Kelley's Attribution Model - Essay Example

Kеllеy's аttributiоn mоdеl Name Institution Tutor Date Introduction The attribution theory focuses on what people consider their world to be like. The theory explains the cause and effects made by people while talking about their behaviors and those of other people. The model is made from the field of social psychology in order to deal with issues of social perception. The theory also deals with explaining the information that people use while describing others and the reasons behind such reasoning. Since its origin, the theory has been considered as the best model for explaining people’s perception, altitude and acquisition of self-knowledge. These are personal dispositions that people make use of when they are describing their world (Malle, 2003). This paper will focus on these personal dispositions of the attribution theory to gain insight into a person work. The paper will specifically consider the case of marketing Toyota Vehicles and use the model to understand what insight can be gained from this job. Perception in organizations Perception is defined as a cognitive approach of processing information in order to help one understand his or her environment. While a person is using the same cognitive process to understand other people, he or she is using social perception. Based on the case example, the information that needs to be processed is based quality and value of the product being marketed. The attribution model recognizes a four model stage for social information processing. Selective attention or comprehension: This is the stage when an individual receives a stimuli and the person has to understand what it is related to. At this stage, limited attention is given to the stimuli depended on how the individual is trained to respond or the prevalence of existing mental models. This most important aspect at this stage is for the individual to comprehend and store this information in the brain (White, 2002). Encoding and simplification: This is the stage when the raw information is interpreted or translated into some meaningful mental data. An individual has scarce interpretation capability and is required to use basic assumptions or mental models to interpret what is in the brain. Storage and retention: the information stored in the brain is filtered accordingly in order to store only the important data. The information can be stored for a long or a short duration depending on the nature of the individual’s memory (Bouwhuis, 2010). The final stage of perception is retrieval and response. The stimuli can now be expressed by the individual after a comprehensive cognitive analysis. Three key concepts of the attribution model consensus, consistency and distinctiveness come into play when perception is being analysed. Consensus deals with the brain coming into a unanimous decision when interpreting information. It can be noted that when a stimuli is received, various assumptions are made from the single stimuli. These judgments should be analysed through cognitive consensus in order to narrow down to the most important ones. Consistency is the constant process to not deviating from the original stimuli during the process of perception. Distinctiveness is the ability to make a unique decision from the stimuli that has been received (Kelley & Michela, 1980). Perception cannot always be perfect as errors can be made in any of the four stages mentioned. These errors can also be referred to fallacies in perception. One such error is stereotyping which is an error made when an individual generalizes a group of people based on wrong perception or negative perception (Parikh, 2010). For instance, a stereotype can be made towards powerless group which may include, the elderly, minority, women or even gays. This type of generalization is makes a person perceive all people included in any this group as powerless which is actually untrue. Another possible error is referred to first-impression error which comes as a result of continued or lasting perception about someone based an initial perception. This is considered as an error because people’s life are dynamic implying that it is only a matter of time for one to change his or her behaviour; any lasting perception on such a person with a close analysis of the individual’s behaviour leads to an error. Another example is when a customer considers Toyota vehicles to be blue in colour just because the first Toyota car the person saw was blue. It does not mean that all cars made by Toyota Motor are blue; this results to a first impression error. White (2002) observes that people are also due to make selective perception where they selectively interpret an individual’s information in a manner that fits their self-concepts, values or attitudes thereby escaping from reality. Kelly’s attribution model is based on such concepts as consensus, consistency and distinctiveness. When marketing Toyota, the perception that the customers will have towards the products will be based on whether it is as a result of consensus. That is, do all people considered Toyota vehicles as durable or it is just an individual. If the position is held by many people, then it can be termed to be a consensus perception. Consistency would help to determine whether a customer’s decision to consider Toyota vehicles as durable is based on a regular or consistent trend or behaviour. Distinctiveness can help to determine whether the perception of the customer is the same to all automobile companies or Toyota alone. Such decision can be influenced by external as well as internal factors. Internal factors are those that are from own cognitive analysis implying that they can be changed while external factors are those factors that are beyond an individual’s control (Schembri & Merrilees, 2010). Motivation Motivation can be defined as the driving force that affects someone’s persistence, direction and intensity when behaving in a certain manner. Persistence is determined by the amount of time taken, direction is determined by the decision towards a certain goal while intensity is determined by the amount of effort exerted to achieve the goal (Simons & Roberson, 2003). Kelly’s attribution model suggests that people are motivated to work hard in order to be in a position to understand the environment we are living and working in. Such environment comprises of people who interact with each other as well as the situations in which the interactions occur. Decisions or attribution are made after a sufficient understanding of the information from the environment through a cognitive process. Kelly attribution model draws some of its principles from the Heider’s Naive psychology model which portrays average people as being objective while deciding the causes of behaviours (White, 2002). Heider was of the position that people attribute behaviours to forces within them (dispositions) or external forces (situational factors). He went further to mention dispositions as such factors like, wishes, needs, willingliness to work, abilities and emotions (Kelley & Michela, 1980). Dispositions have always been categorized into two categories, abilities and motivations; motivation is further sub-divided into intention (cognitive) and exertion (the amount of effort that is intended to be applied into the specific behaviour). Heider also consider situational attributions to difficulty and luck. Therefore, when judging other people’s behaviour it may be attributed to observed ability in doing something or lack of exertion, intention, luck or task difficulty (Latham, 2003). Heider (1958) observes that people may attribute behaviours to various degrees of these factors but as a rule people have the tendency of attributing behaviours to dispositional factors as opposed to those situational. Heider considers the attribution rules to be biased towards personal causations (Heider, 1958). Such a tendency of attributing behaviours to stable internal factors is considered to be fundamental attribution error since the decisions is biased against situational circumstances (Locke & Latham, 2002). Turning to the example of marketing Toyota vehicles, one can ask the question as to what the employer should look at the market in order to judge the marketers behaviour. In reference to the attribution model as well as Heider’s theory, two broad factors can be analysed dispositions and the situational factors. Dispositional factors in this case include abilities and motivation to work. The employer cannot judge the market’s behaviour as not positive towards marketing the product without first motivation the marketer. On the other hand, the market should not have any excuse to work hard if he has been well-motivated. The marketer has to show the needs, abilities and willingliness to work for the purpose to achieve the set goals. However, the other set of factors referred to as external which include difficulty and luck may affect the marketer negatively. This can be common in situations where the perception of the people towards the product being marketed has been negative; this makes marketing hard and any success can only be attributed to luck (Spielmann & Babin, 2011). Kelly’s model on HRM Kelly (1973) address covariation in his theory as a principle of principle of the attribution theory whereby people attribute a certain behaviour to factors that are prevalent when it occurs and absent when it the behaviour fails to occur. As earlier mentioned, events can occur as a result of the person, or as a result of the situation. In determining the factors responsible for the event occurrence, Kelley (1973) recognizes here criteria; consensus, consistency and distinctiveness. Kelley observes that in case of high consistency, object attribution will be the likely case. For the case of low consistency, attribution is made to a passing circumstance like miscommunication. An assumption is made that attributions are commonly useful and usually sufficient explanations for numerous types of behavior, as well employee behavior. Human Resource Management messages are used as communication signals received from the management in order to understand the current work situations. Commitment-based management is considered to have positive outcomes on organizational outcome measurements, like worker altitude. By employing commitment-based management, an organization can realize effective committed behaviors since employees get emotionally involved in such organizations when there are aware of the commitment they have on HRM (Jentink, 2011). What is most important is to ensure that the messages are consistent so that the employees can perceive such messages as same. Therefore when HRM make use of a consistent reward-and-benefits procedure in time, with aligned modalities, people create an object attribution to HRM. This can guide to affective dedicated behaviors that promote an organization, since consistency can result to a feeling that one is accorded fair treatment thereby people are willing to work extra harder for the organization (Dundon et al, 2007). It is the role of HRM to ensure that job satisfaction among the employees of an organization is realized. Well satisfied employees are likely to do something extra for their organization since they are committed to service deliver. This can be done by improving the working conditions, pay and benefits, career progress and cohesiveness with co-workers (Reid & Griffith, 2006). Employees tend to have positive altitude towards their job when they love their job as a result of the satisfaction they get. Additionally, employees should have their voices heard and be involved in the running of an organization. The voices of the employee can be heard through direct expression of their wishes or by joining unions that negotiate their needs (Dundon, Wilkinson, Marchington, & Ackers, 2007). In conclusion, Kelley’s attribution model can be very important in understand the needs of the employees in an organizations. The model helps to understand the peoples’ behavior and what other people judge them from those behaviors. The model focuses on such concepts as perception, motivation and altitudes. Employees in an organization are very important and how they perceive their work determines how successful an organization can be. It is the role of HRM to understand the employees’ altitude in order to know how they can be motivated to work harder and effectively for the benefit of the organization. References Bouwhuis, D. (2010). From Kelley’s attribution theory to Bowen and Ostroff’s HRM system: The moderating effects of consensus. University Twente. Retrieved from http://essay.utwente.nl/61195/1/Bouwhuis,_B.R._-_s0018988_%28verslag%29.pdf Dundon, T., Wilkinson, A., Marchington, M & Ackers, P. (2007). The management of voice in non-union organisations. Employee Relations, 27. pp.307-319. Retrieved from http://www98.griffith.edu.au/dspace/bitstream/handle/10072/16840/34192_1.pdf?sequen ce=1 Heider, F. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley. Retrieved from http://garfield.library.upenn.edu/classics1993/A1993KZ42800001.pdf Jentink, F. (2011). Effects of a consistently perceived HRM-system: the models of Kelley and Bowen & Ostroff examined. University Twente. Retrieved from http://essay.utwente.nl/61211/1/Jentink,_F._-_s1014234_%28verslag%29.pdf Kelley, H. & Michela, J. (1980). Attribution theory and research. Annual Reviews Psychology 31:457-501. Retrieved from http://essay.utwente.nl/61195/1/Bouwhuis,_B.R._- _s0018988_%28verslag%29.pdf Kelley, H. (1973). The process of causal attribution. American Psychologist, 107-128. Retrieved from http://www.nspb.net/index.php/nspb/article/view/105/132 Latham, G. P. (2003). Goal setting: a five step approach to behaviour change. Organisational Dynamics, 32(3): 309-318. Retrived from http://www.duplication.net.au/ANZMAC09/papers/ANZMAC2009-360.pdf Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35 year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57(9): 705-717. Retrieved from http://home.ubalt.edu/tmitch/642/Articles%20syllabus/Locke%20et%20al%20New%20di r%20goal%20setting%2006.pdf Malle, B. (2003). Attributions as Behavior Explanations: Toward a New Theory. University of Oregon. Retrieved from http://books.google.co.ke/books?id=WUuGS3gr9W4C&pg=PA251&dq=Attributions+as +Behavior+Explanations:+Toward+a+New+Theory&hl=en&sa=X&ei=zIFkUfiIC86r0g Wa44HoDg&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Attributions%20as%20Behavior%20Explanati ons%3A%20Toward%20a%20New%20Theory&f=false Parikh, M. (2010). Organisational behaviour. New York: McGraw-Hill Education. http://books.google.co.ke/books?id=WUuGS3gr9W4C&pg=PA251&dq=Attributions+as Reid, K. & Griffith, J. (2006). Social enterprise mythology: Critiquing some assumptions. Social Enterprise Journal, 2 (1) pp. 1-10. Retrieved from http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1728430&show=abstract Schembri, S., & Merrilees, B. (2010). Brand consumption and narrative of the self. Psychology & Marketing, 27(6), 623–638. Retrieved from http://www.duplication.net.au/ANZMAC09/papers/ANZMAC2009-360.pdf Simons, T., & Roberson, Q. (2003). Why managers should care about fairness: The effects of aggregate justice perceptions on organizational outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(3): 432-443. Retrieved from http://faculty.washington.edu/mdj3/MGMT580/Readings/Week%209/Simons.pdf Spielmann, N., & Babin, B. (2011). Service with personality: A note on generalizing personality across services contexts. Journal of Services Marketing, 25(7), 467–474. Retrieved from http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1954590&show=abstract White, P. (2002). Causal attribution from covariation information: the evidential evaluation model. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 667–684. Retrieved from http://www.strategicleaders.org/system/files/private/What%20We%20Know%20About% 20Leadership-Effectiveness%20and%20Personality%20by%20Robert%20Hogan.pdf Read More