Organizational Behavior 6Th Edition Mcshane Solutions Manual Full Chapter PDF

Organizational Behavior 6th Edition
McShane Solutions Manual

Visit to download the full and correct content document: https://testbankdeal.com/dow
nload/organizational-behavior-6th-edition-mcshane-solutions-manual/
Instructor’s Manual to Accompany
Organizational Behavior 6/e
by Steven L. McShane and Mary Ann Von Glinow
Chapter 7:
Decision Making
and Creativity
Prepared by:
Steven L. McShane, The University of Western Australia
fm_i-xxxiv,1.indd Page iv 12/1/11 7:40 PM user-f462 /Volumes/2

This file is part of the Instructors’ Connect and EText Package for Organizational Behavior, 6th edition
Published by McGraw-Hill/Irwin, a business unit of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1221 Avenue
of the Americas, New York, NY, 10020. Copyright © 2013, 2010, 2008, 2005, 2003, 2000 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in
any form or by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written consent of The McGraw-Hill
Companies, Inc., including, but not limited to, in any network or other electronic storage or transmission, or broadcast for
distance learning.
Some ancillaries, including electronic and print components, may not be available to customers outside the United States.
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR:
EMERGING KNOWLEDGE, GLOBAL REALITY
Published by McGraw-Hill/Irwin, a business unit of The McGraw

of the Americas, New York, NY, 10020. Copyright © 2013, 2010, 2
Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States o
reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, or stored
prior written consent of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., includ
other electronic storage or transmission, or broadcast for distance
Chapter 7: Decision Making and Creativity
Decision Making
7 and Creativity
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
After reading this chapter, students should be able to:
1. Describe the rational choice paradigm.
2. Explain why people refrain from applying the rational choice paradigm when
identifying problems/opportunities, evaluating/choosing alternatives, and
evaluating decision outcomes.
3. Discuss the roles of emotions and intuition in decision making.
4. Describe employee characteristics, workplace conditions, and specific activities that
support creativity.
5. Describe the benefits of employee involvement and identify four contingencies that
affect the optimal level of employee involvement.
CHAPTER GLOSSARY
anchoring and adjustment heuristic -- A natural decision making -- The conscious process of making
tendency for people to be influenced by an initial choices among alternatives with the intention of
anchor point such that they do not sufficiently move moving toward some desired state of affairs.
away from that point as new information is provided
divergent thinking -- Reframing the problem in a
availability heuristic -- A natural tendency to assign unique way and generating different approaches to
higher probabilities to objects or events that are the issue.
easier to recall from memory, even though ease of
employee involvement -- The degree to which
recall is also affected by nonprobability factors (e.g.
employees influence how their work is organized
emotional response, recent events)
and carried out
bounded rationality -- The view that people are
escalation of commitment -- The tendency to repeat
bounded in their decision-making capabilities,
an apparently bad decision or allocate more
including access to limited information, limited
resources to a failing course of action.
information processing and tendency toward
satisficing rather than maximizing when making implicit favorite -- A preferred alternative that the
choices. decision maker uses repeatedly as a comparison with
other choices.
creativity -- The development of original ideas that
make a socially recognized contribution. intuition -- The ability to know when a problem or
opportunity exists and to select the best course of
action without conscious reasoning
Page 7-1 © 2013 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved
prospect theory effect -- A natural tendency to feel satisficing -- Selecting an alternative that is
more dissatisfaction from losing a particular amount satisfactory or ‘good enough’ rather than the
than satisfaction from gaining an equal amount. alternative with the highest value (maximization).
rational choice paradigm -- the view in decision scenario planning -- A systematic process of thinking
making that people should—and typically do—use about alternative futures and what the organization
logic and all available information to choose the should do to anticipate and react to those
alternative with the highest value. environments.
representativeness heuristic -- A natural tendency to subjective expected utility – The probability
evaluate probabilities of events or objects by the (expectation) of satisfaction (utility) resulting from
degree to which they resemble (are representative of) choosing a specific alternative in a decision.
other events or objects rather than on objective
probability information.
CHAPTER SUMMARY BY LEARNING OBJECTIVE

LO1. Describe the rational choice paradigm.
Decision making is a conscious process of making choices among one or more alternatives with the intention of
moving toward some desired state of affairs. The rational choice paradigm relies on subjective expected utility
to identify the best choice. It also follows the logical process of identifying problems and opportunities,
choosing the best decision style, discovering and developing alternative solutions, choosing the best solution,
implementing the selected alternative, and evaluating decision outcomes.
LO2. Explain why people refrain from applying the rational choice paradigm when identifying problems/
opportunities, evaluating/choosing alternatives, and evaluating decision outcomes.
Stakeholder framing, mental models, decisive leadership, solution-focused problems, and perceptual defense
affect our ability to objectively identify problems and opportunities. We can minimize these challenges by being
aware of the human limitations and discussing the situation with colleagues.
Evaluating and choosing alternatives is often challenging because organizational goals are ambiguous or in
conflict, human information processing is incomplete and subjective, and people tend to satisfice rather than
maximize. Decision makers also short-circuit the evaluation process when faced with an opportunity rather than
a problem. People generally make better choices by systematically evaluating alternatives. Scenario planning
can help to make future decisions without the pressure and emotions that occur during real emergencies.
Confirmation bias and escalation of commitment make it difficult to accurately evaluate decision outcomes.
Escalation is mainly caused by self-justification, the prospect theory effect, perceptual blinders, and closing
costs. These problems are minimized by separating decision choosers from decision evaluators, establishing a
preset level at which the decision is abandoned or re-evaluated, relying on more systematic and clear feedback
about the project’s success, and involving several people in decision making.
LO3. Discuss the roles of emotions and intuition in decision making.

Emotions shape our preferences for alternatives and the process we follow to evaluate alternatives. We also
listen in to our emotions for guidance when making decisions. This latter activity relates to intuition—the ability
to know when a problem or opportunity exists and to select the best course of action without conscious
reasoning. Intuition is both an emotional experience and a rapid unconscious analytic process that involves both
pattern matching and action scripts.
LO4. Describe employee characteristics, workplace conditions, and specific activities that support creativity.
Creativity is the development of original ideas that make a socially recognized contribution. The four creativity
stages are preparation, incubation, illumination, and verification. Incubation assists divergent thinking, which
involves reframing the problem in a unique way and generating different approaches to the issue.
Four of the main features of creative people are intelligence, persistence, expertise, and independent
imagination. Creativity is also strengthened for everyone when the work environment supports a learning
orientation, the job has high intrinsic motivation, the organization provides a reasonable level of job security,
and project leaders provide appropriate goals, time pressure, and resources. Three types of activities that
encourage creativity are redefining the problem, associative play, and cross-pollination.
LO5. Describe the benefits of employee involvement and identify four contingencies that affect the optimal
level of employee involvement.
Employee involvement refers to the degree that employees influence how their work is organized and carried
out. The level of participation may range from an employee providing specific information to management
without knowing the problem or issue, to complete involvement in all phases of the decision process. Employee
involvement may lead to higher decision quality and commitment, but several contingencies need to be
considered, including the decision structure, source of decision knowledge, decision commitment, and risk of
conflict.
POWERPOINT® SLIDES
Organizational Behavior Sixth Edition includes a complete set of Microsoft PowerPoint® files for each chapter.
(Please contact your McGraw-Hill Irwin representative to find out how instructors can receive these files.) In the
lecture outline that follows, a thumbnail illustration of each PowerPoint slide for this chapter is placed beside
the corresponding lecture material. The slide number helps you to see your location in the slide show sequence
and to skip slides that you don’t want to show to the class. (To jump ahead or back to a particular slide, just type
the slide number and hit the Enter or Return key.)
LECTURE OUTLINE (WITH POWERPOINT®

SLIDES)
Decision Making and Creativity
Decision Making and

Creativity
Slide 1
Decision Making, Creativity, and Involvement at Chrysler Corp.

Fiat and Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne encourages better
decision making, involvement, and creativity to revitalize Chrysler
Corp.
Decision Making,
Creativity, and
Involvement at Chrysler
Corp.
Slide 2
Decision Making Defined

Decision making is the conscious process of making choices among
alternatives with the intention of moving toward some desired state
of affairs
Decision Making
Defined
Slide 3
Rational Choice Paradigm

Rational choice paradigm – the view in decision making that people
should, and typically do, use logic and all available information to
choose the alternative with the highest value
Rational Choice
Paradigm Key elements:
Slide 4 • Subjective expected utility – the probability (expectation) of
satisfaction (utility) resulting from choosing a specific alternative in a
decision – used to determine choice that maximizes
• Decision making process – follows the systematic process and
application of stages of decision making
Rational Choice Decision Making Process

The rational choice paradigm assumes that decision makers follow
the systematic process illustrated
Rational Choice
Decision Process
Slide 5
Rational Choice Decision Process

1. Identify problem/opportunity (symptom vs. problem)
• Problem – gap between “what is” and “what ought to be”
• Opportunity-- deviation between current expectations and
potentially better situation(s) not previously expected
• Symptom – indicators and outcomes of fundamental root causes
2. Choose the best decision process
• Programmed decisions – follow standard operating procedures i.e.
they have been resolved in the past
• Nonprogrammed decisions – require all steps in the decision model
because the problems are new, complex, or ill-defined
3. Develop alternative solutions – search for ready-made solutions first,
then develop/modify custom-made solution
4. Choose the best alternative – alternative with the highest subjective
expected utility
5. Implement the selected alternative – assumed to occur easily
6. Evaluate decision outcomes – determines whether the gap between
“what is” and “what ought to be” has narrowed
Problem Identification Process

Problems and opportunities are not announced or pre-defined –
they are conclusions formed from ambiguous and conflicting
information
Problem Identification
Challenges • People are influenced by both logic and emotions – emotions may
Slide 6 even dominate the decision making process
Five Problem Identification Challenges:
• Stakeholder framing – stakeholders have vested interests and filter
information going to corporate decision makers
• Mental models – frame the problem through preconceived mental
models which may blind us from seeing unique problems or
opportunities
• Decisive leadership – problems or opportunities are announced too
quickly before logically assessing the situation
• Solution-focused problems – defining problems as solutions e.g.
people who feel uncomfortable with ambiguity are particularly prone
to this challenge
• Perceptual defense – blocking out bad news as a coping mechanism
(fail to see information that threatens self-concept)
Identifying Problems Effectively

1. Be aware of perceptual and diagnostic limitations
2. Resist temptation of looking decisive when more thoughtful
examination of the situation should occur
Identifying Problems 3. Create a norm of divine discontent – avoid being satisfied with the
Effectively status quo and adopt an aversion to complacency
Slide 7
4. Discuss the situation with colleagues to discover blind spots and see
different perspectives
Making Choices: Rational vs OB Views

Bounded rationality – people process limited and imperfect
information and rarely select the best choice
Making Choices: Problems with goals

Rational vs OB Views • Rational – goals are clear, compatible, and agreed-upon
Slide 8 • OB – goals are ambiguous, conflicting, lack full support
Problems with information processing
• Rational – people can process all information about all alternatives
and their outcomes
• OB – people have limited information processing abilities
Problems with evaluation timing
• Rational – choices evaluated simultaneously
• OB – choices evaluated sequentially
Making Choices: Rational vs OB (con’t)

Problems with evaluation standards
• Rational – people use absolute standards to evaluate alternatives
• OB – people evaluate against an implicit favorite
Making Choices:
Rational vs OB Views Problems with information quality
Slide 9 • Rational – choices are made using factual information
• OB – choices are made using distorted information
Problems with decision objective
• Rational – people maximize i.e. choose alternative with the highest
payoff (subjective expected utility)
• OB – people satisfice i.e. select “good enough” alternative
Biased Decision Heuristics

People have built-in decision heuristics that bias evaluation of
alternatives
1. Anchoring and adjustment heuristic – we are influenced by an initial
Biased Decision anchor point (e.g. initial offer price, initial opinion) and do no
Heuristics sufficiently move away from that point as new information is provided
Slide 10
2. Availability heuristic – the tendency to estimate the probability of
something occurring by how easily we can recall those events i.e. we
easily remember emotional events (e.g. shark attack) so we
overestimate how often these emotional events occur
3. Representative heuristic – the tendency to pay more attention to
whether something resembles (is representative of) something else
than on more precise statistics about its probability
• e.g. you know that 20% of your students are in engineering and
80% are business majors, however, if one students looks like a
stereotype of an engineering student we tend to believe the person
is in engineering even though there is greater probability that he/
she is a business major
Paralyzed by Choice
Studies have found that people like to have choices but when
exposed to many alternatives they become cognitive misers by
engaging in satisficing
Paralyzed by Choice
• When presented with many choices, people often choose the least
Slide 11
cognitively challenging alternative – no decision at all
• Occurs even when there are clear benefits of selecting any
alternative (such as joining a company retirement plan)
• Provides evidence of human information processing limitations –
increasing risk of choice overload
Emotions and Making Choices

Emotions affect the evaluation of alternatives in 3 ways:
• Emotions Form Early Preferences – emotional marker process
determines our preferences for each alternative before we
Emotions and Making consciously think about those alternatives
Choices
Slide 12 • Emotions Change the Decision Evaluation Process – moods and
emotions influence the process of evaluating alternatives e.g. we
may pay more attention to details when in a negative mood
• Emotions Serve as Information When We Evaluate Alternatives – we
‘listen in’ on our emotions to gain guidance when making choices
(similar to having a temporary improvement in emotional
intelligence)
Intuitive Decision Making

Intuition – ability to know when a problem or opportunity exists
and to select the best course of action without conscious reasoning
Intuitive Decision Intuition is an emotional experience

Making • Gut feelings are emotional signals
Slide 13 • Not all emotional signals are intuition
Intuition as rapid unconscious analysis
• Uses action scripts – programmed decision routines that shorten the
decision making process
Making Choices more Effectively

• Systematically evaluate alternatives against relevant factors
• Remember that decisions are influenced by both emotional and
rational processes
Making Choices more • Use scenario planning – a disciplined method for imagining possible
Effectively
futures
Slide 14
Problems with Decision Evaluation

Confirmation bias
• Tendency to inflate quality of the selected option; forget or
downplay rejected alternatives
Problems with Decision
Evaluation • Gives people an excessively optimistic evaluation of their decisions
Slide 15 • Results from need to maintain a positive self-concept
Escalation of Commitment
• Tendency to repeat an apparently bad decision or allocate more
resources to a failing course of action
• Self-justification – impression management technique to
demonstrate the importance of a decision by continuing to invest in
it
• Prospect theory effect – natural tendency to experience stronger
negative emotions when losing something of value than the positive
emotions when gaining something of equal value
• Perceptual blinders – decision makers nonconsciously screen out or
explain away negative information to protect self-esteem
• Closing costs – the financial, reputational and other costs of
terminating a failing project is a powerful incentive to continue
investing in the decision
Evaluating Decisions More Effectively

1. Separate decision choosers from decision evaluators – minimizes self-
justification effect
2. Stop loss – publicly establish a preset level at which the decision is
Evaluating Decisions abandoned or re-evaluated
More Effectively 3. Find sources of systematic and clear feedback
Slide 16
4. Involve several people in the decision – may notice problems sooner
than when someone is working alone
Tangible Creativity
Alex Beim, founder and chief creative technologist of Tangible
Interaction Design in Vancouver, relies on creative thinking to
invent enticing interactive displays, such as the zygotes at the
Tangible Creativity Vancouver Olympics.
Slide 17
Creativity in Decision Making

Creativity – developing an original idea that makes a socially
recognized contribution
• Creativity identifies problems, alternatives, solutions
Creative Defined
• Part of all aspects of the decision process – problems, alternatives,
Slide 18
solutions
Creative Process Model

1. Preparation
• Investigating the problem or opportunity in many ways e.g.
developing knowledge and possibly skills about the object of
Creative Process Model attention
Slide 19 2. Incubation
• Period of reflective thought i.e. put the problem aside but maintain
low level of awareness
• Assists divergent thinking – reframing a problem in a unique way
and generating different approaches to the issue
• Contrasts with convergent thinking – calculating the conventionally
accepted “right answer” to a logical problem
3. Illumination
• The experience of suddenly becoming aware of a unique idea i.e.
brief bits of inspiration/insight
4. Verification
• Logical evaluation, experimentation, and further creative insight
Characteristics of Creative People

Cognitive and practical intelligence
• Above-average cognitive intelligence to synthesize information,
analyze, and apply ideas
Characteristics of
Creative People • Practical intelligence – the capacity to evaluate the potential
Slide 20 usefulness of ideas
Persistence
• Higher need for achievement, strong motivation from the task itself,
and moderate or high degree of self-esteem
Knowledge and experience
• Expertise/subject matter knowledge – caution is that mental models
may become more rigid
Independent imagination (cluster of personality traits and values)

• Independent imagination i.e. high openness to experience,
moderately low need for affiliation, strong values around self-
direction and stimulation
Creative Work Environments

Learning orientation
• Encourage experimentation
• Tolerate mistakes as part of the creative process
Creative Work
Environments Intrinsically motivating work
Slide 21 • Motivation from the job itself e.g. task significance, autonomy,
aligned with the employee’s competencies
Open communication and sufficient resources
• Includes degree of job security
• Providing nontraditional workspaces e.g. unique building design
Note: It isn’t clear how much pressure should be exerted on employees
to produce creative ideas or the effect of co-worker support/co-worker
competition
Activities That Encourage Creativity

Redefine the problem
• Look at abandoned projects—might be seen in new ways
• Ask people unfamiliar with issue to explore the problem
Creative Activities
Slide 22 Associative play
• Impromptu storytelling and acting
• Artistic activities
• Morphological analysis – listing different dimensions of a system and
the elements of each dimension and then looking at each
combination
Cross-Pollination
• People from different parts of the organization exchange ideas or
are brought into the team
• Informal social interaction
Employee Involvement at Yabulu

Employee involvement was a key factor in skyrocketing productivity
at the Yabulu nickel and cobalt refinery in northern Queensland,
Australia. “We have given power to the people, and it is working,”
Employee Involvement
at Yabulu
says refinery general manager Trefor Flood (in photo).
Slide 23
Employee Involvement Defined

The degree to which employees influence how their work is
organized and carried out
Employee Involvement Different levels and forms of involvement (lowest to highest)
Defined 1. Decide alone
Slide 24
2. Receive information from individuals
3. Consult with individuals
4. Consult with the team
5. Facilitate the team’s decision
Employee Involvement Model

Employee involvement produces several potential beneficial
outcomes, but only under specific circumstances. The benefits
include:
Employee Involvement 1. Better problem identification
Model
Slide 25 • Recognizing problems more quickly and defining them more
accurately
2. Synergy produces more/better solutions
• Team members create synergy by pooling their knowledge to form
new alternatives
3. Better at picking the best choice
• Decision is reviewed by people with diverse perspectives and a
broader representation of values
4. Higher decision commitment
• Increases sense of personal responsibility for decision’s success and
representation of interests
Contingencies of Involvement
Optimal level of employee involvement depends on the situation.
Higher employee involvement is better when:
1. Decision structure
Contingencies of
Involvement • Problem is new and/or complex i.e. nonprogrammed decision
Slide 26 2. Source of decision knowledge
• The leader lacks knowledge and employees have information
3. Decision commitment
• Employees are unlikely to accept a decision made without their
involvement
4. Risk of conflict
• Employee norms support the organization’s goals
• Employees are likely to agree on the solution
Decision Making and Creativity
Decision Making and

Creativity
Slide 27
Subjective Expected Utility

Subjective expected utility: estimating the best possible alternative
(maximization)
• Depends on probabilities of outcomes and value (valence) of those
Subjective Expected outcomes
Utility
Slide 28 Expected – probability of an outcome occurring
• As illustrated: Chance that outcome 3 will occur is 90% if choice ‘A’
is chosen, 30% if choice ‘B’ is chosen
• e.g., 90% probability that applicant ‘A’ will quit within one year; only
30% chance that applicant ‘B’ will quit within one year
Utility – value or happiness produced by each option from value of
expected outcomes
• As illustrated: you believe Choice ‘B’ has higher utility (i.e., will
produce greater happiness) than will Choice ‘A’
Choice ‘B’ expected utility is

(.8x7)+(.2 x -2)+(.3x1)= 6.4
Choice ‘A’ expected utility is
(.2x7)+(.5 x -2)+(.9x1)= 1.3
Note: Value (valence) of outcomes remain the same for both
choices e.g. you value good wireless reception (positive outcome) to the
same degree no matter which tablet (iPad, etc.) you are considering
buying
Solutions to Creativity Brainbusters

This PowerPoint file includes a set of slides showing solutions to the
creativity brainbusters activity
Solutions to Creativity
Brainbusters
Slides 29-34
SOLUTIONS TO CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS
1. A management consultant is hired by a manufacturing firm to determine the best site for its next
production facility. The consultant has had several meetings with the company’s senior executives
regarding the factors to consider when making the recommendation. Discuss the decision-making
problems that might prevent the consultant from recommending the best site location.
This question directly relates to the section on evaluating and choosing solutions. The consultant is asked to
determine the best site location, and this process is subject to the problems presented below. Each problem
should include an example relating to this incident.
Problems with Goals. The consultant likely discovered that executives at the manufacturing firm are not fully
agreed on the priority of factors to consider when choosing a site. They may have conflicting goals – such
as a site that is conveniently located yet low cost. Some of the goals will be ambiguous, such as
“convenience.”
Problems with Information Processing. The consultant is subject to the same human limitations as other
people. The consultant’s personal biases may cause some information to be screened out or viewed in an
unrealistically favorable light. The consultant is unable to evaluate all possible sites (there must be
thousands of them!), let alone consider every factor for each site. Finally, the consultant probably compares
sites against an implicit favorite, rather than look at all prospective sites simultaneously.
Problems with Maximization. The consultant’s recommendation probably won’t be the absolutely best site.
Given the volume of information and the sequential decision process, the recommended site is probably one
that is “good enough.” In other words, the consultant will satisfice.
2. You have been asked to personally recommend a new travel agency to handle all airfare,
accommodation, and related travel needs for your organization of 500 staff. One of your colleagues, who
is responsible for the company’s economic planning, suggests that the best travel agent could be selected
mathematically by inputting the relevant factors for each agency and the weight (importance) of each
factor. What decision making approach is your colleague recommending? Is this recommendation a good
idea in this situation? Why or why not?
The rational choice paradigm approach is being recommended for this decision.
The idea that relevant factors should be identified and weighted is good. At least this would help us think
about which factors are most important for the company. These could include such factors as, cost, speed of
service, quality of service, etc.
However, his suggestion that the best decision could be arrived at mathematically is somewhat misleading.
While the rational choice paradigm may rest on the assumption that people evaluate and choose the best
alternatives logically, that is not borne out by empirical evidence.
OB experts have demonstrated that decision-makers may not choose the best alternatives for a variety of
reasons. For example, decision makers have limited information processing abilities, evaluate alternatives
sequentially and against implicit favorites, and are influenced by perceptual errors, biases and emotions.
Moreover, when it comes to making a final choice their decisions are often made on the basis of satisficing
rather than maximization.
3. Intuition is both an emotional experience and an unconscious analytic process. One problem, however,
is that not all emotions signal that there is a problem or opportunity. Explain how we would know if our
“gut feelings” are intuition or not, and if not intuition, suggest what might be causing them.
All gut feelings are emotional signals that yield emotional experiences. However, not all emotional
experiences constitute intuition.
Intuition involves using well established mental models and templates (derived from tacit knowledge we
have acquired) to compare what fits or doesn’t fit in an observable situation. The unconscious comparison
allows us to anticipate future events. Intuition also relies on action scripts, which are preprogrammed
routines for responding to matched or mismatched patterns. These scripts allow us to act without having to
consciously evaluate the alternatives.
Gut feelings, on the other hand, are not based on well-grounded templates or mental models. Therefore, gut
feelings would be more likely to occur in situations where one has limited experience. The cause of these
feelings would be due to some emotional reaction to a given situation.
4. A developer received financial backing for a new business financial centre along a derelict section of the
waterfront, a few miles from the current downtown area of a large European city. The idea was to build
several high-rise structures, attract large tenants to those sites, and have the city extend transportation
systems out to the new centre. Over the next decade, the developer believed that others would build in
the area, thereby attracting the regional or national offices of many financial institutions. Interest from
potential tenants was much lower than initially predicted and the city did not build transportation
systems as quickly as expected. Still, the builder proceeded with the original plans. Only after financial
support was curtailed did the developer reconsider the project. Using your knowledge of escalation of
commitment, discuss three possible reasons why the developer was motivated to continue with the
project.
Escalation of commitment occurs when an individual repeats a bad decision or continues to allocate
resources to a failing cause of action. Students should be encouraged to consider the causes of escalation
when discussing this case.
The four causes are:
Self-justification. It is possible the developer felt that canceling construction would result in losing face. That
is, because of a personal identification and link with the project, failure would mean a loss of his/her
reputation as well.
Perceptual blinders. Negative information, such as the possibility of failure, may have been unconsciously
screened out or neutralized to protect self-esteem.
Prospect theory effect. The discomfort associated with losing money on this project may have outweighed the
desire for gains. In other words, knowing that stopping the project would mean certain loss, he/she was
willing to go to great lengths to avoid this, even it meant a smaller pay off in the end.
Closing costs. This is closely tied to the prospect theory effect. While there is no evidence of an explicit
monetary penalty clause for non completion, the developer might have been concerned with these
nonetheless. Aside from monetary loss, costs include loss of reputation, trust, influence etc. One way to
avoid these costs is to carry on with the completion.
5. Ancient Book Company has a problem with new book projects. Even when others are aware that a book
is far behind schedule and may engender little public interest, sponsoring editors are reluctant to
terminate contracts with authors whom they have signed. The result is that editors invest more time with
these projects than on more fruitful projects. As a form of escalation of commitment, describe two
methods that Ancient Book Company can use to minimize this problem.
Escalation of commitment occurs in large part because individuals identifying personally with a certain
course of action they might have chosen, which interferes with the evaluation to continue or abandon a
project.
One way to minimize escalation of commitment is to separate the initial decision maker from the evaluator
of the project. These could be two different individuals.
Another way to limit escalation of commitment would involve having clear guidelines or rules that are
publicly established to determine when a project should be abandoned. That would enable the evaluation,
and subsequent decision to abandon the project less subjective, and more impersonal.
Student may also suggest a third way, which is to involve more than one person (team) in the initial
decision. This is predicated on the assumption that it is less likely two or more people would be similarly
attached personally with the decision.
6. Think of a time when you experienced the creative process. Maybe you woke up with a brilliant (but
usually sketchy and incomplete) idea, or you solved a baffling problem while doing something else.
Describe this incident to your class and explain how the experience followed the creative process.
For this question, students should be encouraged to think about a recent project they may completed and
done well (e.g. major research project). They may initially recall the event in a general sense, but should
strive to divide it according to the four stages outlined in the creative process model
The insight stage should be particularly relevant since it is the point at which one idea may come while
thinking or doing something else. Students should try to remember how the idea came to them and how
they documented and tested it. Once done, they may be able to also recall the previous stage (incubation).
7. Two characteristics of creative people are that they have relevant experience and are persistent in their
quest. Does this mean that people with the most experience and the highest need for achievement are the
most creative? Explain your answer.
The answer is probably “No”. The textbook states that there is a dilemma regarding experience. On the one
hand, people need plenty of experience to be familiar with the issues. The literature on creativity suggests
that it may take several years of experience before a person has reached creative potential.
The dilemma is that the longer a person is in one field of study, the more he/she develops a mental model
that stifles creativity. Some companies prefer people with no experience in an industry so they are more
creative. These two points are not exactly contradictory – a person may be new to an industry but has many
years of experience in a particular skill or trade. However, the issue does suggest that there is an optimal
level of experience before mental models undermine creative potential.
It is less certain whether creativity continues to increase with need for achievement. The textbook explains
that need for achievement makes creative people more persistent, which is necessary in the face of short-
term failures and doubts from others. Would a very strong need for achievement undermine creative
potential? This is a matter for debate. Most likely too much need for achievement will create blind drive
which can prevent people from seeing alternative strategies and the obvious inappropriateness of existing
routes.
8. Employee involvement applies just as well to the classroom as to the office or factory floor. Explain how
student involvement in classroom decisions typically made by the instructor alone might improve
decision quality. What potential problems may occur in this process?
Problem identification. Because students have a different perspective than the instructor, their involvement
might help identify issues or problems the instructor was unaware of. This could lead to improvements in
the quality of the learning experience.
Generating alternatives. Student involvement could potential improve the number and quality of solutions
generated. This typically happens when more people look for solutions, because individuals have different
perspectives.
Better solutions. The likelihood of choosing the best solution, from the list of alternatives generated, would
be increased due to diverse perspectives and values.
Increased commitment. When students are involved in identifying the issues, generating alternative
solutions, and choosing a solution they may also feel more committed to the decision taken.
Increased perception of fairness. Being involved in the process, may also promote a sense of fairness among
students.
To avoid problems with this process, limits should be placed on the extent of participation, and the number
of issues requiring student involvement. For example, the determination of grades should be left up to the
instructor. The types of questions and weightings of exams should also be predetermined.
The instructor would have to make sure all students are equally involved to avoid a small influential and
vocal group of students from dominating the others.
Lastly, the instructor should be mindful that increasing student involvement requires more time, which may
in turn reduce teaching time.
CASE INCIDENTS 7-1: EMPLOYEE

INVOLVEMENT INCIDENTS
Scenario Synopsis
These three scenarios provide an excellent opportunity for students to discuss the conditions under which
various levels of employee involvement should be applied. To decide the best level, students should consider
the benefits of and problems with employee involvement described in this chapter.
In the first scenario, students take the role of the director of training, learning, and development for a provincial
government. Despite receiving less than enthusiastic reaction from experienced colleagues, the director is eager
to explore workplace applications for popular social media. In the second scenario, students take the role of
head of research and development (R&D) at a major beer company. One of the scientists has stumbled on a new
sugar substitute and the decision is whether to continue funding this project in light of limited budget and the
company’s unlikely use of this product. The third scenario involves the captain of a Coast Guard cutter who is
searching for a plane that has crashed offshore. After 20 hours of searching, a major storm is approaching and
the captain must decide whether to abandon the search or to continue and place the ship at risk.
Suggested Answers to Case Questions

The five levels of involvement identified in each of the three scenarios is as follows:
Decide alone. Use your personal knowledge and insight to complete the entire decision process without
conferring with anyone else.
Receive information from individuals. Ask specific individuals for information. They do not make
recommendations and might not even know what the problem is about.
Consult with individuals. Describe the problem to selected individuals and seek both their information and
recommendations. The final decision is made by you, and you may or may not take the advice from these
others into account.
Consult with the team. You bring together a team of people (all department staff or a representation of
them if the department is large), who are told about the problem and provide their ideas and
recommendations. You make the final decision, which may or may not reflect the team’s information.
Facilitate the team’s decision. The entire decision- making process is handed over to a team or commit- tee
of subordinates. You serve only as a facilitator to guide the decision process and keep everyone on track.
The team identifies the problem, discovers alternative solutions, chooses the best alternative, and
implements their choice.
Scenario 1: Social Media Decision for the State Government
1. To what extent should your employees be involved in this decision? Select one of the following levels of
involvement:
Most teams will likely identify a medium level of involvement (consult with individuals/team), although
some tend to suggest high involvement (facilitate team’s decision). The answer to the next question explains
why medium involvement that involves a team of people (rather than just one or more employees) is
probably best here.
2. What factors led you to choose this alternative rather than the others?
This question can be answered by reviewing the four contingencies of employee involvement discussed in
the textbook.
Decision structure: This decision has low structure. The scenario provides a situation that is relatively
complex and new for organizations of all types. Consequently, some level of involvement will likely to be
valuable.
Source of decision knowledge: The scenario reveals that although you are interested and intrigued by the
potential of social media, you are aware that your comfort with technology lags many employees, including
recent hires. Many of these employees may have relevant knowledge and information. Overall, this suggests
that some involvement (probably at least a consultation with others level) is desirable.
Decision commitment. This might be mixed. You have experienced direct reports who have suggested these
tools are “just entertainment fads,” so those employees may oppose or resist a decision that supports this
practice unless they have some involvement. However, you are confident that several other employees,
including recent hires, would be interested and engaged in exploring this opportunity.
Risk of conflict. There are two dimensions of this contingency. First, with respect to goal compatibility
between employees and the company, it is likely that most employees would support initiatives intended to
enhance the image of your organization as a great place to work. However, it is almost certain that conflict
will occur among employees who may have difficulty agreeing on the preferred solution i.e. perhaps other
initiatives are more important to attracting and retaining recent hires than using social media. Overall, the
conflict among employee discourages high involvement, but will support a medium level of involvement.
3. What problems might occur if less or more involvement occurred in this case (where possible)?
A high degree of involvement is likely problematic because of the risk of conflict among employees. The
more experienced employees who view social media as “just entertainment fads” may resent seeing other
employees, including recent hires receiving complete discretion to choose and implement social media
applications, which is likely to take time and budget away from other priorities.
A low level of involvement would lose some synergy of discussion about the issue. This synergy brings out
valuable information and potentially more creative solutions to the problem/opportunity.
Scenario 2: The Sugar Substitute Research Decision
involvement:
Most teams will likely identify some level of consultation, although some tend to suggest high involvement
(facilitate the team’s decision). The answer to the next question explains why medium involvement is
probably best here.
the textbook.
Decision structure: This decision has low structure. The incident says that there is a decision process for
funding projects behind schedule, but there are no rules or precedents about funding projects that would be
licensed but not used by the organization. Consequently, some level of involvement may be valuable.
Source of decision knowledge: The incident clearly says that the sugar substitute project is beyond your
technical expertise and that it is difficult to determine the amount of research required. Scientists have
information unavailable to the leader, but they would not have sufficient information to make the decision
alone. Overall, this suggests that some involvement (consultation with individuals or the team) is desirable.
Decision commitment. This might be debatable, but most employees know that funding decisions are
ultimately in the hands of executives who must take responsibility for those decisions. Also, it sounds like
past funding decisions are made by the leader, not employees (mainly due to conflict problems described
below). Moreover, employees don’t implement anything as a result of this decision, so there is probably
minimal adverse effect of low commitment.
Risk of conflict. There are two dimensions of this contingency. First, with respect to goal compatibility
between employees and the company, the incident says that you believe that most researchers in the R&D
unit are committed to ensuring company’s interests are achieved. Second, it is almost certainly true that
conflict will occur among employees. This is a win-lose situation where funding one project reduces or
eliminates funding on other projects. Overall, the conflict among employees means that the decision should
not be given to the team, but consultation with individuals or the team is fine.
A higher degree of involvement would probably be difficult because of the problem of conflict among
employees. Employees could not agree because a decision to fund the project would reduce their own
funding. A low level of involvement would lose some of synergy of discussion about the issue. This synergy
brings out valuable information and potentially more creative solutions to the problem.
Scenario 3: Coast Guard Cutter Decision Problem
involvement:
The preferred level of involvement is “Decide alone” (no involvement). Specifically, the captain would solve
the problem or make the decision him/herself using information available at the time.
the textbook.
Decision structure: This decision probably has high structure because the captain must ultimately protect the
ship and crew, or would have reasonably clear rules on taking this sort of risk.
Source of decision knowledge: The captain has as much information as anyone on the ship about which option
to select.
Decision commitment. The crew will likely support the captain’s decision without any involvement.
Risk of conflict. There is a reasonable possibility that crew members will be divided (i.e., conflict will occur)
over the preferred alternative.
The main problem with applying a higher level of employee involvement here is that the problem is well
structured and the time-consuming process may be redundant. There is also a chance that subordinates
would engage in dysfunctional conflict if they were asked to make the decision.
CASE STUDY 7-2: GOING FOR WOW AT

NOTTINGHAM-SPIRK
Case Synopsis
This case examines creativity at Nottingham-Spirk, the Cleveland-based industrial-design company that has
registered almost 300 patents and produced dozens of well-known household products. The case describes the
company’s work environment and activities that support creativity.
Discussion Questions with Suggested Answers

1. What organizational conditions seem to support creative thinking at Nottingham- Spirk? Why do these
conditions support creativity?
To answer this question, students might want to separate the work environment factors from the work
activities that support creativity.
Work environment factors: The most apparent work environment factor is a learning orientation culture.
Employees are supported for making mistakes and “dust ourselves off and go the other way”. The
company also seems to encourage candid constructive feedback from peers on the potential of ideas. the
company’s physical structure (an old church) is also described as an inspiring environment for creative
thinking.
Work activities: The case describes a few important work activities that support creativity. The most
apparent of these are the diverging-converging sessions, where employees engage in brainstorming
(diverging session) and later (converging session) systematically evaluate ideas and prototypes that have
been developed. A second activity is field discovery, where employees search among store shelves for ideas
(i.e. predict what should be on those shelves in future). Third, the company engages in plenty of
prototyping, where a mock-up of the product is created, tested, and receives feedback from peers and
potential clients.
2. Explain how the converging–diverging sessions at Nottingham-Spirk aid employee and team creativity.
The diverging session is mainly a brainstorming session (described in Chapter 8), in which a team of cross-
functional employees actively produce as many ideas as possible to generate potentially novel and useful
product suggestions. The converging session is an evaluation meeting where the team offers clear, yet
constructive feedback about the potential of ideas that have received some development and prototyping.
TEAM EXERCISE 7-3: WHERE IN THE WORLD

ARE WE?
Purpose
This exercise is designed to help students to understand the potential advantages of involving others in
decisions rather than making decisions alone.
Materials
Students require an unmarked copy of the map of the United States of America and a scoring sheet that includes
names of communities in the United States, both of which are provided on the next two pages of this
instructor’s guide. Students are not allowed to look at any other maps or use any other materials. After students
have individually and in teams estimated the locations of communities, the instructor will also provide copies of
the answer sheet ( see four pages forward in this manual).
Instructions
Step 1: Working alone, students estimate the location on the U.S. map the location of the communities listed. All
of the communities listed are found in the U.S. For example, they would mark a small “1” in Exhibit 2 on the
spot where they believe the first community is located. They would mark a small “2” where they think the
second community is located, and so on. Students need to number each location clearly and with numbers small
enough to fit within one grid space.
Step 2: The instructor will organize students into approximately equal sized teams (typically 5 or 6 people per
team). Team members should reach a consensus on the location of each community listed in Exhibit 1. The
instructor might provide teams with a separate copy of this map, or each member can identify the team’s
numbers using a different collared pen on their individual maps. The team’s decision for each location should
occur by consensus, not voting or averaging.
Step 3: The instructor will provide or display an answer sheet, showing the correct locations of the communities.
Using this answer sheet, students will count the minimum number of grid squares between the location they
individually marked and the true location of each community. Students then write the number of grid squares
in the second column of the scoring sheet, then add up the total. Next, they count the minimum number of grid
squares between the location the team marked and the true location of each community. They should then write
the number of grid squares in the third column, then add up the total.
Step 4: The instructor will ask for information about the totals and the class will discuss the implication of these
results for employee involvement and decision making.
Comments to Instructors
This exercise demonstrates the importance of employee involvement for better decision making. Generally,
teams make better decisions than do individuals working alone. This is reflected by a “Team Score” that is
usually lower than the “Individual Score.” This is particularly true in this exercise because students typically
have varied backgrounds in terms of where they have lived or where their families live. Students currently in
Montana might easily locate Missoula but not Carrizozo.
The discussion should focus on the reasons why groups tend to make better decisions. Specifically, team
members bring diverse knowledge to the decision process, so the collective decision is usually more accurate
than the typical individual’s decision. The class should also explore why some individuals score lower than the
team. Students will usually point out that they were unsure of their knowledge, so did not push their point of
view. Occasionally (but not often stated in class), individual students dominate the discussion, thereby
preventing more knowledgeable students from presenting their information.
COMMUNITIES IN THE UNITED STATES

[Note: These names are NOT jumbled. This is how they are spelled. The names are not listed in any particular
order.]
1. AYDEN
2. CARRIZOZO
3. HEALDTON
4. MORRILTON
5. TIVERTON
6. TUMWATER
7. VIDOR
8. MISSOULA
© 2002 Steven L. McShane
Student Handout: Answer to “Where in the World Are We?”
CLASS EXERCISE 7-4: HOPPING ORANGE

EXERCISE
Purpose
This exercise is designed to help students understand the dynamics of creativity and team problem solving.
Instructions
Students are placed in teams of six students. One student serves as the official timer for the team and must have
a watch, preferably with stop watch timer. The instructor will give each team an orange (or similar object) with a
specific task involving use of the orange. Each team will have a few opportunities to achieve the objective more
efficiently.
The instructor will read the following instructions. These instructions ARE NOT provided in the textbook so
students have not had an opportunity to think about the exercise beforehand.
“The task for this exercise is to have each team member individually handle the orange -- toss to each
other, or anything you want -- but the orange must end up in the hands of the person who first held
it. This is a timed exercise. The winning team accomplishes the task in the shortest length of time.
You will have a few trials to improve your speed.”
Comments for Instructors

This quick exercise works best if you avoid cueing students about the possibility of rolling or dropping the
orange. The title and instructions create a mental model that assumes team members should toss the orange
from one person to the next. In fact, this is not the most efficient method and the exercise does not limit the
method in which all team members touch the orange.
The most efficient way to satisfy the requirements of this exercise is to have team members use their hands to
create a vertical tube. They should each have a few fingers sticking into the tube. Then, one person drops the
orange through the tube so that it touches everyone and the person’s other hand is at the bottom of the tube to
catch it.
If there are some doubts about the meaning of “handle the orange”, then a second strategy is to create a slide for
the orange. The slide consists of the cupped hands of five of the six team members held together so that the
orange is rolled from the top set of hands to the bottom. The sixth person drops the orange onto the slide, then
runs to the other end to catch it as it rolls down.
Although balls or other round objects may be used, an orange or other semi-round fruit or vegetable (e.g. apple,
lemon, potato) works best because students quickly identify balls with rolling. They are less likely to break out
of the mental model of tossing where fruit or vegetables are involved.
CLASS EXERCISE 7-5: CREATIVITY

BRAINBUSTERS
Purpose
This exercise is designed to help students understand the dynamics of creativity and team problem solving.
Instructions
This exercise may be completed alone or in teams of three or four people, although the latter is more fun. If
teams are formed, students who already know the solutions to these problems should identify themselves and
serve as silent observers. When finished (or time is up), the instructor will review the solutions and discuss the
implications of this exercise. In particular, be prepared to discuss what you needed to solve these puzzles and
what may have prevented you from solving them more quickly (or at all).
Comments for Instructors

[NOTE: The PowerPoint file for this chapter includes slides that visually display the answers to these creativity
brainbusters.]
Double Circle Problem. I have found that students are usually dumbfounded and don’t even try. How can you
draw two circles with one line and no connection between them? Here’s the answer: Draw the outer circle
anywhere on the page. When finished, fold a corner of the paper over so that it lies on top of the circle and the
paper edge is beside your pencil (see exhibit (a) below). Move the pencil across this folded over edge to a point
inside the circle you just drew. Move the corner back to its original position and complete the second circle.
Nine Dot Problem. (Note: This is sometimes known as the Eskimo puzzle because Inuit people apparently
have less trouble solving them. The reason is that they have no fences, so their brain doesn’t restrict their
solutions within the area of the dots.) There are many ways to solve this puzzle. The first solution below
(Exhibit (b)) is the most common. Solution (c) is somewhat questionable because the pencil doubles back across
existing lines. Some might say that there are more than four lines, although we see only four lines.
Nine Dot Problem Revisited. Some students will figure out the nine dot problem with four lines. Fewer will
figure out the three line solution The most obvious solution is shown in (d) below. Now, ask students for a
solution with FEWER than three lines. There are a few ways of doing this. Draw nine large dots on a very large
piece of paper, then roll the paper into a large tube. Next, draw a single line on a slight angle from the top of one
column of dots down and around the tube to the middle row, then around the tube again to the third column of
dots. The result is shown in the third illustration below. If students suggest that this method would not cover
the dots correctly, you could suggest that the paper could be so large that the angle becomes asymptotically
minuscule. Also, you could keep the paper flat and draw a straight line twice around the Earth. Another way to
pass a pencil line through all dots with a single straight line is to make the line wide enough to cover all of the
dots. Some students might also consider folding the paper so that the dots are folded on top of each other. Then
punch a hole with your pencil through all of the dots. It would be an unusual line, but it seems to fit within the
protocol!
(c)
(b) (d) (e)

(a)
Word Search Problem. The trick here is to correctly interpret the meaning of the instructions. May people tend
to look for five letters that they can cross out. Instead, they should cross out the words “five letters” that are
embedded in the row of letters. This leaves the word “creative.” [Note: This exercise is fairly new, so it may be
possible that students can cross out any five letters in the sequence to form a single word. However, we have
not yet found this option.]
Burning Ropes. This is a real challenge to most students in my class, but a few people get the solution. At time
0, light BOTH ends of one rope and one end of the second rope. The first rope will necessarily burn up in 30
minutes. When this is done, light the second end of the second rope. With 30 minutes of the second rope burned
up, burning both ends of the remainder will take exactly 15 minutes. Some students suggest cutting the rope in
half, but they forget that burn time is not equal across the rope. If you cut a rope in half and burn both ends of
each, one might burn for five minutes and the other for 25 minutes (not necessarily 15 minutes each).
Bonus Brainbuster
Roman Numeral Problem. Draw the roman numbers “IX” (without quote marks) on an overhead or
whiteboard. Then say to students: “Here is the Roman numeral 9. Add only one line to create a six.”
Answer to Roman Numeral Problem: This puzzle can be solved by drawing an “S” in front of the “IX”.
Alternatively, the solution could simply be to draw a “6”, because this a single line, too. A third solution requires
a wide marker the same color as the paper on which the IX is written. Turn the paper upside down (so you see
an XI). Now, draw a straight line across the bottom half of the two Roman numerals (thereby hiding them
against the paper background). The result shows the Roman numeral “VI”.
SELF-ASSESSMENT 7-6: DO YOU HAVE A

CREATIVE PERSONALITY?
Purpose
This self-assessment is designed to help you to measure the extent to which you have a creative personality.
Overview and Instructions

This instrument estimates the student’s creative potential as a personal characteristic. The scale recognizes that
creative people are intelligent, persistent, and possess an inventive thinking style. Creative disposition varies
somewhat from one occupational group to the next.
This self-assessment consists of an adjective checklist with 30 words. Students are asked to put a mark in the box
beside the words that they think accurately describe them. They MUST NOT mark the boxes for words that do
not describe them. Students need to be honest with themselves to receive a reasonable estimate of their creative
personality.
Feedback for the Creative Personality Measure

The table on the right (and applied to the graph in the student CD) is based on norms for undergraduate and
graduate university students in the United States. Scores range from –12 to +18. People with higher scores have
a higher creative personality.
Score Interpretation
+10 to +18 High creative personality

+1 to +9 Average creative personality
-12 to 0 Low creative personality
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
mend her grandmother’s shift; for the more useful she is, the more
happy you know she will be: so I will take it with me. Good night,
God bless you, I must make haste, for we poor people have no time
to lose. Away she set off: when she got home, well, Polly, said she,
you have had no accident? Polly was very dull, and said no, mother.
Your grandmother enquired kindly after you, and was very glad that
you are such a comfort and help to me; but how was it, my dear,
about the broth you last went with? Your grandmother has never had
them. Polly trembled in every limb; at first she thought of still saying
that she took them, but she found that she had been miserable
enough already, and that it would only make her more so. O, mother,
said she, I have deceived you: I have made myself very unhappy,
and I am very wicked indeed. She then told her mother what had
happened. Her mother was very much shocked, and could hardly
speak. I know, said she, very well, that other people are often
wishing and asking us to do wrong; it is possible your naughty
companions might persuade you; but, to come home and deceive
me, this is dreadful indeed. I know of no other right use of words, but
for us to tell one another of things as they really are. You have,
perhaps, heard quarrels in the street, and seen a good deal of
sorrow and trouble in houses; a great part of this is owing to people’s
deceiving one another in their words, and not telling the strict clear
truth. For my part, I would rather have had a child who could not
speak, than one who deceives me. How can I trust you? How can I
depend upon what you say? Nay, how do I know that this account of
the matter is truth? When shall I be able to believe you again? O, my
dear mother, said she, do forgive me this once, and I hope I shall
always speak the truth for the future. Yes, said she, I can forgive you,
but do you forgive yourself? that is the matter. Can you be as happy
as you was before? I will try: I will watch my words, and tell you all.
Well, said her mother, you seem very sorry; I do not wish to make
you more so, only you will find that I cannot, at present, trust to what
you say; neither can your grandmother, nor neighbour Green; but
this you must endure as the consequence of the fault you have
committed. It is a dreadful effect of doing wrong, that it makes us
unhappy; but the more unhappy it makes you, the more you must
strive against it in future. I hope you are sincerely sorry; if so, we
shall perceive it by your speaking the truth, for deceit is soon found
out, and then we shall trust you as usual; and, I hope, you will
always remember, that none can deceive another without injuring
himself.
Better be dumb than dare to lie;
For words which are not truth,
Far as they reach, spread misery
On childhood, age, and youth.
TALE VII.
! said Phebe Talkative, one day to Nancy Diligent, I wish I

had finished my work—what a long seam this is, I think I never shall
have done. Nancy told her she wished she would not talk so, for she
had as much work to do as herself, and talking only hindered them
both. Phebe told her she thought it very hard if they might not talk;
but, if she would not speak, she would get somebody else. She then
turned to the little girl who sat on the other side; in so doing, she lost
her needle: she was then obliged to get up and look it, and off
dropped her thimble. Dear heart, said she, my things are always so
tiresome, I wonder what business my needle had to drop; I do not
see that other people’s needles and thimbles fall. Thus she kept
talking on, and it was some time before she had again taken her
seat, and got to work. Presently she observed that Nancy Diligent
was not in her place; and, when she came back to it, she said, this is
you who would not speak; but I see you can leave your place and
walk about as well as other girls. Nancy told her that she had only
been to have her work fixed, as she had done her seam. Phebe was
now a little ashamed. Whether she minded better in future, I do not
know; but certain I am, that if people would observe, that the
inconveniencies they meet with are chiefly owing to their own
carelessness, they might do a great deal better, and be a great deal
happier.
Whate’er thy duty bids thee do,
“Do it with all thy might;”
They who this simple path pursue,
And they, alone, are right.
FINIS.
BOOKS
Printed for Vernor and Hood,
No. 31, Poultry.
1. BIOGRAPHY for GIRLS; or Moral and Instructive Examples for

Young Ladies. By Mrs. Pilkington. With Five elegant Heads. 2s.
vellum back.
2. TALES of the HERMITAGE, for improving the Mind and Morals
of Youth. By Mrs. Pilkington. 2s. bound.
3. TALES of the COTTAGE; or Stories moral and amusing, for
Young Persons. By Mrs. Pilkington. 2s. half bound, vellum back.
4. Henry; or, THE FOUNDLING; and the Prejudiced Parent, or
Virtuous Daughter. By Mrs. Pilkington. Frontispiece. 1s. 6d. bound.
5. MIRROR for YOUNG LADIES, or Historical Beauties, applied
to Character, Conduct, and Behaviour; by Mrs. Pilkington. With 24
wooden Cuts; 3s. 6d. bound.
6. MARMONTEL’s MORAL TALES, abridged for Youth, and the
Use of Schools and Academies, by Mrs. Pilkington. With elegant
Frontispiece; and Head and Tail Pieces cut in Wood. Price 3s. 6d.
bound.
7. MISCELLANEOUS POEMS, by Mrs. Pilkington, Dedicated to
the Duchess of Marlborough. 2 volumes, printed on fine vellum
paper, &c. 6s. boards.
8. OBEDIENCE REWARDED; or the History of Mortimer
Lascelles. By Mrs. Pilkington. With elegant Frontispiece. 3s. bound.
9. SCRIPTURE HISTORIES; or Interesting Passages extracted
from the Old Testament, for the Instruction and Amusement of Youth.
By Mrs. Pilkington. 2s. 6d. bound.
Transcriber’s Note:
This book was written in a period when many words had not
become standardized in their spelling. Words may have multiple
spelling variations or inconsistent hyphenation in the text. These
have been left unchanged. Obsolete and alternative spellings were
left unchanged. Misspelled words were not corrected.
Obvious printing errors, such as backwards, upside down, or
partially printed letters and punctuation, were corrected. The use of
italics is inconsistent in the advertisement at the end.
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK PLAIN TALES,
CHIEFLY INTENDED FOR THE USE OF CHARITY SCHOOLS ***
Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions

will be renamed.
Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S.

copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright
in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and
distribute it in the United States without permission and without
paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General
Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and
distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the
PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project
Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if
you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the
trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the
Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is
very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such
as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and
printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in
the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright
law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially
commercial redistribution.
START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the

free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this
work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase
“Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of
the Full Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or
online at www.gutenberg.org/license.
Section 1. General Terms of Use and

Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand,
agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual
property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to
abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using
and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for
obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™
electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms
of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only

be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by
people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.
There are a few things that you can do with most Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying with the
full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There
are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg™
electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and
help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright
law in the United States and you are located in the United
States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying,
distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works
based on the work as long as all references to Project
Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will
support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free
access to electronic works by freely sharing Project
Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this
agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name
associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms
of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with
its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it
without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside
the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to
the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying,
displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works
based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The
Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright
status of any work in any country other than the United States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project

Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project
Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed,
viewed, copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United

States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it
away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg
License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United
States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to
anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges.
If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the
work, you must comply either with the requirements of
paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use
of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth
in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and
distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder.
Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™
License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright
holder found at the beginning of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files
containing a part of this work or any other work associated with
Project Gutenberg™.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute
this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1
with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the
Project Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if
you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project
Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or
other format used in the official version posted on the official
Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at
no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a
means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other
form. Any alternate format must include the full Project
Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™
works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or

providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works provided that:
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that
s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and
discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project
Gutenberg™ works.
• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project

Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different
terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain
permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™
trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3
below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on,
transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright
law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite
these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the
medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,”
such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt
data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other
medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES -

Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in
paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic
work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for
damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU
AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE,
STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH
OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH
1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER
THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR
ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE
OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF
THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If

you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of
receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you
paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you
received the work from. If you received the work on a physical
medium, you must return the medium with your written
explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the
defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu
of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or
entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.
If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund
in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set

forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’,
WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR
ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this
agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this
agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the
maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable
state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of
this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the

Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless
from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that
arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project
Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or
deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect
you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of

Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new
computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of
volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project
Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™
collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In
2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was
created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project
Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your
efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the
Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-
profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the
laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by
the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal
tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax
deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and
your state’s laws.
The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500

West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact
links and up to date contact information can be found at the
Foundation’s website and official page at
www.gutenberg.org/contact
Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission
of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works
that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form
accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated
equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly
important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws

regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of
the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform
and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many
fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not
solicit donations in locations where we have not received written
confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or
determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit
www.gutenberg.org/donate.
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states

where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know
of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from
donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot

make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations
received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp
our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current

donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a
number of other ways including checks, online payments and
credit card donations. To donate, please visit:
www.gutenberg.org/donate.
Section 5. General Information About Project

Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could
be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose
network of volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several

printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by
copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus,
we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any
particular paper edition.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.
This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new
eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear
about new eBooks.

Organizational Behavior 6Th Edition Mcshane Solutions Manual Full Chapter PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Organizational Behavior 6Th Edition Mcshane Solutions Manual Full Chapter PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Organizational Behavior 6Th Edition Mcshane Solutions Manual Full Chapter PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Organizational Behavior 6th Edition

McShane Solutions Manual

fm_i-xxxiv,1.indd Page iv 12/1/11 7:40 PM user-f462 /Volumes/2

Published by McGraw-Hill/Irwin, a business unit of The McGraw

CHAPTER SUMMARY BY LEARNING OBJECTIVE

LO3. Discuss the roles of emotions and intuition in decision making.

LECTURE OUTLINE (WITH POWERPOINT®

Decision Making and

Decision Making, Creativity, and Involvement at Chrysler Corp.

Decision Making Defined

Rational Choice Paradigm

Rational Choice Decision Making Process

Rational Choice Decision Process

Problem Identification Process

Identifying Problems Effectively

Making Choices: Rational vs OB Views

Making Choices: Problems with goals

Making Choices: Rational vs OB (con’t)

Biased Decision Heuristics

Emotions and Making Choices

Intuitive Decision Making

Intuitive Decision Intuition is an emotional experience

Making Choices more Effectively

Problems with Decision Evaluation

Evaluating Decisions More Effectively

Creativity in Decision Making

Creative Process Model

Characteristics of Creative People

Independent imagination (cluster of personality traits and values)

Creative Work Environments

Activities That Encourage Creativity

Employee Involvement at Yabulu

Employee Involvement Defined

Employee Involvement Model

Decision Making and Creativity

Decision Making and

Subjective Expected Utility

Choice ‘B’ expected utility is

Solutions to Creativity Brainbusters

SOLUTIONS TO CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS

CASE INCIDENTS 7-1: EMPLOYEE

Suggested Answers to Case Questions

Scenario 1: Social Media Decision for the State Government

Scenario 2: The Sugar Substitute Research Decision

Scenario 3: Coast Guard Cutter Decision Problem

CASE STUDY 7-2: GOING FOR WOW AT

Discussion Questions with Suggested Answers

TEAM EXERCISE 7-3: WHERE IN THE WORLD

COMMUNITIES IN THE UNITED STATES

© 2002 Steven L. McShane

Student Handout: Answer to “Where in the World Are We?”

CLASS EXERCISE 7-4: HOPPING ORANGE

Comments for Instructors

CLASS EXERCISE 7-5: CREATIVITY

Comments for Instructors

(b) (d) (e)

SELF-ASSESSMENT 7-6: DO YOU HAVE A