Analysis of Attribution Theory - Term Paper Example

Attribution Theory Attribution theory is a tool for understanding human behaviors and thoughts and to deduce how individuals interpret the events that they encounter. Attribution theory has proved to be a useful conceptual framework for the study of motivation in educational contexts (Graham, 1991). It deals with what kinds of explanations individuals come up with when they are faced with a situation or a happening. The explanation or the interpretation of individuals about the events they deal with can be attributed to either external or internal factors (Robbins et al, 2006). For people to interpret the causes of particular behaviour performed by other individuals, it is necessary for them to observe the behaviour, and attribute external or internal causes to it. Any outside body or agent that triggers or causes the event is an external factor while factors that are within the control of an individual and are a part of his/her personality are the internal factors (Shackleton, 1995). An example of how attribution theory can be applied in our daily lives could be our reaction to, say, having a good social circle. An individual who is a loner and has no friends to talk to will always be found complaining about how the world is so cruel and unjust. This is attributing an external factor to the event. However, a person who is the life of a party and is acquainted with a lot of people will be found claiming that it is so because of his being so attractive and smart. As obvious, this case refers to an internal factor or the factor which is within a person. There are many factors which are related to attribution. The determination of the causes depends on three things (Kelly, 1967). Distinctiveness, the first one, tells whether the person's actions are distinct and different from other situations. The second is consensus, which tells whether other people behave in the same way to the same situation. The third factor is consistency, which finds out whether the individual behaves the same way consistently to the same situation. The theory predicts that whenever there is high distinctiveness, the causes of the behaviour are external and with low distinctiveness, the factors are internal. For consensus, it is an external factor whenever there is a high consensus and an internal factor when the consensus is low. High consistency indicates an internal factor while low consistency depicts an external factor. In fact, when we apply attribution theory, there are two types of errors which can result in distorted attributions. One is the fundamental attribution error and the other is self-serving bias. (1) Fundamental attribution error: It occurs when people overestimate the effects of internal factors while underestimating the effects of external factors when judging the behavior of others (Martinko, 1995.) It is when the actions of people are attributed to their traits and personality rather than the external influence that may have led them to such an action. (2) Self-serving bias: This error, also known as attributional bias, refers to the tendency of individuals to claim responsibility for successes while attributing failures to other causes or factors (Martinko, 1995.) It is just one way of imaging what is pleasing to us rather than the realistic situation. One factor which can be related to this bias is whether there is a reward or punishment proclaimed for certain behavior (Harvey & Smith, 1977). It is suggestd that when we suceed, we tend to overestimate the internal factors which could be our talent and effort and underestimate the external factor which could be the help of others. Yet, if we were failed, we would overestimate the external factors which could be lack of collegue's co-operation, and underestimate the internal factors such as our laziness. This indicates that people would explain the same behavior to events differently if it occurred differently (. Systematic bias: It is a form of self-serving bias and occurs when people generally tend to think that they are better at tasks that are important to them than the rest of people and attribute their being better to the internal factors. They tend to think that the success of other people is due to their sheer luck. An example could be of drivers who most of the times tend to think that they are better than the average drivers (Harvey, 1984). Problems in Light of Attribution Theory The theory can be applied to the case to explain how the employees in Happy Home Loan Service judge each other. The researchers in the Customer Research Department (CRD) are feeling overworked after the implementation of the new system. As the theory predicts, the high consensus among employees regarding to the pressuring workload lead them to attribute it to external factors. An example can be seen by a consistent and devoted employee named Cameron, who attributes the cause for the stress being lack of training provided on the ALSS system. John is the leader of line balancers and apparently he is not showing any support to the employees' job consistently. This high consistency leads the employees to attribute his careless behavior as internally caused by his personality. This attribution has a negative impact on the organization such that employees develop cynical and hostile attitudes towards the leader, which in turn makes them unsatisfied with the job and less motivated, ultimately resulting in decreased productivity. Fundamental attribution error is also evident in the case. Due to the increase in workload, Anna's performance over the first few months has declined and her ability to cope up with the pending tasks has suffered. However, her leader Sue responds to Anna's distinct sever reaction (i.e. physical illness, absence from work, and crying for days) by suggesting her to go to the counselor. Therefore, Sue is making a fundamental attribution error when she judges Anna's behavior, such that she attributes Anna's complains to her inability to cope with pressure and lack of control on her emotions, instead of the external factor which is in fact the lack of practical support to the employees. Employees make fundamental attribution error towards the leader too. Sue is concerned with the increased workload and the tension shared between the employees who are all much strained. Being a responsible leader, she has tried to raise her voice and communicate her concerns to the senior management. However, most of them do not agree to her ideas and think that providing help to the employees may be a waste of time and resources. Her helplessness towards the situation has led her team members to think that she is not really concerned about their problems. Brett have attributed an internal factor, her being not interested to the situation, despite the fact that Sue is faced with an external factor that is a lack of cooperation by the senior management. John shows self serving bias when he dealing with punctuality. He threatens anyone who comes even a few minutes late even if they have an understandable reason. However, he has been late himself and made excuses. John attributes his late to the external factors, that is, the change in schedule of the train. Whereas for team members, he thinks that the excuses for external factors are unacceptable and blames it on internal factor, such as the irresponsibility or clumsiness of employees. Lastly, Abigail is one employee who may be having a systematic bias. She thinks that she is working better than the rest of her colleagues. Abigail believes that she is one of the most hard-working employees and is upset that her performance has been judged to be lower. Critique of Attribution Theory To a certain extent, attribution theory is capable of helping the organization to recognize the causes of employees' behaviors. Leaders can take subsequent corrective action to deal with particular behavior. For example, when the manager Thomas realizes that employees' complaint on the workload is attributed to the lack of training, he can then develop further training programs to deal with the problem. There are certain limitations of the attribution theory, however. Human judgments are not always reliable as they can be biased or quite different from reality (Shackleton, 1995). It was mentioned in the case that Maria is an experienced but unproductive worker. Her unproductiveness is accepted because other employees share the belief that she does more complex tasks than they do. The high consensus among employees mean that Maria's behavior is attributed to external factor as the theory predicts (i.e. complexity of the tasks). Yet, the actual cause for her behavior is internal factors (i.e. Maria's laziness). Consequently, although the theory has predicted the attribution made correctly, the attribution itself is untrue. If faulty attribution is made by the manager, he may take inappropriate action such as reducing Maria's challenge instead of reprimanding her laziness. The theory can fail to recognize the social context in which attributes occur. Anna attributes Sue's helplessness to external factors initially (i.e. lack of support from senior management), but she changed her attitudes and judges Sue differently after the conversation with Brett. In this situation, attribution theory does not explain how the switch between internal and external factors occurs. The attribution theory has certainly furthered research on human behaviour. However, one cannot ignore its limitations which need to be kept in mind and the errors avoided while applying the theory to any case. References: Graham, S. (1991). 'A review of attribution theory in achievement context'. Educational Psychology Review , Vol.3 (1). pp. 5-39. Harvey, J. H. (1984). 'Current Issues in Attribution theory and Research'. Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 35, pp. 427-459. Harvey J.H. & Smith, W. P. (1977). Social Psychology: An Attributional Approach. London: Henry Kimpton Kelly,H. H. (1967) 'Attribution theory in social psychology', in D. Levine (ed.) Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, Vol. 15, M. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. Martinko, M. J. (1995). Attribution Theory: An Organizational Perspective. Delray Beach, FL: St. Lucie Press. Organisational Behaviour: Happy Homes Loan Services Pty. Ltd (HHLS), 325-201 (2007). Robbins, Millett & Water-Marsh. (2006). 'Perceptions, Attribution & Individual Decision Making' in Organisational Behaviour 4e (pp.38-69). Sydney: Pearson Custom Publishing. Shackleton, V.(1995). 'Attribution theory of leadership' in Business Leadership. London and New York: Routledge Weiner, B. (1974). Achievement, Motivation and Attribution Theory. Morristown, New Jersey: General Learning Press. Read More