Session iv-U1

Organizational BehaviourUnit-I

Session- IV

THEORITICAL FRAMEWORKS OF OB

OB – Theoretical Framework

• Although OB is extremely complex and includes many inputs and dimensions, three frameworks:• The cognitive,

• Behaviouristic,

• social cognitive frameworks

• Can be used to develop an overall model for OB

13-11-2014 Ruturaj Baber MBA-IE Session IV 3

The theories

• The theories to be discussed will include:

• Behaviouristic theories • Classical conditioning

• Operant conditioning

• Cognitive theory

• Social learning

• Social cognitive theory


Cognitive Framework

• The cognitive approach to human behaviour has many sources of inputs ( the five senses)

• Cognition, which is the basic unit of the cognitive framework, can be defined as the act of knowing an item from information

• Under this framework, cognition precedes behaviour and constitutes input into the persons thinking, perception, problem solving, and information processing


Edward Tolman Cognitive framework

• Although Tolman believed behaviour to be appropriate unit of analysis, he felt that behaviour is purposeful, that it is directed towards a goal

• He felt that cognitive learning consists of a relationship between cognitive environmental cues and expectations

• Through experimentation, he found out that a rat could learn to run through an intricate maze, with purpose and direction, towards goal (food)


• Tolman observed that at each point in the maze, expectations were established – in other words, the rat learned to expect a certain cogitative cue associated with the choice point might eventually lead to the food

• If the rat actually received the food, the association between the cue and the expectancy was strengthen, and leaning occurred

• Tolman’s approach could be depicted that learning is an association between the cue and the expectancy)


• In his laboratory experiment, he found that animals learned to expect a certain event would follow another – for example, animal learned to behaviour as if they expect food when a certain cue appeared.

• Thus, Tolman believed that learning consist of expectancy that a particular event will lead to a particular consequence

• This cognitive concept of expectancy implies that the organisms is thinking about or is conscious or aware of, the goal.


• Thus Tolman and others espousing the cognitive approach felt hat behaviour is best explained by these cognitions

• Applied to OB, cognitive approach has dominated unit of analysis such as perception, personality and attitudes, motivation, decision making and goal setting


BEHAVIOURISTIC FRAMEWORK

• The roots of behavioristic theory of human behaviour can be trace back to the work of Ivan Pavlov and John Watson

• These pioneering behaviorists stressed the importance of dealing with observable behaviour instead of the elusive mind that had preoccupied earlier psychologist

• They used the classical conditioning experiment to formulate the stimulus-response (S - R) explanation of human behaviour


• Both Pavlov and Watson felt that behavior could be best understood in terms of S-R

• A stimulus caused response

• They concentrated mainly on the impact of the stimulus and felt that learning occurred when the S -R connection was made

• Ivan Pavlov who attributed leaning to the association or connection between stimulus and response (S-R)


• Based on Pavlov classical conditioning experiment using dogs as subjects

• When presented with meat powder ( unconditioned stimulus) - the dog secreted saliva (unconditioned response)

• When he merely rang a bell (neutral stimulus) the dog did not salivate

• When meat was accompanied with the ringing of the bell several times, then Pavlov rang the bell without presenting the meat, the dog salivated to the bell alone


• Conclusion - that the dog has become classically conditioned to salivate (conditioned response) to the sound of the bell ( conditioned stimulus

• Thus classical conditioned can be defined as a process in which a formerly neutral stimulus, when paired with an unconditioned stimulus, becomes a conditioned stimulus that elicit a conditioned response; in other words, the S-R connection is learned


B.F Skinner

• Another psychologist whose work explains this framework is B. F. Skinner.

• He felt that the early behaviorists helped explain respondent’s behaviours (those behaviours elicited by stimulus) but not the more complex operant behaviours

• In other words, the S -R approach helped explain the physical reflexes, for examples, when stuck by a pin (S), the person will flinch ( R) or when tapped below the kneecap (S) the Epson will extend the lower leg ( R)


• Skinner felt that classical conditioning explains only respondent (reflexive) behaviours. – i.e. involuntary responses that are elicited by a stimulus

• He felt that more complex, but common human behaviour cannot be explained by classical conditioning alone.

• He noted that the greater part of the behaviour of an organism was under control of stimuli which were effective only because they were correlated with reinforcing consequences

• Through his research thus , skinner posited that behaviour was a function of consequences, not the classical conditioning eliciting stimuli


• He felt that most human behaviour affects, or operates on, the environment to receive a desirable consequences.

• This type of behaviour is learned through operant conditioning

• Operant conditioning is concerned primarily with learning that occurs as a consequence of behaviour, or R-S.

• It is not concerned with the eliciting causes of behaviour, as classical , or respondent, conditioning is

• The organism has to operate on an environment (thus the term operant conditioning) in order to receive the desirable consequences.


• The preceding stimulus does not cause the behaviour in operant conditioning; it serves as a cue to emit the behaviour. For skinner and other behaviorists, behaviour is a function of its contingent environmental consequences

• So behavourisitic approach is environmentally based. It posits that cognitive processes such as thinking, expectancies, and perception may exist but are not needed to predict and control or manage behaviour


• On the other hand, Skinner found out through his operant conditioning experiment, that the consequences of a response could better explain most behaviour than elicit stimuli could

• He emphasized the importance of the response-stimulus (R -S) relationship


Behavioristic theories

• These came out of the behaviorist school of thought in psychology and derived from the work of:Classical behaviorist like Ivan Pavlov who attributed leaning to the association or connection between stimulus and response (S-R)

• The operant behaviorist, in particular the well known American psychologist B. F. Skinner who give more attention to the role that consequences play in learning or the response –stimulus (R-S) connection


Differences between operant and classical

Classical

• A change in the stimulus (US to CS ) will elicit a particular responses

• The strength and frequency of classically conditioned behavior are determined mainly by the frequency of the eliciting stimuli ( the environmental events that precedes the behavior)

Operant

• One particular response out of many possible ones occur in a given stimulus

• The stimulus situation serves as a cue for person to emit response and does not elicit response


Differences between operant and classical (cont..)

• During the classical conditioning process, the unconditioned stimulus, serving as a reward is presented every time

• The rewards presented only after the organism gives the correct response

• The organism must operate in the environment (thus the term operant conditioning) in order to receive a reward


Social learning and social cognitive theory

• This theory combines and integrates both behaviorist and cognitive concepts and emphasizes the interactive, reciprocal nature of cognitive, behavioral, and environmental determinants

• Social learning theory recognizes and draws from the principles of classical and operant conditioning but went beyond classical and operant theory by recognizing that there is more to leaning than direct learning via antecedent stimuli and contingent consequences


• Social learning takes position that behaviour can best b explained in terms of continuous interactions among cognitive, behavioral and environmental determinants

• The person and the environmental situation do not function as independent unit but in conjunction with behaviour itself


• It is largely through their actions that people produce the environmental condition that affect their behavior in a reciprocal fashion

• The experience generated by behavior also partly determines what a person becomes and can do which in tern affects subsequent behavior


Org. participant, environment and behavior -relationship

• participant control their own behaviour to the extent that they rely on cognitive support and manage relevant environmental cues and consequences

• Cognitive representation of reality helps guide organizational behaviour

• Much of complex behaviour is acquired by directly observing others in the surrounding environment


Social learning theory (cont..)

• Social learning theory posits that learning can also take place via vicarious/explicit/shocking/juicy, or modeling, and self –control conditioning processes.

• Thus social learning theory agrees with classical and operant conditioning processes, but says they too are limiting and adds vicarious, modeling and self-control processes


Cont.…

• New employees will bring with them a set of previously learned ways of behaving. They are then expected to learn additional information than applies to their jobs.

• Established employees continue to develop their job related skills and abilities

• Therefore, learning is a never ending process for all employees.


Contd…

• The process is also very complex. -an employee who has already learned one way to perform a job may have trouble learning a second one in better way

• An employee motivation to perform is closely linked to learning.

• Therefore a manager who understands leaning process can use the principles of learning to guide employees behavior and performance.


Social cognition – Albert Bandura (SCT Framework)

• This theory goes beyond social learning

• It extents learning and/or modifying by giving more attention to self-regulatory mechanisms

• Specifically, social cognitive theory identifies five capabilities that people use to initiate, regulate and sustain their behaviors.

• These are (1) symbolizing, (2) forethoughts, (3) vicarious/ modeling /learning (observational) , (4) self regulation, and (5) self reflection


Bandura’s SCT Framework

• Symbolizing: People process visual experiences into cognitive models. They helpin future action.

• Forethought: Employees plan their actions.• Observational: Employees learn by observing the performance of the referent

group (peers, supervisors and high performers) and the consequences of theiractions.

• Self-regulatory: Employees self regulate their actions by setting internalstandards (aspired level of performance).

• Self-reflective: Employees reflect back on their actions (how did I do?) andperceptually determine how they believe then can successfully accomplish thetask in the future given the context (probability of success between 0 to 100% isestimated)


Contd…

• Learning is one of the fundamental behavior processes, involves both the development and the modification of thoughts and behaviors

• Other concepts and aspects of organizational behavior.

• For example motivation, perception, attitude that will be discussed in later chapters can be fully explained with the use of learning principles.


THANK YOU


Session iv-U1

Business

Transcript of Session iv-U1