Attribution Theory
Exploring attribution theory directs on understanding perception among people. Since organisational management involves a lot of instances where people need to communicate with each other, it is very important to have a grasp of how they act and react on specific situations. Behaviours are intrinsically divergent among people. Thus, it is assumed that actions and reactions vary. This paper discusses attribution theory and underlying principles. It specifically looks on the function of perception and making judgment among others.
Perception
Robbins and Judge (2007) define perception as the process occurring among people when they organize and interpret sensory impressions to give meanings to what is happening in their immediate environment. However, it is argued that what is considerably perceived by a person is substantially different from the objective reality. There is often disagreement. It is basic to understand that the ways people behave are based on their individual perception of what is real and what is not. As stated, the world as it is perceived is the world that is behaviourally important. There are several factors that affect perception and as follows: factors in the perceiver, factors in the situation, and factors in the target. The factors in the perceiver include attitudes, motives, interests, experience, and expectations. Meanwhile, the factors in the situation involve time, work setting, and social setting. Factors in the target, on the other hand, are consist of novelty, motion, sounds, size, background, proximity, and similarity. These factors functions as something to shape or sometimes distort the process of perception. It is then considered that with these factors, the process of perception is clearly understood. Understanding perception, particularly on the perspective of organisational behaviour is rooted on the significant reason that people’s behaviour is based on what reality is, not on reality itself. As stated, perceptions of individual responsibility are influenced by various variables including freedom of choice, personal initiative and intentionality, prudence, and the knowledge of what is right and what is wrong. With this, perceptions can never go wrong.
Attribution Theory
Earlier literatures (e.g. Jones et al., 1972) adhere that this theory necessitates highly cognitive and rational understanding of man. The attribution theory is predicated on the following set of assumptions:
Þ Considering that errors are inevitable, every person possesses a natural desire to honestly understand the various occurrences in their immediate environment. In turn, a person needs to have potent information that will enlighten them.
Þ There are “causes” that every person has in mind to use in explaining various occurrences in logical manner.
Þ The specific “cause” that the person strongly believes will significantly affects subsequent feelings and behaviours.
In simpler terms, attributions are perceptions of causality, or inferences made by a person that something has caused something else.
According to Ashkanasy (2002), attribution theory is consequential from Fritz Heider's (1954) thought about people as “naive scientists”. This thought describes how people keenly look for underlying explanations of observed behaviour, and come up with hypotheses that explain its causes. The resulting causal attributions determine, in turn, cognitive, affective, and behavioural responses toward the actor. Robbins and Judge (2007) believe that the perceptions of every person are divergent. These perceptions affect the way each person behaves. In attribution theory, it is “when individuals observe behaviour, they attempt to determine whether it is internally or externally caused” (Robbins et al. 2008). The same authors identify three determinants of attribution, these are:
Þ Distinctiveness - shows different behaviours in different situations.
Þ Consensus - response is the same as others to same situation.
Þ Consistency - responds in the same way over time.
These determinants are expected to occur so as to consider that an attribution is occurring or had occurred.
Attribution theories are deemed to generally fall into two categories: intrapersonal and interpersonal (Martinko 1995 cited in Schaffer 2002, p. 103). Intrapersonal category includes theories relating to identified ways used by people to make evaluations of their personal successes or defeats. On the other hand, interpersonal category looks on the identified ways on how people assign accountability for the outcomes of others. In general concepts, attribution theory suggests that the observation of a person’s behaviour leads to the attempt to determine whether the shown behaviour was caused internally (by the people) or caused externally (by the context or the situation) (Schaffer 2002). The most basic consideration of any attribution theory is the internal or external distinction. It is always emphasised that there is no single or dominant theory of attribution. Instead, a variety of perspectives is applied in evaluating how people behave and act or react in specific conditions and circumstances. Despite the differences in people’s perspectives, a common theme in attribution theory is that discrepancy leads to attributions of cause as originally specified by Heider. The application of attribution theory in organisational setting can be seen on the effectiveness of causal reasoning process that can provide insight into how the cognitions and emotions of functional and dysfunctional people (particularly on managers and leaders) can influence the quality of their working relationships with others.
A common or perhaps, the simplest example of attribution process is performance. It is very known that all organisations hold performance goals to be achieved at a given period of time and particular conditions and specifications. In the process of attribution, when performance goals neither are nor met (a discrepancy), involved individuals and parties are more likely to develop attributions of cause. This leads to coming up with reasons like attributing responsibility for poor performance to either personal or situational factors. This is also the main controversy in organisational theory, most especially on the case of organisational behaviour.
Errors and Biases of Attributions
Researches on attribution theory adhere that there are errors or biases that misrepresent attribution (Gerber et al. 2004). Like in general application, people blame others first, rather than the situation. The fundament attribution error, as defined by Robbins and colleagues (2008), is “the tendency to underestimate the influence of external factors and overestimate the influence of internal factors when making judgments about the behaviour of others”. On other cases, people attribute theor success to the effort that they exerted. When they fail, they say otherwise or either attributes it to the condition itself. This is called self-serving bias or the “the tendency for individuals to attribute their own successes to internal factors while putting the blame for failures on external factors” (Robbins et al. 2008). There are also some frequently used shortcuts in judging others including selective perception, hallo effect, contrast effects, projection, and stereotyping.
The application of attribution theory in organisational behaviour is the fact that people possess different line of thinking or perspectives. In reality, we are all guided by our own perception of reality. The uniqueness of every individual is acknowledged by attribution theories. However, the process of attribution identifies the conditions on why such behaviour, action, or reaction occurred. The organisational setting is characterised by different people. The motives and purposes of people are seen on how they react on specific situations. Cognitive processing and the attribution of such behaviour to either internal or external causes are considered interpersonal (Yagil 2005). Judging others is another lesson of the attribution theory. Practically speaking, the ways in which we view other people affects our relationship with them. The common case of stereotyping in the organisation is explicated by attribution theory. It is expected that people should have knowledge of what is acceptable and what is not. On the case of stereotyping, attribution theory discourages this practice. Instead, the uniqueness of a person and the group he/she belongs is appreciated and used towards advantageous position.
Attribution theory is known to explain the rationale when a person observe behaviour and determine if whether or not it is internally or externally motivated. While organisational management usually encourages employees to aim, achieve, and take pride in success, it often strives to develop their ability to acknowledge flaws in their performance, learn from them, and improve. Human perception is the lock. Attribution theory is the key.
References
Ashkanasy, NM (2002) ‘Studies of Cognition and Emotion in Organisations: Attribution, Affective Events, Emotional Intelligence and Perception of Emotion’, Australian Journal of Management, 27; 2, pp. 11+
Gailey, JA and Lee, ΜΤ (2005) ‘An integrated model of attribution of responsibility for wrongdoing in organizations’, Social Psychology Quarterly, 68, 338-358
Gerber, GL, Cronin, JM, and Steigman, H (2004) ‘Attributions of blame in sexual assault to perpetrators and victims of both genders’, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 2149-2165
Robbins, SP and Judge, TA (2007) Organizational Behavior, 12th ed. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ
Robbins, SP, Judge, TA, Millet, B and Waters-Marsh, T (2008) Organisational Behaviour, 5th ed., Pearson Education, Australia
Schaffer, BS (2002) ‘Boards assessment of managerial performance: an analysis of attribution process’, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 17; 2, pp. 95-115
Yagil, D (2005) ‘Employees' Attribution of Abusive Supervisory Behaviors’, The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 13; 4, pp. 307-326
0 comments:
Post a Comment