Question

What is Attribution Theory? What are its implications for explaining organizational
behavior?

Answer

Attribution theory is a social psychology theory developed by Fritz Heider, Harold

Kelley, Edward E. Jones, and Lee Ross. The theory explores how individuals "attribute"
causes to events and behavior.

It is defined as,
“An attempt when individuals observe behavior to determine whether it is internally or
externally caused.”

Elements of Attribution Theory

1. Locus - location of the cause—internal (dispositional) or external (situational) to
the person
• Closely related to feelings of self-esteem
• If success or failure is attributed to internal factors, success will lead to
pride and increased motivation, whereas failure will diminish self-esteem
2. Stability - whether the cause is likely to stay the same in the near future or can
change
• Closely related to expectations about the future
• If students attribute their failure to stable factors such as the difficulty of
the subject, they will expect to fail in that subject in the future
3. Controllability - whether the person can control the cause
• Related to ambitions such as anger, pity, gratitude, or shame
• If we feel responsible for our failures, we may feel guilt
• If we feel responsible for our successes, we may feel proud
• Failing at a task we cannot control can lead to shame or anger

The theory divides the way people attribute causes into two types.
1. "External" or "situational" attribution assigns causality to an outside factor, such
as the weather.
2. "Internal" or "dispositional" attribution assigns causality to factors within the
person, such as their own level of intelligence or other variables that make the
individual responsible for the event.
Implications for Explaining Organizational Behavior

We all have a need to explain the world, both to ourselves and to other people, attributing
cause to the events around us. This gives us a greater sense of control. When explaining
behavior, it can affect the standing of people within a group (especially ourselves).
When another person has erred, we will often use internal attribution, saying it is due to
internal personality factors. When we have erred, we will more likely use external
attribution, attributing causes to situational factors rather than blaming ourselves and vice
versa. We will attribute our successes internally and the successes of our rivals to
external ‘luck’. When a football team wins, supporters say ‘we won’. But when the team
loses, the supporters say ‘they lost’.
Our attributions are also significantly driven by our emotional and motivational drives.
Blaming other people and avoiding personal recrimination are very real self-serving
attributions. We will also make attributions to defend what we perceive as attacks. We
will point to injustice in an unfair world. People with a high need to avoid failure will
have a greater tendency to make attributions that put themselves in a good light.
Concluding the debate, I would like to quote a golden saying by one of the greatest
scholars world has ever produced,

“Beware of losing trust by blaming others (i.e. making internal attributions about them).
Also beware of making excuses (external attributions) that lead you to repeat mistakes
and leads to Cognitive Dissonance in others when they are making internal attributions
about you.”