ent4050 dynamic organizing · dedreu, c., & weingart, l. (2003b). a contingency theory of task...
TRANSCRIPT
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
ENT4050 Dynamic Organizing
Centre for Entrepreneurship
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
Team Decision-Making Pitfalls
• Groupthink• Escalation of commitment• Abilene paradox• Group polarization• Unethical decision making
CHAPTER 7
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
Exhibit 7-1. Team Process and Outcomes
Failure Outcome Successful Outcome
Flawed process Predictable failure “Lucky”· Nonreplicable success
Vigilant process “Unlucky” Predictable Success· Best condition for replicable success
CHAPTER 7
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
Exhibit 7-2. A Rational Model of Group Decision Making
CHAPTER 7
Orientation
Define the problemSet goalPlan the process
Discussion
Gather informationIdentify alternativesEvaluate alternatives
Decision Making
Choose group solution
Implementation
Adhere to the decisionEvaluate the decisionSeek feedback
Forsyth, D. (1990). Group dynamics (2nd ed., p. 286). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
Symptoms of Groupthink
• Incomplete survey of alternatives• Incomplete survey of objectives• Failure to reexamine alternatives• Failure to examine preferred choices• Selection bias• Poor information search• Failure to create contingency plans
CHAPTER 7
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
Avoiding Groupthink
• Monitor team size• Provide face-saving mechanism for teams• Risk technique• Invite different perspectives• Appoint a devil’s advocate• Structure discussion principles• Establish procedures for protecting alternative viewpoints• Second solution• Beware of time pressure
CHAPTER 7
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
Exhibit 7-8. Escalation of Commitment
CHAPTER 7
Questionable or Negative Outcomes
Reexamination of Current Course of Action
Perceived Utility of Current Course of Action
Perceived Utility of Withdrawal and/or Change
Commitment to Current Course of Action
Withdrawal and Assumption of Losses
Continued Failure
Low
High
Source: Adapted from Ross, J., & Staw, B. M. (1993). Organizational escalation and exit: Lessons from the Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant. Academy of Management Journal, 701–73
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
Escalation of Commitment
• Project determinants• Psychological determinants• Social determinants• Structural determinants• Avoiding the escalation of commitment problem
• Set limits• Avoid the bystander effect• Avoid tunnel vision• Recognize sunk costs• Avoid bad mood• External review
CHAPTER 7
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
Key Causes of Self-Limiting Behavior in Teams
• Presence of someone with expertise• Presentation of a compelling argument• Lack of confidence in one’s ability to contribute• Unimportant or meaningless decision• Pressure from others to conform to team’s decision• Dysfunctional decision-making climate
CHAPTER 7
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
Avoiding the Abilene Paradox
• Confront the issue in a team setting• Conduct a private vote• Minimize status differences• Frame task as a decision to be made• Provide formal forum for controversial views• Take responsibility for failure
CHAPTER 7
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
Group Polarization
• Risky shift• Cautious shift• Explanations
• The need to be right• The need to be liked• Conformity pressures
CHAPTER 7
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
Exhibit 7-12. Group Polarization
CHAPTER 7
Group polarization processes. Imagine that Group 1 includes Person A (who chose 1), Person B (who chose 3), and Persons C and D (who both chose 5); the average of pregroup choices would be (1 + 3 + 5 + 5)/4, or 3.5. Because this mean is less than 5, a risky shift would probably occur in Group 1. If, in contrast, Group 2 contained Persons C, D, E and F, their pregroup average would be (5 +5 + 7 + 9)/4 or 6.5. Because this mean is closer to the caution pole, a conservative shift would probably occur in the group.
1 3 5 7 9Risk Caution
BA D EC & D
Group 1 mean
Group 2 mean
Risky shift Cautious shift
Source: Adapted from Janis, I. L. (1982). Victims of groupthink (2nc ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
Unethical Decision Making
Situational triggers• Rational man model
• Pluralistic ignorance
• Desensitization
CHAPTER 7
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
How to Remedy or Prevent Unethical Decision Making
• Accountability for behavior• Reward model• Appropriate role models• Eliminate conflicts of interest• Create cultures of integrity
CHAPTER 7
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
Exhibit 8-1. Three Types of Conflict
CHAPTER 8
Type of Conflict Definition Example of items used to assess/measure this type of conflict
Relationship conflict (also known as emotional conflict, A-type conflict, or affective conflict)
Involves disagreements based on personal and social issues that are not related to work
How often do people get angry while working in your team? How much relationship tension is there in your team?
Task conflict (also known as cognitive conflict or C- type conflict)
Involves disagreements about the work that is being done in a group
To what extent are there differences of opinion in your team? How much conflict is there about the work you do in your team? How often do people in your team disagree about opinions regarding the work to be done?How frequently are there conflicts about ideas in your team?
Process conflict Centers on task strategy and delegation of duties and resources
How often do members of your team disagree about who should do what? How frequently do members of your team disagree about the way to complete a team task? How much disagreement about the delegation of tasks exists within your team?
Source: Jehn, K. A. (1995). A Multimethod Examination of the Benefits and Detriments of Intragroup Conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 256– 282; Jehn, K. A., & Mannix, E. A. (2001). The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal study of intragroup conflict and group performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 238–251; Behfar, K. (2003). The team exchange contract in autonomous work groups: Behaviors and work strategies for sustainable performance. Doctoral dissertation, Cornell Univeristy; Peterson, R. (1997). A directive leadership style in group decision making can be both virtue and vice: Evidence from elite and experimental groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(5), 1107–1121.
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
CHAPTER 8
Exhibit 8-3. Managerial grid
Concern for the other person(empathy)
Con
cern
for
ones
elf
(sel
f-int
eres
t; se
lf-pr
eser
vatio
n)
Avoidance(stalemate)
Compromise
Collaboration(win-win)
Accommodation(capitulation)
Competition(intimidation)
Thomas, K.W. (1992). Conflict and Conflict Management: Reflections and Update (p. 266). Journal of Organizational behavior, 13, 265-274.
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
CHAPTER 8
Conflict management approachCollaboratingContending
Rights-basedPower-based
Avoiding
Type of conflictTask contentTask process Task uncertainty
Team performance
Individual health and well-being
Amount of conflict
Exhibit 8-5. Conflict and Team Performance
Source: DeDreu, C., & Weingart, L. (2003b). A contingency theory of task conflict and performance in groups and organizational teams. In M. A. West, D. Tjosvold, & K. G. Smith (Eds.), International handbook of organizational teamwork and cooperative working. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
Norms of Fairness
• Equity method (or contribution-based distribution)
• Equality method (or blind justice)
• Need method (or welfare-based justice)
CHAPTER 8
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
Exhibit 8-7. A Model of Cross Functional Product Development Team
Conflict And Performance
CHAPTER 8
Cognitive Integration
Affective Integration
Functional Diversity
Representational Gaps
Task Disagreement
Task Characteristics
Conflict Management Techniques• Interests• Rights• Power
Design Discussion Quality• Transaction costs•
Outcome satisfaction• Relationship•
Recurrence of conflict
Team Performance• Innovativeness• Timeliness• Budget adherence• Product quality
Source: Weingart, L., Cronin, M., Houser, C., Cagan, J., & Vogel, C. (2005). Functional diversity and conflict in cross-functional product development teams: Considering representational gaps and task characteristics. In L. Neider & C. Schriesheim (Eds.), Understanding teams. (pp. 89–100). Greenwich, CT: IAP.
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
Exhibit 9-1. Four General, Conceptual Domains into which New Ideas Can Be Classified
CHAPTER 9
CREATIVE REALISM
CONSERVATIVE REALISM
CREATIVE IDEALISM
CONSERVATIVE IDEALISM
CREATIVE CONSERVATIVE
REALISTIC
IDEALISTICSource: Finke, R. A. (1995). Creative realism. In S. M. Smith, T. B. Ward, & R. A. Finke (Eds.), The creative cognition approach (pp. 303–326). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
Measuring Creativity
• Three indices• Fluency• Flexibility• Originality
• Convergent and divergent thinking• Exploration and exploitation• Creativity and context dependence
CHAPTER 9
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
Exhibit 9-3. Rules for Brainstorming
• Expressiveness• Nonevaluation• Quantity• Building
CHAPTER 9
Source: Adapted from Osborn, A. F. (1957). Applied imagination (rev. ed.). New York: Scribner.
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
Exhibit 9-4. Performance Data of Brainstorming and Solitary Groups
CHAPTER 9
Face-to-Face Brainstorming Group
Same Number of People Working Independently (Solitary Brainstorming)
Quantity: The number of ideas generated28 74.5
Quality: Percentage of “Good ideas” as judged by independent experts who did not know whose ideas they were evaluating 8.9% 12.7%
Source: Adapted from Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W. (1987). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward a solution of a riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 497–509.
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
Threats to Team Creativity
• Social loafing• Conformity• Production blocking• Performance matching
CHAPTER 9
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
CHAPTER 9
Enhancing Team Creativity
Cognitive-Goal instructions Social-Organizational suggestions
Structural-Environmental suggestions
• Set high goals• Explicit set of rules• Paulus’ new rules• Positive mood•
Increase individual accountability• Analogical reasoning
•Trained facilitators• Brainwriting• Brief breaks• Nominal group technique• Delphi technique• Stepladder technique
• Diversify the team• Membership change and rotation• Organizational networking• Build a playground
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
Advantages of Electronic Brainstorming
• Parallel entry of ideas• Anonymity• Size• Proximity• Memory• Refinement and evaluation of ideas• Equality
CHAPTER 9
Senter for entreprenørskap – Silvia Tofte
Disadvantages of Electronic Brainstorming
• Small teams• Loss of social interaction• Loss of power• No credit
CHAPTER 9