We are now moving on to the topic of understanding people in the workplace. This article will introduce you to the differences you will see in the workplace and help you understand these differences better. You'll also read about the concept of perception, which we will cover more in-depth in the next unit.
Perception
Learning Objectives
- Understand the influence of self in the process of perception.
- Describe how we perceive visual objects and how these tendencies may affect our behavior.
- Describe the biases of self-perception.
- Describe the biases inherent in perception of other people.
- Explain what attributions mean, how we form attributions, and their consequences for organizational behavior.
Our
behavior is not only a function of our personality, values, and
preferences, but also of the situation. We interpret our environment,
formulate responses, and act accordingly. Perception may be defined as
the process with which individuals detect and interpret environmental
stimuli. What makes human perception so interesting is that we do not
solely respond to the stimuli in our environment. We go beyond the
information that is present in our environment, pay selective attention
to some aspects of the environment, and ignore other elements that may
be immediately apparent to other people. Our perception of the
environment is not entirely rational. For example, have you ever noticed
that while glancing at a newspaper or a news Web site, information that
is interesting or important to you jumps out of the page and catches
your eye? If you are a sports fan, while scrolling down the pages you
may immediately see a news item describing the latest success of your
team. If you are the parent of a picky eater, an advice column on
toddler feeding may be the first thing you see when looking at the page.
So what we see in the environment is a function of what we value, our
needs, our fears, and our emotions. In fact, what we see in the environment may be objectively,
flat-out wrong because of our personality, values, or emotions. For
example, one experiment showed that when people who were afraid of
spiders were shown spiders, they inaccurately thought that the spider
was moving toward them.In this
section, we will describe some common tendencies we engage in when
perceiving objects or other people, and the consequences of such
perceptions. Our coverage of biases and tendencies in perception is not
exhaustive - there are many other biases and tendencies on our social
perception.
Visual Perception
Our
visual perception definitely goes beyond the physical information
available to us. First of all, we extrapolate from the information
available to us. Take a look at the following figure. The white triangle
you see in the middle is not really there, but we extrapolate from the
information available to us and see it there.
Figure 3.7

Our
visual perception goes beyond the information physically available. In
this figure, we see the white triangle in the middle even though it is
not really there.
Figure 3.8

Which
of the circles in the middle is bigger? At first glance, the one on the
left may appear bigger, but they are in fact the same size. We compare
the middle circle on the left to its surrounding circles, whereas the
middle circle on the right is compared to the bigger circles surrounding
it.
Our
visual perception is often biased because we do not perceive objects in
isolation. The contrast between our focus of attention and the
remainder of the environment may make an object appear bigger or
smaller. This principle is illustrated in the figure with circles. Which
of the middle circles is bigger? To most people, the one on the left
appears bigger, but this is because it is surrounded by smaller circles.
The contrast between the focal object and the objects surrounding it
may make an object bigger or smaller to our eye.
How
do these tendencies influence behavior in organizations? You may have
realized that the fact that our visual perception is faulty may make
witness testimony faulty and biased. How do we know whether the employee
you judge to be hardworking, fast, and neat is really like that? Is it
really true, or are we comparing this person to other people in the
immediate environment? Or let's say that you do not like one of your
peers and you think that this person is constantly surfing the Web
during work hours. Are you sure? Have you really seen this person surf
unrelated Web sites, or is it possible that the person was surfing the
Web for work-related purposes? Our biased visual perception may lead to
the wrong inferences about the people around us.
Self-Perception
Human
beings are prone to errors and biases when perceiving themselves.
Moreover, the type of bias people have depends on their personality.
Many people suffer from self-enhancement bias. This is the tendency to
overestimate our performance and capabilities and see ourselves in a
more positive light than others see us. People who have a narcissistic
personality are particularly subject to this bias, but many others are
still prone to overestimating their abilities. At the same time, other
people have the opposing extreme, which may be labeled as
self-effacement bias. This is the tendency for people to underestimate
their performance, undervalue capabilities, and see events in a way that
puts them in a more negative light. We may expect that people with low
self-esteem may be particularly prone to making this error. These
tendencies have real consequences for behavior in organizations. For
example, people who suffer from extreme levels of self-enhancement
tendencies may not understand why they are not getting promoted or
rewarded, while those who have a tendency to self-efface may project low
confidence and take more blame for their failures than necessary.
When
perceiving themselves, human beings are also subject to the false
consensus error. Simply put, we overestimate how similar we are to other
people. We
assume that whatever quirks we have are shared by a larger number of
people than in reality. People who take office supplies home, tell white
lies to their boss or colleagues, or take credit for other people's
work to get ahead may genuinely feel that these behaviors are more
common than they really are. The problem for behavior in organizations
is that, when people believe that a behavior is common and normal, they
may repeat the behavior more freely. Under some circumstances this may
lead to a high level of unethical or even illegal behaviors.
Social Perception
How
we perceive other people in our environment is also shaped by our
values, emotions, feelings, and personality. Moreover, how we perceive
others will shape our behavior, which in turn will shape the behavior of
the person we are interacting with.
One
of the factors biasing our perception is stereotypes. Stereotypes are
generalizations based on group characteristics. For example, believing
that women are more cooperative than men, or men are more assertive than
women, is a stereotype. Stereotypes may be positive, negative, or
neutral. Human beings have a natural tendency to categorize the
information around them to make sense of their environment. What makes
stereotypes potentially discriminatory and a perceptual bias is the
tendency to generalize from a group to a particular individual. If the
belief that men are more assertive than women leads to choosing a man
over an equally (or potentially more) qualified female candidate for a
position, the decision will be biased, potentially illegal, and unfair.
Stereotypes
often create a situation called a self-fulfilling prophecy. This cycle
occurs when people automatically behave as if an established stereotype
is accurate, which leads to reactive behavior from the other party that
confirms the stereotype. If you have a stereotype such as
"Asians are friendly," you are more likely to be friendly toward an
Asian yourself. Because you are treating the other person better, the
response you get may also be better, confirming your original belief
that Asians are friendly. Of course, just the opposite is also true.
Suppose you believe that "young employees are slackers". You are less
likely to give a young employee high levels of responsibility or
interesting and challenging assignments. The result may be that the
young employee reporting to you may become increasingly bored at work
and start goofing off, confirming your suspicions that young people are
slackers!
Stereotypes
persist because of a process called selective perception. Selective
perception simply means that we pay selective attention to parts of the
environment while ignoring other parts. When we observe our environment,
we see what we want to see and ignore information that may seem out of
place. Here is an interesting example of how selective perception leads
our perception to be shaped by the context: As part of a social
experiment, in 2007 the Washington Post newspaper arranged Joshua Bell,
the internationally acclaimed violin virtuoso, to perform in a corner of
the Metro station in Washington DC. The violin he was playing was worth
$3.5 million, and tickets for Bell's concerts usually cost around $100.
During the rush hour in which he played for 45 minutes, only one person
recognized him, only a few realized that they were hearing
extraordinary music, and he made only $32 in tips. When you see someone
playing at the metro station, would you expect them to be
extraordinary?
Our
background, expectations, and beliefs will shape which events we notice
and which events we ignore. For example, the functional background of
executives affects the changes they perceive in their
environment. Executives with a
background in sales and marketing see the changes in the demand for
their product, while executives with a background in information
technology may more readily perceive the changes in the technology the
company is using. Selective perception may perpetuate stereotypes,
because we are less likely to notice events that go against our beliefs.
A person who believes that men drive better than women may be more
likely to notice women driving poorly than men driving poorly. As a
result, a stereotype is maintained because information to the contrary
may not reach our brain.
Let's
say we noticed information that goes against our beliefs. What then?
Unfortunately, this is no guarantee that we will modify our beliefs and
prejudices. First, when we see examples that go against our stereotypes,
we tend to come up with subcategories. For example, when people who
believe that women are more cooperative see a female who is assertive,
they may classify this person as a "career woman". Therefore, the
example to the contrary does not violate the stereotype, and instead is
explained as an exception to the rule. Second, we may simply discount the information.
In one study, people who were either in favor of or opposed to the
death penalty were shown two studies, one showing benefits from the
death penalty and the other discounting any benefits. People rejected
the study that went against their belief as methodologically inferior
and actually reinforced the belief in their original position even
more. In other words, trying to debunk people's
beliefs or previously established opinions with data may not necessarily
help.
One
other perceptual tendency that may affect work behavior is that of
first impressions. The first impressions we form about people tend to
have a lasting impact. In fact, first impressions, once formed, are
surprisingly resilient to contrary information. Even if people are told
that the first impressions were caused by inaccurate information, people
hold onto them to a certain degree. The reason is that, once we form
first impressions, they become independent of the evidence that created
them. Any information we receive to the contrary does not serve
the purpose of altering the original impression. Imagine the first day
you met your colleague Anne. She treated you in a rude manner and when
you asked for her help, she brushed you off. You may form the belief
that she is a rude and unhelpful person. Later, you may hear that her
mother is very sick and she is very stressed. In reality she may have
been unusually stressed on the day you met her. If you had met her on a
different day, you could have thought that she is a really nice person
who is unusually stressed these days. But chances are your impression
that she is rude and unhelpful will not change even when you hear about
her mother. Instead, this new piece of information will be added to the
first one: She is rude, unhelpful, and her mother is sick. Being aware
of this tendency and consciously opening your mind to new information
may protect you against some of the downsides of this bias. Also, it
would be to your advantage to pay careful attention to the first
impressions you create, particularly during job interviews.
OB Toolbox: How Can I Make a Great First Impression in the Job Interview?
A
job interview is your first step to getting the job of your dreams. It
is also a social interaction in which your actions during the first 5
minutes will determine the impression you make. Here are some tips to
help you create a positive first impression.
- Your first opportunity to make a great impression starts even before the interview, the moment you send your résumé. Be sure that you send your résumé to the correct people, and spell the name of the contact person correctly! Make sure that your résumé looks professional and is free from typos and grammar problems. Have someone else read it before you hit the send button or mail it.
- Be prepared for the interview. Many interviews have some standard questions such as "tell me about yourself" or "why do you want to work here?" Be ready to answer these questions. Prepare answers highlighting your skills and accomplishments, and practice your message. Better yet, practice an interview with a friend. Practicing your answers will prevent you from regretting your answers or finding a better answer after the interview is over!
- Research the company. If you know a lot about the company and the job in question, you will come out as someone who is really interested in the job. If you ask basic questions such as "what does this company do?" you will not be taken as a serious candidate. Visit the company's Web site as well as others, and learn as much about the company and the job as you can.
- When you are invited for an office interview, be sure to dress properly. Like it or not, the manner you dress is a big part of the impression you make. Dress properly for the job and company in question. In many jobs, wearing professional clothes, such as a suit, is expected. In some information technology jobs, it may be more proper to wear clean and neat business casual clothes (such as khakis and a pressed shirt) as opposed to dressing formally. Do some investigation about what is suitable. Whatever the norm is, make sure that your clothes fit well and are clean and neat.
- Be on time to the interview. Being late will show that you either don't care about the interview or you are not very reliable. While waiting for the interview, don't forget that your interview has already started. As soon as you enter the company's parking lot, every person you see on the way or talk to may be a potential influence over the decision maker. Act professionally and treat everyone nicely.
-
During the interview, be polite. Use correct grammar, show eagerness
and enthusiasm, and watch your body language. From your handshake to
your posture, your body is communicating whether you are the right
person for the job!
Attributions
Your
colleague Peter failed to meet the deadline. What do you do? Do you
help him finish up his work? Do you give him the benefit of the doubt
and place the blame on the difficulty of the project? Or do you think
that he is irresponsible? Our behavior is a function of our perceptions.
More specifically, when we observe others behave in a certain way, we
ask ourselves a fundamental question: Why? Why did he fail to meet the
deadline? Why did Mary get the promotion? Why did Mark help you when you
needed help? The answer we give is the key to understanding our
subsequent behavior. If you believe that Mark helped you because he is a
nice person, your action will be different from your response if you
think that Mark helped you because your boss pressured him to.
An
attribution is the causal explanation we give for an observed behavior.
If you believe that a behavior is due to the internal characteristics
of an actor, you are making an internal attribution. For example, let's
say your classmate Erin complained a lot when completing a finance
assignment. If you think that she complained because she is a negative
person, you are making an internal attribution. An external attribution
is explaining someone's behavior by referring to the situation. If you
believe that Erin complained because finance homework was difficult, you
are making an external attribution.
When
do we make internal or external attributions? Research shows that three
factors are the key to understanding what kind of attributions we make.
Consensus: Do other people behave the same way?
Distinctiveness: Does this person behave the same way across different situations?
Consistency: Does this person behave this way in different occasions in the same situation?
Let's
assume that in addition to Erin, other people in the same class also
complained (high consensus). Erin does not usually complain in other
classes (high distinctiveness). Erin usually does not complain in
finance class (low consistency). In this situation, you are likely to
make an external attribution, such as thinking that finance homework is
difficult. On the other hand, let's assume that Erin is the only person
complaining (low consensus). Erin complains in a variety of situations
(low distinctiveness), and every time she is in finance, she complains
(high consistency). In this situation, you are likely to make an
internal attribution such as thinking that Erin is a negative
person.
Interestingly
though, our attributions do not always depend on the consensus,
distinctiveness, and consistency we observe in a given situation. In
other words, when making attributions, we do not always look at the
situation objectively. For example, our overall relationship is a
factor. When a manager likes a subordinate, the attributions made would
be more favorable (successes are attributed to internal causes, while
failures are attributed to external causes). Moreover, when
interpreting our own behavior, we suffer from self-serving bias. This is
the tendency to attribute our failures to the situation while
attributing our successes to internal causes.
Table 3.1 Consensus, distinctiveness, and consistency determine the type of attribution we make in a given situation.
Consensus | Distinctiveness | Consistency | Type of attribution |
---|---|---|---|
High consensus | High distinctiveness | Low consistency | External |
Everyone else behaves the same way. | This person does not usually behave this way in different situations. | This person does not usually behave this way in this situation. | |
Low consensus | Low distinctiveness | High consistency | Internal |
No one else behaves the same way. | This person usually behaves this way in different situations. | Every time this person is in this situation, he or she acts the same way. |
Key Takeaway
Exercises
- What are the implications of contrast error for interpersonal interactions? Does this error occur only when we observe physical objects? Or have you encountered this error when perceiving behavior of others?
- What are the problems of false consensus error? How can managers deal with this tendency?
- Is there such a thing as a "good" stereotype? Is a "good" stereotype useful or still problematic?
- How do we manage the fact that human beings develop stereotypes? How would you prevent stereotypes from creating unfairness in decision making?
- Is it possible to manage the attributions other people make about our behavior? Let's assume that you have completed a project successfully. How would you maximize the chances that your manager will make an internal attribution? How would you increase the chances of an external attribution when you fail in a task?