KPE320 NOTES

Lecture 1
Understanding organizations
- Personal factors: Things that affect individuals
o Personalities: Everyone has slightly different personalities (intro, extra etc.)
 Innumerable amount of sliding scales to describe a person
 Understanding personalities can help us to understand how they contribute to the
organization
o Perceptions: Who you think other people are – or other people perception of you
(personality does not necessarily align with perceptions)
 What you think you come off as does not necessarily mean others think of you that
way
 Gentle reminder… (< Percieves it as passive aggressive)
o Competency: How strong each person’s skills are
o Compatibility: How well each individuals personalities, perceptions and competency align
with one another (Not just select all the most competent people, but select the most
compatible)
 Basketball team
 Take all superstar players and form a team does not mean that the team will
be good because they do not gel
 Need to work together
o Motivation: How motivated you are to perform at your best
 Weather, pay, time, etc.
- Interpersonal factors
o Communication: Talking with others (email vs talking face to face: Words are the same, but
impact may be different [different richness])
o Conflict: Absolute. Resolving conflict is best. When there is no conflict there is no innovation
and productivity. (Want to encourage productive conflict)
o Negotiation: Not trying to find a compromise (Nobody gets what they want- only halfway).
Goal is for everyone to feel fulfilled
o Teamwork: Goal is to have teams working effectively together. Division of labor where we
leverage everyone’s skillset, so we get the best outcome
o Politics: Use of power to leverage some sort of advantage
- Macro-Level Factors
o Organizational mission: Company has set objectives and values
o Economic/Financial
 Because the economic status of the company is good = more motivation [better
culture, better job security]
 Economic status bad = less motivation [worse culture, less job security]
o Technology
 More technology influences the culture of the organization
 Influences what an organization can and can’t do and how they do it
o Legal/Political
 Organizations are heavily influenced by what is or is not legal
Shareholder vs. Stakeholder
- Shareholder: Free market will determine what an organization should and should not be (If they
are on the right track, then the free market will support them and will prosper. If not, then they will
not prosper) – Milton friedman
 o The purpose of an organization is to make economic process. As long as you are doing it in a
legal way, where you are deceiving or frauding, then its fair game.
o If what the company is doing is against societal norms, then they will not be profitable
o The free market can vote with their wallets and decide what is and isn’t acceptable
o Only reason something is immoral is if the company does something to deceive you
o Ultimately, if we are open with our practices and the free market will or will not support the
organization (with money) and we by looking at how profitable they are we can determine if
they align with societal norms
o (Letter of the law)
- Stakeholder: Do the most good for the most people
o Must do so that it benefits the lives of employees,
community etc.
o (Spirit of the law)
o Healthcare costs more for poor people than rich. People
who are exposed to the worst conditions, need the most
access to healthcare but have the least amount of money to
pay for it
Leadership styles
- Autocratic: One leader, you tell people what to do
- Democratic: Back and forth dialogue
- Laissez-Faire: You get to decide how you want to do it; it doesn’t matter to me as a leader. Allows
people to try and see what works. Empowers people to develop themselves.
o Veteran team members
o The task is not super clear, give the team a shot on how to do it
- Visionary: Giving the team a framework of what to do (no step by step) – give them a tone on how
to act (give a vision)
o Pro: Gives direction
o Con: Not everyone interprets the vision the same way
- Coaching: Incorporate all different styles
Leadership Styles
Transactional Leadership: Tell you how to do it, less Transformational Leadership: More autonomy,
autonomy, less decision making (STEPS) more decision making (RESULTS)
• Focused on the process • Focused on the outcome
• “How” is important • “Why” is important
• Success comes from following the process • Success comes from achieving the goal,
• Innovation is low regardless of process
• Consistency is high • Innovation is high
• Consistency is low
• High performing organization are more
transformational based
Lecture 2: Perceptions
How we perceive others
- Example
o Both shows the boss at the head of a boardroom table, and directing the
employees
 However, the mood of the two meetings are very different
 We immediately get a sense that the top photo is more forceful and
aggressive
  The bottom photo has more variety in non-verbal information (happier)
- We immediately pick this information up without conscious thought
- Just because we can pick up this information, doesn’t mean we are correct.
- When we look at the photos, we naturally make judgement and interpret the situation, although it may
be wrong. Perception happens at all points in out human interactions
Perceptual errors
- What drives our differing perceptions?
o Attribution theory – Things need to have a cause. Humans believe that there is a cause for
everything. Under informed people lack the ability to see that two things that are seemingly
related are not actually related. This is a problem because these people are blinded, and they
think that it is related when it is not.
o Selective perception: Being influenced by relatively unique attributes that stand out (Person
with confederate flag on their cars — That is such a powerful symbol and makes you ignore
other cues.)
o Priming effect: When we are asked to look at the difference, then we are primed to see all the
differences in the different photos. We weren’t primed to see racial/gender equality so we
didn’t look for that. Whatever we are primed for, that is what we see.
o Contrast effect: Comparing one to another, you can contrast the other. If we were only seen
one photo, we have nothing to compare with, so we have less inferences. What we choose to
compare and contrast to, is important. (i.e. If an introverted person on your team is compared
to a highly extraverted person on the team then the introverted one will seem a lot more cold
than if by themselves)
o Halo effect: AKA anchoring bias. Once we decide that we like someone/something, we show it
favoritism and it is hard to see what is bad about them.
o Projection: Project what you think onto someone else’s words and interpret it that way. You
project your views onto the people around you (good, bad, neutral) and presume that they feel
the same way as you. You typically surround yourself with people who share the same world
views as you do
o Stereotyping: We use stereotypes as a shortcut way to understand someone
- Stereotyping vs Prejudice
o What’s the difference?
 Stereotyping: A heuristic; Not positive or negative. Shortcut way of taking pieces of
information and understand it.
 Prejudice: Prejudge based on the package we put them in
o Are they inherently bad?
 Police carding example: Not inherently bad when you card people in your area, but it is
bad when you add stereotype to it. When you believe that people that are associated
with gangs are involved in gang violence, even if they’re not. It is worse when you add in
racial and gender differences
 Job interview example: Spend an hour with employer to share information about
yourself. They take this information that you give them, and they fill in the blanks and
decide if you will be a good fit for the company. As we discussed, this could be an issue
because humans automatically add shortcuts and add their own perceptions.
 Sports tryout example: Stereotypes are a large influencer for if they make it or not. The
‘January birthdays’ are more likely to make it than ‘December babies. Which place you
go in line matters. How big and tall you are matters.
- Cognitive Dissonance
o We struggle to accept ideas that are at odds with our current world view
 o When we are faced with information that doesn’t fit our world view, we must make a decision.
Accept it and change or world view (we are usually bad at this), OR just reject it and pretend it
doesn’t exist OR convince us that it doesn’t count (Invent another story in your head to reason)
 See hillbilly that drives a Prius: You think he’s not driving his own car (truck) and think
he’s driving his wife’s car
 Is a pickup truck guy but doesn’t have garage space to hold it so he drives a Prius
 OR He just drives a Prius because it is what it is. YOU ARE JUST WRONG
o Crux of interpersonal conflict
Personality types
- The underlying essence of what makes a person that person. Who they really are. Personality does
exist and is fairly stable and predictable.
- We should be able to quantify and measure it then
- Myers – Briggs Type Indicator  VERY COMMON!
 Extraverted / Introverted: Do you prefer to work with others, or keep to yourself?
 Sensing / Intuitive: Whatever my 5 senses tell me, I will go with that (gut feeling) or,
want to think and interpret senses slowly.
 Thinking / Feeling: Do you address things more using logic or emotion
 Judging / Perceiving: Do we judge the new information and stick with it or are we open
to new information
o One is not better than another
o There can be 16 different combinations
o Must cater information differently to each person
o By far, most widely used in large organizations
o Lots of fun, has some consistency
o Very little scholarly support!
- ‘Big Five’ Personality Model
 Extraversion
 Agreeableness
 Conscientiousness
 Emotional Stability
 Openness to New Experiences
o Much more scholarly support
o Not quite as fun nor easy to label /compare
o Not used nearly as often
Cultural influencers
- Generational differences
o Baby Boomers (born 1946 – 1964)
o Generation X (born 1965 – 1980)
o Millennials (born 1981 – 1996)
o Generation Z? (born after 1996)
- The conflict that we see between each generation is in part due to the cultural differences between
each generation
- In a student’s experience
o Teachers are all older than us (1-2 generations)
o Peers are all in the same generation
- In the workforce
o Peers are all different generations
o Superiors are all different generations
 o Inferiors are all different generations
Hofstede’s Cultural Values
- The cultural difference does influence how we interact with one another
o Power distance
 The degree of accepted inequality that exists and is
accepted between people with and without power
 I.e. does your boss make you feel valued and
include you to be part of the team? If so, the
power distance is low.
 If the coach does not get you involved, then the
power distance is high. For people in high power
distance countries, it is not socially and
culturally acceptable to talk back to your
superiors
o Individualism vs Collectivism
 Is everyone in it for themselves or do they care more about the
community
 North America: Highly individualistic
 White/light pink countries: helping others is seen as
positive
 In china, it is seen bad to be individualistic vs. in Canada, it is
seen as bad to be collectivist
o Masculinity vs Femininity
 Not about who is more powerful; MORE about what is more
masculine or more feminine
 Like does it matter. What is a male pastime vs female pastime
o Uncertainty avoidance
 People who are more or less comfortable to uncertainty
 Not knowing the exact way to do things
 People that are in the darker scale, people like it more
black/white
 At the end of meeting, want a set plan
 People in the lighter shaded region, they have higher
tolerance
 If at the end of a meeting, you are okay with
not knowing which direction to go
o Long vs. short term orientation
 Countries that are more short term oriented; more
worried about right now. Plan for today, but be
prepared for the future (when we get there)  Blue
on map
 Countries that are more long term oriented; more
worried about later down the line. Trade away star
player now for five draft picks in future years. Want a
concrete long term plan  More orange on map
Lecture 3: True colours
Understanding personal temperaments
True colours test
 - Similar to ‘big 5’ but less focused on scholarly material but more practical application
- Easy to use
o Illustrates how different personalities work in group dynamics
- Predominantly my results leaned towards gold and orange and weak towards blue and green

o Orange: Social butterfly

o Gold: Plan
o Green: Overthinker
o Blue: People person, caring, cooperative

COLOUR CHARACTERISTICS
 
 
Discovering new Being a good Being fun and taking
Esteemed for Being dependable
insights listener risks
Feeling
Stressed by  Lack of order Feeling inadequate  Restrictions
artificial
Highest virtue is Responsibility  Objectivity Loyalty Courage
Key
 Being prepared  Ingenuity  Authenticity Talent and skill
characteristics
On the job  Organizer Pragmatist  Peacemaker Energizer

Perception Structure Abstract Concern Excitement

To provide stability To be
To be competent and To be free and
Primary needs and order; be in authentic and
rational spontaneous
control care for others
Insights and Love and
Longs for  Security  Freedom
knowledge acceptance
Thoughtful
Strives to foster  Traditional values Harmony Fun and recreation
consideration
Take pride in  Dependability Competence  Empathy  Impact
Accomplishments Research and
Specialty is  People  Entrepreneurship
and results conceptualizations
Affirming their Acceptance of Achieving visible
Validated by  Being appreciated
wisdom others results
Authority and Intuition and
 Trusts  Facts and logic Impulses
tradition feelings

HOW PEOPLE SEE THEMSELVES AS…

Stable Superior intellect Warm Fun-loving, enjoys life

 
Providing security Powerful Romantic Flexible, adaptable
  
Always have a view Eminently reasonable Idealist Proficient, capable
Good at sorting/ Clam, not emotional Belief-driven Hands-on person
weeding out
Decisive Precise, not repetitive Affirming Problem-solver

Executive style Able to find flaws Promoting Do many things at once

growth
Organized person Seeking justice Relates well Welcomes new ideas
Goal oriented Able to reprimand Likes to please Will try anything
people

Dependable 98% right Communicator Spontaneous

 
Firm Creative Compassionate Carefree
 
Efficient Visionary Spiritual Practical
 
Good planner Original Unselfish Eclectic
 
Orderly, neat Rational Empathic Good negotiator
 
Punctual Under control Caretaker Can deal with chaos
 
HOW OTHERS SEE THEM AS…

Rigid Intellectual snob Stuck in / lives in Irresponsible

the past
Dull, boring Heartless Overly emotional Goofs off too much
 
Opinionated Ruthless Bleeding heart Manipulative
 
Unimaginative Unrealistic Mushy Not to be trusted
 
Bossy Emotionally controlled Hopelessly naïve Not able to stay on task

Predictable Afraid to open up Too soft Resists closure or

decisions
Controlling Critical, fault-finding Easily duped Obnoxious
Stubborn Unfair Smothering Flaky
System-bound Unappreciative of others Too touchy-feely Disobey rules

Judgmental Arrogant Pushover Scattered

 
Uptight Doesn’t care about Too nice Cluttered
 people
Autocratic Eccentric, weird Too trusting Uncontrollable
 
Rigid Intellectual snob Stuck in the past Irresponsible

Dull, boring Heartless Overly emotional Goofs off too much

 
FRUSTRATED BY…

Irresponsibility Routine Lying Rules and laws

Lack of planning Small-talk Violence Same routine

Lack of discipline Plagiarism Personal rejection Deadlines

Laziness Illogical arguments Lack of communication Paperwork

High risk taking Social functions Lack of close friends Lack of adventure

Illegal behavior Incompetence Sarcasm Too much structure

FRUSTRATES OTHERS BECAUSE…

Irresponsibility Routine Lying Rules and laws

Lack of planning Small-talk Violence Same routine

Lack of discipline Plagiarism Personal rejection Deadlines

Laziness Illogical arguments Lack of communication Paperwork

High risk taking Social functions Lack of close friends Lack of adventure

Illegal behavior Incompetence Sarcasm Too much structure

Summary
When working in groups and teams, remember everyone has:
- At least one personality
- Perceptual biases
- Cultural influences

Lecture 4: Motivation
Motivation matters
- As an employee / team manager
- As a leader / manager / supervisor
Carrot and sticks
- Idea of motivating farm animals for doing work
- Carrot: Dangle carrot in front of them, if they do good, they get carrot (reward)
- Stick: If they do bad you hit them with a stick (punishment)
Basic framework
- Positive: Carrot / Negative: stick
- Extrinsic: External motivation / Intrinsic: Internal motivation
Money as a motivator
- Does not align with scholarly theory
- Is money positive and intrinsic?
o Base salary: Pay certain amount of money for work; At some point it becomes less rewarding
and it will cost more to keep them motivated
o Paying by piece of work: Pay you only enough to compensate you for the work. Pay you X
amount of money for each contract you do, each project etc.; Can run into upper limit also,
paying people to be as efficient as possible
o Paying commissions and bonuses: Base salary and bonus on top of high performance; Never
enough money to continue to continue to raise compensation, next year want more money. If
they don’t get more, they think they are losing
o Fines and Penalties: Base salary and if you don’t do good, you lose money; Negative and
extrinsic (Punishment; stick analogy)
Process theories
o The relationship between you and the work itself is central to your motivation
o Can be both intrinsic and extrinsic
o Most appropriate in longer-term, more stable relationships
o Highly dependent on trust between organization and employee
- Example 1: Expectancy theory
o “If I do well, I’ll get rewarded”
 Promotion; bigger title; more money (?)
o “The reward is proportionate to the effort”
 Suggests that people will do things based on the expectation that they will get paid for
how much they work
o “The reward is something of value to me”
 Does not always have to be tangible award, an emotional award is good enough
 Endless supply of money will only do so much, need the pat on the back as well!
- Example 2: Self-Efficacy theory (Not related to expectancy theory)
o “The more confidence I have, the better I do”
 People perform based on the level of confidence they have that they will do a good job
 The more confidence I have the better I will perform, up to a physical limit
VS.
 The less I believe in myself, the worse I will perform
o “I have more confidence if others have confidence in me”
 Instilling confidence in people drives intrinsic motivation and provides a positive
motivation (has value)
 Can’t use it on its own, but positive self-reinforcement does make a difference
 Negative talk is negative and diminished intrinsic motivation
- Example 3: Goal setting theory (Separate from the others)
o “People are motivated to work towards goals”
 By setting a goal for a person we are trying to improve will be positive and intrinsic
 Better if the person has a hand in setting it for themselves
o “They are more motivated if the goals meet certain criteria…”
o Goal setting theory is used by good leaders
 Key criteria
  Stakeholder participation
o Come to goal together; leader and worker
 If you give them goal: Becomes extrinsic
 If you tell them to set themselves: They will always wonder if its
good enough
 SMART Goals

Needs theories
o The work itself has little to do with the motivation
o Motivation centers more around the person, not
the work
o Highly intrinsic
o Less interpersonally variable as you might imagine
- Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs
o Probably a little too broad and general to be
useful in understanding how motivation impacts
organizations…
- Herzberg’s 2-factor theory
o Maslow may have been on to something with respect to hierarchies…
o Herzberg suggests the hierarchy isn’t as simple as a single pyramid…
 Motivation is built on a ‘foundation’ of factors, called hygiene factors
 Base pay
 Comfort
 Security
 Positive relationship
 Quality supervision
 Reasonable conditions
 If the hygiene factors are securely in place, you can build on them using motivational
factors
 Need the hygiene as a foundation
 Beyond that is a different set of factors; motivation (intrinsic)
o Hygiene factors need to be present, but beyond a certain point
increasing them has no impact
 If you remove the hygiene factors, no number of motivational factors will make up for it
 No matter how many motivational factors there are, if you take away hygiene
then it will all crumble
o Essentially
  Hygiene factors need to be present first.
 Once they are present, increasing them has limited impact
o Base pay
o Comfort
o Security
o Positive relationship
o Quality supervision
o Reasonable conditions
 Once hygiene factors are secure, then you can add motivation factors
 The more we add motivation factors, the more they will be motivated to work
hard
o Opportunity for advancement
o Challenge
o Recognition
o Increased responsibility
o Personal achievement
o Connection to higher purpose
 Incentive; If hygiene factors are there, increased responsibility will increase
motivation. Need to revisit hygiene factors to ensure balance
 If hygiene factors are removed, no number of motivational factors can make up for it
Lecture 5: Leading teams
5 stage model
o Not necessarily sequential (may not start at 1)  If you take over a team as a new leader
- Forming
o Team acquaints and establishes ground rules. Formalities are preserved and members are
treated as strangers
o Relatively new team, just getting used to everything, easy going
- Storming
o Members start to communicate their feelings but still view themselves as individuals rather
than part of the team, they resist control by group leaders and show hostility
o Getting to know everyone a little better, seeing biases and perceptions, alliances form
- Norming
o People feel part of the team and realize that they can achieve work if they accept other
viewpoints
o Teams hit their stride, understand how everyone can contribute, and everyone knows their
roles, come up with standard ways of doing things
- Performing
o The team works in an open and trusting atmosphere where flexibility is the key and hierarchy is
of little importance
o Everything is running smooth, know how to function and can anticipate what is needed from us
- Adjourning
o The team conducts an assessment of the year and implements a plan for transitioning roles and
recognizing members contributions
o Done task, recap, replan
o Rare in work-setting
Another way of looking at 5 stage model
 - Forming: Everyone is new, on their best behaviour so the performance and effectiveness is pretty high
(Right after soccer tryouts, everyone is on fire, everyone wants to put their skills on display)
- Storming: Performance drops because they are finding their way, their allies, then there are the least
effective teams
- Norming: You have gotten to know everyone and how it all works, normalizing, performance increases
- Performing: Happens before the very end, you perform highest
- BASED ON WHICH PHASE THE TEAM IS IN, YOU CAN CATER TASKS TO THEIR EFFECTIVENESS AND
PERFORMANCE LEVELS ACCORDINGLY
Elements of high performing teams
- Organizational Resources: How we structure the team
o Organizational structure; Manager, sub teams, subordinate etc. What is the hierarchy?
o Leadership: What leadership style, existence of leadership?
o Role definition and clarity: Who does what? Does everyone contribute to everything?
o Task definition and clarity: What is the specific task?
 Want more role and task clarity when it is a specialized task (Carpentry)
 Need less when it is simple task
o Trust and support: Relationships
- Team Composition: Who makes up the team
o Personality blends: Mixes of personalities. Find personality based on personality tests
o Skills: Diversity of skills is more important than everyone being very good at one skill
o Team size: Small teams may be more effective than one big team
 5 teams of 5 with 5 separate managers reporting to supervisor
 1 team of 25 reporting to one manager
o Appropriate diversity: Mix of personalities is good, can be challenging to manage but can pull
the best in each part of the diverse team
- Work Design: How we structure work
o Appropriate direction / instruction: Clear details (transactional), Guideline approach
(transformational)
 Certain tasks need details other do not
 Novel: Something new, something people don’t really know; Let people learn
themselves
 Procedural: Building a car needs more transactional approach
o Autonomy: Level of autonomy has to do with how the team is structured
o Task significance: Performing insignificant tasks over and over will decrease motivation
 Sometimes you just have to get the work done, might be boring
 Task variety: Important to vary tasks to keep motivation up (Rotate tasks)
- Team Processes: Purpose of the work
o Shared purpose: Team vision
o SMART goals (individual, team, organization): Goals keep people motivated
o Linking tasks and goals
o Accountability: More motivated when your actions come back to bite you or not
o Conflict management: Avoiding conflict is not the goal, it is working around the conflict
Link between elements of high performing teams and motivation
- Hygiene factors: Organizational resources and team composition
o Way that the team is structured
o Need to be done well enough but still needs fine-tuning
o Once we have the right people in place, we don’t need to worry anymore
 o IF THE HYGIENE FACTORS FALL APPART, YOU CANNOT BUILD ON THE MOTIVATIONAL
FACTORS
- Motivational factor: Work design and team process

Leading teams
- Transactional vs transformational leadership
Transactional Leadership: Tell you how to do it, less Transformational Leadership: More autonomy,
autonomy, less decision making (STEPS) more decision making (RESULTS)
• Focused on the process • Focused on the outcome
• “How” is important • “Why” is important
• Success comes from following the process • Success comes from achieving the goal,
• Innovation is low regardless of process
• Consistency is high • Innovation is high
• BETTER FOR NOVICE • Consistency is low
• High performing organization are more
transformational based
• BETTER FOR SEASONED VETERANS
- Dual axis concept of motivation and transactional vs. transformational
o Transactional is more extrinsic
(Leading them through process,
‘he told me to…’
o Transformational is more intrinsic
because they understand and
believe in the process. No step by
step guideline

- Hertzbergs 2-factor theory and transactional vs.

transformational
 Hygiene  Transactional: You tell them
what to do, how to get it done, how
much to get paid
 Motivation  Transformational: Why
you’re doing it, responsibility, no leader
looking over your shoulder
o If too transformational (too little guideline), people will ask you to reinforce the transactional
o Will need more hygiene factors
- Example of transformational and translational
o Teaching a young athlete, a skill
 At first; transactional  Tell them exactly what to do
 Then; Transformational  Explain why it is important to do so
o Orienting new colleague to workplace (hospital)
  More transactional because too much variance in protocol may cause patient death
 You say… ‘Here is how we do this’ (transactional), ‘what do you think about this? Would
you do anything differently?’ (transformational)
o Joining a new project
 ‘I am new, what steps do you guys do for the project’ (transactional)
 ‘Put your own ideas on the table’ (transformational)
 Must acknowledge the transactional piece of the individuals and respect it, but
open them up to changes
o MOVING TOWARDS TRANSFORMATIONAL (MOTIVATION) IS THE GOAL. NEED TO
STRENGTHEN THE TRANSACTIONAL (HYGIENE) FACTORS BUT GOAL IS TO HAVE
TRANSFORMATIONAL
- 3 Roles of team leaders (Must be in this order)
o 1 - Leading People
 People are – BY FAR – the most critical element of any high performing team
 Effective transformational leaders focus on leading people first, and everything else
comes second
 If people come after, you will find yourself in a transactional leadership that pushes
hygiene factors. Pushing people first will allow for transformational leadership
 When leader is focused on the task before people involved, that is when you hate the
leader
 Best performance when you worry about the person first then task
o 2 - Leading Goal Setting and Achievement
 Together with their people, transformational leaders establish goals, measure progress
towards the goal and celebrate achievement of the goal
 What the end goal is…
o 3 - Leading Task Design and Execution
 The third priority of a transformational leader is establishing exactly how things are
done
 If you prioritize how things are done over what you’re trying to accomplish or how your
people are feeling, you are a transactional leader
6: Communication and negotiation
Communication channels
- Channel richness
o Low: Pretty much set in stone, no opportunity to see body language, no feedback/clarification,
static/simplified out of context communication
o High: More sensory feedback (body language, tone, facial expression), feedback/clarifications
o CHOOSING TYPES OF CHANNELS IS IMPORTANT
 Firing someone, quitting job, collecting feedback etc.
 - Barriers to communications
o Filtering: News sources filtering a large piece of information into one headline
 Distilling information in its truest form and trying to have as little bias as possible
 Problem: Doesn’t show the entire story and can heavily influence the message they are
trying to get across
o Selective perception: Related to filtering; Picking and choosing and manipulating the original
message (biased way)
o Broken telephone: One person passes message onto the next and next. As the message passes
from one person to the next, there is bias and filtering that occurs and it alters it.
 Can happen more in more nuanced ideas/messages vs. than when in more objective
ideas
o Information overload: Non-relevant information can be buried in relevant information when
there is too much information given. This is not a effective way of communication
o Emotional investment: Is a determinant for how much information you retain
 When there is no emotional investment, there you are less inclined to retain
information
 When you are too emotionally invested, that can prevent you from hearing with good
clarity of the information communicated
 Automatic process of filtering and selective perception occurs
o Communicating bad news: Just because you told patient doesn’t mean
they heard
o Body language: Important to match body language with the information we are trying to
convey.
 If they do not match, body language will trump what you are saying
Conflict
- The absence of conflict is not the goal.
- The absence of dysfunctional conflict is the goal.
- Functional conflict is how teams and organizations grow, innovate and improve!
Functional conflict (Want to facilitate) Dysfunctional conflict (Want to avoid)
Constructive: Share opposing idea to adv concepts Destructive
Objective: Not about being right, about getting it Subjective
right Personal: About who is right, winning the battle
Impersonal: Not about who came up with the Problem focused
 answer, acknowledging the steps needed to be right
Resolution focused: Forget about problem, focus on Negative
solution Undesirable
Unhealthy
Positive
Desirable
Healthy
Avoidance: Don’t ever talk about the discussion to get rid of conflict
Force: Forcefully supressing ideas; reject your idea and I don’t want you to ever
bring it up again. Can be beneficial if the boss has a better understanding the
employee.
Yielding: Instead of opposing others, you allow them to impose onto you. You
don’t challenge boss/colleague b/c you don’t want to hurt their feelings (timid).
Time and place where it may be beneficial
Compromise: Poor conflict resolution strategy. ‘meet half-way’, forcing someone to give up something so that
you can gain something (vice versa). NO ONE GETS WHAT THEY WANT
Negotiation: Desired; Everyone gets what they need. Introduce more variables.
Negotiation
- Framework
Zero sum (Compromise) Non-zero sum
• For me to win, you have to lose • For me to win, you don’t necessarily have to
• My gains come at your expense lose. Can find shared interests.
• The total value of the benefits is fixed • We can both experience gains
• We are adversaries • We can dictate the sum based on our
decisions
• We are colleagues

Less shared

More shared

- Creating value using non-zero-sum negotiations

- Getting to the yes
o Separate the people from the problem: Making it less personal, more objective. Removing
emotions.
o Focus on interests, not positions: Doesn’t matter whose idea is what. Not where we are at but
where we want to get to
 o Generate multiple options: Adding in more value so everyone can remain whole when finding
common ground
o Insist the agreement be based on objective criteria: Objective criteria to determine progress in
the agreement
- Getting the yes
o Doctor and nurse disagree on certain course of action to follow for patient
Doctor Solution Nurse
Separate the people PEOPLE Patient care PEOPLE
from the problem Personality Personality
Culture: Personally Preserve Culture
(parents, bring up), functional Feelings
professionally conflict Emotions
(training) Professional scope
Feelings Respect for Hx of past
Emotions colleagues interactions: Do they
Professional scope always object
Hx of past interactions Biases
Biases
Focus on interests, INTERESTS INTERESTS
not positions: Wanting what’s best Wanting what’s best
for patient for patient

The optimal treatment The optimal

plan treatment plan

Being treated with Being treated with

respect respect

Feeling valued Feeling valued

Nurses respecting that

doctors are superior
Generate multiple Option A – We ignore the conflict (AVOIDANCE)
options Option B – We let the doctor decide (YIELDING)
Option C – The doctor ‘pulls rank’ (FORCE)
Option D – We implement some of each idea (COMPROMISE)
Option E – We defer to a third party authority (NEGOTIATION)
Insist the agreement Follow the clinical practice guidelines. This defines…
be based on - What is best for the patient
objective criteria - Who feels more respected?
- Feeling valued
- Optimal treatment plan

This solution helps to define who is objectively right and maintains

everyones values
Module 7: Power and Politics
Power
- Bases of Power (All can overlap but also distinct)
 o How do we acquire and leverage power?
 Legitimate Power
 Power assigned by organizational structure (TML head coach, Justin Trudeau)
 Organizational trees (Tells who is in charge of who, who is who’s boss)
 Expert Power
 Someone with more expertise, more knowledge (Physicians, real-estate agent)
 Gives them power that they can leverage over you
 Coercive Power
 Can be positive: Takes on other forms as well
 Abuse of power to negatively influence someone
o Political leaders: Stalin (Do what we want, or we will impose
consequences from you-dictatorship)
o Parent and child:
 Overt: Physically yelling and screaming at child
 Psychological manipulation: No active yelling, but negatively
influencing them in other ways
 Reward Power
 Opposite as coercive
 Carrot and stick analogy
o Hiring manager: Can get potential employees to do things by dangling
reward (job) in front of them
o Video game achievements: Controlling how people behave by giving
them achievements
 Referent Power
 Power with being associated with someone who is influential
o Young ballerina looking up to old ballerina
o Young kids walking out with pro soccer players
 Improve idolization and make the kid want to play for that
organization
o Using Drake to advertise Sprite
 If Drake is popular and is drinking sprite, you may want to drink
sprite
 Information Power
 Imbalance of information
o Different than expert power
 You and a doctor can be given the same information, but they
have power because they have expertise (not just access to
information)
o Information on its own is a power base
 Having or not having information: but both know what to do with
it. (solely access to information)
Each basis of power is distinct but rarely occurs on its own. Power often comes from more than one base
Real estate agent
- Legitimate Power: Hired them and given them power to make decisions
- Expert Power: More expertise
- Coercive Power: Can impose negative consequences (penalties)
- Reward Power: Can reward us (fee structure)
- Information Power: Have stronger networks and information than us
Coach
- Legitimate Power: Hired them and given them power to make decisions
- Expert Power: More expertise
- Coercive Power: Can impose negative consequences (no play time)
- Reward Power: Can reward us (more play time)
- Referent Power: Coaches are known
- Information Power: Have stronger networks and information than us

Which power base is the best?

Coercion: Met with the most resistance

- People may comply and may be able influence them, but will be met with resistance
- Forced because you are doing what I say because I can punish you
Reward and Legitimate
- Give reward or because we are assigned by an organization
o People will go with what you say either because they want the reward or because you are their
boss
- Relates to transactional leadership goals
- Relies on rewards and coercion
- Functional but not most appropriate
- Reward: Purchased, you do what I say, and I give you what you want (you are purchasing power)
- Legitimate: Assigned power, but no respect
Expert and referent power
- Best way
- If the person who is holding power over, you because you know they have expertise or esteem you will
get compliance and commitment
- Earned power and respect

Politics in Organizations
- Politics: Actions and activities that are outside one’s formal role in the organization that aim to
influence the distribution of power within the organization.
- Common political tactics
 o Information management
 Control the information so you can control the message
 Selectively sharing pieces of information and withholding others
 Does immigration lead to more crime?
 There is an objective answer
 But you wouldn’t know it because of the news networks
 If you skew and bias the message, it will change the way that people react to the
message
o Personal attacks
 Attack particular person to influence others’ perception of them and gain political power
that way
o Building bases of support
 Cognitive dissonance: suck at holding two opposing viewpoints at the same time
 Getting people to join your party that strongly agree with one of your positions
and get them to support you on all other points
 Autism and tax cut example
o If you both agree on autism but one agree on tax cut and other does not,
the leader that mentioned autism in the beginning will get your backing
about tax cut
 Getting others’ beliefs to align with yours
o Impression management
 Taking the same information and broadcasting a different impression so that others join
in and strengthen the political agenda
o Coalitions / alliances
 Sub-category of bases of support
 Others don’t have to have the same beliefs as you but it helps both your interests
 You can hate each other but join an alliance because you hate someone else
more
 An enemy of my enemy is my friend
o Creating obligations
 The coalition between parties can result in the creation of obligations of one party cant
get anything done without the other
 Canadian politic example
 Liberal party has minority seats so they cannot do anything without NDP
 NDP has the least seats so they cannot do anything without liberals
 So they make obligations: if NDP helps liberals for one thing then the liberals
have to help NDP for something else
Influence
Influential tactics
- Rational persuasion
o People are already aligned ideologically or intellectually
o Present rational information to students is more influential than to employees
 Students go to school to learn so they are more open
- Inspiration
o Share a message that resonates with people and make them believe that they can change
things
- Consultation
 o Consult with stakeholders even if you know what they will say or have no intention of using
their opinion
o Consultation is important because it makes them feel included and make you better influence
people and broadening your power base
- Personal appeal
o Not exchange of one for another
o You should do this for me because we are friends; I am only doing this for you because we are
close friends
o By using this influential tactic as a personal favor, implies an exchange (I owe you one), doing so
will diminish your own power base
- Exchange
o I scratch your back you scratch my back
o Power bases are pooled/exchanged to get things done (Liberal and NDP)
Empowerment
- Power bases are temporary and contingent
o Not set in stone, they are temporary
 Legitimacy, coercive and reward, expert and referent power
o Power can go away; The only thing that will remain is expert and referent power
 If you treat someone poorly, the expert and referent power will be diminished
 “Lasting power arrives by foot but leaves on horseback”
 Takes a long time to build a power base, but can leave quickly
- Empowerment is more sustained and resilient
o Growing your power base
o Candle example
 Can use your candle to light someone else’s flame without diminishing your flame
 Growing others’ flame will do you no harm will only increase your power
 It enhances your ability to use your power to influence without diminishing the base
- It’s nice to be important, but it’s more important to be nice
- Earning power is hard; keeping it is harder
- Use your power to empower, not hold others down
- Sharing your power does NOT diminish it. It enhances it.

Module 8: Decision Making Theory

Rational decision-making model
- Has been the default concept of how to make most organizational decisions since 1970s
o Process of thinking out the solution
 Weighing pros and cons
 Making lists
 Using brain, logic and reasoning to think of something you can defend
- There are also ways to make decisions irrationally and there is an application for irrational models
- Usually ‘irrational’ has negative connotation
o But it only means lack of thought and reason
 Can be used for unimportant things—Selecting things at random (Restaurants in a bowl)
 Can be important too
 How firefighters are chosen in Toronto
o Everyone does physical and mental tests then all the passing names are
put into a bowl, then they are selected at random
 Reduces hiring biases (age, gender, race etc.)—most effective
Not all steps of this process is equally useful
- 1: Understand the situation (Pick apartment in new city)
- 2: Define the problem (Need place to live)
- 3: Define Objective (Close to where we work)
- 4: Problem (Only have so much money)
- 5: Alternatives (Think of new ways)
- 6: Evaluate alternatives (Pros and cons/points)
- 7: Choose based off of ‘points’
- 8: Do it

Intuitive decision making

- Before we do rational decision making, we do intuitive (gut feeling) decision making
o Rational decision making is just verbalizing our thoughts
- Examples
o Football quarterback
 Decision must be made about which plays to run, what to do next
 Timeframe is short and things are always changing (cannot full rational decision making)
 Need to use intuitive decision making
 They may not be able to articulate what they did because its outside of the
conscious
o Cyclist going down a busy road (Parked car on your right)
 No time to rationally decide what to do
 Can take in the information (as much as poss.) around you to make an intuitive decision
o Interview panel looking to hire someone
 More rational approach
 Scholarly literature suggests that the decision on whether or not you want to hire
someone is made in the first few minutes of meeting
 The rest is filler and need ‘evidence’ for why to pick them
Compare rational vs. intuitive
- Intuitive decision making…
• Occurs instantly, often unconsciously
• Impacts most of our decisions
• Has some serious limitations
- Rational decision making…
• Can override intuition
• Can take into account far more factors
• Is seriously flawed as well
Limitations of rational decision making
- Anchoring Bias: Once you intuitively like one, your decision becomes skewed towards that one person
even with rational information (relates to cognitive dissonance)
o After you intuitively like a new employee, everything they say will be better than other
candidates
- Confirmation Bias: Selectively pay attention to information that aligns with your initial belief
o Look for criteria about that person that supports what you think
 o Makes it easy for us to make positive information and hard to accept rational information that
goes against our intuitive decision
- Availability Bias: Once our decision has been made, then it is more readily recalled in our memory and
we don’t think about others
o Only think about how good one candidate is because that’s all that comes to mind
- Causation / Correlation
- Risk Assessment
o Intuitive decision making makes it hard for us to assess risk
o Especially if the risk is very very small or very very high
Group decision making
- Theoretically, groups offer several advantages to making decisions
• More information and diverse viewpoints balance out the limitations of both intuitive and
rational decision models (Because we are stuck in our own thinking ways—if its pointed out to
us, then we can see the other side easier)
• This increases decision creativity and quality
• It also increases acceptance
- On the downside, it tends to be a little slower and less efficient (ALSO, conflicting interpersonal
relationships)
Group think
- In practice, group decision making introduces a whole new set of limitations and risks
• Anchoring bias gets magnified
• Peer pressure
• Power imbalances
• Quid pro quo rationalization
• Illusions of acceptance and unanimity
- When the group thinks different than the individual group member, it creates cognitive dissonance
Summary
- We make reasonably good decisions quickly and intuitively, even if we can’t articulate the decision nor
the rationale for making it.
- We use rational thought to augment intuitive decisions. This can be helpful, but also has its
limitations.
- Rational thought is most helpful when we focus on defining the problem, not creating the solutions
- When making decisions as groups we can benefit from diverse thought, but groups also create a new
set of challenges.

Module 9: Managing change

Understanding change
- Change is constant
- Change does not happen seamlessly on its own (Good organizations/leaders must manage change)
- Change is very common
o Self-checkouts at grocery stores, new curbside pickup/delivered grocery changes
o People used to pack groceries for you  They do checkout, Pack yourself  self-checkout 
pickup style
- Change is going to happen, and everyone is going to have a different level of comfort with it.
o Some change is organic. Some is deliberate
o Change – any change – needs to be understood and managed to be optimally effective

Lewins Model
 - Well managed change doesn’t just ‘happen’.
- There is a process that is followed.
- Lewin’s Model helps us understand the basic process that good change management follows

Unfreezing: Humans are normally set in their ways. If we want to change something, we need to deliberately
agree that there is a preferred process in place and break it up. If we don’t acknowledge that there is a set
process, and declaring that we need change, change will not be successful. Pause the old way, agree to move
towards change
Changing: Most people who do not employ a deliberate model of change start here. No one is prepared for
change and it just happens. Not successful. Go thru the process of change.
Refreezing: Need to declare that change is over, and there is no more change. Cement the change to avoid
backslide (old way of doing things).

Individual barriers to change

- Self-interest: People are resistant to change that is against their self interest
o Example: Doing this change will mean employees losing job
 Need to acknowledge that this change will be against their self interest and need their
buy in
- Lack of trust: Inherent lack of trust between superior and worker
o Example: Manager keeping a close eye on group of employees when needing to let people go
- Differing perspectives: As we move change thru various phases, we need to acknowledge that not
everyone sees it the same way
o Example: Change project reduces employees
 Manager view: ‘Trimming the fat’, think employee are expendable
 Employee view: Think they are critical
- Change fatigue: People have a limited capacity to make changes (Even if the change is right and better,
it will fatigue them)
o Need to be understanding of how often changes should be made. Need to allow time for people
to recover
- Personalities: Different personalities intersect and conflict in different ways and can cause different
outcomes

Organizational barriers to change

- Group norms:
o Individuals may have their own resistance to change but in a group, it may change
 o Can cement their own thinking (good/bad) or change their thinking (good/bad)
- Threats to power structure
o Push for social change can influence the power structure
- Stakeholder inertia
o Suggest that within any group of people. Different stakeholders might need different things to
move towards the desired change.
 Example: Looking to make changes to how the prosthetic program was paid for
 Move from hospital resources to private (public to private)
o Physician group: Wanted to know that the quality of care for the patients
is the same
o Business group: Financially more beneficial for them
o Public: People who relied on this program (Quality of care was better, out
of pocket wasn’t A LOT higher etc.)
 Each stakeholder perceived the change differently
 Change projects may need different messaging (goals) to manage different
stakeholders —even though it is all part of one project
- Inappropriate scope
 Small change projects do not need EVERYONE involved
 Big change projects cannot only focus on a small group of people
 Need to find an appropriate balance
o Need to understand how all the aspects are interconnected to define the right scope
 Who needs to be looped in?
 If we get the scope wrong, the change project will fail no matter how good it is
o Everything/everyone is interconnected
 Need to consider every aspect when doing change and need to have the right scope

Kotter’s model for implementing change

Creating the climate for change
- Create urgency: Needs to happen now (why now and not later?)— not rushed
o People leaving organization, clients changing etc.
- Form a powerful coalition
o Understand that each stakeholder has their own perspective, needs, reasons
o Need to make sure that messaging is appropriate to each stakeholder so that they are with you
o Anybody against you, you need to understand and identify that and have a plan to mitigate that

 It’s okay that people are against you, you just need to know what to do
- Create high level vision
o Explain what the vision looks like
o Different stakeholders needed to see different vision, but emphasize how this change will help
them
Engaging and enabling the organization
- Communicate the vision
o Different members need different message
o Need to ensure that the different people that need to hear your message can hear it
- Empower action
o Transactional vs transformational leadership
o More effective to empower employees to do things themselves
- Create quick wins
o Along the process, it takes a long time
o To avoid change fatigue, creating quick wins (can see some positive outcomes) helps with
morale, buy-in, can see and feel the change
o Taking a road that will see early quick wins will motivate employees
Implementing and sustaining for change
- Build on the change
o Solidify change and go all the way with it before we call it finished
- Make it stick
o Refreeze or else there will be backslide and chaos

Kotter’s model vs lewins model

- Largely interchangeable
- Depends on which
population you are talking
to and what level of
specificity
- One is just more detailed
than the other