Date post: | 09-Dec-2014 |
Category: |
Business |
Upload: | curtin-university |
View: | 375 times |
Download: | 1 times |
Social Loafing
Zhe zhang 14330937Weilong wang 14393574Ziyu wang 14453096Kaiwei jia 14999613
Outline
Explain why performance drops off when teams are used in individualistic cultures.
Describe the significance of social loafing in the process.
How can social loafing be reduced?
Definition of Individualistic culture
Individualistic culture is a society characterized by individualism which emphasizes personal freedom and achievement.
Individualist culture therefore awards social status to personal accomplishments
Feature of Individualistic culture
1 Emphasizes independence and individual achievement
2Promotes self-expression, individual thinking and personal choice
3 Associated with private property and individual ownership
4Stresses competition as a means of achieving collective goals
Hofstede’s (2001) measure of individualism
Individualism Vs. Collectivism
Reasons of Performance Drop off
Individualistic culture gives social status rewards to people who stand out
Individualism can make collective action more difficult
Individualistic culture would affect the company following the trend in the market
Individualism decreases coordination capacities leads to lower efficiency in the economy
NOKIA
The Finnish mobile phone manufacturer Nokia was the most successful European company of the 1990s
NOKIA went to downfall since 2000s
Microsoft acquired Nokia’s devices & services business, license Nokia’s patents and mapping services for €5.44 billion.
The reasons of NOKIA went wrong:Nokia underestimated the importance of softwareNokia overestimated the strength of its brandNokia wasn't located near a cluster of similar
companies
NOKIA
A world without NOKIA…
NOKIA keep insisting on their dictatorial decision (individualism), which leads to Social Loafing.
Social Loafing
Social loafing describes the phenomenon that occurs when individuals exert less effort when working as a group than when working independently.
In 1913, a French agricultural engineer identified this social phenomenon.
Causes of Social Loafing
Equitable contributionSubmaximal goal settingLessened contingency between
input and outcomeLack of evaluationUnequal distribution of
compensationNon-cohesive group
The significance of social loafing issues
Individualistic National Cultures
• Avoid cooperation
• Example: American group compare with Chinese group
• A results of research
The significance of social loafing issues
Personal assumption • Result in low efficiency of teamwork.
• Dependency
The significance of social loafing issues
Free-rider problem • Forgoing a personal contribution.
• Reductions of individual effort.
The significance of social loafing issues
Self – Interest
• Dilemma has been created
• Example: Different self – interest between agent and owner
How to reduce social loafing
Determine specific situations in which loafing may occur.
Monitor individual efforts.
Emphasize the importance of individual pride and unique contributions.
Conduct individual meetings to discuss loafing.
How to reduce social loafing
Assign players to other positions.
Divide the team into smaller units.
Create fun team cooperation projects to increase team cohesion through team building activity.
Create competition mechanism between teams
Conclusion
Individual culture
Feature of individual culture
Performance drops off
Causes of social loafing
Effect on individual and group
Reduce social loafing effect
Social loafing issues Individualistic
National Cultures Personal
assumption Free-rider
problem Self – Interest
Bibliography
Christopher P. Earley. 1993. “East Meets West Meets Mideast: Further Explorations of Collectivistic and Individualistic Work Groups”. The Academy of Management Journal, 36 (2): 319-348. http://www.jstor.org/stable/256525
Jack W. Duncan. 1994. “Why some people loaf in groups while others loaf alone”. Academy of Management Executive, 8 (1): 79. http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/9411302400/why-some-people-loaf-groups-while-others-loaf-alone
John A. Wagner. 1995. “Studies of Individualism-Collectivism: Effects on Cooperation in Groups”. The Academy of Management Journal, 38 (1): 152-172. http://www.jstor.org/stable/256731
Graen, G., Novak, and Sommerkamp. 1982. “The effects of leader – member exchange and job design on productivity and satisfaction: Testing a dual attachment model”. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 30: 109-131.
Olson, M. 1971. The logic of collective action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Turner, J. C., Sachedv, and Hogg. 1983. “Social categorization, interpersonal attraction and group formation”. British Journal of Social Psychology, 22: 227-239.
Surowiecki, James. 2012. "Where Nokia Went Wrong : The New Yorker." The New Yorker. http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/currency/2013/09/where-nokia-went-wrong.html (Accessed October 10, 2013)
Miyamoto, Y., & Schwarz, N. (2006). “When conveying a message may hurt the relationship: Cultural differences in the difficulty of using an answering machine.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 540-547.
Guiso, L., P. Sapienza and L. Zingales (2006) "Does Culture Affect Economic Outcomes?“. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20 (2),23-49.
Rui. (2010) "The individualism movement of now.: 3 lessons from Nokia's downfall." The individualism movement of now. http://wtfbbqpwn.blogspot.com.au/2010/09/3-lessons-from-nokias-downfall.html. (Accessed October 21, 2013)
Hofstede, G. 2001. Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviours, and Organizations Across Nations. 2nd edition. Sage Publications.
Iyengar, S. S.,& Lepper, M. R. 1999. “Rethinking the value of choice: A cultural perspective on intrinsic motivation”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 349-366.