Understanding Social Perception and Managing Diversity Learning Objectives Describe perception in terms of the social information processing model. Identify and briefly explain four managerial implications for social perception. Explain, according to Kelley’s model, how external and internal causal attributions are formulated. Demonstrate your familiarity with the demographic trends that are creating an increasingly diverse workforce. Identify the barriers and challenges to managing diversity. Discuss the organizational practices used to manage diversity identified by Ann Morrison Chapter Four

Perception Defined 4-1 Perception is the process of interpreting one’s environment. McGraw-Hill/Irwin McGraw-Hill © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. © 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

A Social Information Processing Model of Perception 4-2 Figure 4-1 Stage 1 Selective Attention/ Comprehension Stage 2 Encoding and Simplification A Competing environmental stimuli: * People * Events * Objects B Interpretation and categorization A C C D E F F McGraw-Hill/Irwin McGraw-Hill © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. © 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

A Social Information Processing Model of Perception (Cont.) 4-3 Figure 4-1 Stage 3 Storage and Retention Stage 4 Retrieval and Response Memory Judgments and decisions C McGraw-Hill/Irwin McGraw-Hill © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. © 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

Social Information Processing Model Of Perception 4-4 Stage 1: Selective Attention/Comprehension - Attention is the process of becoming aware of something or someone - People pay attention to salient stimuli Stage 2: Encoding and Simplification - Encoding is the process of interpreting environmental stimuli by using information contained in cognitive categories and schemata - The same information can be interpreted differently by people due to individual differences McGraw-Hill/Irwin McGraw-Hill © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. © 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

Social Information Processing Model of Perception (Cont.) 4-5 Stage 3: Storage and Retention - Encoded information or stimuli is sent to long- term memory - Long-term memory is composed of three compartments containing categories of information about events, semantic materials, and people Stage 4: Retrieval and Response - Information is retrieved from memory when people make judgments and decisions McGraw-Hill/Irwin McGraw-Hill © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. © 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

Stereotypes 4-6 A Stereotype is a belief about the characteristics of a group McGraw-Hill/Irwin McGraw-Hill © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. © 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

Commonly Found Perceptual Errors 4-7 Table 4-1 Perceptual Error Description A rater forms an overall impression about an object and then uses the impression to bias ratings about the object. Halo A personal characteristic that leads an individual to consistently evaluate other people or objects in an extremely positive fashion. Leniency The tendency to avoid all extreme judgments and rate people and objects as average or neutral. Central Tendency McGraw-Hill/Irwin McGraw-Hill © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. © 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

Perceptual Errors (Cont.) Commonly Found Perceptual Errors (Cont.) 4-8 Table 4-1 Perceptual Error Description The tendency to remember recent information. If the recent information is negative, the person or object is evaluated negatively. Recency Effects The tendency to evaluate people or objects by comparing them with characteristics of recently observed people or objects. Contrast Effects McGraw-Hill/Irwin McGraw-Hill © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. © 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

Kelley’s Model of Attribution 4-9 Basic Premise: An attribution is based on the consensus, distinctiveness, and consistency of the observed behavior. Consensus - Involves comparing an individual’s behavior with that of his or her peers. - High consistency indicates an individual is different from peers. Distinctiveness - Involves comparing a person’s behavior or accomplishments on one task with the behavior or accomplishments from other tasks. - Highly distinctive behavior or results represents a situation where the current behavior or result is significantly different from typical behavior or results on other tasks. McGraw-Hill/Irwin McGraw-Hill © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. © 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

Kelley’s Model of Attribution (Cont.) 4-10 Consistency - Involves comparing a person’s behavior or accomplishments on a given task over time. - High consistency implies that a person performs a certain task the same, time after time. Predictions - Internal or personal attributions are made when a behavior is associated with low consensus and distinctiveness, and high consistency. - External or environmental attributions are made when a behavior is related with high consensus and distinctiveness, and low consistency. McGraw-Hill/Irwin McGraw-Hill © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. © 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

Consensus Low High A B C D E A B C D E People People 4-11 Figure 4-2 Low High Individual Performance Individual Performance A B C D E A B C D E People People Source: KA Brown, “Explaining Group Poor Performance: an Attributional Analysis,” Academy of Management Review, January 1984, p 56. Used with permission. McGraw-Hill/Irwin McGraw-Hill © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. © 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

Consensus High Low A B C D E A B C D E Tasks Tasks 4-12 Figure 4-2 High Low Individual Performance Individual Performance A B C D E A B C D E Tasks Tasks Source: KA Brown, “Explaining Group Poor Performance: an Attributional Analysis,” Academy of Management Review, January 1984, p 56. Used with permission. McGraw-Hill/Irwin McGraw-Hill © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. © 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

Consensus Low High Time Time Individual Performance 4-13 Figure 4-2 Low High Individual Performance Individual Performance Time Time Source: KA Brown, “Explaining Group Poor Performance: an Attributional Analysis,” Academy of Management Review, January 1984, p 56. Used with permission. McGraw-Hill/Irwin McGraw-Hill © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. © 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

Attributional Tendencies 4-14 Fundamental attribution bias- ignoring environment factors that affect behavior Self-serving bias- taking more personal responsibility for success than failure McGraw-Hill/Irwin McGraw-Hill © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. © 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

The Four Layers of Diversity 4-15 Figure 4-3 Organizational Dimensions Functional Level/ Classification External Dimensions* Geographic Location Marital Status Work Content/ Field Mgmt. Status Internal Dimensions* Income Age Personality Parental Status Personal Habits Race Recreational Habits Division/ Dept./ Unit/ Group Appearance Sexual Orientation Union Affiliation Ethnicity Physical Ability Work Experience Religion Educational Background Work Location Seniority Source: L Gardenswartz and A Rowe, Diverse Teams at Work: Capitalizing on the Power of Diversity (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1994), p. 33 McGraw-Hill/Irwin McGraw-Hill © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. © 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

Projected Entrants and Departures in the US Workforce from 2000 to 2010 4-16 Table 4-2 Percent Entrants 2000-2010 Percent Leavers Total Men Women 100 49.6 50.4 55.4 44.6 White (Non-Hispanic) 60.6 77.4 African-American 13.7 11.8 Hispanic 17.9 7.2 Asian and Other Races 7.8 3.6 McGraw-Hill/Irwin McGraw-Hill © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. © 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

Barriers and Challenges to Managing Diversity 4-17 Inaccurate stereotypes and prejudice Ethnocentrism Poor career planning An unsupportive and hostile working environment for diverse employees Lack of political savvy on the part of diverse employees Difficulty in balancing career and family issues Fears of reverse discrimination Diversity is not seen as an organizational priority The need to revamp the organization’s performance appraisal and reward system Resistance to change McGraw-Hill/Irwin McGraw-Hill © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. © 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

Common Diversity Practices: Accountability Practices 4-18 Table 4-3 Top management’s personal intervention Internal advocacy groups Emphasis on EEO statistics, profiles Inclusion of diversity in performance evaluation goals, ratings Inclusion of diversity in promotion, decision criteria Inclusion of diversity in management succession planning Work and family policies Policies against racism, sexism Internal audit or attitude survey Active AA/EEO committee, office McGraw-Hill/Irwin McGraw-Hill © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. © 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

Common Diversity Practices: Development Practices 4-19 Table 4-3 Diversity training programs Networks and support groups Development programs for all high-potential managers Informal networking activities Job rotation Formal mentoring program Informal mentoring program Entry development programs for all high-potential new hires Internal training (such as personal safety or language) Recognition events, awards McGraw-Hill/Irwin McGraw-Hill © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. © 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

Common Diversity Practices: Recruitment Practices 4-20 Table 4-3 Targeted recruitment of non-managers Key outside hires Extensive public exposure on diversity (AA) Corporate image as liberal, progressive, or benevolent Partnerships with educational institutions Recruitment incentives such as cash supplements Internships (such as INROADS) Publications or PR products that highlight diversity Targeted recruitment of managers Partnerships with nontraditional groups McGraw-Hill/Irwin McGraw-Hill © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. © 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.