Decision-Making Critical Review Vroom V H  Research Paper
- Length: 8 pages
- Sources: 8
- Subject: Psychology
- Type: Research Paper
- Paper: #12534437
Excerpt from Research Paper :
The two scenarios are likely to sway employees to provide false information if they are encouraged. However, the relationship had much strength in the positive. Therefore, in this study, there were clear choices. The participants were required to either tell the truth or lie. If things were easy for individuals in the world, lines of making moral decisions tend to be much fuzzier, however, the bottom line remains the same and rules. When making decisions, time to talk to someone or think is likely to assist individuals make decisions that are more ethically sound (Gunia, Wang, Huang, Wang & Murnighan, 2012).
Shin, S., J., Kim, T., Y., Lee, J., Y. & Bian. L. (2012). Cognitive team diversity and individual team member creativity: A cross-level interaction. Academy of Management Journal Volume: 55, Issue: 1, Pages: 197-212
A creative group work brings joy to a firm. Organizations must ensure that their teams act as creative, effective, and cohesive units. It is so simple for this to be achieved even though it may not be rudimentary as most organizations perceive. In this paper, I seek to venture outside the box of this article. Team creativity entails creativity of the team members in their contribution towards group output. Further, we can look at it as the entire creative group output. However, this would not be good if team members take the same line of thought. Group work requires cognitive team diversity. This must be based on psychology that calls for group members to think along different lines. In addition, it must have different skills and knowledge and individuals must bring diverse beliefs and values on board. In this regard, the logical step would be cognitive group diversity; thinking along different lines. This is likely to lead to enhanced creativity within team members. This is reasonable when individual employees generate different thoughts, they tend to develop different ideas (Shin, Kim, Lee & Bian, 2006).
However, firms should not think that this is easy. The model suggested by Shin, Kim, Lee, and Bian needs to incorporate two more components; Leadership and efficiency. With a charismatic team leader, the real deal would be the relationship between team creativity and team diversity. Nevertheless, when the leader lacks charisma, the team is likely to lack transformational relationships between team diversity and creativity. Similarly, creative self-efficiency is also important. Self-efficiency among members of team enables them attain the essence that creativity is appreciated and warranted. All teams have an opportunity to be creative. All they require is to ensure that they appoint the right group leader and also ensure that all team members feel fuzzy and warm about sharing their ideas (Shin, Kim, Lee & Bian, 2006).
Bridoux, F., Coeurderoy, R., and Durand, R. (2011). Heterogeneous Motives and the Collective Creation of Value. Academy of Management Review, vol. 36 no. 4 711-730.
In a world with the increasing scarcity of resources, companies must pursue to boost all kinds of available competitive advantages. They have suggested that competitive advantage is developed from employees who work competitively towards creating a collective value: this involves effective use of company resources. They have also provided a theoretical summary, which claim that companies are likely to enhance outperformance and collective value creation by aligning motivational systems and employees' motives. The authors pose that these alignments should occur at the individual level, as well as between the individual levels (Bridoux, Coeurderoy & Durand, 2007).
To begin with, Bridoux has described the variations between individuals' dispositions of motives. Individuals are either reciprocators or self-guarded attitudes. Such mixed types of motivations among individuals are likely to cause different reactions to different motivational systems used by firms. Out of the major ideal motivational systems, monetary rewards to individuals hold the assumption that all people are self-regarding. On the other side, benevolent cooperation is of the assumption that people are capable of benevolently creating value. Finally, disciplined cooperation holds that there are mixtures of motives in a firm. Disciplined cooperation entails punishment and rewards imposed through reciprocating in case of absent authority sanctions. Disciplined cooperation has been recommended as the best when firms comprise of various types of motivational systems and incorporates rarely observed work by direct authorities (Bridoux, Coeurderoy & Durand, 2007).
As we understand that such motivational systems are likely to be effective in accommodating motivational among individual variations, they have emphasized the importance of firms to align their differences with the firm's motivational systems. The authors have described the individual motivational variation as the tension arising from the motivation of ensuring that firms are successful vs. The motivation of making sure that individuals remain successful. The authors have claimed that relieving such tensions by embracing motivational systems that fill relational and economic needs. For instance, they have mentioned employee motivation through h stock options. Indeed, this is likely to establish congruence between mixtures of motives of seeking to work for the firm's needs and serve individual needs. This is achieved through developing attitudes based on the concept where firms succeed, and individuals succeed. By being attentive and focusing on such conflicting motivations, managers are poised to ensure that their subordinates work in cooperation with each other and the entire organization in maximizing the collective company value (Bridoux, Coeurderoy & Durand, 2007).
Bechara, A. (2004). The role of emotion in decision-making: Evidence from neurological patients with orbitofrontal damage. Brain and cognition, 55(1), 30-40
Bridoux, F., Coeurderoy, R., and Durand, R. (2011). Heterogeneous Motives and the Collective
Creation of Value. Academy of Management Review, vol. 36 no. 4 711-730
Connolly, T. & Ordonez, L. 2003. Judgment and Decision Making. Handbook of Psychology.
Three: 493 -- 517
Gunia, B.C., Wang, L., Huang, L., Wang, J., & Murnighan, J.K. (2012). Contemplation and conversation: subtle Influences on moral decision-making. Academy of Management
Journal, 55(1), 13-33
Maier, N.R. (1967). Assets and liabilities in group problem solving: the need for an integrative function. Psychological Review; Psychological Review, 74(4), 239
Shin, S., J., Kim, T., Y., Lee, J., Y. & Bian.…