chapter16.ppt

1
Organizational Behavior
16
Chapter
Critical Thinking and Continuous Learning
1
Purpose of This Chapter
2
Critical Thinking and the Scientific Process
3
Causal Inferences
4
Generalizing Research Results
2
It is very interesting that many of the most
successful CEOs do not hold MBAs. GEs Jack
Welch, for example, is formally trained in the
hard sciences.
Although the specialized skills learned in an
MBAs program are useful for gaining entry-level
positions, managers who rise to the top of the
organization are often those who generate, test,
and implement new ideas and discoveries. In deed,
some have begun to question whether the
convergent thinking skills associated with a
traditional MBA degree are the most relevant in
changing world, and many employers now look in
nonbusiness programs for successful leaders.
?
What is the most essential factor to be a
successful manager
3
Case The following is part of a business plan
being discussed at a board meeting of the Perks
Company.

• To avoid the quick-fix mentality, managers need
  to take several steps
• Keep current with the literature in the field of
  management.
• Be skeptical when simple solutions are offered
  and analyze such solution thoroughly.
• Ensure that the concept they apply are based on
  science rather than advocacy and experiment
  with new solutions themselves whenever
• possible.

It is no longer cost-effective for the Perks
Company to continue offering its employees a
generous package of benefits and incentive year
after year. In periods when national
unemployment rates are low, Perks may need to
offer such a package in order to attract and keep
good employees, but since national unemployment
rates are now high, Perks does not need to offer
the same benefits and incentives. The money thus
saved could be better used to replace the
existing plant machinery with more
technologically sophisticated equipment, or even
to build an additional plant.
This case is an argument question for the GMAT.
4
Content of Management
Thinking Process
5
Organizational Behavior
16
Chapter
Critical Thinking and Continuous Learning
1
Purpose of This Chapter
2
Critical Thinking and the Scientific Process
3
Causal Inferences
4
Generalizing Research Results
6
2
Critical Thinking and the Scientific Process
Charles Sanders Peirce To satisfy our doubt it
is necessary that a method should be found by
which our beliefs may be determined by nothing
human, but by some external permanency.The
method must be such that the ultimate conclusion
of every man should be the Same. Such is the
method of science.
Objectivity
Repeatable
Self-correcting
Cumulative
Public
Understand the World
Control the situation
Prediction
Explanation
Description
7
2
Critical Thinking and the Scientific Process
The Nature of Scientific Process
Theory
which refutes or modifies the
is expressed as
A specific, testable prediction, deprived
typically from a theory, about the relationship
between two variables.
A set of interrelated constructs, definitions and
propositions that present a systematic view of
phenomenon by specifying relations among
variables.
Characteristics of Good Data i. Reliability ii.
Validity iii. standardization
Verification
Hypotheses
which allow us test the theory through
which is quantified with
Data
8
Stages in the Scientific Method
Case
Mark W. Roosa, Scientific Method, Arizona
University http//www.public.asu.edu/atmwr/fas5
00/documents/scifig.gif
9
Correlates of Intellectual Property Violation
Introduction
The occurrence of intellectual property
violation varies significantly across countries.
Whereas industrialized countries provide the
strongest support to the protection of
intellectual property, developing countries are
at the end of the spectrum.
Case
Ilkka A. Ronkainen and Jose-Luis
Guerrero-Cusumano, Correlates of Intellectual
Property Violation , Best Practices in
International Marketing 61-69
10
Case
Correlates of Intellectual Property Violation
1. Identify Research Problem
This study focuses on two sets of factors as
correlates of intellectual property violation
Market factors and involvement factors.
Market Factors Involvement Factors
1. GNP per capita 7. Signatory to intellectual property treaty
2. Degree of enforcement of the intellectual property law 8. Level of trade dependence
3. Power distance 9. Level of trade with advanced economies
4. Avoidance of uncertainty
5. Degree of individualism
6. Masculinity
11
2. Formulate Hypotheses
H1 The lower GNP per capita in a country, he
higher the incidence of intellectual property
violation. H2 The lower the degree of
enforcement of law and regulations governing the
protection of intellectual property, the higher
the incidence of its violation. H3 The higher
the power distance in a country, the higher the
occurrence of intellectual property
violation. . . . H8 The higher the level of
trade dependence, the lower the level of
intellectual property violation. H9 The higher
the level of trade with advanced economies, the
lower the level of intellectual property
violation.
12
3.Choose Research Design/Develop Models to
Measures Variables
The relationships were tested using
regression with the following model IPV ß0
ß1 GNP ß9 TRADEADV e. The measures of
the factors as correlates of intellectual
property violation are as follows
Factors Measures
1. GNP per capita Purchasing Power Parities (PPP)
2. Degree of enforcement of the intellectual property law Corruption Perception Index (CPI)
3. Power distance Power Distance Index (PDI)
4. Avoidance of uncertainty Uncertainty Avoidance Index (UAI)
5. Degree of individualism Individualism Index (II)
6. Masculinity Masculinity Index (MI)
7. Signatory to intellectual property treaty Membership in Berne Convention
8. Level of trade dependence Imports/GNP
9. Level of trade with advanced economies U.S Share in Imports for a Nation
13
4. Gather Data
The data for the study were obtained from
public sources. The software industry was chosen
as the focus for the testing of the hypothesis
with the rate of piracy per market as estimated
by the industry serving as the dependent
variable. The data base consisted of 50
countries for which all of the data in this study
could be secured (1997 Global Software Piracy
Report, 1998) .
14
5. Analyze Data / Test Hypotheses
15
6. Analyze Data / Test Hypotheses
HYP r2 p Test Hypotheses
1 0.73 Plt0.000 The result is in line with the Hypotheses.
2 0.63 Plt0.000 The result is in line with the Hypotheses.
3 0.37 Plt0.000 The result is in line with the Hypotheses.
4 0.14 Plt0.005 The result is contrary to the Hypotheses.
5 0.60 Plt0.000 The result is in line with the Hypotheses.
6 0.00 Plt0.365 The result fail to receive support.
7 0.30 Plt0.000 The result is in line with the Hypotheses.
8 0.06 Plt0.038 The result is contrary to the Hypotheses.
9 0.11 Plt0.0008 The result is contrary to the Hypotheses.
16
7. Prepare Research Report
Report Preparation i. Report Format ii.
Report Writing iii. Guidelines for Tables iv.
Guidelines for Graphs
Basic Principle of Report Writing TOPIC

• i. Timely
• ii. Objective
• Professional
• Informative
• v. Clear

17
Organizational Behavior
16
Chapter
Critical Thinking and Continuous Learning
1
Purpose of This Chapter
2
Critical Thinking and the Scientific Process
3
Causal Inferences
4
Generalizing Research Results
18
3
Causal Inferences
Criteria for Inferring Cause (John Stuart Mill)

• Temporal Precedence the cause must come before
  the effect
• ?????????????
• Covariation the cause is varied the
  effect varied
• ??(??????)???? ????
• III. Elimination of Alternative Explanation
• ????????????

19
Case
The Cause of Absenteeism

1. Establishing Covariation

20
Case
The Cause of Absenteeism

1. Establishing Covariation

Test of correlation coefficient (????)
Plots Depicting Various Level of Correlation
between Variables
-.50
.50
Positive Relationship
Negative Relationship
(The absolute value of the correlation reveals
the magnitude of the relationship.)
21
Case
The Cause of Absenteeism
II. Elimination of Alternative Explanation
Selection threat the group selected for
comparison were not the same initially
???????????????????
Plant A (With Day Care)
Plant B (Without Day Care)
Age
Age
Employee
Number of Absences
Number of Absences
1
27
27
10
12
2
31
34
11
11
30
31
3
8
13
11
8
26
25
4
16
40
33
5
3
4
14
61
35
6
3
10
52
25
7
2
4
47
40
8
9
1
2
46
52
10
3
5
41
46
Average
9.3
5.8
40.1
34.6
22
II. Elimination of Alternative Explanation
Selection threat the group selected for
comparison were not the same initially
???????????????????
History threat the real cause is not the change
you made but rather something else that happened
at the same time ?????????????????????????
23
3
Causal Inferences
Designing Observation to Infer Cause
Two Faulty Research Designs ??????
A. One Group Before-After ??????
We use (O2-O1) to estimate the result of this
experiment.
B. After Only with Unequal Group ???????
24
3
Causal Inferences
Designing Observation to Infer Cause
Two Improved Research Designs ??????
A. Two Groups Before-After ?????????
B. Tow Groups After-Only with Randomization
????????
25
Case
How can we rule out age as the alternative
explanation for our results?
I. Homogeneous Groupselect workers who are 25to
35 years old.
ConclusionWith this sample, we still found lower
absenteeism in Plant A than in Plan B, so we
could attribute the difference to age.
26
Case
How can we rule out age as the alternative
explanation for our results?
II. Matching Subjectstudy only the subject in
Plant A for whom there are corresponding
subjects in Plant B .
ConclusionWith this sample, we still found lower
absenteeism in Plant A than in Plan B, so we
could attribute the difference to age.
27
Case
How can we rule out age as the alternative
explanation for our results?
III. Build the Threat into the Designsimply
treat age as another possible factor affecting
the rate of absenteeism and examine its effect at
the some time that we study the effect of day
care.
ConclusionThe relationship between day care and
absenteeism depends on the factor of age.
28
Organizational Behavior
16
Chapter
Critical Thinking and Continuous Learning
1
Purpose of This Chapter
2
Critical Thinking and the Scientific Process
3
Causal Inferences
4
Generalizing Research Results
29
4
Generalizing Research Results
Research is generally conducted with one sample,
in one setting, in one time period?However, we
often wish to know the generalizability of the
results.
Generalizability is defined as the extent to
which results obtained in one sample-setting-time
configuration can be repeated in a different
configuration.
Results of research may not generalize across all
samples. Results of research must be examined
across - Samples - Settings - Time
30
(No Transcript)