Agreement among the Articles

Discuss about the Power And Overconfidence.

The article selected for this paper focuses on the topic of power and overconfidence that is employed in decision-making. Fast, Sivanathan, Mayer & Galinsky.2011 conducts an experiment to demonstrate that power generates overconfidence in the process of decision-making. As a result of overconfidence involved in decision-making, organizations may incur losses for the controlling (McShane & Von Glinow, 2013). Moreover, overconfidence among leaders occurs as a result of psychological and social aspects. Walumbwa, Mayer, Wang, Wang, Workman & Christensen, 2011 investigates the connection between employee performance, ethical leadership, self-efficacy, institutional recognition, and leader-stuff exchange. The authors explore the normative demonstrated by leaders in the context of conduct and personal actions to facilitate performance and decision-making. Polman, 2012 focused on the concept of negativity which results after bias is employed in decision-making as well as making judgments. The topic that connects the three articles is performance and decision-making as they are demonstrated differently in the articles. The articles show that leadership and staff conduct determines the decision-making process in any organization. This paper outlines the summary of the three articles, analysis, recommendations, and conclusion.

Fast et al, 2011 demonstrates that power generates overconfidence which impacts decision-making. The significant findings in the article indicate that power has significant impacts on the tendencies of decision-making. The article proves that power generates overconfidence and not overconfidence persons are attracted to power. Based on the research, the theory of power outlines that power maximizes the behavioral system of an individual hence causes people to be more sensitive to the possibilities of reward (Miner, 2015). It means that leaders pay concern to rewarding and positive information. Evidence portrays that power elevates overconfidence which impacts performance and decision making. This research is related to the concept of cognitive psychology (Pinder, 2014). Cognitive psychology uncovers that people view the world with positivity that is not warranted. The five experiments conducted in the article shows that power causes overconfidence which results in bias during decision-making.

On the other hand, Walumbwa et al, 2011 indicated that ethical behavior in leadership impacts the behaviors and attitudes of employees. The authors link ethical leadership with deviant behavior. Moreover, Walumbwa et al, 2011 conducted an experiment to demonstrate how ethical leadership impacts behavior. The main goal of the article is to examine social identification procedure, institutional identification, self-efficacy, and social learning concept relate to ethical leadership (Wagner III & Hollenbeck, 2014). The authors needed to provide understanding based on challenging relationships which prevail among leaders and employees. Walumbwa et al, 2011 incorporates the social learning as well as social exchange theories to explain the complex connection that exists between staff and ethical leadership. In regard to vast literature, it is clear that ethical leadership and behaviors may impact performance and decision-making in an organization.

Differences among the Articles

Finally, Polman, 2012 focused on the disparities which prevail in systems that involve decision-making. The study shows individuals think in a de-contextualized way which increases psychological distance during decision-making. Polman, 2012 outlined the disparities which exist in the individuals’ systems of thought that lead them to choose for themselves and judge others. At such point, the psychological distance is said to be short (DuBrin, 2013). Also, the psychological distance is long when people choose for others. The authors provide examples of people who saw themselves in a close tower and those in a long tower. Based on vast studies, this research matter as it shows loss aversion. In regard to information seeking there is a significant disparity between the concept of choosing for others and choosing for self. For instance, people choose for other people when seeking more information. For example, in the study conducted by Polman, people choose for restaurants and for self. However, the study shows that those who choose for restaurant aimed to acquire more information. Polman, 2012 analyzed the relationship between performance, loss aversion, and decision-making. The study also incorporates the regulatory theory which recognizes the motivational aspect embraced by people in decision-making (Van Lange, Joireman, Parks & Van Dijk, 2013). The author conducted a collective research suggesting that loss aversion impacts choices. The study also shows that people make judgments differently hence may show or ignore empathy in decision-making. The study concludes that the concept of negativity which results after bias is employed in decision-making as well as making judgments.

The three articles have points which agree and that differ. To start with the points that agree, the articles claim that people require adequate information to increase performance and effective decision-making. The articles also agree that employing bias in decision-making as well as making judgments also results in poor performance. Third, the articles agree that cognitive psychology also affects decision-making. Fourth, the articles confirm that the process of decision-making integrates both the intergroup and interpersonal discussions. It means that people may tend to act in a self-interested or egocentric way. Also, it is clear that powerful people in the organizations act in a self-centered manner as they only focus on rewarding situations. Finally, the articles agree that ethical leadership is positively oriented and it determines the staff performance as well as decision-making.

On the other hand, points which do not agree, Fast et al, 2011 focuses on power which generates overconfidence hence impacts job performance and decision-making. The authors do not agree on the psychological and social aspects for overconfidence among leaders. Polman 2012 focuses on bias employed in judgments and decision-making. The article does not agree about overconfidence but incorporates loss aversion in the study. Finally, Walumbwa et al, 2011 focused on the impacts of ethical leadership on job performance. The article incorporates the argument of self-efficacy as well as organizational recognition which facilitates effective decision-making.

Synthesizing Arguments

The differing opinions can be synthesized differently based on the author’s argument. For instance, Fast et al, 2011 differ from others as the author holds that overconfidence may affect the performance and decision-making in an organization. This argument can be synthesized in that leaders should be humble to facilitate good relationships in an organization. On the other hand, Polman, 2012 suggests that bias should not be employed in decision-making as well as making judgments. This argument can be synthesized since bias in judgment can result in organizational conflicts which must be avoided (Luthans, Luthans & Luthans, 2015). Finally, Walumbwa et al, 2011 suggests that ethical leadership facilitates efficiency in job performance. This argument can be synthesized since ethical leadership promotes positivity in the organization.

I deem the argument made by Fast et al, 2011 credible due to various reasons. It is expected that in case a designated leader is present during decision-making, the members participate in a sensible way and the resources are used maximally. However, if a designated leader is never engaged in decision-making, it is expected that some errors may arise and the resources will be underutilized. This is because leaders provide direction and have authority to engage every staff in organization planning to avoid losses. However, studies show that power may result in overconfidence which results in inappropriate decision-making. Clearly, power may create but also power may break as it impacts humility of an individual. On the other hand, I do not disagree with either of the author’s argument as they appear credible. They all agree that managers should avoid being overconfident, should not apply a bias in judgment and decision-making, and that ethical leadership facilitates efficiency in an organization and also improves job performance.

The research findings across the three articles matter and they can be applied in the real work settings through various ways. For instance, the argument made by Fast et al, 2011 may be applied in the real world settings as leaders should not overdo power. Leaders should make use of power to ensure the workplace is productive. Effective use of power leads to a successful organization while misuse of power generates overconfidence which is the beginning of failure in the organization. Also, the argument made by Polman, 2012 may apply in the real world setting as leaders are expected to avoid bias in making judgments to enhance good working relations as well as unifying the employees. Finally, the argument made by Walumbwa et al, 2011 may apply in a real-world setting since ethical leadership facilitates a productive working environment.

Application of Findings in Real-World

Based on the analysis of the discussed articles, there are several recommendations that can be made for managers in any organization. First, managers should manage their attitude in the organizations. Right attitudes facilitate the right mindset in the organization. Based on the arguments made in the three articles, they all focus on attitudes overconfidence and employing bias in making judgments, and choices results due to poor attitude management in the organization (Morgeson, Aguinis, Waldman & Siegel, 2013). Attitude management allows leaders focus on the organizational goal and result in a productive working environment. Leadership with attitude management ensures that the individual goals are fulfilled as well as organizational objectives (Hogg & Terry, 2014).  Managers should be goal oriented to ensure that the organization’s mission is achieved. Also, attitude management facilitates good working relations with the employees.

Second, an effective manager in an organization must listen. Listening facilitates effective communication which helps in achieving the organizational and interpersonal goals (Kaplan & Schwartz, 2013). Based on the research of the three articles, Fast et al, 2011, Walumbwa et al, 2011, and Polman, 2012 it is clear that listening will help leaders observe ethical leadership, manage attitudes and embrace humility, as well as avoid applying a bias in making judgments. Communication engages two persons hence require a manager to employ good listening skills. Listening allows an individual to synthesize and understand matters of concern in the organization.

Third, an effective manager should adhere to the policies as well as follow the outlined procedures keenly. Basically, effective managers are good followers (Van der Vliert, 2013). They need to understand that they are responsible for the staff and other organizational plans. They engage the employees in decision-making and seek to avoid making bias judgments. Also, managers make good use of power and avoid being overconfident by following the policies carefully. Effective managers must prioritize the organizational goals for effective performance. Finally, effective managers must remain committed in the organization. Moreover, managers must remain committed to the group to ensure that they work towards a common objective with the employees. Managers commit all their capabilities to conceptualize situations, apply technical skills, and lead others to ensure the organizational goals are achieved.

Conclusion

To summarize, this paper provides an analysis using three articles. The main article selected for this paper focuses on how power generates overconfidence an argument made by Fast et al, 2011.Walumbwa et al, 2011 also makes an assertion by connecting employee performance, ethical leadership, self-efficacy, institutional recognition, and leader-stuff exchange. Finally, Polman, 2012 analyzed the concept of negativity which results after bias is employed in decision-making. Also, the topic based on organizational performance and decision-making connects the three articles. My research in this paper is that the three articles agree on several things such as they claim that people require adequate information to increase performance and effective decision-making. They also differ in several things as the authors make different arguments. Also, various recommendations are issued in this paper that ensures there are effective managers in organizations. The research findings in this paper have limitations such as it assumes the decision-makers addressed do not know the people they make decisions for. The research in this paper is hypothetical in nature. Finally, this research cannot infer casualty as it adopts the cross-sectional design. Therefore, the final comment focuses on leaders, they should avoid being overconfident, make good use of power, avoid bias in judgments, and also exercise ethical leadership.

References

DuBrin, A. J. (2013). Fundamentals of organizational behavior: An applied perspective. Elsevier.

Fast, N. J., Sivanathan, N., Mayer, N. D., &Galinsky, A. D. (2012).Power and overconfident decision-making. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 117(2), 249-260.

Hogg, M. A., & Terry, D. J. (2014). Social identity processes in organizational contexts. Psychology Press.

Kaplan, M. F., & Schwartz, S. (Eds.). (2013). Human judgment and decision processes in applied settings. Academic Press.

Luthans, F., Luthans, B. C., & Luthans, K. W. (2015). Organizational Behavior: An evidencebased approach. IAP.

McShane, S., & Von Glinow, M. (2013). M Organizational Behavior. New York, New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Miner, J. B. (2015). Organizational behavior 1: Essential theories of motivation and leadership. Routledge.

Morgeson, F. P., Aguinis, H., Waldman, D. A., & Siegel, D. S. (2013). Extending corporate social responsibility research to the human resource management and organizational behavior domains: A look to the future. Personnel Psychology, 66(4), 805-824.

Pinder, C. C. (2014). Work motivation in organizational behavior. Psychology Press.

Polman, E. (2012). Self–other decision making and loss aversion. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 119(2), 141-150

Simon, H. A. (2013). Administrative behavior. Simon and Schuster.

Van der Vliert, E. (2013). Complex interpersonal conflict behaviour: Theoretical frontiers. Psychology Press.

Van Lange, P. A., Joireman, J., Parks, C. D., & Van Dijk, E. (2013). The psychology of social dilemmas: A review. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 120(2), 125-141.

Wagner III, J. A., & Hollenbeck, J. R. (2014). Organizational behavior: Securing competitive advantage. Routledge.

Walumbwa, F. O., Mayer, D. M., Wang, P., Wang, H., Workman, K., & Christensen, A. L. (2011). Linking ethical leadership to employee performance: The roles of leader–member exchange, self-efficacy, and organizational identification. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 115(2), 204-213.