Organizational Behavior - Essay Example

? Organizational Behavior Introduction One of the greatest challenges of the modern job market is the dominance of the principles of bias. To avoid bias at work is a great job for any employee. Though the majority of employees claim that they do not have any biases, they have. We can claim that implicit prejudices are deeply rooted in unconscious trend of making associations. It is on behalf of an individual and it depends on an inner nature of an individual to draw parallels and associations between different phenomena, subjects or objects. Biased prejudices mainly concern racism and sexism. Thus, even if a person if biased, he shows such kind of attitudes because it is his natural feature. For example, very often in media, films or printed press we come across negative representations of Black males. Thus, their images are imprinted in our minds in a negative air. Poor people are often perceived as lazy or mentally ill ones. These are negative imprints in our minds and these reflections are projected on real perceptions of real individuals. There are many other examples, when a person is exposed to external pressures of the society and perceives other people through a prism of a prejudiced subjective nature. This research paper is focused on finding appropriate behavioral decisions for the Companies, where biases occur. Thus, one of the most interesting and relevant ways of bias identification is Implicit Association Test. Modern psychologists, researchers and scientists are highly concerned about the problem of bias. Thus, we will apply IAT test to solving the problem of bias in the companies. Implicit Association Test Tony Greenwald in 90s a Professor of psychology at the University of Washington developed an experimental tool, which is referred to as the Implicit Association Test (IAT). This test is focused on unconscious bias identification. The test exposes implicit biases by identifying some shifts in reaction time that can occur in the process of tests completion. The respondents are asked to find association between different sets of words and faces. There are some persons, who can surely claim that they do not have any biases in their lives. Biases can be too challenging and destroying in the modern context and job market. Thus, some biased individuals cannot perform at the highest level, because of their own prejudices. Actually, biases are too powerful triggers of negative energy and emotions. Moreover, employees can be exposed to biases of the managers and employers. In the result of this type of biased context and relations, qualified people can be excluded from their future successful careers or effective performance at work. There are two main categories of biased people. The first group holds a stronger implicit bias and another group of people are less biased. It is possible to differentiate and claim that there are 2 main types of biases: a counter intentional and unconscious bias. In accordance with this classification, even the person with good intentions, reputation and many other positive traits can let his biased ideas and intentions go. Managers are responsible for prevention of biases. For example, they can motivate an employee's performance, involve a superior character of employee's developments and cooperate with employees effectively at different levels. There is a famous case Thomas v. Kodak where an implicit bias was identified. The court claimed that they identified "subjective evaluations which could easily mask covert or unconscious race discrimination" (Banaji, Bazerman & Chugh, 2003). In this case we can consider a corporate liability and creation of a stable basis for prevention of potential biases in the future. One of possible ways out of dealing with biases is the Implicit Association Test. A person can reveal his hidden biased beliefs if he passes this type of test. For example, he can think about association triggered in his head, when he looks at the words connected with images of different people. Data obtained in the result of tests processed underlines that biases are widely prevalent (75% of the respondents favored the young, the rich, and whites). Moreover, if one thinks about his own desire not to be biased- it is the first sign of his unconscious biased nature. Implicit biases to African Americans, representatives of the Arab world and LGBT people are evident. It should be mentioned that representatives of minority groups are less biased and they show less implicit preference in the tests (Greenwald, Poehlman, Uhlmann, Banaji, 2009). There are people who are considered to be consequential in their biased nature development. Persons, who showed high levels of the IAT, are more biased in interpersonal communication. Feature of IAT tests is that they are based on "associative processes that can operate automatically. The sensitivity of IAT measures to automatically activated associations is sometimes credited with making IAT scores resistant (even if not immune) to faking" (Banaji, Bazerman & Chugh, 2003). Therefore, we can see that IAT tests can show fake positive attitudes to gay men, but they reflected these answers in self-report questionnaires, but a homosexual–heterosexual attitude IAT reflected a different result (Greenwald, Poehlman, Uhlmann, Banaji, 2009). Thus, it is difficult to find a key to bias identification. A race attitude IAT measure reflects some other results. Thus, for example, subjects instructed to make a good impression in a job application scenario showed low levels of anxiety. They did this action intentionally and their behavior template has been previously formed in the mind of a biased person. Thus, respondents can show low levels of biases intentionally. As a result of this cheating response, faked scores can beshown. Moreover, it is possible to suggest implementation of IAT and self-report measures as behavior indices. There are some drawbacks in these tests too: "for socially sensitive topics, the predictive validity of self-report measures was remarkably low and the incremental validity of IAT measures was relatively high" (Greenwald, Poehlman, Uhlmann & Banaji, 2009). In the number of researches and studies it is identified that a high level of social sensitivity of certain topics mostly concern racial biases and intergroup relations. If to take into account the Study 3 of Amodio and Devine (2006), it is evident that a race attitude IAT that can predict voluntary selected seating distance from an African American and IAT stereotype. On the sample analysis of independent studies it is shown that IAT measure can be correlated with the seating distance measure and the independent-sample ICC. Thus, there are different options to identify bias in the organizational behavior. Hofmann et al. (2005) underlined that “evidence that correlations [of IAT with self-report measures] were influenced by the degree of social desirability… associated with the topic” (cited by Greenwald, Poehlman, Uhlmann & Banaji, 2009). Therefore, conclusions of different researches and studies can be fake ones in case a respondent intentionally gives one or another self-developed answer. The issue of a social sensitivity is rather vague and we can claim that some characteristics of personality are socially acceptable. Hurtz & Donovan (2000) claim that there are "Big Five personality dimensions", which are measured by scales developed concerning explicit factors and the five-factor model. Although some researchers have interpreted this evidence of the criterion-related validity of Conscientiousness somewhat less optimistically than many researchers, they nevertheless suggest that it is possible to improve the validity of personality predictors. The researchers underline that global measures of the Conscientiousness dimension can exert a moderate impact on performance, and validity will be rather stable and a generalized concept can occur. The following conclusion can be made: personality measures can contribute much to the prediction of job performance criteria and they should be used appropriately otherwise a value to personnel selection practices can be added. It is an additional possibility for employers to select their employees. In other words, modern employers have some more criteria for selection of potentially unbiased employees. Personality measures are very important for different types of modern organizations; because they can make their personnel selection decisions (Hurtz & Donovan, 2000). The Five Factor Model (FFM) of personality is of high importance in the modern context of management. There is a need to make an emphasis on narrow personality measures and demonstrate equal or greater utility for personnel selection. It is possible to choose an appropriate personality measure to implement it for determination of future job performance. There is a developed decision to prevent fake answers: "the most effective ways to limit the effects of faking is to employ a faking warning and/or a forced-choice personality test" (Hurtz & Donovan, 2000). A personal implicit bias can be reflected at many levels. It should be mentioned that there is a need for a basic premise of cultural competency training, especially in the field of medicine. Thus, an individual competence and a cultural competence of the individuals should be properly considered. It can be claimed that the anonymous nature of the IAT would bring more positive results and the respondents would feel much more confident in case they could reflect their ideas about bias anonymously. IAT Tests Faking It is possible to deal with faking. This issue should be properly considered by managers. For example, very often a social desirability can suppress valid trait variance. A personal assessment can often violate validity and elevated scores on typical social desirability scales can be more focused on valid personality differences than the motivation to fake. There is a chance that respondents intentionally give fake answers. As a matter of fact, it is appropriate to reveal the reasons for fake answers. Some researchers underline the importance of the employment-related motivation distortion (EMD) index. The EMD can solve the problem of "correcting" fake answers of IAT tests. Faking may underline a completely different response patterns and very often it depends on an individual whether he gives true answers or not. A single universal faking scale would be a perfect way out. Rothstein & Goffin (2006) claim: "We submit that the resulting increase in knowledge of the effects of faking and possible “cures” has been instrumental in the continuing growth of personality assessment in personnel selection. Two main trends can be identified in the faking research and both, ultimately, have provided researchers and practitioners in human resource management with grounds for optimism" (Rothstein & Goffin, 2006). From a positive perspective the faking warning "is inexpensive to add to a selection testing program and can readily be combined with other approaches to faking reduction. Additional research is required to determine whether different strengths of the faking warning are differentially effective" (Rothstein & Goffin, 2006). As far as we can see faking should be suppressed at different levels. The letters of reference can be credible sources for a valid assessment of personality. It is interesting to mention that for the researchers the “cognitive loading” of personality trait scores (Hurtz & Donovan, 2000). It means the level of a cognitive ability to assess the personality. Cognitive loading implies a large number of ethical issues concerning the use of the faking warning. Whether it is a breach of professional ethics or not is a challenging question. Personal issues should be considered and biases can be revealed in the process of test's application. On the basis of obtained results, it is possible for the managers of the organization to define levels of biases classification. However, it is possible to introduce a certain degree of coaching in the Company and conduct further research on various biases. In other words, even if the cases of biases in the organization are identified, it is possible to develop possible strategies to deal with them. It can be claimed that not always application of Item Response Theory (IRT) may be helpful in identifying biased persons who provided faked answers. In the majority of cases, IRT is based on a mathematical model and the relationship between test-takers' levels on the personality trait being measured and their ability to choose different types of response of a certain personality test item (Rothstein & Goffin, 2006). Thus, managers can use test model in bias identification and consider statistical data obtained after testing. Conclusion We have found out that biased prejudices exist in the modern organizations. The basic sources of prejudices and biases are racism and sexism. A person can be biased either intentionally or not. It is relevant to identify a biased nature of a potential employee to foster the organization's progress. Modern society and media pervert moral judgments of people and there is no one to be blamed for biases, but only people. We have developed the world we live in. We have created conditions for biases development and it is on our behalf to deal with social prejudices biases. References Banaji, M. R., Bazerman, M. H., & Chugh, D., 2003. How (Un)ethical Are You? Harvard Business Review, 81(12), 56-64. Greenwald, A. G., Poehlman, T. A., Uhlmann, E. L., & Banaji, M. R., 2009. Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-analysis of predictive validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 17-41. Hurtz, G., & Donovan, J., 2000. Personality and job performance: The Big Five revisited. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 869-879. Rothstein, M. G., & Goffin, R. D., 2006. The use of personality measures in personnel selection: What does current research support? Human Resource Management Review, 16, 155-180. Read More