final cheatsheet

2 Pages
187 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Rotman Commerce
Course
RSM260H1
Professor
Christianson
Semester
Winter

Description
GROUPS Leader-Member Exchange Theory – Focuses on the quality of the relationship that develops between a Formal Groups facilitate the achievement of org goals which includes task forces & committees. leader & employee. Effective leadership processes result if there is a high quality relationship. Informal Groups emerge in response to common interests of the members – they can help or hurt an org. a. High Quality LMX involve high mutual influence & obligation, as well as trust, respect, & loyalty. They Stages of Group Development – Forming (testing waters), Storming (conflict & roles), Norming (resolve provide employees with challenging tasks & opportunities, greater latitude/discretion, task-related issue, develop consensus, interdependence & comprises are reached & the group is more cohesive) resources, & recognition. b. Low Quality relationships/Low LMX involve low trust, respect, & obligation. Performing (creativity & mutual assistance), Adjourning (parties, emotional support, etc.) Employees do only what they need to, not beyond. c. Higher LMX is related to higher satisfaction, org GROUP STRUCTURE: 1) GROUP SIZE (3-20 members) 2) DIVERSE groups argue more but have more commitment, OCB, role clarity, job performance, lower role conflict & turnover. creativity 4) Norms (collective not individual) 5) Roles 6) Status Transactional Leadership - based on a straightforward exchange relationship between the leader & Types of Group Tasks: Additive – the more people, the better performance (like building a house), or followers. Involves contingent reward behaviour (e.g. do this task well, reward with money), & Disjunctive (Perf depends on that of the best member, more ppl can lead to better perf), or Conjunctive management by exception (take corrective action before problems are created). They clarify path to goals, (Perf limited by the poorest performer, like an assembly line. Larger = worse). & reward behaviour. Very ROUTINE, can be hard tho. Actual Performance = Potential Perf – Process Losses (Problems motivating/coordinating larger groups) Transformational Leadership - provides followers with a new vision that instils true commitment. He Group Norms – collective expectations about behaviour; People even comply with norms they don’t agree changes the attitudes & beliefs of followers & motivates to achieve performance beyond expectations. with because it provides regularity & predictability. They save time & prevent social confusion & they There are four key dimensions: include dress codes, reward allocation, & performance norms (when take break). 1. Intellectual Stimulation – challenges assumptions, take risks, novel & creative ideas (Apple) Roles – positions in groups that have a set of expected behaviours. Designated roles are prescribed to 2. Individualized Consideration - having concern for personal needs of employees (military) divide labour; Emergent Roles naturally develop to meet social needs. Role ambiguity occurs when the 3. Inspirational Motivation – communicate inspiriting ideas, stimulate enthusiasm, high standards, & task is unclear, often due to org factors, the role sender, or the focal person. Leads to stress, reduced MEANING for the task at hand commitment, lower perf, & intentions to quit. Role Conflict happens when one is placed with incompatible 4. Charisma – idealized influence, or the ability to command strong loyalty & have potential for strong responsibilities. Intrasender role conflict occurs when a role sender provides incompatible expectations to influence upon followers. This is the most important aspect of transformational leadership. It offers the the doer (take it easy, but do all this). Intersender role conflict happens when there are different emotional aspect of leadership. Although charisma may not lead to performance, transformational expectations for the role occupant. Interrole Conflict happens when someone is too involved in different leadership DOES. aspects of the business. Person-role conflict happens when the demands of the role are incompatible with RESEARCH: transform was more related to follower satisfaction & leader effectiveness, while contingent the personality or skills of the occupant. reward was more related to job satisfaction & leader performance. Transform is ESPECIALLY useful during Status – the rank, social position, or prestige accorded to group members. Formal status systems have times of change. They develop high LMX relationships, self-efficacy, & enhancing the five core job titles & symbols, while informal is just recognition. Problem: ppl only talk to their own status characteristics model factors. The best leaders however, are BOTH transactional & transformational. Group Cohesiveness – the degree to which the group is attractive to its members. Under extreme threat, Laissez-Faire Leadership – complete freedom for employees; good for highly skilled & motivated increased cohesiveness won’t help, success increases cohesiveness, diversity doesn’t matter as long as employees, but leads to the lowest productivity & satisfy. ideas are agreed, the smaller the better, toughness of initiation increases cohesiveness as well. More Ethical Leadership is the demonstration of normatively appropriate conduct through personal actions & cohesiveness leads to more participation, conformity, & success (if goals align with the org; sometimes interpersonal relationships, & the promotion of such conduct to followers through two-way productivity can be low, has similar productivity) Cohesiveness is the best predictor of performance, & communication, reinforcement, & decision making. They care about people & the broader society & seek can be increased by smaller groups, more time together, admission difficulty, competition, rewards, etc. to do the right thing personally & professionally. Social Loafing – tendency to withhold physical or intellectual effort when performing a group task. It’s a DECISION MAKING motivational problem that has two forms: Free Rider effect – people lower their effort at the expense of Decision Making: The process of developing a commitment to some course of action. Rational Decision their fellow members doing all the work, or Sucker effect – lower effort because others are ‘free-riding’, to Making. Involves choice & commitment of resources, it’s a process. Problem: gap between now&desired maintain equality. To counter it: Make individual performance more visible, make sure work is interesting, Perfect Rationality – completely informed, has logical preferences, & focused on economic gain increase feelings of indispensability, & Increase feedback + rewards Bounded Rationality – relies on limited information & reflects time constraints & political considerations, LEADERSHIP deals with emotions/moods/etc. Leadership -influence that particular individuals exert on the goal achievement of others – it should Framing – aspects of the presentation of information about a problem that are assumed by decision enhance productivity, innovation, satisfaction, & commitment. Strategic leaders are helpful in turbulent makers. A frame can include assumptions about the possible outcomes, or the references points used. times because they anticipate changes. Managers can hold leadership roles but not be a leader. Cognitive Biases – tendencies to acquire & process information in an error-prone way, such as →Traits – characteristics like attributes, ability, & personality. Leadership traits include: intelligence, confirmation bias (the tendency to seek out info that conforms to one’s one biased solution), or the emotional stability, agreeableness, dominance, need for achieve, motivation to lead, confident anchoring effect (the inadequate adjustment of estimates that serves as an anchor). Holding ppl Trait theory of leadership predicts leader EMERGENCE better than leader Effectiveness! accountable before the decision is made can prevent biases, or availability bias (make decisions based on Behavioural Leadership – leaders aren’t born, but trained. It’s about their leadership style & what they do. recent, vivid memories) →Consideration –extent a leader is approachable & shows personal concern & respect for employees. Satisficing - establishes an adequate level of acceptability for a solution & screens solutions until he finds →Initiating Structure –degree a leader concentrates on group goal attainment; stresses procedures; one that exceeds this level. Eval. of alternatives ceases. Many orgs do this done under bounded rationality assigns roles, schedules work. (Structuring leader defines & organizes his role) In evaluation, ppl tend to be overconfident in their decisions. Escalation of Commitment can occur when ^Both contribute positively to motivation, satisfaction, & leader effectiveness. However, Hard one devotes more resources to a failing project/action. People high in neuroticism & negative affectivity Work/Pressure →structure, Intrinsically Satisfying → none, Clear Job Methods → Consideration, Employees are less likely to escalate commitment. To avoid it: experiment with solutions, set goals, emphasize HOW a Lack Knowledge → Structure decision is made & not if it’s successful, & separate initial & subsequent decision makers. GROUPS ARE Leader Reward Behaviour: positively related to employees’ perceptions (trust), attitudes (satis. & MORE PRONE. commitment), & behaviour (effort, performance, OCB). Leader punishment Behaviour led to favourable Hindsight: The tendency to review what was done right or wrong. One bias is the knew-it-all-along effect, employee perceptions, non-contingent led to bad outcomes. or taking too much responsibility for success. Situational Leadership: Effectiveness of leadership style depends on the setting (Char of employees, GROUP DECISION MAKING: Advantages – higher quality, acceptance & commitment, & diffusion of nature of task, char of the organization) responsibility. Disadvantages: Time, Conflict, Domination, Bystander Effect, Groupthink(The capacity for 1)FIEDLER’s CONTINGENCY THEORY: Leadership orientation & Group effectiveness depends on the group pressure to damage the quality of decision-making in groups. Unanimous acceptance is stressed, & situation. Least Preferred Co-Worker is measured by asking the leader to describe someone with whom he strong identification with the group, concern for approval, & isolation of the group from other info can has had a hard time getting the job done. If it’s HIGH (favourable), then he is a Relationship Leader. If it’s contribute to this. To prevent it, leaders should Encourage Dissent & avoid pressure towards one solution) LOW, he is a Task Leader. This is an attitude, not behaviour (like consideration & initiating structure). Risky Shift – tendency for groups to make riskier decisions. Group discussions (groupshift) tend to a. Situational Favourableness depends on: Leader-Member Relations, Task Structure, & Position Power exaggerate the groups’ initial position (more in virtual) b. Task orientation is good when the situation is favourable or extremely unfavourable. Relationship is IMPROVING GROUP DECISIONS: good for the middle 4-7. Training discussion leaders, managing/stimulating controversy (Devil’s Advocate), Traditional & Electronic c. REVISED: Cognitive Resource Theory – how intelligence/experience contribute to leadership. Brainstorming (In life, the more people, the less ideas/person due to inhibition & dominance), Nominal Intelligence is most effective when the leader is directive, the group supports him, & it’s low-stress. Under Group Technique (brainstorming w/o interaction), & The Delphi Technique (questionnaires) high stress, work experience is more important. CONFLICT 2)HOUSE’S PATH-GOAL THEORY: the situations under which leader Behaviours are most effective. The Relationship Conflict – interpersonal tensions among individuals that have to do with their relationship, effective leader forms a connection between employee goals & org goals. Leaders must make rewards such as personality clashes. dependent on performance, provide support through guidance, & have behaviour that is satisfying to Task Conflict – concerns the nature of the work, such as opinion differences about goals/technical matters. others. a. Leader Behaviour: Directive (like structure), Supportive (see consideration), Participative, Process Conflict – disagreements about how work should be organized & accomplished, like responsibility, Achievement-Oriented (encouraging towards a high level of goal accomplishment, confident that goals can authority, resource allocation, etc. be met) b. High need-achievers need AO Leadership, Low task Abilities like Directive, clear & routine work Modes of Managing Conflict: Avoiding (low assertiveness & cooperation) Good when ppl need to cool discourages directive/participative, as opposed to challenging & ambiguous. Frustrating jobs should have down or opponent is too strong. Accommodating (high C but low A) Good when you’re wrong or want supportive leadership. Better predictor of job satisfaction then performance goodwill. Competing (high A & low C) Good if you have power, sure of facts, & won’t interact with them Participative Leadership – involving employees in making work-related decisions. It can increase employee again. Compromise (medium levels of C & A) Satisfice instead of maximize; it’s not creative or good for motivation (adds to autonomy → satisfaction, enriched jobs). More participation leads to higher quality power issues. Fallback. Collaborative (high levels of C & A) Win-win situation where both parties have decisions, & they empower employees to take direct action to solve problems. Involvement also leads to useful information. Acceptance (fairness). Increases satisfaction. Cons: too much time & energy to make decisions, loss of Negotiation: a decision-making process among interdependent parties who don’t share same preferences - power, & lack of receptivity or Knowledge (when the leader is not trusted or work env is bad) prevents conflict & reaches a satisfactory exchange. Autocratic/Directive Leadership – Individual control over all group decisions w/o feedback from others. Distributive Negotiation: assumes a zero-sum, win-lose situation which a fixed pie is divided among They dictate the work methods. Can be effective when quick decisions need to be made, or when it is parties. In b/w competition & accommodation, so compromise is usually made. Tactics include: Threats & stressful. High productivity. Promises, Firmness vs. Concessions (deadlock can occur), & Persuasion. Integrative Negotiation: mutual problem solving can result in a win-win situation where the pie is relationships (like others, want others to like them, social networking, communicate a lot, avoid conflicts & enlargened. It lies b/w avoiding & collaborating. They can happen simultaneously! Tactics include: Copious competition- ex: social worker)/ Need for power: desire to influence others, make big impact, impressn (seek social setting to be influential, act in high profile attention getting manner, strong concern for info exchange, Framing differences as opportunities, Cutting costs, increasing resources, & increasing personal prestige, power used to serve power seeker, others, or org – ex: journalist, manager) superordinate goals (attractive outcomes as a result of collaboration). Need theories managerial implications: appreciate diversity(evaluate individuals), & intrinsic motivation Mediation: a neutral third party helps facilitate a negotiated agreement. They aid the process or Expectancy theory: motivation is determined by the outcomes that people expect to occur as a result of atmosphere of negotiation. They help both parties clarify their interest to themselves & to each other. their actions on the job. Outcomes:1st lvl(interest of org), 2 lvl(interest of worker-pay)/Instrumentality: st nd Intervene in the content of the negotiation, pointing out new options or point of agreement. Works best prob 1 lvl outcome will b followed by 2 lvl outcome/ Valence:expected value of work outcome when conflict is not intense & both are resolved to negotiate/compromise. (attractive/unattractive)/ Expectancy:prob worker can do 1 lvl outcome/ Force: effort directed to 1 lvl st outcome. ||ppl motivated work activities they find attractive & feel can accomplish, attractiveness Arbitration: a third party is given authority to dictate the terms of settlement of a conflict. They can agree to this, or it can be mandated by law. This doesn’t lead to integrative solutions. In conventional arbitration, depends on extent which they lead to good personal consequences (pay, benefit) Managerial implications for expectancy theory: boost expectancies, clarify reward, and appreciate diverse needs the arbitrator can choose any outcome, like splitting the differences b/w two parties. In final offer Goal setting theory: goals are motivational when they’re specific (specify to exact level of achievement
More Less

Related notes for RSM260H1

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit