Ethics in Human Communication Part III. Organizations Organizational Culture and Climate Organizational Culture and Climate Values, beliefs, symbols and.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Decision-Making in Small Groups  Group decisions are usually better than individual ones, but this depends on several factors, including the type of.
Advertisements

Ethics February 21st. Ford/Firestone background Long History deaths in Saudi Arabia (not reported in US) 2000 first deaths reported in the US.
GROUPTHINK in Archived Chapter, 3rd ed.
Chapter 12 Group Dynamics Groups and Social Groups and Social Exchanges Exchanges The Group Development The Group Development Process Process Roles and.
Crisis And Conflict Management
© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Problem Solving & Decision Making II: Deciding & Implementing © 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies,
Social Scientists define a social group as a group of two or more people who have four characteristics: * They interact regularly and influence each other.
Themes in 12 Angry Men Groupthink Obedience to Authority Conformity
Chapter 6 Groups and Teams. Copyright © 2006 by Thomson Delmar Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 2 Purpose and Overview Purpose –To understand effective.
Organizational Behavior: An Experiential Approach 7/E Joyce S. Osland, David A. Kolb, and Irwin M. Rubin 1 ©2001 by Prentice-Hall, Inc. Chapter 15.
Organizational Behaviour Individual and Social Behaviour
© 2011 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. Chapter 10 Decision Making by Individuals & Groups Learning Outcomes.
Organizational Behavior: An Experiential Approach 7/E Joyce S. Osland, David A. Kolb, and Irwin M. Rubin 1 ©2001 by Prentice-Hall, Inc. Chapter 15.
Group and Social Influence on Behavior and Decision Making.
Chuck Millstead – Master Student University of Michigan, Flint
Chapter 17 Decision Making
Lecture 10 Group Behaviour. Outline Introduction: What is a “group”? Effects of Mere Presence Social facilitation Social loafing Working in Groups Leadership.
Chapter 15 Decision Making and Organizational Learning
Bipartisan Reports Cite Groupthink
Re-designing Decision-Making Processes (Kennedy Cases) Prof. Morten Hansen MIIC, April
Putting It all Together Facilitating Learning and Project Groups.
Prepared by Charlie Cook The University of West Alabama © 2012 South-Western, a part of Cengage Learning All rights reserved. Group and Interpersonal Behavior.
Social Psychology Alive, Breckler/Olson/Wiggins Chapter 10 Chapter Ten Group Dynamics and Intergroup Conflict.
©Prentice Hall 2006 CHAPTER FOUR SUPPORTIVE LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOR 4-1.
4e Nelson/Quick ©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole.
The Nature of Managerial Decision Making
“Patrice Zagame’s Team Leadership of Novartis Brazil” Case Study for Chapter 11 “Developing and Leading Teams” by Mohammad Khadim.
DECISION MAKING Chapter 10. Groups Decision Making None of us alone is as smart as all of us together (Myers, 2002)  more people = more information 
1 PSY 321 Dr. Sanchez Obedience/Group Influence. 2 Chapter 8: Group Processes How do groups effect individual effort? How do groups effect individual.
Foundations of Group Behavior
THE ABILENE PARADOX Managing Agreement. History of Abilene Paradox Was observed by management expert Jerry B. Harvey in his 1988 book “The Abilene Paradox.
Organizational Design, Diagnosis, and Development Session 17 Human Process Interventions, II.
How Teams Work. Task and Maintenance Needs  Task Activities – Any activity a team member does that contributes to the group’s performance purpose. 
Introductory Psychology Concepts Instructor name Class Title, Term/Semester, Year Institution © 2011 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Social Influence.
Copyright © 2002 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Slide 1.
Team Proposal Presentation
GroupThink Embracing the Power of the Group Elaine Seat, PhD, PE.
Groupthink What is it? Why should we care about it? What can we do about it?
Abilene Paradox Group members adopt a position because they feel that other group members desire it Team members do not challenge suggestion because they.
Team Presentation Working in Small Groups. Overview of Team Presentation Assignment minutes (i.e. 6-7 mins/team member) 10 minutes for Q & A (audience.
Team Development Objectives To know the stages in the development of teams To understand team roles To understand about team decisions To learn how to.
Defective Decision Making & Problem Solving Small Group Communication.
QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT Making Decisions The purpose of this module is to develop participants’ facilitation and training skills to enable them to enhance.
GroupThink Maria Tierra. What is Group Think?  A form of faulty decision making in cohesive groups in which there is insufficient thinking.
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 8-1 Chapter 8 Participative Management and Leading Teams.
The Process of Decision Making Much of a supervisor’s job is making decisions that cover all of the functions of management. In many cases, supervisors.
Types of Group Interaction
GROUP DECISION MAKING ADVANTAGES BROAD REPRESENTATION TAPS EXPERTISE MORE IDEAS GENERATED EVALUATION OF OPTIONS COORDINATION HIGH ACCEPTANCE DISADVANTAGES.
Groupthink Clip art.
7-1 © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.McGraw-Hill/Irwin The Nature of Managerial Decision Making Decision Making  The process.
Organizational Culture & Environment
Abilene Paradox Group members adopt a position because they feel that other group members desire it Team members do not challenge suggestion because they.
Listening in Groups. Listening - HURIER Hearing Understanding Remembering Interpreting Evaluating Responding.
Do people try less hard when working in groups? If so, why do they do so? Ringleman Effect --- (e.g., with rope pulling task) The average performance (input)
Decision-Making © 2010 Randall B. Dunham. Decision-Making Define decision-making Assess individual versus group decision- making Consider the group phenomenon,
Groupthink When group members striving for agreement (norm for unanimity), fail to realistically appraise alternative courses of action A means for a group.
Eight Main Symptoms of Group Think.
Chapter 15: Decision Making and Organizational Learning
Foundations of Interpersonal and Group Behavior
GROUPTHINK in Archived Chapter, 3rd ed.
How to Eliminate cliques from Schools
Characteristics of Effective Teams
Why should we care about it?
Team Dynamics Chapter 16.
Group Behavior and Influence
Chapter 11 Functioning in Groups.
Groupthink What is Groupthink?
Groupthink.
GROUPTHINK in Archived Chapter, 3rd ed.
Group Behavior and Influence
Presentation transcript:

Ethics in Human Communication Part III

Organizations Organizational Culture and Climate Organizational Culture and Climate Values, beliefs, symbols and customsValues, beliefs, symbols and customs Rituals, ceremonies and narrativesRituals, ceremonies and narratives Heroes, villains and foolsHeroes, villains and fools Misspeaking v. Silence Misspeaking v. Silence

Groupthink Antecedent conditions Antecedent conditions Decision makers are cohesive groupDecision makers are cohesive group Structural faultsStructural faults Insulation of group Insulation of group Lack of tradition of impartial leadership Lack of tradition of impartial leadership Lack of norms for methodological procedures Lack of norms for methodological procedures Homogeneity of group Homogeneity of group Provocative contextProvocative context

High stress from external threatsHigh stress from external threats Low self-esteem from recent failuresLow self-esteem from recent failures Excessive complexityExcessive complexity Moral dilemmasMoral dilemmas Etc.Etc. All lead to concurrence-seeking tendency (Groupthink) All lead to concurrence-seeking tendency (Groupthink)

Symptoms of Groupthink Overestimation of group Overestimation of group Illusion of invulnerabilityIllusion of invulnerability Belief in moralityBelief in morality Closed-mindedness Closed-mindedness Collective rationalizationCollective rationalization Stereotypes of ingroupsStereotypes of ingroups Uniformity pressures Uniformity pressures Self-censorshipSelf-censorship Direct pressureDirect pressure Self-appointed mindguardsSelf-appointed mindguards

Symptoms of Defective Decision Making Incomplete survey of alternatives Incomplete survey of alternatives Incomplete survey of objectives Incomplete survey of objectives Failure to examine risks of preferred choice Failure to examine risks of preferred choice Failure to reappraise rejected choices Failure to reappraise rejected choices Poor information search Poor information search Selective information bias Selective information bias Failure to contingency plan Failure to contingency plan

All leads to... Low probability of successful outcome

Abilene Paradox Limits of a particular situation force a group of people to act in a way that is directly the opposite of their actual preferences Limits of a particular situation force a group of people to act in a way that is directly the opposite of their actual preferences Occurs when groups continue with misguided activities which no group member desires because no member is willing to raise objections. Occurs when groups continue with misguided activities which no group member desires because no member is willing to raise objections. Observed by Jerry B. Harvey in his article The Abilene Paradox and other Meditations on Management Observed by Jerry B. Harvey in his article The Abilene Paradox and other Meditations on Management

The Story “ On a hot afternoon visiting in Coleman, Texas, the family is comfortably playing dominoes on a porch, until the father-in-law suggests that they take a trip to Abilene [53 miles north] for dinner. The wife says, "Sounds like a great idea." The husband, despite having reservations because the drive is long and hot, thinks that his preferences must be out-of-step with the group and says, "Sounds good to me. I just hope your mother wants to go." The mother-in-law then says, "Of course I want to go. I haven't been to Abilene in a long time." The drive is hot, dusty, and long. When they arrive at the cafeteria, the food is as bad. They arrive back home four hours later, exhausted. One of them dishonestly says, "It was a great trip, wasn't it." The mother-in-law says that, actually, she would rather have stayed home, but went along since the other three were so enthusiastic. The husband says, "I wasn't delighted to be doing what we were doing. I only went to satisfy the rest of you." The wife says, "I just went along to keep you happy. I would have had to be crazy to want to go out in the heat like that." The father-in-law then says that he only suggested it because he thought the others might be bored. The group sits back, perplexed that they together decided to take a trip which none of them wanted. They each would have preferred to sit comfortably, but did not admit to it when they still had time to enjoy the afternoon.

The Paradox Often used to help explain extremely poor business decisions, especially notions of the superiority of “rule by committee” Often used to help explain extremely poor business decisions, especially notions of the superiority of “rule by committee” A technique mentioned in the study and/or training of management, as well as practical guidance by consultants, is that group members, when the time comes for a group to make decisions, should ask each other, “Are we going to Abilene?” to determine whether their decision is legitimately desired by the group's members or merely a result of this kind of groupthink A technique mentioned in the study and/or training of management, as well as practical guidance by consultants, is that group members, when the time comes for a group to make decisions, should ask each other, “Are we going to Abilene?” to determine whether their decision is legitimately desired by the group's members or merely a result of this kind of groupthink

Avoidance Techniques Neutrality of leader, withholding preferences, encouraging open inquiry Neutrality of leader, withholding preferences, encouraging open inquiry Encourage expression of objections and doubts... Accepting of criticism Encourage expression of objections and doubts... Accepting of criticism Assign role(s) of devil’s advocate Assign role(s) of devil’s advocate Divide group in two (or more) separate DM bodies Divide group in two (or more) separate DM bodies

Survey warning signals from rivals Survey warning signals from rivals Put initial consensus on hold and reconsider later Put initial consensus on hold and reconsider later Include outside experts Include outside experts Discuss tentative decision with trusted colleagues outside group Discuss tentative decision with trusted colleagues outside group Establish several independent DM groups to work on same critical issue or policy Establish several independent DM groups to work on same critical issue or policy

Formal Ethics Codes Concerns Concerns Style over substanceStyle over substance PracticalityPracticality EffectivenessEffectiveness Unintended consequencesUnintended consequences Benefits Benefits Argumentative and Character-depiction functionsArgumentative and Character-depiction functions Examples Examples

Feminist Contributions Ethic of Care (Gilligan) Ethic of Care (Gilligan) Justice v. CareJustice v. Care Invitational Rhetoric (Foss and Griffin) Invitational Rhetoric (Foss and Griffin) Safety, Value and FreedomSafety, Value and Freedom Rakow’s ethic Rakow’s ethic Inclusiveness, participation and reciprocityInclusiveness, participation and reciprocity