Term
|
Definition
| Stage one in Tuckman's group development theory. It involves the uncertainty people feel in a new group regarding leadership and roles. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Stage two in Tuckman's group development theory. It involves members trying to test leaders and experimenting and seeing how a person fits in.
- Rebellious actions |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Stage Three in Tuckman's group development theory. In this stage, power roles are figured out for the sake of progress. Group unity starts to form. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Stage Four in Tuckman's group development theory. This stage involves members doing their work and cohesiveness and determination regarding goals exists. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Stage Five in Tuckman's group development theory. In this stage members may feel at a loss and things such a reflections and rewards are used to ease this feeling. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Are roles that enable the group to stay on track and define, clarity and peruse a common purpose. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| These roles fosters supportive and constructive interpersonal relationships. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Task Role - A role that serves to suggest new roles. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A task role that promotes greater understanding through examples or explanations. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A task role that make sure the group is heading in the correct direction. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A task role that encourages the group to keep moving along towards the goal. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A maintenance role that foster group solidarity by accepting and praising other members. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
A feeling, attitude or belief shared by two or more people that guides action.
- Help the organization survive
- Clarify/simplify behaviors
- Help avoid embarrassing situations
- Clarify the groups values/identity
Formed by;
1. Statements by supervisors
2. Primacy Effect
3. History
4. Carryover Effects |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
A small number of people with similar skills who are committed to a common purpose.Critical events in history
1. Leadership becomes shared
2. Accountability becomes a group issue.
3. Purpose develops
4. Problem solving becomes important
5. Effectiveness is evaluated on outcomes
Teams are considered to be in the performing stage. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Trust of character - Do people do/act they way they say they will? Do people make it clear what they expect from one another. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Trust of disclosure - How well to people share information truthfully? |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Trust of Capability - How well do people carry out their responsibilities and acknowledge other peoples skills/abilities. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This can be done by doing the following things;
1. Communication
2. Support
3. Respect
4. Fairness
5. Predictability
6. Competence |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
A mode of thinking that overrides your better judgement to appease other members of your group.
- Personal Assumptions
- Stereotyped Views of opposition
- Illusion of unanimity
- Peer Pressure |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The tenancy for individual effort to decline as team sizes increase. |
|
|
Term
| Facilitators of Effective Groups |
|
Definition
1. Participative Leadership
2. Shared Responsibility
3. Alignment of Goals
4. High Communcation levels
5. Future Oriented
6. Task focused
7. Creative talents
8. Rapid Resoponse |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A document that describes how the team will operate and and how they will go about their activities. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Strategies that outline what exactly the team is to do what what certain responsibilities are. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A term that describes the collection of jobs, knowledge, skills and abilities of its members. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The ability to meet changing circumstances and transition members in and out. |
|
|
Term
| Ration Decision-making Model |
|
Definition
Proposes that managers use a rational 4 step model to make decisions.
- Managers are objective
- Have perfect information
- Considered unrealistic |
|
|
Term
| RM - Stage 1 - Identify the Problem/Opportunity |
|
Definition
| During stage one, managers have to realize the root issue or potential avenue that will cause something good to happen |
|
|
Term
| RM - Stage 2 - Generate Alternative Solutions |
|
Definition
| In this stage mangers have to decide on the course of action to proceed with. Managers are encouraged to take this step slowly and evaluate non common solutions. |
|
|
Term
| RM - Stage 3 - Evaluate Alternatives and Select a Solution |
|
Definition
| In this stage, the ideas generated in step two are evaluated on terms of ethics, feasibility and cost. |
|
|
Term
| RM - Stage 4 - Implement Decision and Evaluteate |
|
Definition
| In this stage the solution is implemented and evaluated. If the solution doesn't fix the issues managers need to figure out if the problem was miss identified or the solution was inappropriate. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The process of picking the best possible solution when problem solving. Its used by mangers in the Rational Model of decision making. |
|
|
Term
| Non-rational Model of Decision Making |
|
Definition
A decision making model that attempts to actually explain how managers make decisions.
- No Perfect Information
- Assumptions are imperfect |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Decisions are bound by limitations of the persons mind, environment and situation.
- Personality
- Time Constraints |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A non rational model that says that bounded rationality plays a major part in a decision making process. Managers tend to acquire manageable information opposed to optimal information - this leads to a failure in evaluating all of the possible solutions to a problem |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
A management decision that meets certain minimum requirements.
- Finding an "ok" radio station
- Good Enough
Causes include:
1. Poor decision making practices
2. Unclear Goals
3. Lack of leadership
4. Lack of Information |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This model says decisions result from a complex set of interactions between four independent streams of events
1. Problems
2. Solutions
3. Participants
4. Opportunities
Can be compared to a trashcan, where things are thrown together. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Rules of thumb or shortcuts people use to reduce uncertainty. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The tendency to base decisions on events that are very recent. This might cause people to overestimate the likely hood of something happening. |
|
|
Term
| Representativenss Heuristic |
|
Definition
This occurs when people estimate the likelihood of an event occurring based on one impressions.
- Hiring students from a university who turned out good in the past |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This happens when we make a decision with out the facts to back it up, then proceed to find the facts to prove our point correct. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| When we make a decision based on the first information received about a topic, even if its irrelevant. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| When we tend to be over optimistic and overconfident about our decisions |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| When we look back and examine why we made a choice |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
The way questions or scenarios are worded can lead to us making different decisions.
- Risk vs. Reward |
|
|
Term
| Escalation of Commitment Bias |
|
Definition
The tendency to stick with a bad decision even when the outcomes are not going to resolve themselves.
- Putting more money into an old car
- Saving a bad relationship
This can be prevented by rotating mangers, set standard and encourage managers to become less involved with their decisions. |
|
|
Term
| Directive Decision Making Style |
|
Definition
| These people have a low tolerance towards ambiguity and are very task oriented. People who are this type tend to want power and control. |
|
|
Term
| Analytical Decision Making Style |
|
Definition
| People who are this type have a higher tolerance towards ambiguity and tend to analyze many alternatives before making a decision. |
|
|
Term
| Conceptual Decision Making Style |
|
Definition
| People with this style tend to have a high tolerance for ambiguity and tend to focus on the social aspects in a work environment. These people tend to like interactions from others when making a decision. |
|
|
Term
| Behavioral Approach to Decision Making |
|
Definition
| People with this style enjoy working with others and like to exchange ideas. The downside of this approach is that these people are to concerned with others and tend to have a hard time making decisions. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Represents judgement, insights or decisions that come to mind on their own with out outside cues.
Pros: Faster Decisions
Cons: Subject to Decision Making Bias, ignore better ideas |
|
|
Term
| Creativity and the stages of Creativity |
|
Definition
Types are Creation, Synthesis and Modification
Stages are:
1. Preparation
2. Concentration - Focus on issue at hand
3. Incubation - A stage done subconsciously, involves thinking about ways to solve the issue
4. Illumination - Figure out what to do
5. Varification - Enact the creativity |
|
|
Term
| Advantages/Disadvantages of Group Decision Making |
|
Definition
Advantages:
1. Greater Pool of Knowledge
2. Different Perspectives
3. Greater Comprehension
4. Increased Acceptance
5. Training Ground
Disadvantages:
1. Social Pressure
2. Domination
3. Logrolling
4. Goal Displacement - At times secondary arguments or competetions might offset a goal
5. Groupthink - Willingness to be part or the group overrides our betterjudgement. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Used by groups to help generate ideas. This method anonymously generates idea in a judge free zone, the goal is to generate a lot of ideas and wild ideas are welcomed. |
|
|
Term
| Desired Outcomes of Conflict |
|
Definition
1. Agreement
2. Stronger Relationships
3. Learning |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Interpersonal opposition based on personal dislike or disagreement. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Low intensity deviant behaviors intended to hard the target.
- Rudeness |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. Members of groups view themselves as all alike
2. See themselves are morally correct
3. See outsiders as threats
4. Exaggerate differences between other groups |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Is a person who is a critic in a group. |
|
|
Term
| Problem Solving - Intergrating |
|
Definition
| A style in which there is high concern for others and a high concern for yourself. It involves confronting the issue as group and determining the best course of action. |
|
|
Term
| Problem Solving - Obliging |
|
Definition
| A strategy where the concern for self is low and the concern for others is high. A person who focuses on finding similarities in opposing view points and disregards their own viewpoints. |
|
|
Term
| Problem Solving - Dominating |
|
Definition
| High concern for yourself and low concern for others. Considered a I win you lose approach, the other party's needs are largely ignored. |
|
|
Term
| Problem Solving - Avoiding |
|
Definition
| Low concern for self and low concern for others. This can include withdrawal from the issue or suppressing the issue all together. |
|
|
Term
| Problem Solving - Compromising |
|
Definition
| A give and take approach which shows moderate concern for self and others. This is appropriate when opposite goals exist because everyone gets a little of what they want. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A negotiation where one person wins and the other person loses. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A strategy where both parties win and this can foster future business deals and leave both party's happy. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Parties develop multiple deals and also build trust and relationships. These deals satisfy the goals of both parties. |
|
|
Term
| Perceptual Model of Comm. |
|
Definition
Sender
Message
Receiver
Feedback
Noise |
|
|
Term
| Communication Effectiveness - PB |
|
Definition
| Some people are better at communicating than others are. |
|
|
Term
| Variations of How Information is Presented - PB |
|
Definition
| Depending on when, where and how you were raised/grew up affect reactions in communication. |
|
|
Term
| Variations in Interpersonal Trust - PB |
|
Definition
| Communication is more likely to be distorted if a lack of trust exists. |
|
|
Term
| Stereotypes and Prejudices - PB |
|
Definition
| Belief in stereotypes can lead to distortions in messages. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Communication with a person who has a large ego can lead to distortion of messages and meanings. |
|
|
Term
| Poor Listening Skills - PB |
|
Definition
| One of the parties isn’t paying full attention to the conversation, leads to distortion of information. |
|
|
Term
| Natural Tendency to Evaluate Others - PB |
|
Definition
| We interpret meanings of messages from our own point of view. |
|
|
Term
| Inability to Listen with Understanding - PB |
|
Definition
| When we understand what the speaker is feeling when making his statement. |
|
|
Term
| Non Verbal Communication - PB |
|
Definition
| When non verbal cues are consistant with the verbal messages, accuracy is increased. |
|
|
Term
| Physical Barriers to Comm. |
|
Definition
| Barriers such as background noise, timezone differences, office design and weak phone signals. |
|
|
Term
| Semantic Barriers to Comm. |
|
Definition
| The choice of words we use when talking to some one. If they don't understand fully what we mean there are barriers present. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Forceful with out taking advantage of other or harming others rights.
- Good eye contact
- Good Posture
- Good tone |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
A style that takes advantage of others and their needs/boundaries.
- Aggressive Posture
- Loud Voice
- Harsh Words |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
A style that is described as timid and allows for us to be take advantage of.
- Lack of eye contact
- Downward glance
- Fillers in speach |
|
|
