1. Decision Making Presentation 2010 Here you can enter your own personal message. Just select all of this existing text and start typing your own message.

2. Threat-Rigidity Effects in Organizational Behavior A Multilevel Analysis Luke Chiu

3. Frame of Article

4. 2010/5/12 4 Intensification of Threat (Radical Change) ***↑Maladaptive Cycles↑ Environmental Change Information Restriction Threats (Lost / Cost) Rigidity in Response (well-learned / dominant response) Constriction in Control ↓Functional Adaption↓ Reducing of Threat (Incremental Change) ***Conclusion mentioned that when adversity results from radical change, organizational control and press efficiency may be dysfunction due to [Resource Scarcity]. (page 519)

5. Single-Level & Multilevel Analysis Pressure Uniformity

6. INDIVIDUAL GROUP (3) (1) (2) ORGANIZATION

7. 2010/5/12 7 Individual Level Effects (1). Three Manipulated Variables-- SAA (2). Two Key-point for research on SAA (3). Three Aspects for Summary Model

8. 2010/5/12 8 Stress, Anxiety, Physiological Arousal Psychological Stress is manipulated by experimental context to test “Performance-Failure” feedback. 3 Variables- ❶Perception Arena: Visual vs. Stimuli. ❷Problem Solving & Learning ❸Motor Performance : Stress vs. Training ☑support “Hull-Spence Theory of Motivation”. ☑Dominant response are irrelevant. STRESS

9. 2010/5/12 9 Trained TS STRESS ≽ NON-STRESS ≽ uTS uTnS Motor Performance Untrained

10. 2010/5/12 10 Stress, Anxiety, Physiological Arousal 2 Sub stream Studies- ❶Correlation [Anxiety] vs. [Performance Indicator] Anxiety↑; Visual Stimulation ↓ ❷ [ Experimental Manipulations ] ≋[ Stress Study] ANXIETY

11. 2010/5/12 11 Stress, Anxiety, Physiological Arousal ❶Effect of Arousal on Perception ❷ Learning ❸Motor Performance [ Psychological ] [ Physical] Complementary Stress & Anxiety AROUSAL AROUSAL

12. Model of Individual Threat-Response STRESS ANXIETY AROUSAL Natural Cognitive Indicates SAA Threat Situation Link Properties of Individual Behaviors [Psychological] STRESS & ANXIETY [Physical]

13. GROUP Level Effects

14. Outside Threats Intergroup Ties ⤵ Inside Threats Sociometric Choices Sociometric Choices Intergroup Hostility Group1 Group 2 Manipulated Intragroup Bases Intragroup Relations ⤴ Outside Threats

15. Receive Failure Information (Cont’ next in ORG ) Failure➞ Leader’s Influence ⤵⤵⤵ Leadership Replacement Decentralized Power Centralized Authority Collective Achievements External Threats Preexisting

16. Collective Goals Individuals Pressure on opinions / Belief Individuals perceive uniformity as necessary to reach collective goals Group Syndrome: Pressure toward uniformity, self-censorship of deviant beliefs by other members (individuals) Dependent on Group ⤴⤴

17. Outside Threats Internal Attribution Information Restriction & Control Cohesiveness⤴ Leadership ⤴ ➵Uniformity Likelihood of Success⤴ External Attribution Outside Threats

18. 2010/5/12 18 Organizational Level Effects 1. The Effects of Threat on Information Process. 2. The Effects of Threat in Control (Mechanistic Shift)

19. 2010/5/12 19 Information Process Detect Threats information Found Reality-Threat Received Failure information Decision Made Coz Overload Communication Channels INF Search Decreased INF Search Reintensify ONLY to confirmdecision Outcomes Subordinates solicited Advices

20. 2010/5/12 20 Mechanistic Shift 1. Organizational Hierarchy 2. Formation; Standardized; Centralized Exception: Natural Disasters

21. 2010/5/12 21 Model of Organization Response Threats

22. 2010/5/12 22 LEVEL ANALYSIS ORGANIZATION (Mechanistic Shift) 1.Restricting INF 2. Move control to higher level GROUP Expectation of successfully Resisting Threats INDIVIDUAL Information Processing Behavior Response Multilevel TRE Theory

23. 2010/5/12 23 Individual-Level Effect in Group Settings Individual Organization Group May be explained by [ Cognitive Changes] in the individuals who compose the group.

24. 2010/5/12 24 Individuals ORG Group Group Effects in Org Any rigidity generated by [ Groupthink] process under threats may be manifested or regarded as [Organizational Actions].

25. 2010/5/12 25 Individual ORG Individual Effects in ORG Decision originates with administrator acting alone, so regarded as “Individual” Organizational challenges usually cover [ interests of individual actors]. Individual may exacerbate the power differential between subunits and administrators.

26. Individual in Organizations Center TOP-Level Administrators *Individuals in organization may be central or peripheral interests. Middle-Level Administrator *Middle-level administrators express loyalty to subunits or groups. Peripheral

27. Conclusion Extinction-Survival 2-Edged Mechanism Amplified.

28. Supplementary Case The Icelandic volcano Eyjafjallajokull is a vivid and latest evidence to challenge the conclusion of TRT. The initial position of Europe’s regulators was that the safe level of volcanic ash was zero, thus grounding all flights in the broad swathes of sky which computer models said could be tainted. The fact that this regulatory stance changed in the face of an affluent cadre of displaced people, airlines feeling pinch, a looming threat to some supply chains and an election (constituency in Britain), makes it all the more suspicious.

29. TRT in Organization Behavior In the field of organization behavior, there are two conflict theories in explaining the risk-taking-driven behaviors. Threat-rigidity theory asserts that organizations will behave conservatively under threat conditions; meanwhile, “Prospect theory”argues that organizations will behave in a risk-taking manner when they is below a specific self-perceived reference point.

30. Thank you!