Midterm 3: Chapters 10, 11, 12 Ob

Front 1

what are common group decision making pitfalls

Back 1

groupthink
common information bias
diversity based infighting
risky shift

Front 2

d: groupthink

Back 2

a situation in which group members maintain or seek consensus at the expense of identifying and debating honest disagreements

Front 3

why does groupthink occur

Back 3

like each other
have high regard for collective wisdom so they yield to early ideas
derive satisfaction from membership in a group that has a positive self image

Front 4

when will groupthink most likely occur

Back 4

when the group is under threat

Front 5

what are the symptoms of groupthink

Back 5

self censorship
pressure
unanimity
rationalization
invulnerability
mindguards
morality
stereotypes

Front 6

groupthink: self censorship

Back 6

group members who see flaws in the group keep quiet to avoid affecting group harmony

Front 7

groupthink: pressure

Back 7

group members apply pressure on a group member who isnt supporting the group

Front 8

groupthink: unanimity

Back 8

bc of self censorship and pressure it appears that no one else opposes the group, creating this illusion of unanimity

Front 9

groupthink: rationalization

Back 9

group members have complex rationales that discount warnings or information,

Front 10

groupthink: invulnerability

Back 10

believe the group is invulerable to any dangers, take unwarranted risks
overestimates its collective wisdom

Front 11

groupthink: mindguards

Back 11

a group member acts as a mindguard and attempts to shield the group from any facts that may alter the illusions of invulnerability and unanimity

Front 12

groupthink: morality

Back 12

believe the group is inherently moral and anything that goes against the group is immoral

Front 13

groupthink: stereotypes

Back 13

group members have neg stereotypes of other people and groups

Front 14

d: common information bias

Back 14

a bias in which group members tend to overemphasize certain information that is held by all members in the group, while neglecting information that may be important thats held by 1 or 2 people
defeats: the idea that groups can introduce unique info

Front 15

d: diversity-based infighting

Back 15

when there is an overflow of diverse ideas and group members are unproductive and are conflictive over differing views

Front 16

when will diversity based infighting occur

Back 16

when ind feel strongly about their ideas

Front 17

d: risky-shift

Back 17

the phenomenon where groups make more risky decisions that individuals because of a diffusion of responsibility

Front 18

do groups or ind make more risky decisions

Back 18

groups due to risky shift

Front 19

benefits of brainstorming

Back 19

wide variety of new ideas
important facts or considerations not overlooked

Front 20

basic features of brainstorming

Back 20

imagination encouraged
using or building on the ideas of others is encouraged
no criticism of any idea
evaluation is postponed until the end

Front 21

does research support brainstorming

Back 21

yes

Front 22

is individual or group brainstorming more effective

Back 22

individual

Front 23

how are brain writing and electronic brainstorming better than normal brainstorming

Back 23

introduces anonymity so people are less inhibited
no talking in room so no distractions

Front 24

d: brainwriting

Back 24

form of brainstorming
everyone writes down ideas at certain times of the meeting, then someone reads out all the ideas at the end, they are put on a flipchart and evaluated

Front 25

d: electronic brainstorming (EBS)

Back 25

form of brainstorming
everyone in meeting sits at a computer and before meeting starts they enter as many ideas as possible which are cast up on a screen for all to see, members can build on ideas

Front 26

steps of the nominal group technique

Back 26

1) group members sit around a table and silently write down all of their ideas
2) group members present ideas one by one until all ideas are presented and recorded on a whiteboard
3) discussion of ideas for clarification
4) members silently rank all the ideas to determine the most supported idea
* research supports since members are more uninhibited

Front 27

d: delphi technique

Back 27

highly structured group deicision making technique
members fill out questionaires about their opinions, opinions are averaged
research supports but it restricts some ideas

Front 28

what two group decision making techniques improve the quality not the quantity of ideas proposed

Back 28

dialectical
devil's advocacy

Front 29

d: dialectical technique

Back 29

group decision making technique
2 subgroups form each with very different ideas, each group develops very different assumptions and reccommendations to encourage full disclosure

Front 30

d: devil's advocacy

Back 30

1 assumption is created, and a group member or subgroup critiques it
group decision making technique

Front 31

d: synergy

Back 31

the output of the group is greater than if you added up all the individual inputs

Front 32

d: group

Back 32

2 or more individuals working together

Front 33

d: team

Back 33

a group who works together toward a common goal

Front 34

how are groups and teams different

Back 34

teams work together toward a common goal

Front 35

d: formal groups

Back 35

members are assigned
teams are a formal group

Front 36

are teams a formal or informal group

Back 36

formal

Front 37

d: informal group

Back 37

a group of people who share common interests and attitudes
teams arent informal groups since membership in informal groups are voluntary
ex: fantasy football league

Front 38

d: identity group

Back 38

group membership based on the identities of group members
(ex: christian unions)
might make teamwork difficult if memebers are from different identity groups (ex: NAACP members and members of white suprematist groups)

Front 39

d: virtual teams

Back 39

teams who are separated physically
not as effective as normal teams

Front 40

list reasons why virtual teams are less effective than normal teams

Back 40

1) trust develops more slowly
2) use less rich communication channels so miscommunication occurs
3) develop behavorial norms
4) free riders exsist

Front 41

functional teams: production team

Back 41

a team that produces a tangible product
(ex: automobile assemblers)

Front 42

functional teams: service team

Back 42

a team that engages in customer service and repeated transactions with a customer
(ex: starbucks)

Front 43

functional teams: management team

Back 43

group of senior level managers that come together to coordinate the efforts of their respective units

Front 44

functional teams: project team

Back 44

team that comes together temporarily to produce a common goal

Front 45

functional teams: advisory team

Back 45

team that advises the organization about a specific issue

Front 46

d: self managing teams

Back 46

teams that come together to produce an entire piece of work
(ex: instead of producing parts of a car, they produce the whole car)
managers exsist, but they facilitate efforts rather than being too overbearing

Front 47

benefits of self managing teams

Back 47

lower turnover/absenteeism
higher employee satisfaction

Front 48

knowledge criteria of team effectiveness

Back 48

does the team learn over time?
does the team increase its performance capabilities
does the team have shared knowledge and capabilities of the team's task

Front 49

d: mental model

Back 49

part of the knowledge criteria of team effectiveness
is the shared knowledge the group possesses

Front 50

affective criteria of team effectiveness

Back 50

team's opinion of whether they had a satisfying group experienced
measured by the affective tone (overall emotional state)

Front 51

d: affective tone

Back 51

overall emotional state of teh team in measuring team effectiveness

Front 52

outcome criteria of team effectiveness

Back 52

the quality and quantity of the team's work
the degree of acceptableness
teams should be viable (since they have a tendency to burnout)
teams should reflect synergy

Front 53

d: process loss

Back 53

the time and effort put into maintaining the team and not focusing on the goals of the team
synergy does not exist

Front 54

what three factors affect team effectiveness

Back 54

team composition
team structure
team process

Front 55

what are the three common assumptions managers make when composing teams

Back 55

1) homogeneous teams are more effective
2) everyone knows how to work in a team
3) the bigger the better

Front 56

of (task, outcome, time, type of diversity) when is diversity most effective in team composition

Back 56

task- when it calls for innovative and creative
outcome- positive effect on performance, but team members might not want to stay together due to differences
time- neg effects in short run, pos in long run
type of diversity- neg effects when people are diverse on their performance expectations

Front 57

what are the personality attributes of an effective team

Back 57

agreeableness
openess to experience
emotional stability
extraversion
conscientiousness

Front 58

d: team orientation

Back 58

an individual likes working on the team and works well with others

Front 59

is there an ideal team size that improves team effectiveness

Back 59

no
5-9 members ideal

Front 60

d: inverted-u team size

Back 60

as the number of team members grows, team effectiveness increases due to the increase in the number of skills, but at some point, the team becomes uneffective due to the effort put into managing the team is more costly than the actual goal of the team

Front 61

d: linear team size

Back 61

as team size grows, the effectiveness of teams increases
there is no decrease bc managers effectively manage teams to prevent problems that could arise normally

Front 62

d: roles

Back 62

assumptions held by all group members about who will do what, do not need to be formally assigned, as leaders as just emerge

Front 63

d: socioemotional roles

Back 63

social needs

Front 64

d: task roles

Back 64

roles associated with accomplishing the group's task at hand

Front 65

d: individuals roles

Back 65

when an invidual only thinks of him/herself and does things that impede the group's progress

Front 66

d: divisible tasks

Back 66

tasks that can be broken down into subcomponents

Front 67

d: unitary tasks

Back 67

tasks that must require an individual to complete
teams are not necessary

Front 68

d: optimization tasks

Back 68

quality goals
diverse teams preform better at

Front 69

d: maximization tasks

Back 69

quantity goals

Front 70

d: additive tasks

Back 70

team inputs are added together (data entry)
team preformance is better than individual

Front 71

d: compensatory tasks

Back 71

team inputs are averaged together
team should do better than individual, but isnt guaranteed

Front 72

d: disjunctive tasks

Back 72

team comes together to make a single decision (jury decision)
team should preform better than most members, but not as well as the best preformer

Front 73

d: conjunctive tasks

Back 73

all team inputs go together to produce 1 item (assembly line)
team cannot do better than worse individual performer

Front 74

d: interpersonal cohesion

Back 74

team members like each other

Front 75

d: task cohesion

Back 75

team members like the task

Front 76

d: personal conflict

Back 76

TM just don't like each other, more likely to occur when teams are assigned rather informally formed

Front 77

d: substantive conflict

Back 77

TM disagreee over the task at hand, often creates more innovative ideas

Front 78

d: procedural conflict:

Back 78

TM disagree over the way things should be done

Front 79

d: social facilitation effect

Back 79

on well learned tasks (running) people tend to do better when other people are around

Front 80

d: social loafing

Back 80

people don't do their share of the work

Front 81

what case demonstrates social loafing

Back 81

kitty genovese

Front 82

how do you avoid social loafing

Back 82

smaller groups
make individual inputs visible
have an overseer

Front 83

what causes social loafing

Back 83

1) ind feel their inputs will not be important
2) ind know other ind will social loaf, so they do less of the work
3) output is not individually identifiable

Front 84

what are the stages of the stage model of development

Back 84

forming
storming
norming
performing
adjourning

Front 85

stage model of development: forming

Back 85

team members meet and form opinions ab one another

Front 86

stage model of development: storming

Back 86

team members clash about what needs to be done

Front 87

stage model of development: norming

Back 87

form norms of group behavior
problems resolved
become cohesive

Front 88

stage model of development: performing

Back 88

task is performed

Front 89

stage model of development: adjourning

Back 89

team disbands

Front 90

d: punctuated equilibrium model

Back 90

model of group development characterized by 2 stages: socioemotional stages then a SHOCK then performing stages

Front 91

d: conflict

Back 91

when an individual believes that someone or something is interferring with their interests

Front 92

d: dysfunctional conflict

Back 92

conflict that interferes with performance

Front 93

dysfunctional conflict occurs because:

Back 93

1) conflict can cause doubts in the organizations future, causing stock prices to drop
2) people look out for individual interests not organizations interests
3) have neg effects on interpersonal relationships
4) takes time and resources to deal with conflict

Front 94

d: functional conflict

Back 94

conflict thats beneficial to the organization
good for starting change

Front 95

d: personal conflict

Back 95

conflict arises from personal relationships and differences in personality
negatively affects work performance

Front 96

d: substantive conflict

Back 96

conflict that arises out of work content and goals
can positively affect work performance

Front 97

d: procedural conflict

Back 97

conflict that arises out of roles and responsibilities
negatively affects performance

Front 98

what are the structural factors that cause conflict

Back 98

increased specialization
interdependency
layout
centralization
decentralization

Front 99

how does increased specialized units cause conflict

Back 99

each unit may have different goals or view things differently

Front 100

how does interdependency cause conflict

Back 100

competition for limited resources

Front 101

how does physical layout cause conflict

Back 101

miscommunication may occur
employees may feel personal space is being violated

Front 102

d: dilbertization effect

Back 102

conflict arising from working too closely with someone

Front 103

d: centralization

Back 103

power located in the hands of just 1 person or 1 unit

Front 104

d: decentralization

Back 104

power located in the heads of specific groups

Front 105

how does centralization create and lessen conflict

Back 105

create: people have less control over decisions
lessen: share similar goals

Front 106

how does decentralization create and lessen conflict

Back 106

create: goals of different units may overlap
lessen: people have more control over decisions

Front 107

what are cognitive causes of conflict

Back 107

differing expectations
perceptions of the other party

Front 108

how does differing expectations cause conflict

Back 108

professionals are more loyal to their career than to an organization and managers might expect them to be more loyal to the organization causing professionals to be unhappy and want to leave

Front 109

how does perceptions of the other party cause conflict

Back 109

a person might perceive the other person's goals will interfere with their own

Front 110

what personality characteristics cause conflict

Back 110

type a
people high in conscientiousness

Front 111

d: dispositional trust

Back 111

people just dont trust each other. causes conflict

Front 112

how does value differences cause conflict

Back 112

people from different countries view conflict differently
us- people perceive conflict is inevitable so engage in conflict activites
asia- people hate conflict and think its highly offensive

Front 113

how do goals cause conflict

Back 113

people with different or rigid/competitive/high are likely to experience conflict

Front 114

how does past performance cause conflict

Back 114

when people receive neg feedback about past performance they are likely to exert more control over the group creating conflict

Front 115

how do previous interactions cause conflict

Back 115

people whove engaged in conflicting behaviors in the past are likely to do so in the future

Front 116

d: conflict escalation

Back 116

when a conflict becomes more intense over time
person begins to care less about their own goals and more focused on hurting the other person

Front 117

d: lose lose

Back 117

neither party gets what they want

Front 118

d: win lose / lose win

Back 118

one party gets what they want while the other doesnt
might occur because of zero sum (when one party can only benefit at the loss of another)

Front 119

d: compromise

Back 119

when one party gives up something so another party can benefit

Front 120

d: win win

Back 120

both parties benefit

Front 121

d: zero sum(distributive)

Back 121

one party benefits at the expense of another, happens when there is competing resources

Front 122

what are the five responses to conflict

Back 122

1) competing
2) compromising
3) avoiding
4) accomodating
5) collaborating

Front 123

d: assertiveness

Back 123

putting your own needs first

Front 124

d: cooperativeness

Back 124

putting the needs of the other first

Front 125

conflict response: competing

Back 125

A high
C low
when parties want to fulfil their own interests at the expense of another
used: when quick/decisive decision is required or the decision is unpopular

Front 126

conflict response: accomodating

Back 126

A low
C high
party forgos their own interests for another
used: when a party believes they cant win

Front 127

conflict response: avoiding

Back 127

A low
C low
when parties forgo both interests
used: to cool down from argument

Front 128

conflict response: compromising

Back 128

A medium
C medium
when parties give up a little and both get a little of what they want
used: when parties are of equal power

Front 129

conflict response: collaborating

Back 129

A high
C high
when parties fully get what they want
used: when concerns are too high to be ignored

Front 130

d: power

Back 130

the ability to get someone to do something for you
the ability to achieve desired outcomes

Front 131

French and Raven's Bases of Ind Power

Back 131

legitamate
reward
coercive
expert
referent

Front 132

French and Raven's Bases of Ind Power: legitimate

Back 132

power resulting from holding a position of authority

Front 133

French and Raven's Bases of Ind Power: reward

Back 133

power resulting from an individual's belief you can produce a desired outcome

Front 134

French and Raven's Bases of Ind Power: coercive

Back 134

power resulting from an individual's belief you will punish them if they do not produce desired outcome
person has to be highly dependent

Front 135

French and Raven's Bases of Ind Power: expert

Back 135

power resulting from unique knowledge
must be irreplaceable

Front 136

French and Raven's Bases of Ind Power: referent

Back 136

power resulting from other individual's desire to be associated with you
most resilient

Front 137

d: strategic contingencies model of power

Back 137

obtain power by being able to address the fundamental issues of the organization

Front 138

sources of strategic contingencies model of power

Back 138

1) dependency
2) ability to cope with uncertainty
3) controlling decision process
4) being irreplaceable

Front 139

d: organizational politics

Back 139

behavior thats directed at furthering your own interests at the expense of the organization

Front 140

d: coalition

Back 140

when a group bands together to support their own interests

Front 141

d: political skill

Back 141

the ability to use the tactics to your benefit

Front 142

political tactics (9)

Back 142

rational persuasion, consultation, personal appeal, ingratiation, inspirational appeal, exchange, coalition, legitimizing, pressure

Front 143

political tactic: rational persuasion

Back 143

use facts to back up your arguement
people high in conscientiousness do this

Front 144

political tactic: consultation

Back 144

tactic where you allow your target to participate in the decision allowing them to become attached and supportive

Front 145

political tactic: personal appeal

Back 145

focus on the loyalty of the target

Front 146

political tactic: ingratiation

Back 146

flattery

Front 147

political tactic: inspirational appeal

Back 147

tactic where you target the target's morals and appeal to them

Front 148

political tactic: exchange

Back 148

favor for a favor

Front 149

political tactic: coalition

Back 149

band together for common interests

Front 150

political tactic: legitimizing

Back 150

make it seem like your request is official

Front 151

political tactic: pressure

Back 151

threats