Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
89 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Adhocracy
|
prime coordinating mechainsm: mutual adjustment
Key part of organization: support staff Type of decentralization:selective decentralization i.e. 501 c 3 organizations |
|
|
Professional Bureaucracy
|
example: BU
Prime coordinating mechainism: standardization of skills key part of organization: operating level type of decentralization: vertical and horizontle |
|
|
divisionized form
|
example: IBM
prime coorinating mechanism is standardization of output key part of organization: middle level type of decentralization: limited vertical decentraliztion |
|
|
simple structure
|
prime coordinating mechanism: direct supervision
key part of org is upper echelon type of decentralization: centralization i.e. red barn computers |
|
|
machine bureaucracy
|
i.e. Frito Lay
prime coordinating mechanism: standardization of work porcess (almost substitute for leadership) key part of org: technical staff type of decentralization: limited horizontal decentralization (machine drives company) |
|
|
Complexity
|
the degree to which many different types of activities occur in the organization
i.e. how much outstanding -complex organization offers mobility -low complexity - have to like what you are doing |
|
|
hierarchy of authority
|
degree of vertical differentiation across levels of management
how many levels bw management and employment |
|
|
standardization
|
degree to which work activities are accomplished in a routine fashion
-how routine are tasks i.e. assembly line vs. consulting |
|
|
formalization
|
degree to which the organization has official rules, regulations, and procedures
|
|
|
centralization
|
degree to which decisions are made at top of organization
high when need supervisor to make ov decision entrepreneurs easy to be decentralized decantralization: push decisions down (empowerment) Nordstrom - no layer to get to CEO (decentralized) |
|
|
specialization
|
degree to which jobs are narrowly defined and depend on unique expertise, i.e. BU SOM
makes sense for larger organization |
|
|
size
|
when small organizations don't need much structure
if big company, need a management strucutre |
|
|
contextual variables
|
set of characteristics that influence the organization's design process
includes: size, technology, environment, strategy and goals |
|
|
technology
|
where are people located
|
|
|
environment
|
stable or rapid/quickfire
|
|
|
strategy and goals
|
as you grow, may need to change strategy and goals
|
|
|
differentiation
|
process of deciding how to divide work in organizations
natural to do because it helps give structure to situation |
|
|
spatial differentiation
|
geographic dispersion of offices, plants, personel...where should we be located?
|
|
|
horizontle differentiation
|
subunits and specialized knowledge
functional departments org chart = visible representation |
|
|
verticle differentiation
|
authority and responsabilityin hierarchy; want to do work need responsibility and authority
org chart is visible representation |
|
|
engineering
|
goal oritneation: design
time orientation: medium run interpersonal orientation: task strucutre: more formal low extraversion |
|
|
marketing
|
goal orientation: sales volume
long run: time orientation interpersonal orientation: people oriented structure: less formal extroverted |
|
|
integration
|
goal: achieve balance
process of coordinating different parts of organization |
|
|
dimensions of organizational strucutre
|
1. formalization
2. centralization (where decision-making is housed) 3. specialization 4. standardization 5. complexity 6. hierarchy of authority |
|
|
organizational structure
|
linking of departments and jobs within an organization
|
|
|
organizational design
|
process of constructing and adjusting an organization's structure to achieve its goals
-how we put organization together to achieve its goals ie. functional v cross-functional teams |
|
|
virtual office
|
a mobile platform of computer, telecommunication and information technology and services
no social stimulation distractions or may always be doing work |
|
|
technostress
|
stress caused by new and advanced technologies in the workplace
|
|
|
flextime
|
an alternative work pattern that enables employees to set their own daily work chedules
8-10 hour day but come and leave when you want hard to manage but more hours are covered |
|
|
job sharing
|
an alternative work pattern in which more than one person occupies a single job
full time equivalent companies are reluctant to do this |
|
|
scandenavian approach (international perspective)
|
emphasis on social concern rather than industrial efficiency
emaphasis on work design model that encourages a high degree of worker control and good social support systems for workers socially focused and liberal value enjoyment of life and happy people |
|
|
lean production
|
using commited empoyees with ever-expanding responsibilities to achieve seero waste, 100% good products delivered on time, overtime
ie. LSS, TQM approach, lean manufacturing |
|
|
sociotechnical systms (STS)
|
giving equal attention to technical and social considerations in job design
ie. Jap are collectivistic and care about relationships to build better peers and teams |
|
|
technocentric
|
placing technology and engineering at the center of job design decisions
|
|
|
perceptual motor job design approach
|
addresses how people mentally process information acquired from the physical work envrinmoent through perceptual and motor skills
positive outcomes - lower likelihood of error/accidents -less chance of mental stress -decreased training time -higher presonnel utilization levels |
|
|
biological job design approach
|
- emphasizes the person's interaction w physical aspects of work environment and concerned with the amount of physical exertion required for position
positive outcomes less physical effort and fatigue fewer health compaliints/medical incidents lower absenteeism higher job satisfaction negativ outcom - higher cost financially b/c changes in equipment and job enviroment |
|
|
motivational job design approach (smiler to job characteristics model)
|
positive outcomes:
-higher job satisfaction -higher motivation -greater job involvement -higher job performance -lower absenteeism |
|
|
mechanistic job design approach (similar to scientific management's work simplification)
|
positive outcomes - dec training time, higher personnel utilization levels, lower likelihood for error, less chance of mental overload, lower stress levels
negative outcomes - lower job satisfaction, lower motivation, higher absentteism |
|
|
job characteristics model
|
a framework for understanding person - job fit through the interaction of core job dimensions with critical psychological states w/in a person
where should I work in company? very costly |
|
|
job diagnostic survey
|
the survey instrument designed to measure the elements in the job characteristics model
want to keep employee employment employee satisfaction survey based |
|
|
engagement
|
the expression of oneself as one performs in work or other roles
how much of your job is related to you |
|
|
core job characteristics
|
1. skill variety
2. task identity 3. task significance 4. autonomy - have your own decision making 5. feedback from the job itself- don't get feedback right away so become unsure |
|
|
Social Information Processing (SIP) Processing Model
|
a model that suggests that the important job factors depend in part on what others tell a person about the job
|
|
|
Ergonomics
|
science of adapting work and working conditions to emlpoyee/worker
physical i.e. specialty chair so don't strain your back |
|
|
Job
|
tied to organization
a set of specified work and task activities that engage an individual in an organization |
|
|
work
|
you and what you bring to table
mental or physical activity that has productive results |
|
|
work simplification
|
standardization ad narrow, explicit specification of task activities for workers
do one thing really well |
|
|
Job enlargement
|
a method of job design that increases the number of activities in job to overcome the boredom of overspecialized work
|
|
|
when work is unstimulating
|
1. leave job
2. accidents |
|
|
job rotation
|
a variation of job enlargement in which workers are exposed to a variety of specialized jobs overtime
cross functional teams move around to different jobs -need cross training to accomplish |
|
|
cross-training
|
a variation of job enlargement in which workers are trained indifferent specialized tasks or activities
|
|
|
job enrichment
|
designing or redesigning jobs by incorporating motivational factors into them
|
|
|
classical conditioning
|
modifying behavior so that a conditioned stimulus is paired with an unconditioned stimulus and elicits an unconditioned response
dog barking / back pain when manager comes in |
|
|
operant conditioning
|
modifying behavior through the use of positive or negativee consequences following specific behaviors
|
|
|
reinforcement
|
attempt to develop or strengthen desirable behavior by either bestowing positive consequences or withholding negative consequences
|
|
|
punishment
|
the attempt to eliminate or weaken undesirable behavior by either bestowing negative consequences or withholding positive consequences
negative/displeasing and contingent withdrawal don't want you to do it again weaken behavior by making behavior occur less by administering something displeasing |
|
|
positive reinforcement
|
positive/pleasing & contingent presentation
want to see the behavior again strengthens behavior by increasing is frequency |
|
|
negative reinforcement
|
negative/displeasing & contingent withdrawal
remove something valuable strengthens behavior by providing relief from an unpleasant situation |
|
|
response cost punishment
|
positive/pleasing & contingent withdrawal
do something positive but take away something displeasing making behavior occur less by taking away something positive |
|
|
extinction
|
no contingent consequence
never respond/engage weakens behavior by ignoring it and making sure it doesn't get reinforce |
|
|
3 types of informational cues
|
1. consensus - extent to which peers in the same situation behave the same way
2. distinctiveness: degree tow which the person behaves the same way in other situations 3. consistency - frequency of a particular behavior overtime |
|
|
internal attributions
|
personal attribution combinationof low consensus, low distinctiveness and high consistency
|
|
|
external attributions
|
situational attribution; combo of high consensus, high distinctiveness, low consistency
|
|
|
leniency perceptual error
|
don't want conflict so evaluate everyone favorably (but they wont improve)
everyone gets good grade |
|
|
central tendency perceptual error
|
everyone gets an average rating
avoid all extreme judgments so give everyone average/neutral rating |
|
|
recency effect perceptual error
|
tendency to remember recent information
if recent information is negative person is evaluated negatively rate low for one time bad thing close to performance evaluation |
|
|
contrast effect perceptual effect
|
tendency to evaluate people by comparing them with characteristics of recently observed people
want to: compare people tojob description not against superstar |
|
|
halo perceptual error
|
don't see anything bad you do nothing wrong, no negative feedback
screw up and still get a good evaluation rater forms overall impression about persona and uses impression to bias ratings about person |
|
|
learning
|
a change in behavior acquired through experience
|
|
|
Banduras social learning theory; task specific self efficacy
|
an individuals beliefs and expectations about his or her ability to perform a specific task effectively
|
|
|
Bandura's theory sources of task-specific self efficacy
|
prior experiences (strongest source)
behavior models - witnessing the success or others - 2nd strongest persuasion from other people - peer pressure - giving confidence that it will be okay -assessment of current physical and emotional capabilities |
|
|
goal setting
|
the process of establishing desired results that guide and direct behavior
|
|
|
central ingredients in a goal setting program
|
planning - organizational & individual goal setting
evaluation - intermim reviews of goal progress, conducted by managers and empoyees formal performance evaluation |
|
|
performance appraisal
|
the evaluation of a person's performance once it is well-defined
-fair, access, learning |
|
|
360 degree feedback
|
a process ofself evaluation and evaluations by a lmanger peers, direct reports, and possibly customers
everyone provides feedback don't know which peers are giving you feedback |
|
|
key characteristics of an effective appraisal system
|
validity - does it tap the appropriate measure?
reliability repsonsiveness fleixbilty equitability |
|
|
kelleys attribution theory
consensus |
informaitonal cue indicating extent peers in same situation behave in similar fashion
|
|
|
kellyes attribution theory
distinctiveness |
informational cue degree to which individual behaves same way in other situations
|
|
|
kellys attribution theory
consistency |
an informal uce indicating frequency of behavior overtime
|
|
|
technological interdependence
|
degree of interrelatedness of organization's various technological elements
greater interdependence leads to greater organizational complexity (offset these problems via decentralized decision making) |
|
|
environment
|
anything outside boundaries of organization
|
|
|
task environmenty
|
elements of an organization's environment that are related ot its goal attainment (including stakeolders)
|
|
|
environmental uncertainty
|
amount and rate of change in the organization's environment
|
|
|
formalization
|
small organizations: less
large organizations: more mechanistic organization: high organic organization: low |
|
|
centralization
|
small organizations: high (b/c owner makes significant decisions)
large organizations -low mechanistic organization - high organic organization - low |
|
|
specialization
|
small organizations: low
large organizations: high mechanistic organization: high organic organization: low |
|
|
standardization
|
small organization: low
large organization: high mechanistic organization: high organic organization: low |
|
|
complexity
|
small organizations: low
large organizations: high if very complex, need may people to address complexity mechanistic organization: low organic organization: high |
|
|
hierarchy of authority
|
small organizations: flat
large organizations: tall mechanisitc organizaiton, strong tall organic organization: weak, flat |
