ORGANIZATIONA BEHAVIOR: A DEFINITION

As have been alluding the field of organizational behavior (or OB, as it is

commonly called) deals with human behavior in organizations. Formally defined,
organizational behavior is the multidisciplinary field that seeks knowledge of behavior
in organizational settings by systematically studying individual, group, and
organizational processes. This knowledge is used both by Scientists interested in
understanding human behavior and by practitioners interested in enhancing
organizational effectivenes and individual well-being. Our orientation in this book will
highlight both these purposes, focusing on how scientific knowledge has been-or
may be- used for these practical purposes for

Having formally defined the field of OB, we are now ready to more closely
examine some of its core characteristics.

CARACTERSTICS OF THE FIELD OF OB

Our definition of OB highlights four central characteristics of the field. First,

OB is firmly grounded in the scientific method. Second, OB Studies individuals
groups and organizations. Third, OB is interdisciplinary in nature. And fourth, OB is
used as the basis for enhancing organizational effectiveness and individual well-
being. I will now take a closer look at these four characteristics of the field.

1. OB applies the scientific method to practical managerial problem.

Our definition of OB refers to seeking knowledge and to studying behavioral

processes. Although it is neither as Sophisticated as the Study of physics or
chemistry, nor is it as mature as these disciplines, the orientation of the field
of OB is still scientific in nature. Thus, like other Scientific fields, OB seeks
to develop a base of knowledge by using an empirical, research-based
approach. That is, it is based on systematic observation and measure ment
of the phenomena of interest. For an overview of some of the research
techniques used in the field of organizational behavior see Table 11.

2. OB focuses on three levels of analysis : individuals, groups, and

organizations.
 To best appreciate behavior in organizations. Ob specialist cannot focus
exclusively on individuals acting alone. After all, in organizational settings
people frequently work together in groups and teams, futhermore, people-
alone and in groups-both influence and are influenced by their work
environments. Considering this, it should not be surprising to learn that the
field of OB focuses on three distinct levels of analysis-individuals groups,
and organizations.
3. OB is multidisciplinary in nature.
When ou COnSider the broad range of issues and approaches taken by the
field of OB, it is easy to appreciate the fact that the field is multidisciplinary
in nature. By this, I mean that it draws on a wide variety of social science
disciplines. Rather than studying a topic from only one particular
perspective, the field of OB is likely to consider a wide variety of
approaches. These range from the highly individual-oriented approach of
psychology, through the more group-oriented approach of sociology to
issues in organizational quality studied by management Scientists.
4. OB seeks to improve organizaional efectiveness and the quality of life at
work.
In the early part of the twentieth century, as railroads opened up the
Western portion of the United States and the nations population rapidly
grew (it doubled from 1880 to 1920), the demand for manufactured
products was great. New manufacturing plants were built, attracting waves
of new immigrants in search of a living Wage and laborers lured of farms by
the employment prospects factory work offered. These men and Women
found that factories were gigantic, noisy, hot, and highly regimented-in
short, brytal place in which to work. Bosses demanded more and more of
their employees and treated them like disposable machines, replacing
those who quit or who died from accidents with others who waited outside
the factory gates.
Characteristize the nature of the field of OB today.

Today, OB is a dynamic field that is sensitive to the realities of modern life in

Organizations. For example, it pays considerable attention to the cross-cultural aspects of
behavior, aS as the growing diversity of the workforce. Consideral attention is also paid to
changing work arrangements that make it possible for people to enjoy their personal lives
along with their work lives, OB scientists are also interested understanding-and attempting
to eliminate-the unethical things people do (e.g., stealing from their employers and
behaving aggressively on the job). Finally, the field of OB is also paying great attention to the
way work is changing due to advances in technology, competition, and other forces for
change.

SOCIAL PERCEPTION: UNDERSTONDING CIND JUDGING OTHERS

What Do The Following Organizational Situations Have In Common ?
You are interviewing a prospective employee for a new position in your company.
You apologize profusely after spilling a cup of coffee on your boSS.
You complete a form asking you to rate the strengths and weaknesses of your
subordinates.
If you don't immediately see the connection, it's probably because these situations all
involve a phenomenon that is so automatic that you probably never have thought about it
before. The answer is that they all involve understanding and evaluating others-in other
words, figuring out what they are like. In our example, you judge the applicant's
qualifications, you make sure your boss's opinion of you is not negative, and you assess the
extent to which your employees are doing their jobs properly. In each of these instances,
you are engaging in social perceptionthe process of integrating and interpreting
information about others so as to accurately understand them. As these examples illustrate,
social perception is a very important process in a wide variety of organizational situations. To
better understand social perception, we will examine several different ways in which the
process works.
SOCIAL IDENTITY THEORY: ANSWERING THE QUESTION WHO ARE YOU?'
How would you answer if someone asked, Who are you?" There are many things you
might say. For example, you could focus on individual characteristics, such as your
appearance, your personality, and your special skills and intereststhat is, your personal
identity. You could also answer in terms of the various groups to which you belong, saying,
for example, that you are a student in a particular organizational behavior class, an
employee of a certain company, Or a citizen of a certain country, that is, your social identity.
The conceptualization known as social identity theory recognizes that the way we perceive
others and ourselves is based on both our unique characteristics (i.e., personal identity) and
our membership in verious groups (i.e., social identity).
ATTRIBUTION: JUDGING WHAT PEOPLE ARE LIKE AND WHY THEY DO WHAT THEY DO
A question we often ask about others is "why? Why did the manager use the Wrong data in
his report? Why did the chief executive develop the policy she did? When we ask such
questions, we're attempting to get at two different types of information: (1) What is
someone really like? and (2) What made the person behave as he or she did? People
attempt to answer these questions in different ways,
Making correspondent inferences. Using acts to judge dispositions. Situations frequently
arise in organizations in which we want to know what someone is like. Is your new boss likely
to be tough or kindhearted? Are your coworkers prone to be punctual or late? The more you
know about what people are like, the better equipped you are to know what to expect and
how to deal with them. How, then, do we go about identifying anothers traits?
Generally speaking, the answer is that we infer others traits based on what we are able to
observe of their behavior. The judgments we make about what people are like based on
what we have seen them do are known as correspondent inferences. Simply put,
correspondent inferences are judgments about people's dispositionstheir traits and
characteristics-that correspond to what we have observed of their actions.
Causal attribution of responsibility: answering the question "Why?" Imagine finding out
that your boss just fired one of your fellow employees. Naturally, youd ask yourself, why
did he do thata? Was it because your coworker violated the companys code of conduct?
Or, was it because the boss is a cruel and heartless person? These two answers to the
question why? represent two major classes of explanations for the causes of someone's
behavior: internal causes, explanations based on actions for which the individual is
responsible, and external causes, explanations based on situations over which the individual
has no control. In this case, the internal cause would be the person's violation of the rules,
and the external cause would be the boss's cruel and arbitrary behavior.
THE BIASED NATURE OF SOCIAL PERCEPTION
As you might imagine, people are far from perfect when it comes to making judgments of
others. In fact, researchers have noted thet there are several important types of biases that
interfere with making completely accurate judgments of other.
the undamental attribution error. Despite what kelleys theory says, people are not equally
predisposed to reach Judgments regarding internal and external causality. Rather, they are
more likely to explain others actions in term of internal rather than external causes. In other
words, We are prone tO assume that others behavior is due to the way they are, their traits
and dispositions (e.g., she's that kind of person). So, for example, we are more likely to
assume that someone who show up for work late does so because she is lazy rather than
because she got caught in traffic. This tendency is so strong that is known as the
fundamental attribution error.
OVERCOMING BIAS IN SOCIAL PERCEPTION: SOME GUIDELINES
In most cases, people's biased perceptions of others are not the result of any malicious
intent to inflict harm. Instead, biases in social perception tend to occur because We, as
perceivers, are imperfect processors of information. We assume that people are internally
responsible for their behavior because we cannot be aware of all the possible situational
factors that may be involvedhence, we make the fundamental attribution error. Further, it
is highly impractical to be able to learn everything about someone that may guide our
reactionshence, we use stereotypes. This does not mean, however, that we cannot
minimize the impact of these biases. Indeed, there are several steps that can be taken to
help promote the accurate perception of others in the workplace.
SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECIES: THE PYGMALION EFFECT
AND THE GOLEM EFFECT
In case it already isn't apparent just how important perceptions are in the workplace,
consider the fact that the Way We perceive others actually can dictate how effectively
people will work. Put differently, perceptions can influence reality! This is the idea behind
what is known as the self-fulfilling prophecy-the tendency for someone's expectations about
another to cause that individual to behave in a manner consistent with those expectations.