I have an assignment i have to respond to two peers in two different discussions I will attach in a file to make more clear

Need your ASSIGNMENT done? Use our paper writing service to score better and meet your deadlines.


Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper

I have an assignment i have to respond to two peers in two different discussions

I will attach in a file to make more clear

I have an assignment i have to respond to two peers in two different discussions I will attach in a file to make more clear
First discussion Perception: Interpreting Our Environment Consider the text’s point that we often perceive things differently from others and that no one perception is necessarily right. What, from an OB perspective, are the benefits of differences of perception when a team of people are working on a project? What are the potential drawbacks of perceptual differences when a team is working together on a project? Common Perceptual Distortions Choose one of the perceptual distortions discussed (stereotypes, selective attention, halo effect, primary effect, recency effect, contrast effect, project, self-fulfilling prophecy, and impression management), and briefly describe a situation where your perception of another person was impacted by that distortion. Common Attribution Errors Imagine that you are waiting in line to purchase groceries. You notice that your line is moving very slowly because the high school-aged student who is bagging groceries is flirting with the cashier rather than working quickly and paying attention to customers. What internal and external attributions might you apply to this behavior? Try to generate at least three options for each type of attribution. Student answer Perception: Interpreting Our Environment Consider the text’s point that we often perceive things differently from others and that no one perception is necessarily right. What, from an OB perspective, are the benefits of differences of perception when a team of people are working on a project? What are the potential drawbacks of perceptual differences when a team is working together on a project? – Regarding this question, I believe it is important to fully understand the definition of perception in order to fully gain an understanding as to why perception may benefit a team of people working on a project or even set potential drawbacks of perceptual differences when a team is working together on a project. According to the text, “Perception is the process by which we receive and interpret information from our environment. Managing perceptions in the workplace is important for nurturing a healthy organizational culture, especially when people hold different perceptions about their colleagues, how tasks are carried out, and even the organization itself” (Neck, Houghton, Murray, 1965). From an organizational behavioral perspective, perception benefits a team working on a project because it allows unique interpretations and thoughts to be said, leading to a more diverse and well thought out outcome. Like the text had mentioned, perception allows for a healthy environment in the workplace, as well as provides greater possibility for a more organized result, healthier workplace dynamic, and working process. Working with a team may include various amounts of opinions and thoughts, but if a team and organization takes time on explaining proper perception and how it can positively benefit a project, then it will be used correctly for a greater result rather than lead to more negative actions. If perception is not taken advantage of the proper way, it can lead to potential drawbacks of perceptual differences when a team does work together on a project. Perception is how an individual interprets information, which can be contrasted to another individual’s perception revolving around the same viewpoint, “Each and every day we take in and process a huge amount of complex information. Our attempts to organize and sift this information can lead to inaccuracies and clouds our perceptions of different people, situations, and events” (Neck, Houghton, Murray, 1965). If perception amongst a group of people is not interpreted the correct way, it can lead to stereotypical thoughts, selective attention, halo effects, primary effects, recency effects, and projecting. Stereotypes are an individual’s fixed beliefs about the characteristics of a particular group, selective attention is the tendency to selectively focus on aspects of situations that are most aligned with our own interests, values, and attitudes, the halo effect is described as a perception problem through which we form a positive or negative bias of an individual based on our overall impressions of that person, a primary effect is defined as a perception problem through which an individual assesses a person quickly on the basis of the first information encountered, the recency effect is a perception problem through which we use the most recent information available to assess a person, and lastly, projecting is known as a process through which people ascribe their own personal attributes onto others (Neck, Houghton, Murray, 1965). These are just some examples of potential drawbacks of perceptual differences. All of these terms can lead to issues within a team working on a project for an organization. Every individual is entitled to their own opinion and impressions, but I believe there is an appropriate time and place for these differences, the workplace not being one of them. If every individual within a group holds these thought processes throughout a work process, it overall will just lead to more time being wasted and more disagreement. I feel these drawbacks should be communicated within an organization, not only because it can be detrimental to an organization’s project and team, but also because it will allow a transparency amongst team members.  Common Attribution Errors Imagine that you are waiting in line to purchase groceries. You notice that your line is moving very slowly because the high school-aged student who is bagging groceries is flirting with the cashier rather than working quickly and paying attention to customers. What internal and external attributions might you apply to this behavior? Try to generate at least three options for each type of attribution. -Neck, Houghton, and Murray stated, “When we see someone behave in a certain way, we tend to try and make sense of it or at least attach some meaning to it. Attribution  (Links to an external site.)theory holds that people look for two causes to explain the behavior of others: internal attributions, which are personal characteristics of others, and external attributions, which are situational factors. The attribution theory supposes that one will attempt to understand the behavior of others by attributing feelings, beliefs, and intentions to them, which can connect strongly to our own daily situations we may encounter. Relating to the question, if I were in line at a grocery store and realized the line was moving slowly due to two individuals interacting flirtatiously, then leading to delayed service for myself and others, I would apply several different attributions to this behavior. I would first understand that this is human nature behavior, and it is okay to want to get to know someone. Even though this kind of behavior is appropriate amongst two individuals, I feel it depends on the environment they are in. The grocery store is a place where people want to get what they need, check out efficiently, and leave. If it were a different situation where someone in front of me had a large number of groceries, being the reason why it was moving slow, I would consider this a situational factor, an external attribution, being that it is expected the line would move a bit slower. An internal attribution would be me recognizing if the person is moving unnecessarily slow purposely, depending on the person and their abilities of course. People should be respectful in these environments as patience can be very thin. Going back to the question, if I were behind two individuals flirting, an internal attribution would be myself examining the two individuals’ characteristics and understanding whether or not they previously know each other or are meeting for the first time. Are they being inconsiderate of their surroundings? Are they trying to be quick with the conversation or just being selfish? Either way I believe it should be a simple conversation that can be continued later. An external attribution to a situation like this would include looking at my surroundings. I may be in a grocery store, but so are various other people who want a quick moving line; therefore, a grocery store is not the place for this type of behavior because it is potentially affecting many others around me. It is important to be considerate of those around you, depending on the environment you may be in, because it can lead to several different opinions and attributions, whether they may be right or wrong, it is bound to happen.   Reference Neck, C. P., Houghton, J. D., & Murray, E. L. (1965). Organizational Behavior: A Skill-Building Approach (2nd ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.  Example of reply Hey Kayla, I am glad you answered the question concerning common attribution errors regarding the grocery checkout scenario because I didn’t quite understand the question. I can see from your response to the prompt that your internal attributions mainly concern your thought process or you analyzing the situation as is. You point out that one of your internal attribution would be yourself examining the two individuals’ characteristics and understanding whether or not they know each other. My question is, how would you be able to do that? Assuming you’re just waiting on line and you can’t quite hear the conversation, how would you come to a conclusion whether or not the two people know each other. And if the two people know each other, does it make it okay to just hold up the line on a busy day like that? The textbook states that attribution theory holds the idea that “people look for two causes to explain the behavior of others: internal attributions, which are personal characteristics of others, and external attributions, which are situational factors,” (Neck et al., p.217, 2020). I don’t see the distinguishing factors between the internal and external attributions in your response, could you maybe just list them? I was having trouble understanding the question myself so I want to understand your answer better. Overall, great job! References Neck, C. P., Houghton, J. D., & Murray, E. L. (2020). Organizational behavior: A skill-building approach. Sage.  Reply 2. Perception: Interpreting Our Environment Consider the text’s point that we often perceive things differently from others and that no one perception is necessarily right. What, from an OB perspective, are the benefits of differences of perception when a team of people are working on a project? What are the potential drawbacks of perceptual differences when a team is working together on a project? The text describes perception as a process than it is a sense. The human body receives stimulus via the senses, such as the eye. We see, interpret and then act based on the results. From an OB perspective, the benefits of having multiple versions of this process are beyond invaluable. Because no one perspective is right, and all our perspectives are unique, often there can be major benefits when in a team environment. Because of our experiences and the resulting knowledge, one person may be able to understand and resolve a problem or assignment, where others may not. In different situations, that other person may shine, because of their perspective. Although, in the working world, we see that there can be drawbacks to the more people you involve in a team. Multiple perspectives can be quite tricky because the possibility for reality distortion between the individuals can be large. We all interpret our senses very differently. In a National institutes of Health discussion about understanding human perception, Claus-Christian stated, “…. our acoustic sense can only register and process a very narrow band of frequencies ranging from about 16 Hz–20 kHz as a young adult—this band gets narrower and narrower with increasing age.” (Carbon, pg.2).   Carbon, C.-C. (2014, July 31). Understanding human perception by human-made illusions. US National Library of Medicine. Retrieved September 15, 2021, from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4116780/   Common Attribution Errors Imagine that you are waiting in line to purchase groceries. You notice that your line is moving very slowly because the high school-aged student who is bagging groceries is flirting with the cashier rather than working quickly and paying attention to customers. What internal and external attributions might you apply to this behavior? Try to generate at least three options for each type of attribution. When we see someone behave or act in a certain manner, we immediately try to make sense of what we see, and often we can overlook certain factors. In general, people look for two causes, internal attribution and external attribution. Internal attribution are personal characteristics, while external attributions are situational factors. In the case where the Highschool bagger is flirting with the cashier, concern may come from internal attributions; “I don’t have time for this, my choice in supermarket is poor”, or “the service here is beyond bad, I could do this better”. External attributions in the same situation could come from, an observation of how many cashiers are open, what the cashier is doing, or “can’t you see I’m in a rush, the school traffic is ridiculous”. Two errors are often common, self-serving bias, and fundamental attribution error. In this situation at the supermarket, we would display fundamental attribution error, if we chalked up the “flirtation” to internal factors, more than current situational factors. Conversely, if we attributed external factors more than internal factors we would find ourselves facing a self-serving bias. Although Organizational Behavior 2nd edition illustrates a sufficient picture of attribution theory, I also consider this definition from simplepsychology.org, “Attribution theory deals with how the social perceiver uses information to arrive at causal explanations for events.  It examines what information is gathered and how it is combined to form a causal judgment”. McLeod, S. A. (2012). Attribution theory. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/attribution-th Example of someone reply Hey Travis,  Regarding the question about interpretation of our environment, it seems that we were both thinking along the same lines. From an OB perspective, benefits of perception might include different viewpoints, and different judgment of character. Having different minds in one group results in various solutions and approaches to problems. I gave an example of how an Asian colleague would be a better fit to approach an Asian client because maybe they both think along the same lines about one another. Maybe that colleague understand how the Asian client wants to be treated, and how they would perceive any of the non-Asian coworkers if they approached him/her. However, as you went on to state, there is also a lot of distortion when you have different types of people working in a group.It would be very difficult to get along with people in a group or team, who “stereotype” you for being something you’re not, or someone who assesses your personality very quickly on the basis of the initial information they receive (primary effect) (Neck et al., 2020). It hinders one’s performance and confidence in themselves, which is not healthy for the group or the company.  As far your answer to the last question goes, I found it very insightful. I think you gave great examples of internal and external attributions that could be applied to the situation at the register. In terms of internal attributions, you can go as far as to put the blame on yourself rather than the flirting duo, which is not necessarily healthy for your own mind. In this case, I would personally focus more on external attribution, and blame the management, or scold the “lovebirds” for holding up the line because after all, I’m a valued shopper and am here to shop and leave. I don’t have time to listen to them flirt and slow my checkout process down. That’s an example of a self-serving bias in which someone has the” tendency to blame external forces when bad things happen and to give ourselves credit when good things happen” (Cherry, 2020). I personally think this type of bias is more healthy for the mind, no matter how self-centered or egotistic it may seem.  Second discussion While emotional intelligence is considered an important and desirable quality in employees, discuss the ways in which emotional intelligence may be used in unscrupulous or unethical ways. For example, imagine you are running a Ponzi scheme similar to the one Bernie Madoff created and ran. How would social awareness, relationship management, self-awareness, and self-management benefit your efforts to swindle people and foundations? Rank the usefulness of each of the four dimensions of IE in this context and explain your rationale. Student response Hi Lia! Our rankings are a little different, but I like your explanations for how you ranked them. Social awareness and relationship management are really important and an instance like a Ponzi scheme. If you can’t step in the shoes of the other person to anticipate and manipulate their feelings, you will walk away unsuccessful of your goal. Although, I don’t think self management is the second to least useful. You need to be able to monitor your emotions and keep them in check to ensure they will not be perceived poorly by the other individual. Regulating ones emotions takes practice for most people, that’s why it’s very useful and important for it to be practiced frequently before trying to use it unethically, or it can ruin the plan to scam. Just as the textbook states, depending on the situations, the emotional regulation will be different. Situation modification consist of changing situations to change emotional impact and response, so these four skills in combination with antecedent-focused strategies can make a great con-artist, and very unethical business person.  Neck, C. P., Houghton, J. D., & Murray, E. L. (2018). Organizational behavior 2. While emotional intelligence is considered an important and desirable quality in employees, discuss the ways in which emotional intelligence may be used in unscrupulous or unethical ways. For example, imagine you are running a Ponzi scheme similar to the one Bernie Madoff created and ran. How would social awareness, relationship management, self-awareness, and self-management benefit your efforts to swindle people and foundations? I would rank Social Awareness and Relationship Management first and second as the most useful if I were carrying out a Ponzi scheme. Social Awareness: Skills in perceiving, empathizing with, and reacting appropriately to the emotions of others and Relationship Management: The ability to manage the emotions of others to build strong and healthy relationships with them would benefit my scheme as I would be able to manipulate a situation by persuading others on an emotional level to invest in my fake proposals. Playing on the emotions of others by having an understanding of how they react in certain situation can work in my favor, convincing them they are doing the right thing by investing money with me and that they would have regrets if they didn’t. Self-Awareness and Self-Management I would rank third and fourth in usefulness. Self-Awareness: A good understanding of your own emotions and Self-Management: The ability to control and regulate emotions and impulses, would benefit me by allowing me to hold back my emotions in situations that I need to steer in a particular direction in order to carry out the scheme.   Reference: Neck, Organizational Behavior, 2nd Ed., Sage Publishing, 2020 Neck, C. P., Houghton, J. D., & Murray, E. L. (2016). Organizational Behavior: A Critical Thinking Approach. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications Example of reply Hey Catherine,  I like the order in which you ranked the four dimensions of EI, from most useful to least useful when utilizing it for unethical or immoral practices such as a Ponzi scheme. I had an almost similar ranking in my response, except for one. I would like ask you what your first step would be if you were running a Ponzi scheme? Would you jump directly into swindling others, or would you sit down one night and think about the actions you’re about to take? In my opinion, I would first start to accept the type of person I am. Self awareness means having a good understanding of your own personal emotions (Neck et al., 2020). You must first come to terms with the fact that you’re an unethical person with no morals and accept what you’re doing is wrong, but also that it won’t affect you mentally or emotionally. Only after this can you carry on with swindling others. Without knowledge of your own limitations and morals, can you begin scamming others? It takes a certain corrupt-minded human being like Bernie Madoff to go to sleep at night after stealing from others. Other than that, i agree that understanding others through social awareness and relationship management would be very crucial because after all, the only way a Ponzi scheme would work is if others play along. If you can’t fool others or manipulate them to join, then you can’t run a successful scheme. 

"Is this question part of your assignment? We can help"

ORDER NOW
Writerbay.net

Need help with an assignment? We work for the best interests of our clients. We maintain professionalism and offer brilliant writing services in most of the fields ranging from nursing, philosophy, psychology, biology, finance, accounting, criminal justice, mathematics, computer science, among others.

Get a 15% discount on your order using the following coupon code SAVE15


Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper