back to Class,”

86.

The Wall Street Journal, No

vem-

ber 14, 2005.

Lee Smith, “Closing the Gap,” 87.

Fortune (November 14, 2005):

211–218.

“Sexual Harassment: Vanderbilt 88.

University Policy” (Nashville, TN:

Vanderbilt University, 1993).

Rachel Thompson, “Sexual 89.

Harassment: It Doesn’t Go with

the Territory,” Horizons 15, no. 3

(Winter 2002): 22–26.

Statistics reported in Jim Mulligan 90.

and Norman Foy, “Not in My

Company: Preventing Sexual Ha-

rassment,” Industrial Management

(September/October 2003): 26–29;

also see EEOC Charge Complaints,

http://www.eeoc.gov.

Jack Corcoran, “Of Nice and Men,” 91.

Success (June 1998): 65–67.

Barbara Carton, “At Jenny Craig, 92.

Men Are Ones Who Claim Sex

Discrimination,” The Wall Street

Journal, November 29, 1994.

“Impact of Diversity Initiatives 93.

on the Bottom Line: A SHRM

Survey of the Fortune 1000”

(pp. S12–S14), in Fortune, “Keep-

ing Your Edge: Managing a

Diverse Corporate Culture,”

produced in association with

the Society for Human Resource

Management (June 3, 2001),

http://www.fortune.com/sections.

Joseph J. Distefano and Martha L. 94.

Maznevski, “Creating Value with

Diverse Teams in Global Manage-

ment,” Organizational Dynamics

29, no. 1 (Summer 2000): 45–63;

and Finnigan, “Different

Strokes.”

W. E. Watson, K. Kumar, and L. K. 95.

Michaelsen, “Cultural Diversity’s

Impact on Interaction Process

and Performance: Comparing

Homogeneous and Diverse Task

Groups,” Academy of Management

Journal 36 (1993): 590–602; G.

Robinson and K. Dechant, “Build-

ing a Business Case for Diversity,”

Academy of Management Executive

11, no. 3 (1997): 21–31; and D.

A. Thomas and R. J. Ely, “Mak-

ing Differences Matter: A New

Paradigm for Managing Diversity,”

Harvard Business Review

(September–October 1996): 79–90.

Marc Hequet, Chris Lee, Michele 96.

Picard, and David Stamps, “Teams

Get Global,” Training (December

1996): 16–17.

See Distefano and Maznevski, 97.

“Creating Value with Diverse

Teams” for a discussion of the

advantages of multicultural teams.

Watson, Kumar, and Michaelsen, 98.

“Cultural Diversity’s Impact

on Interaction Process and

Performance.”

Distefano and Maznevski, “Creat-99.

ing Value with Diverse Teams.”

This deﬁ nition and discussion is 100.

based on Raymond A. Friedman,

“Employee Network Groups:

Self-Help Strategy for Women

and Minorities,” Performance

Improvement Quarterly 12, no. 1

(1999): 148–163.

Raymond A. Friedman and Brooks 101.

Holtom, “The Effects of Network

Groups on Minority Employee

Turnover Intentions,” Human

Resource Management 41, no. 4

(Winter 2002): 405–421.

CHAPTER 12 MANAGING DIVERSITY 373

Organizing

Diane Brady and Jena McGregar, 102.

“What Works in Women’s Net-

works,” BusinessWeek (June 18,

2007): 58.

Wasserman, “A Race for Proﬁ ts.”103.

Finnigan, “Different Strokes.”104.

Raymond A. Friedman, Melinda 105.

Kane, and Daniel B. Cornﬁ eld,

“Social Support and Career Opti-

mism: Examining the Effectiveness

of Network Groups Among Black

Managers,” Human Relations 51,

no. 9 (1998): 1155–1177;

“Diversity in the New Millennium,”

Working Woman (March 2000).

374

ContinuingCasept4

General Motors

Part Four: Organizing

Diversity Equals Opportunity at

General Motors

William “Billy” Durant and Henry Ford are celebrated

founders of the two greatest automobile companies

in America’s history: General Motors (GM) and Ford

Motor Company. Ford was the famous inventor who

introduced the Model T, the world’s  rst affordable

automobile. Durant was an entrepreneur whose Flint,

Michigan, carriage business manufactured a vari-

ety of luxury models and farm wagons for diverse

customers.

Although both were pioneers of the auto industry,

their approaches could not have been more different.

Whereas Ford remained focused on one brand and one

vehicle, Durant dreamed of a whole family of car com-

panies, each producing different models for different

kinds of consumers and needs. Not satis ed owning

only GM Buick in 1908, Durant proceeded to acquire

Oldsmobile, Cadillac, and Oakland Motor Car Com-

pany. (Pontiac), among others, bringing them under

one roof alongside Chevrolet, which he co-founded on

the side.

The story of William Durant is a powerful meta-

phor for the spirit of diversity that infuses the work

and culture of GM today. In the global marketplace,

managers interact with people of different cultures,

languages, beliefs, and values. Recognizing diver-

sity, and the unique way people with different back-

grounds interact and communicate, is key to success in

the international arena.

As GM celebrates 100 years of auto manufactur-

ing greatness, its workforce is increasingly made up of

people of all ethnicities and walks of life. The company

is home to a variety of employee-resource groups,

including the African Ancestry Network, the His-

panic Initiative Team, the Native American Cultural

Network, the People with Disabilities Group, and the

Veteran’s Af nity Group. Employees who join these

special support groups discover a wealth of resources

for career and personal development.

By promoting a workforce that is as diverse as its

customer base, GM brings a broad range of ideas and

voices to bear on tough business challenges. “By valu-

ing and respecting differences and similarities in the

workplace, we will be in a better position to win in

the marketplace,” said Rod Gillum, vice president of

corporate responsibility and diversity at GM. “It is our

goal to recruit and retain diverse talent that re ects our

global customers and to create an environment where

everyone can fully contribute in creating great GM

products and services.”

The top automaker has made great strides toward

Gillum’s goal. DiversityInc magazine ranks GM among

its Top 50 Companies for Diversity. The magazine

writes that GM shows “unbiased retention” in hiring

people of all races, ethnicities, and gender—and at all

levels of the organization. To appear in the magazine’s

rankings, companies must demonstrate a commitment

to diversity in four areas: CEO commitment, human

capital, organizational communications, and supplier

diversity.

Cultivating a broad multinational workforce means

eliminating glass ceilings that discourage groups from

participating fully in the company. Edward T. Welburn

is GM’s vice president of global design, heading up a

multinational division with 11 design centers around

the world. Appointed in 2005, Welburn is the sixth per-

son to hold this position, and the  rst African-American.

Under his leadership, GM uni ed its design efforts

worldwide by establishing coordinated collaboration

between 1,900 designers in eight countries. The results

speak for themselves. Whether it’s the sleek luxury of

the Cadillac CTS or the retrospective cool of the 2010

Chevy Camaro, GM’s most exciting new concepts are

developing rapidly under Welburn’s watchful eye.

Hired by GM in 1972, Welburn appears to have been

born for the job. “All I ever wanted to do was design

cars,” the design chief says.

Yet for any diversity initiative to thrive in an orga-

nization, it must have support all the way to the top.

CEO Rick Wagoner understands the challenges of the

new millennium as well as diversity’s role in meeting

those challenges. “At General Motors, we know that

to succeed in today’s global marketplace, we need a

diverse workforce, one that brings together a wide

range of talents, ideas, experiences, and perspectives.”

Questions

1. What do you think are the most compelling

advantages of diversity pr

esented here?

2. What challenges do managers face in creating a

diverse workplace, and how might they respond

to these challenges?

3. Do you think that GM’s encouragement of

employee networks always leads to a culture of

diversity and cooperation? Explain.

SOURCES: Bryce G. Hoffman, “Legendary Execs: 7 Notable Presidents

Who Helped Shape GM,” The Detroit News, August 30, 2008, http://

375

Organizing

www.detnews.com (accessed October 13 2008); David Phillips, “Legacy

of Innovation,” The Detroit News, September 16, 2008, http://www

.detnews.com (accessed October 15, 2008); General Motors, “African

Americans Take the Driver’s Seat in GM Product Development,” The

Inside Scoop, vol. 1, no. 2 (February 2007), http://www.gmdynamic

.com/newsletter/diversity/feb_07/feb-stry1.html (accessed October 14,

2008); Katie Merx, “GM Turns 100 with Focus on Future,” USA Today,

January 1, 2008, http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2008-01-01-

gm-birthday_N.htm (accessed October 13, 2008); “2008 DiversityInc

Top 50 Companies for Diversity: General Motors” DiversityInc (June 2,

2008), http://www.diversityinc.com/public/3335.cfm (accessed October

13, 2008); General Motors, “Leadership from a Design Perspective—

GM Design Chief Addresses Entrepreneurs’ Conference,” The Inside

Scoop, vol. 2, no. 6 (June 2008), http://www.gmdynamic.com/newslet-

ter/diversity/june_08/story2.html (accessed October 14, 2008); General

Motors Web site, “Senior Leadership Group: Edward T. Welburn Jr.,

GM Vice President, Global Design,” http://www.gm.com/corporate/

investor_information/corp_gov/bios/welburn.jsp (accessed October 14,

2008).

chapter13pt5

Learning Outcomes

Chapter Outline

After studying this chapter, you should be able to:

1. Deﬁ

ne attitudes and explain their relationship to personality, percep-

tion, and behavior.

2. Discuss the importance of work-related attitudes.

3. Identify major personality traits and describe how personality can inﬂ u-

ence workplace attitudes and behaviors.

4. Deﬁ

ne the four components of emotional intelligence and explain why

they are important for today’s managers.

5. Explain how people learn in general and in terms of individual learning

styles.

6. Discuss the effects of stress and identify ways individuals and organiza-

tions can manage str

ess to improve employee health, satisfaction, and

productivity.

Are You Self-Conﬁ dent?

Organizational Beha

vior

Attitudes

Components of Attitudes

High-P

erformance Work Attitudes

Conﬂ icts Among Attitudes

Perception

Perceptual Selectivity

erceptual Distortions

Attributions

Personality and Behavior

Personality Traits

Emotional Int

elligence

Attitudes and Behaviors Inﬂ uenced

by Personality

New Manager Self-Test: What’s Your EQ?

Person–Job Fit

Learning

The Learning Process

Learning Styles

Stress and Stress Management

Type A and Type B Behavior

Causes of W

ork Stress

Innovative Responses to Stress

Management

377

Dynamics of Behavior

in Organizations

Controlling

Planning

Environment

Organizing

Leading

Introduction

ARE YOU SELF-CONFIDENT?

Self-conﬁ dence is the foundation for many important

behaviors of a new manager. To learn something about

your level of self-conﬁ dence, answer the following ques-

tions. Please answer whether each item is Mostly True or

Mostly False for you.

Mostly

True

Mostly

False

1. I have lots of conﬁ dence in my

decisions.

2. I would like to change some

things about myself.

3. I am satisﬁ ed with my appearance

and personality.

4. I would be nervous about meeting

important people.

5. I come across as a positive

person.

6. I sometimes think of myself as a

failure.

7. I am able to do things as well as

most people.

8. I ﬁ nd it difﬁ cult to believe nice

things someone says about me.

SCORING AND INTERPRETATION: Many good things

come from self-conﬁ dence. How self-conﬁ dent are you?

Give yourself one point for each odd-numbered item above

marked as Mostly True and one point for each even-

numbered item marked Mostly False. If you scored three

or less, your self-conﬁ dence may not be very high. You

might want to practice new behavior in problematic areas

to develop greater conﬁ dence. A score of 6 or above sug-

gests a high level of self-conﬁ dence and a solid founda-

tion on which to begin your career as a new manager.

If a new manager lacks self-conﬁ dence, he or she is

more likely to avoid difﬁ cult decisions and confronta-

tions and may tend to overcontrol subordinates, which

is called micromanaging. A lack of self-conﬁ dence also

leads to less sharing of information and less time hiring

and developing capable people. Self-conﬁ dent managers,

by contrast, can more easily delegate responsibility, take

risks, give credit to others, confront problems, and assert

themselves for the good of their team.

Managers’ attitudes, personality characteristics, values, and personal qualities

such as self-con dence affect their behavior, including how they handle work situa-

tions and relate to others. These characteristics can profoundly affect the workplace

and in uence employee motivation, morale, and job performance. Equally important

is managers’ ability to understand others. Insight into why people behave the way

they do is a part of good management.

People are an organization’s most valuable resource—and the source of some of

managers’ most dif cult problems. Individuals differ in many ways. Some are quiet

and shy while others are gregarious; some are perpetual optimists while others tend

to look at the negative side of things. People bring their individual differences to

work each day, and these differences in attitudes, personality, and so forth in uence

how they interpret assignments, whether they like to be told what to do, how they

handle challenges, and how they interact with others.

Three basic leadership skills are at the core of identifying and solving people

problems: (1) diagnosing, or gaining insight into the situation a manager is trying

to in uence, (2) adapting individual behavior and resources to meet the needs of the

situation, and (3) communicating in a way that others can understand and accept.

Thus, managers need a grounding in the principles of organizational behavior—that

is, the ways individuals and groups tend to act in organizations. By increasing their

knowledge of individual differences in the areas of attitudes, personality, perception,

learning, and stress management, managers can understand and lead employees and

colleagues through many workplace challenges. This chapter introduces basic prin-

ciples of organizational behavior in each of these areas.

PART 5 LEADING378

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

Organizational behavior, commonly called OB, is an interdisciplinary  eld ded-

icated to the study of human attitudes, behavior, and performance in organiza-

tions. OB draws concepts from many disciplines, including psychology, sociology,

cultural anthropology, industrial engineering, economics, ethics, and vocational

counseling, as well as the discipline of management. The concepts and principles

of organizational behavior are important to managers because in every organiza-

tion human beings ultimately make the decisions that control how the organiza-

tion acquires and uses resources. Those people may cooperate with, compete with,

support, or undermine one another. Their beliefs and feelings about themselves,

their coworkers, and the organization shape what they do and how well they do

it. People can distract the organization from its strategy by engaging in con ict

and misunderstandings, or they can pool their diverse talents and perspectives to

accomplish much more as a group than they could ever do as individuals.

Organizational citizenship refers to the tendency of people to help one another

and put in extra ef

fort that goes beyond job requirements to contribute to the orga-

nization’s success. An employee demonstrates organizational citizenship by being

helpful to coworkers and customers, doing extra work when necessary, and look-

ing for ways to improve products and procedures. These behaviors enhance the

organization’s performance and contribute to positive relationships both within the

organization and with customers. Managers can encourage organizational citizen-

ship by applying their knowledge of human behavior, such as selecting people with

positive attitudes, managing different personalities, putting people in jobs where

they can thrive, and enabling employees to cope with and learn from workplace

challenges.

ATTITUDES

Most students have probably heard the expression that someone “has an attitude

problem,” which means some consistent quality about the person affects his or her

behavior in a negative way. An employee with an attitude problem might be hard to

get along with, might constantly gripe and cause problems, and might persistently

resist new ideas. We all seem to know intuitively what an attitude is, but we do not

consciously think about how strongly attitudes affect our

behavior. De ned formally, an attitude is an evaluation—

either positive or negative—that predisposes a person to

act in a certain way. Understanding employee attitudes

is important to managers because attitudes determine

how people perceive the work environment, interact

with others, and behave on the job. Emerging research

is revealing the importance of positive attitudes to both

individual and organizational success. For example,

studies have found that the characteristic most common

to top executives is an optimistic attitude. People rise to

the top because they have the ability to see opportuni-

ties where others see problems and can instill in others a

sense of hope and possibility for the future.

Managers strive to develop and reinforce positive

attitudes among all employees, because happy, posi-

tive people are healthier, more effective, and more pro-

ductive.

Some companies, such as David’s Bridal, the

nation’s largest bridal store chain, are applying scien-

ti c research to improve employee attitudes—and sales

performance.

JetBlue founder David Neeleman illus-

trates the positive attitude and optimism that are common traits of

successful leaders. Neeleman was shocked when the board of directors

of JetBlue removed him as CEO after the highly reported stranding of

131,000 passengers during the 2007 Valentine’s Day ice storm. At the

time, Neeleman said he would never found another airline, but now

he is launching a new low-cost carrier, Azul (Portuguese for blue) in

Brazil. “Every time a door closes, another one opens up,” Neeleman

says. “And so I’m excited to be off to the country of my birth to start

something new.”

org

anizational behavior

terdisciplinar

ﬁ eld dedicate

e stu

ow in

ivi

rou

ten

to act in

rganizational citizenship

ork behavior that

oes

requirements an

ntri

utes as nee

to t

ganization’s success

att

A co

nitive and

fective evaluation that pre

poses a person to act in a

tai

n wa

CHAPTER 13 DYNAMICS OF BEHAVIOR IN ORGANIZATIONS 379

Leading

Planning a wedding can be one of the most joyful experiences in a woman’s life—and one

of the most nerve-wracking. The salespeople at David’s Bridal, a 267-store chain owned by

Federated Department Stores, bear the brunt of these intense emotions. For many, dealing

with those emotions can be overwhelming and exhausting, translating into negative attitudes

and impatience with already-stressed customers.

Managers turned to new research on happiness to help employees cope and develop

more positive attitudes. In a pilot training program based on the work of psychologist Mar-

tin Seligman, salespeople were taught how to feel more cheerful with techniques such as

“emotion regulation,” “impulse control,” and “learned optimism.” These techniques enable

salespeople to be more calm and centered with harried, indecisive brides-to-be, which helps

customers stay calm and centered as well. The constructive behavior translates into better

sales, meaning employees make better commissions, which in turn contributes to more posi-

tive attitudes toward the job.

As this example shows, sometimes negative attitudes can result from characteris-

tics of the job, such as a high stress level, but managers can  nd ways to help people

have better attitudes. Managers should pay attention to negative attitudes because

they can be both the result of underlying problems in the workplace as well as a con-

tributor to forthcoming problems.

Components of Attitudes

One important step for managers is recognizing and understanding the compo-

nents of attitudes, which is particularly important when attempting to change

attitudes.

Behavioral scientists consider attitudes to have three components: cognitions

(thoughts), affect (feelings), and behavior.

The cognitive component of an attitude

includes the beliefs, opinions, and information the person has about the object of the

attitude, such as knowledge of what a job entails and opinions about personal abili-

ties. The affective component is the person’s emotions or feelings about the object

of the attitude, such as enjoying or hating a job. The behavioral component of an

attitude is the person’s intention to behave toward the object of the attitude in a cer-

tain way. Exhibit 13.1 illustrates the three components of a positive attitude toward

one’s job. The cognitive element is the conscious thought that “my job is interesting

and challenging.” The affective element is the feeling that “I love this job.” These ele-

ments, in turn, are related to the behavioral component—an employee might arrive

at work early because he or she is happy with the job.

The emotional (affective) component is often the stronger factor in affecting behav-

ior, so managers should be aware of situations that involve strong feelings. However,

as a general rule, changing just one component—cognitions, affect, or behavior—can

contribute to an overall change in attitude. Suppose a manager concludes that some

employees have the attitude that the manager should make all the decisions affecting

the department, but the manager prefers that employees assume more decision-making

responsibility. To change the underlying attitude, the manager would consider whether

to educate employees about the areas in which they can make good decisions (chang-

ing the cognitive component), build enthusiasm with pep talks about the satisfaction

of employee empowerment (changing the affective component), or simply insist that

employees make their own decisions (behavioral component) with the expectation

that, once they experience the advantages of decision-making authority, they will begin

to like it.

As a new manager, be mindful of your own attitude and how it affects people who

work for you. A positive attitude can go a long way toward helping others feel good

about themselves and their work responsibilities. If you want to change employees’

attitudes, don’t underestimate the strength of the emotions.

David’s Bridal

Innovative Way

TakeaMoment