Introduction
Norms and Conformity – Describe best practices for utilizing groups
Introduction
Norms and Conformity – Describe best practices for utilizing groups and work teams in organizations: Advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion through groups and teams.
Directions
Choose either the point or counterpoint to argue for both cases with justification and evidence. Label your choice clearly.
Complete the assigned critical thinking task and submit your work for review. Please note that there is no length requirement; however, your submission should completely address each case using supporting material and properly credit any borrowed information (paraphrased, summarized, or quoted) using APA format.
Case 1 ~ Point/Counterpoint
Conformity Is Counterproductive and Should Be Avoided
PointWhile individuals may have good intentions when trying to conform or fit in, this inauthenticity can negatively impact psychological and emotional well-being. Although conformity can be unintentional, with many unknowingly falling in line with the rest of the group, it can also be an intentional process that should be avoided. Conformity strips people of their autonomy and authenticity. When employees can be their authentic selves, there are multiple benefits, including lower stress levels and increased overall well-being. In more extreme cases, conformity can even lead to serious unethical behavior and group division. For instance, social media has created conformity dynamics that make it extremely easy for people to band together under common interests. These groups divide the world into ingroups and outgroups and criticize others who think differently as evil or reprehensible. Conformity may be highly responsible for this polarization. People look to trusted members of ingroups for how to feel or act, signal to other members they “belong” to the group, echo important group members’ beliefs or positions, and perpetuate the spread of problematic information through the network in a social cascade. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, these cascades led to the retweeting and reposting of inaccurate information by thousands of people (e.g., viral inaccurate memes about the virus). As Adam Grant describes in his book Originals: How Non-Conformists Move the World, individuals who think for themselves and do not go along with ideas just because they are popular can be some of the best innovators. Organizations need more “shapers,” or what Grant calls the independent and curious thinkers. Because they are not consumed by a fear of failing and do not hesitate to break norms, they can also influence others to be more original. Although deviating from the group is often no easy task, ultimately, it can lead individuals to be more innovative, productive, and satisfied at work.
CounterpointThere is a time and place for conformity, particularly when it can help support an organization’s larger goals. Research has shown that peer pressure can be very effective at motivating individuals to conform to certain norms. In one study on improving hand hygiene in hospitals, an intervention that utilized peer pressure was more effective than a monetary incentive in improving hand hygiene. In this case, doctors were pressured to conform to the desired norm of hand hygiene through strategies like appreciation notes, celebratory emails, and firm reminders of the importance of cooperating to achieve a collective goal. In this case, conformity was key to the health and safety of patients.
Furthermore, conformists may be crucial to innovation in organizations. Although teams with creative individuals can develop excellent ideas, many innovative ideas may never be executed. If members of the group dislike rules and are prone to conflict, they may reject the ideas and refuse to implement them. However, when there is a balance within the team, including both nonconformists and conformists, there is greater group cohesion, facilitating creative ideas that will benefit the organization. Thus, although conformists may not be as helpful in generating innovative ideas, they can dramatically increase a group’s ability to innovate. As such, conformity is hardly counterproductive.
Sources: P. Bregman, “The High Cost of Conformity and How to Avoid It,” Harvard Business Review, October 21, 2015, https://hbr.org/2015/10/the-high-cost-of- conformity-and-how-to-avoid-it; S. Gallani, “Incentives Don’t Help People Change, but Peer Pressure Does,” Harvard Business Review, March 23, 2017, https:// hbr.org/2017/03/incentives-dont-help-people-change-but-peer-pressure-does; A. Grant, Originals: How Non-Conformists Move the World (New York, NY: Penguin Books, 2016); P. F. Hewlin, S. S. Kim, and Y. H. Song, “Creating Facades of Conformity in the Face of Job Insecurity: A Study of Consequences and Conditions,” Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 89, no. 3 (2016): 539–67; Z. Jilani, “How Conformity Can Be Good or Bad for Society,” Greater Good, May 30, 2019, https://greatergood.berkeley. edu/article/item/how_conformity_can_be_good_ and_bad_for_society; E. Matchar, “Innovators May Be Non-Conformists, but They Are Not Risk-Takers,” Smithsonian Magazine, February 26, 2016, https:// www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/innovators- non-conformists-but-not-risk-takers-180958218/; E. Miron-Spektor, “Why Conformists Are Key to Successful Innovation,” Harvard Business Review, October 2, 2013, https://hbr.org/2013/10/why-conformists-are-a-key-…
Case 2 ~ Point/Counterpoint
Team Building Exercises Are a Waste of Time
PointIt is easy to see why team-building exercises have become so popular. They are usually advertised as exciting or fun activities for the entire office, such as bowling nights or ropes courses, that offer an escape from the office. However, the reality is that these exercises are often extremely costly and do not live up to their goals of building team relationships and improving collaboration. Some may be convinced by the enthusiastic testimonials, but in reality, the research indicates that team-building interventions do not have a significant effect on team performance (when conducted in a large-scale and entertainment-centric way). Furthermore, research has found that managers should be more focused on enhancing individual motivation to create effective teams. While strong relationships and trust are essential for collaboration, they are not necessarily the starting point.
Unfortunately, any potential benefits of team-building activities are often short-lived and soon forgotten when employees return to their day-to-day work. While teams can be valuable and necessary, there is such a thing as an overemphasis on collaborative activities. Data from the past decade shows that the time spent by managers and employees involved in collaborative activities has grown by 50 percent or more. Rather than focusing so much time and money on team-building exercises, organizations would be wise to monitor and recognize when collaborative work is needed. By allocating team tasks and purposefully forming teams, they can prevent an overabundance of team tasks that can leave employees feeling burned out and stressed.
CounterpointTeam-building exercises may have a groan-worthy reputation for many employees, but that does not mean we should do away with them altogether. In fact, they can be quite effective if they are implemented correctly. Team-building exercises have been found to improve team processes and states. Team building is also particularly effective at improving affective outcomes, including trust and team potency (e.g., team self-efficacy—a belief shared by team members that their group can effectively achieve their goals). These exercises are very different than the type of team-based activities that are simply fun, advertised in popular culture. But if only implemented on a one-off basis, they may only lead to temporary improvements in team performance.
Instead, effective team-building exercises focus on the needs relevant to a specific team. Furthermore, they include discussion and experiences that facilitate self-discovery, lead to concrete action plans, and involve accountability for team members meeting the action plans. It also appears that investing in team training that includes improving social support and conflict management can be worthwhile. These improvements can enhance the functioning of a team, which in turn can positively impact the team performance. Thus, companies should devote resources toward properly conducting team-building activities based on needs and that are a part of a continuous team performance management system. In so doing, they may find that they can be valuable in improving team performance and effectiveness.
Sources: S. Choo, “Is Your Team-Building Exercise a Waste of Time and Money?
Introduction
Describe the types of interpersonal communication; Evaluate how to choose communication methods and handle barriers to effective communication: Factors influencing effective communication in organizations; Identify the challenges and opportunities to our understanding of leadership.
Directions
Complete the assigned critical thinking task (ethical dilemma and reflective thinking on leadership) and submit your work for review. Please note that there is no length requirement; however, your submission should completely address each question using supporting material and properly credit any borrowed information (paraphrased, summarized, or quoted) using APA format.
Ethical Dilemma
BYOD
“What’s your cell phone number? Good, I’ll call you about the meeting.” If you’re like many people in the world who have used a smartphone for years, or one of the 1.4 billion people who bought one recently, chances are you’ve used it for work. In fact, your employer may have even invited—or asked—you to use your smartphone, tablet, or laptop in your job. Such is the bring-your-own-device (BYOD) trend, which started out of friendly convenience but now carries major ethical issues. For instance:
Did you know your employer can wipe your personal devices clean? Remotely? With no warning? It happens, especially considering that 31 percent of organizations require employees to BYOD to work and 61 percent of organizations expect their employees to be available remotely, without giving company-owned devices. Anytime an organization has a privacy concern, it may wipe all devices clean to prevent a further breach of its cyber defenses, as long as the employee has consented to a “mobile device management” agreement. For instance, Rivers (a former transgender Google employee) had her entire personal phone wiped almost completely to the point that it appeared like it was back at factory settings. This was especially painful for Rivers, who lost four months of her transition timeline photos that she will not be able to get back.
Is your device part of your employment contract, either explicitly or by understanding? If so, who pays for the device? Well, you did, and you continue to pay for the service. If the device breaks, then who pays for the replacement device? Can you lose your job if you can’t afford the device and service?
Can you use your device for all work-related communications? The cloud has brought opportunities for people to send classified work information anywhere, anytime. Organizations are concerned about what social media, collaboration, and file-sharing applications are in use, which is fair, but some policies can limit how you use your own device.
Once you use your personal device for work, where are the boundaries between work and home life? Research indicates that intensive smartphone users, for instance, need to disengage in their off-hours to prevent work–home stress and burnout. Yet not everyone can do this even if they are allowed to; research indicates that a significant proportion of smartphone users felt pressured to access their devices around the clock, whether or not that pressure was warranted.
The clear dilemma for employees is whether to acknowledge you own a smart device, and whether to offer its use for your employer’s convenience. Put that way, it seems obvious to say no: Why would you risk possibly later losing everything to a corporate swipe? But the convenience of carrying one phone is real. Some people think it’s just better to carry two phones—one for work, another for personal use. Attorney Luke Cocalis tried it and concluded, “It frankly keeps me saner.”
Sources: S. E. Ante, “Perilous Mix: Cloud, Devices from Home,” The Wall Street Journal, February 20, 2014, B4; D. Derks and A. B. Bakker, “Smartphone Use, Work-Home Interference, and Burnout: A Diary Study on the Role of Recovery,” Applied Psychology: An International Review 63, no. 3 (2014): 411–440; L. Duxbury, C. Higgins, R. Smart, and M. Stevenson, “Mobile Technology and Boundary Permeability,” British Journal of Management 25 (2014): 570–588; E. Holmes, “When One Phone Isn’t Enough,” The Wall Street Journal, April 2, 2014, D1, D2; C. Mims, “2014: The Year of Living Vulnerably,” The Wall Street Journal, December 22, 2014, B1, B2; L. Weber, “Leaving a Job? Better Watch Your Cellphone,” The Wall Street Journal, January 22, 2014; and E. Yost, “Can an Employer Remotely Wipe an Employee’s Cellphone?” HR Magazine, July 2014, 19.
Questions
1. Do you use your smartphone or other personal devices for work? If so, do you think this adds to your stress level or helps you by providing convenience? If not, how would you feel about doing so and why?
2. Cocalis likes the two-phone lifestyle and says that his supervisor has his personal phone number only for emergencies. But assistant talent manager Chloe Ifshin reports it doesn’t work so well in practice. “I have friends who are clients and clients who are friends,” she says, so work contacts end up on her personal phone and friends call her work phone. How does this consideration affect your thinking about using your own device for both work and leisure?
3. Organizations are taking steps to protect themselves from what employees might be doing on their personal devices through allowing only approved computer programs and stricter policies, but no federal regulations protect employees from these restrictions. What ethical initiatives might organizations adopt to make this situation fair for everyone?
Defend your opinions on each of the items using ethical criteria.
Sources: Based on S. E. Ante, “Perilous Mix: Cloud, Devices From Home,” The Wall Street Journal, February 20, 2014, B4; S. Captain, “If you use your personal phone for work, say goodbye to your privacy,” FastCompany December 9, 2019, https:// www.fastcompany.com/90440073/if-you-use-your- personal-phone-for-work-say-goodbye-to-your-privacy; D. Derks and A. B. Bakker, “Smartphone Use, Work-Home Interference, and Burnout: A Diary Study on the Role of Recovery,” Applied Psychology: An International Review 63, no. 3 (2014): 411–40; E. Holmes, “When One Phone Isn’t Enough,” The Wall Street Journal, April 2, 2014, D1, D2; L. Nagele-Piazza, “Portable devices create data-security challenges,” Society for Human Resource Management: Technology [blog], November 20, 2018, https://www.shrm.org/ resourcesandtools/hr-topics/technology/pages/ portable-devices-create-data-security-challenges. aspx; Oxford Economics and Samsung, Maximizing Mobile Value: Is BYOD Holding you Back? (Oxford, UK: Oxford Economics, June 2018); L. Weber, “Leaving a Job? Better Watch Your Cellphone,” The Wall Street Journal, January 22, 2014; E. Yost, “Can an Employer Remotely Wipe an Employee’s Cellphone?” HR Magazine ( July 2014): 19.
Reflective Thinking on Leadership
After reviewing the ethical dilemma, consider the issue of character and character building as an ingredient in effective leadership. One of the fundamental reasons for a leader to have integrity is because it is a cornerstone of great leadership.
As evidenced by the growing number of corporate scandals of which almost all involve the CEO and other top officers, corporate America in many cases is missing one essential leadership ingredient—character. Character building may well be one of the new buzz words that will be heard across the airways and Internet in the next few years as a prescription for what is wrong with our current state of top management. Corporate leadership has failed its character test in the last few years and has some ground to make up in the future. Character is not just a manager’s psychological profile carried to an extreme. It is, to use an old phrase, doing the right things, not just doing things right. To learn about character, young executives should go through self-awareness training, study, and, most importantly, experiential training with respect to character issues.
As plebes in the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, “new” managers of men and women are taught eleven principles of leadership from the Army’s manual, Principles of Leadership. The principles (summated) are as follows: (1) Know yourself and seek self-improvement; (2) Be technically and tactically proficient; (3) Seek responsibility and take responsibility for your actions; (4) Make sound and timely decisions; (5) Set the example; (6) Know your subordinates and look out for their well-being; (7) Keep your subordinates informed; (8) Develop a sense of responsibility in your subordinates; (9) Ensure that the task is understood, supervised, and accomplished; (10) Train your personnel as a team; and (11) Employ your wit in accordance with its capabilities. Following these principles can certainly improve one’s character.
Share your thoughts.
1. Explain your views on the importance of character in effective leadership.
2. Using the eleven principles of leadership (highlighted above), list which principles would be most instrumental in developing character in a leader with reasoning.
3. Which theory of leadership do you feel is most meaningful and applicable to effective leadership and why?
Introduction
Apply the five steps of the negotiation process; Show how individual differences influence negotiations; Describe the nature of conflict and the negotiation process; Explain influence tactics and their contingencies in organizations; Analyze elements of an organization’s structure.
Directions
Complete the assigned critical thinking task (myth or science case) and submit your work for review. Please note that there is no length requirement; however, your submission should completely address each question using supporting material and properly credit any borrowed information (paraphrased, summarized, or quoted) using APA format.
Myth or Science?
Good Negotiators Rely on Intuition
Intuition often fails us in negotiation due to the unconscious biases we hold. In fact, negotiators may unintentionally engage in behavior that contradicts their values and ethical standards. The ethical implications of a decision are often apparent when one prepares for a negotiation. However, the implications of our decisions often fade away during the actual negotiation as we become more focused on pragmatic concerns. As a result, the cognitions and biases of negotiators can interfere with reaching agreements that reflect our interests.
Researchers have studied negotiators who engaged in empathizing (emotionally feeling what the other party was feeling) and those who engaged in perspective taking (view the world from the other person’s perspective). The evidence indicated that individuals are better prepared to negotiate when they imagine how their counterpart is thinking, not how they feel.
While we are often capable of identifying the biases that influence others, we are often unaware of the biases that impact our behavior in negotiations. This disconnect can be explained by what psychologists have identified as two different lenses, the insider lens and the outsider lens, that individuals utilize during negotiations. A negotiator usually uses an insider lens to make decisions when they are deeply engaged in a specific situation and relying on intuitive thinking. On the other hand, a negotiator tends to adopt an outsider lens when they are removed from a situation and using rational thinking. Unfortunately, adopting the outsider lens is frequently not the default option during negotiations. However, utilizing the outsider lens rather than relying on intuition is vital in preventing negotiators from being influenced by biases that can ultimately lead negotiators to make irrational decisions.
Sources: Based on J. Brett, “Negotiation,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 136 (2016): 68–79; M. R. Rees, A. E. Tenbrunsel, and M. H. Bazerman, “Bounded Ethicality and Ethical Fading in Negotiations: Understanding Unintended Unethical Behavior,” Academy of Management Perspectives 33, no. 1 (2019): 26–42; PON Staff, “Essential Negotiation Skills: Limiting Cognitive Bias in Negotiations,” Program on Negotiation Harvard Law School, January 7, 2021, https://www. pon.harvard.edu/daily/negotiation-skills-daily/ integrative-negotiation-and-negotiating-rationally/
Reflective Thinking
Describe the nature of conflict and the negotiation process.
Watch the video, “Chris Voss – 3 Tips on Negotiations, with FBI NegotiatorLinks to an external site.”
Discuss if the video supports the claim that unconscious biases impact negotiations (or not).
How would you evaluate your skills as a negotiator and minimize the negative impact biases may have on negotiations?
Explain power and influence tactics including their use(s) in organizations.
How might power and influence be influenced by organizational structure. For example, the characteristics of the virtual structure, the team structure, and the circular structure.