An Important Tool for Understanding and Managing Goal-Oriented Organisational Behaviours - Literature review Example

Attribution Theory: An Important Tool for Understanding and Managing Goal -Oriented Organisational Behaviours Introduction Over the years a number of theories or theoretical models have been developed in an attempt to explain human behaviour. Attribution theory is a good example of a social psychology theoretical model that seeks to explain the underlying aspects that influence human behaviour (Schneider, Gruman & Coutts 2005). This theory concerns itself with processes of attribution which generally encompass the way in which individuals perceive, infer or explain the causes of behaviour and events. An understanding on attribution processes is important mainly because it conveys how people make judgment and the underlying motivations or influences of human behaviour. Hence, within the organisational context, attribution theory is considered relevant and useful particularly when it comes to understanding and managing the dynamics of organisational behaviour (Martinko 2004). This essay seeks to discuss attribution theory and how and why attribution processes are an important tool for understanding and managing goal oriented organisational behaviours. Firstly, it will provide a brief overview of the attribution theory. Subsequently, it will discuss how attribution processes can act as important tools for understanding and managing organisational processes or behaviours particularly in relations to employee motivation and diversity management. Attribution Theory Attribution can be described as a process by which people perceive or explain causes of events and behaviour. Attribution theory can be traced back to studies conducted by Fritz Heider (1958) and later on Bernard Weiner (1972). In his studies, Heider (1958), argued that people perceive behaviour as being caused by either personal (dispositional) factors or environmental (situational) factors. In essence, a person can make internal attribution or external attribution. Personal or internal attribution of behaviour may take into account factors such as values, attitudes, personality or knowledge among many other factors. On the other hand, environmental or external attribution of behaviour may take into account the characteristics of one’s surroundings or social situations (Sanderson 2009). For instance, when an employee is consistently late for work, the manager may attribute the employee’s behaviour to either personal factor such as laziness, disregard for rules, stress, lack of motivation or lack of knowledge. The manager could also attribute the employee’s behaviour to external or situational factors such as car break down, road traffic or problems at home. Following Heider’s model of attribution, Weiner et al. (1972) also developed an attribution theoretical model that aimed at understanding the causes, nature and consequences of success and failure attributions particularly in achievement situation. Although the focus on Weiner’s attribution model is different from that of Heider (1958), he adopted Heider’s perspective that attributions can either be internal or external. Weiner’s model suggests that, individual’s attributions for success or failure are chracterised by three main bipolar aspects namely; locus of causality (internal or external), cause stability (stable or unstable) and the controllability of the cause (controllable or uncontrollable) (Hagger & Chatzisarantis 2005). He further argues that, following an event people tend to evaluate whether they have succeeded or failed. They subsequently experience either a positive or negative emotional response depending on the results of their evaluation. Later on, this attribution is ascribed after experiences of more specific affective responses that are based on certain performance outcomes. For example, an individual may feel a sense of pride if they attribute their success to their abilities and hard work. However, they may feel a sense of hopelessness if they attribute their failure to luck. Due to these attributions expectations of future success in relations to behavioural engagement are formed. Essentially, Weiner’s model of attribution explores how people could make attributions of their success or failure to internal and stable factors (abilities), internal and unstable factors (effort), external and stable factors (task difficulty) or external and unstable factors (luck). Subsequently, these attributions influence individual’s emotional responses, expectations of future success and their behavioural engagement in work (Weiner 1985; Weiner et al. 1987; Weiner et al. 1972). Attribution processes and Employee Motivation Motivation can be described as a psychological drive that arouses, directs and sustains an individual’s actions or behaviour towards the attainment of a particular goal (Muller 2011). Within the organisational context motivation is considered to be an important driver of employee productivity or performance. A considerable number of studies have established that employee motivation is one of the key factors that play a significant role in contributing to organisational performance and effectiveness (Bright 2007; Martin 2005; Wright & Pandley 2008). Therefore, employee motivation is crucial if organisational effectiveness and productivity is to be attained. Recent research suggests that, attribution processes depicted under attribution theory, can be useful for understanding and managing goal-oriented organisational behaviour such as employee motivation (Gu 2009; Martinko, Harvey & Dasborough 2010; Weiner 2010). For instance, attribution processes depicted in Weiner’s theory of attribution can help managers to explore ways in which employees make sense of the causes of success and failure in past events and how their attributions of failure and success influence their motivation towards work. Gu (2009) observes that attribution processes depicted in this theory can be helpful to managers by revealing complex or dynamic motivational processes. For instance, when employees in an organisation attribute the success of particular project or work task to internal and stable factors such as personal abilities or internal and unstable factors such as their effort towards the task, they are likely to feel a sense of pride. Due to these attributions, employees feel motivated to maximize on their personal abilities and efforts in order to achieve success in future. Conversely, in a case where employees attribute the failure of a particular project to external and stable factors such as task difficulty, lack of resources or external and unstable factors such as luck, they are likely for feel a sense of hopelessness or lack of control towards their contributions towards the projection. As a result, the employees are bound to feel less motivated to maximize on their personal abilities and efforts in order to achieve success in future (Schneider et al. 2005; Weiner 1985; Weiner et al. 1987; Weiner et al. 1972). By taking into account employee’s attributions of success or failure, managers can be able to identify best ways of motivating employees so as to enhance their productivity or performance. For example, in a case where managers establish that employees in an organisation attribute the success of particular project or work task to internal and stable factors such as personal abilities or internal and unstable factors such as their effort towards the task, they can employ intrinsic motivational approaches. Intrinsic motivational approaches focus on internal drivers as impetus of arousing, directing and sustaining an individual’s actions or behaviour towards the attainment of a particular goal (Oudeyer & Kaplan 2007). Some of the intrinsic motivational approaches that managers can use in case employees attribute success or failure to internal stable or unstable factors include; mentoring, training, regular feedback, recognition and assigning employees more challenging tasks. Mentoring and training through professional development sessions or workshops may help employees to enhance their knowledge and skills. This intrinsic motivator is bound to make employees feel a sense of self-worth and confidence in their abilities. Hence they are likely to feel motivated towards attaining organisational goals. Moreover, managers can intrinsically motivate employees through regular feedback and recognition of their performance. Employees who know their position in relations to the organisations’ performance measurements are likely to feel a sense of control over their work quality. When managers take time to provide feedback regularly and recognise the performance of employees, employees are bound to make positive attributions for not only success events but also failure. With time they are bound to feel motivated to improve on their performance (McQuerrey 2013; Makowka 2007; Weiner 1985). Conversely, in a case where managers establish that employees in an organisation make attributions of their failure to external and stable factors such as task difficulty or external and unstable factors like luck, they can employ extrinsic motivational approaches such as training, incentives and provision of additional resources to empower and motivate employees (Makowka 2007; Weiner 1985). Attribution Processes and Diversity Management In recent times, a considerable number of organisations have a diversified population of employees in terms of gender, race, cultural background, religion or beliefs. Research studies show that if diversities in the workplace are effectively managed, they can bring about a myriad of benefits to an organisation. Studies have established a positive correlation between diversity in the workplace and better problem solving and decision making, increased creativity and innovation and enhanced productivity or performance (Allen 1995; Forsyth 2009, Shore et al. 2009; Thomas 1999). Although diversity in the work place has numerous benefits, it can be challenging for managers to develop an inclusive work environment whereby each employee regardless of their diverse traits, gender, race, cultural background or religion is valued, respected and given equal opportunities to develop. If workplace diversity is not effectively managed, issues such as prejudice, stereotypes, discrimination and stigma are likely to emanate in a workplace with a diverse employee population (Shore et al. 2009). Attribution processes depicted under attribution theory, can provide managers a useful framework for understanding and managing workplace diversity issues. According to Shore et al (2009), different forms of diversity evoke different perceptions or attributions which in turn affect organisational processes such as recruitment, promotion, delegation of tasks or work roles and performance reviews among many other organisational processes. For instance, a common perception about elderly employees is that they are less productive, flexible and creative. As a result, low productivity or lack of innovativeness in the workplace may be attributed to the elderly. Consequently, younger workers may be preferred when it comes to recruitment, promotion or delegation of challenging work roles. Alternatively, managers may show more leniency towards elderly employees than younger employees in the course of performance reviews or when taking disciplinary action (Weiss & Maurer 2004). In reference to attribution processes depicted under Kelly’s (1967) covariation model it is apparent that individuals tend to use information regarding consistency, consensus and distinctiveness when judging people’s behaviour. The level of consistency, consensus and distinctiveness may either result in a dispositional or situational attribution. An understanding on attribution processes can help managers to take into account that despite the fact that best efforts are put forth in interpreting and attributing behaviour biases or errors can occur. For instance, when judging the behaviours of other people, most people tend to focus on personal or dispositional aspects such as personality, race, culture, abilities, intelligence, attitudes and values at the expense of situational or external aspects. This may in turn encourage issues such as prejudice, stereotypes, discrimination and stigma against an individual due to their personal attributes. For instance, since elderly people are often associated with issues such as ill-health or physical frailty, technological illiteracy and rigidness. In a case where a work project fails, the failure of the project is likely to be attributed to personal or situational aspects such as poor skills and capacities rather than external issues such as lack of adequate resources or difficulty of the project. Consequently, this may lead to stigmatization or discrimination of elderly employees when it comes to recruitment, promotion or delegation of work roles(Weiss & Maurer 2004; Shore et al. 2009). Understanding such attribution processes may help managers to effectively manage diversity in the work place by being open minded , listening and responding to the views of others, being responsive to the specific needs of each diverse group, treating every employee fairly, equally with respect, consideration and courtesy. Furthermore, understanding the biases and errors that may occur during attribution processes reinforces the need of managers to act ethically and convey integrity while dealing with employee. It also reinforces the need to develop an inclusive work environment where employees are given equal opportunities to voice their issues and participate (Thomas 2010). Conclusion Generally, this essay has examined how attribution processes illustrated under attribution theory can act as important tool for understanding and managing goal oriented organisational behaviours. It has primarily focused on employee motivation and diversity management. The findings of this essay show that attribution theory concerns itself with processes of attribution which generally encompass the way in which individuals perceive, infer or explain the causes of behaviour and events. Attribution processes depicted in Weiner’s theory of attribution can help managers to explore ways in which employees make sense of the causes of success and failure in past events and how their attributions of failure and success influence their motivation towards work. As a result, managers can be able to identify best ways of motivating employees so as to enhance their productivity or performance. Moreover, this essay establishes that attribution processes can provide managers a useful framework for understanding and managing workplace diversity issues by being responsive, treating employees equally and developing an inclusive work environment. References Allen, B. 1995, “Diversity and Organizational Communication". Journal of Applied Communication Research vol 23, no 2, pp. 143–155. Bright, L 2007, “Does Person-Organization Fit Mediate the Relationship Between Public Service Motivation and Job Performance of Public Employees?” Review of Public Personnel Administration vol 27, no. 4, pp. 361-379. Forsyth, D 2009, Group Dynamics, Cengage Learning, London. Gu, M 2009, The Discursive Construction of Second Language Learners’ Motivation: A Multi-Level Perspective, Peter Lang, Bern. Hagger, M & Chatzisarantis, N 2005, Social Psychology of Exercise and Sport, McGraw-Hill, New York. Heider, F 1958, The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations, John Wiley & Sons, New York. Kelley, H. H. 1967, Attribution theory in social psychology, In D. Levine (ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (Volume 15, pp. 192-238), University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln. Makowka, T. L 2007, The influence of intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation on test-taking practices, Kean University, New Jersey. Martinko, M. J 2004, Attribution Theory in Organisational Sciences: Theoretical and Empirical Contributions, Information Age Publishing, Charlotte, North Carolina. Martinko, M J & Harvey, P. & Dasborough, M.T 2010, “Attribution theory in the organizational sciences: A case of unrealized potential”, Journal of Organizational Behaviour vol 32, issue 1, pp. 144-149. Martin, J 2005, Organisational Behaviour and Management, Thompson Learning, London. McQuerrey, L 2013,Top Intrinsic Motivation Techniques for Employees, viewed September 23 2013 Muller, C 2011, Employee Motivation and Incentives at Apple, GRIN Verlag, Munich. Oudeyer, P & Kaplan, F 2007, “What is intrinsic motivation? A Typology of Computational Approaches”, Frontiers Neurorobot vol 1, no. 6, pp. 1-13. Sanderson, C.A 2009, Social Psychology, John Wiley and Sons, New York. Schneider,F. W. Gruman, J. A & Coutts, L. M. 2005, Applied Social Psychology: Understanding and Addressing Social and Practical Problems, SAGE, London. Shore, L. M., Chung, B., Dean, M. A., Ehrhart, K. H., Jung, D., Randel, A., & Singh, G. 2009, “Diversity and inclusiveness: Where are we now and where are we going?” Human Resource Management Review,19, pp. 117-133 Thomas, D. 1999, ‘Cultural diversity and work group effectiveness: an experimental study’Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, vol 30, pp.242−263 Thomas, R 2010, World Class Diversity Management: A Strategic Approach, Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco. Weiner, B 1985, ‘An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion’, Psychological Review vol 92, no. 4, pp. 548-573. Weiner, B., Amirkhan, J., Folkes, V., & Verette, J. 1987, “An attributional analysis of excuse giving: Studies of a naïve theory of emotion”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol 52, no.2, pp. 316-324. Weiner, B., Frieze, I., Kukla, A., Reed, L., Rest, S., & Rosenbaum, R. 1972, “Perceiving the causes of success and failure”. In E. Jones, D. Kanouse, H. Kelley, R. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the Causes of Behavior, General Learning Press, Morristown, NJ. Weiner, B 2010, “The Development of an Attribution-Based Theory of Motivation: A History of Ideas”, Educational Psychologist, vol 45, issue 1, pp. 28-36. Weiss, E. M., & Maurer, T. J. 2004, “Age discrimination in personnel decision: a reexamination”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, vol 34, 1551−1562. Wright, B. E & Pandley, S. K. 2008, “Public Service Motivation and Assumption of Person: Organization Fit”, Administration and Society, vol 40, no. 5, pp. 502-521. Read More