12MGT 301Individual paper.docx

1
2
MGT 301Individual paper
Ericsson et al. (2007, HBR) – Deliberate practice
The article has managed to illustrate deliberate practice
well; it has shown how far an individual can be able to reach if
he or she decides to practice. It cannot be measured the level a
person may be able to reach. However, a person may reach a
level where they only use intuition instead of practicing to be
able to deal with the problem they face each day.
The article has not managed to show us the bad side of
deliberate practice. We have mostly been shown what we can
achieve. We do not know the practicality of it in real life.

Deliberate practice can be highly impractical. Some professions
may not have the time to be able to practice due to the nature of
fixed schedules. Coming back closer it can also be seen that
women who have multiple small children are mostly under
pressure to deliver care, making it impractical for deliberate
practice. This shows their recommendation lacked practical
utility.
Gladwell (Dec 15, 2008) – Predicting performance
Through Gladwell’s research, we concluded that most of the
college quarterbacks may not be able to replicate the
performance that they had in college in the N.F.L. The
individuals could not predict which quarterback may have the
chance to shine. Some of the bench quarterbacks while in
college sometimes become big stars in the N.F.L who exceed
expectations.
There is a high level of bias in the article, as we cannot
tell if the research was conducted in the required way. The
individuals had a lot of evidence but they misinterpreted it
getting the wrong results. They only focused on one factor to
come up with the conclusion rather than having several factors.
This is because they did not have a system of evaluating the
competencies of the players. The study was also based on
previous data, which was speculative in nature and cannot be
verified. The structures for data collection were not in place.
This means they could not get the results they were looking for
due to the range restriction. The prediction of quarterbacks in
the N.F.L could be possible if better research is conducted.
Gladwell (2008, Outliers) – Practical intelligence
There are several things that may come about with having a
high IQ. Individuals with high IQ develop at a much faster rate
compared to normal individuals. This can be seen by the way
Chris developed. In addition, high IQ comes together with a
high ability to grasp and understand things, which may be hard
for others.
The article appears to be unrealistic to some point. The narrator
mostly focuses on appeasing the reader and passing the message

rather than having facts. This can be known as narrative fallacy.
It is not logical somethings to happen such as a child speaking
at six months and listening to the radio to be able to know how
to read. Children can only utter a few words at six months due
to undeveloped speech organs and a person cannot learn to read
by listening.
Gladwell (July 22, 2002) – Talent myth
Enron a model company sourced the best talent in the
market. This is due to the thought that talent was the main
factor that could push a company forward and achieve the best
results. However, they failed even though they followed the
McKinsey and Company research.
There are several factors that lead to the demise of the
company. Even though they focused on the talent, they did not
focus on the other factors such as experience, which deal with
productivity. They had minds only focused on talent thus they
suffered from ambiguous causality. The effect of leaders also
played a part since they were too confident and did not stand to
be corrected. This made the company run on leaders’ judgment
while talent played a small part.
The passing and implantation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA)
came with both positive aspects as well as negative. One
positive aspect is that millions of Americans are now able to
obtain insurance whereas they were not able to do so before. A
major negative aspect to consider when discussing the ACA is
the cost associated with it. In fact prior to its passing and since,
many Republican’s questioned how Americans would cover the
cost.
Since its passing, numerous increases in cost for health
insurance have occurred. Increases in overall premiums as well
as large deductibles are now significant issues for most
individuals. Even employers cost have increased due to the
increase in premiums for their employee’s health insurance. In
fact studies show that the cost of insurance has increased

significantly enough that the average working employee is
picking up over $5000 more in cost for their family insurance
plan through their employer (How Has Obamacare Impacted
health Care Spending, n.d.). Also many plans are now deducible
plans and the amount of the deducible is so large that many
average healthy citizens still have to pay out of pocket and
honestly may never reach the amount required of the deducible.
Having such a plan is something much newer and it is said that
the ACA is to thank for those increases.
Upon further research and seeing correlation between
the ACA and higher cost for health insurance premiums, it is
very difficult for me to support it. Living a good life comes at a
high cost as it is. Adding to those high cost for adequate health
care insurance coverage should not cause more financial
hardship on individuals or employers. A recent employment
change for myself has caused me to see firsthand how it is to
have a deductible insurance plan. It is frustrating to me to pay
every two weeks for something that does not even cover a sick
visit at my children’s pediatrician. Each time I pay between
eight to one hundred and fifty dollars to get my kid seen for
something as simple as an ear infection. Then also pay a higher
cost for the medication to treat it. I could not imagine the
higher cost and or deductible that others have to tolerate.
Although I thoroughly believe that the ACA had good intentions
to serve all individuals regardless of pre-existing conditions;
the cost associated are not fair for the public in which it serves.
I think that if this act had more time to be reviewed and
discussed it could have been much more successful to the
American people. As it stands now insurance companies and
their executives are lining their pockets. Even people who
decide not to have coverage due to cost still get penalized for
not paying for coverage. If more stipulations where placed on
the insurance companies to be fair to members the ACA would
have been much more successful overall. Fairness for each
individual person needs to be taken into consideration as every
person has a right to affordable health care coverage. From a

Christian worldview our Lord would want fairness and equality
for all, even when discussing health care. “But the wisdom from
above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full
of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere” ( James 3:17,
ESV).
Reference
How Has Obamacare Impacted Health Care Spending in ... -
Money. (n.d.). Retrieved February 27, 2018, from
http://www.bing.com/cr?IG=DBBF86452BC0477588591C09B08
5CE0A&CID=23666279C6776C44013869DAC7D86D74&rd=1
&h=8-wb9ju4IemW-fZFtx3uo-
OPADLkX84FmqhEXt2_JpI&v=1&r=http%3a%2f%2ftime.com
%2fmoney%2f4503325%2fobama-health-care-costs-
obamacare%2f&p=DevEx,5069.1
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) was passed in 2010. The ACA
was implemented to help cover individuals who fell into the
“coverage gap.” ACA expansion effected many individuals. For
instance, many young adults from between the ages of 19 and 25
became eligible for insurance, through their parent’s insurance.
The ACA established new national standards for private
insurance sold to small groups and individuals. Secondly, the
ACA created new private insurance marketplaces. Finally, the
ACA expanded Medicaid eligibility, which provided many
individuals with health insurance (Hamel et. al., 2014).
However, one must look at the influence the ACA has had on
healthcare prices. For many, the dramatic increase in healthcare
prices was a surprise. Kantarjian (2017) notes the significant
change in costs. For example, before the implementation of the
ACA, healthcare price increases were lower than the cost
increases under the ACA. At the same time, under the ACA
insurance companies spend between 80 and 85% of revenue on
healthcare. Additionally, Medicare spends 97% of revenue on
healthcare. This drastically contrasts the figures prior to the
ACA. Health insurance companies normally spent between 50%

and 60% of revenue on healthcare (Kantarjian, 2017). In
addition, the ACA effected federal subsidies. As McLaughlin
and McLaughlin (2015) noted, that under a private market
approach to Medicare and Medicaid, private insurance
companies were subsidized to offer Medicare Advantage plans.
However, under the ACA federal subsidies for Medicare
Advantage plans decreased (McLaughlin & McLaughlin, 2015).
One must also note that many individuals who signed up for
“Obamacare”, were not fully aware of every aspect included.
For instance, many individuals who received coverage were not
familiar with terms like co-pays, deductibles and premiums
(Huntoon, 2014). With all of this in mind, I do not think I can
fully support the ACA. It is a great idea, in theory but many
aspects like the costs truly hinder its success. Individuals who
will be covered under the new policy should understand the
aspects and terminology used. At the same time, the costs for
healthcare should be properly managed.
References
Hamel, M.B., Blumenthal, D., Collins, S. T. (2014). Health Care
coverage under the Affordable Care Act -- a progress
report. The New England Journal of Medicine 371(3), 275-281.
Retrieved from:https://search-proquest-
com.ezproxy.liberty.edu/docview/1545854049/abstract/4F5C245
C937D488FPQ/1?accountid=12085.
Huntoon, L. R., (2014). Obamacare: fraud, incompetence,
confusion, and higher costs. Journal of American Physicians and
Surgeons, 19(3), 66+. Retrieved
from: http://go.galegroup.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu/ps/i.do?p=A
ONE&u=vic_liberty&id=GALE%7CA468141502&v=2.1&it=r&
sid=summon&authCount=1
McLaughlin, C. P.; McLaughlin, M. J. (2015). Health Policy
Analysis (Second ed.)Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett
Learning.

3/1/2018 Health Policy Analysis
https://ereader.chegg.com/#/books/EGG9781284037784/cfi/319!
/4/[email protected]:0.00 1/1
PRINTED BY: [email protected] Printing is for personal,
private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or
transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will
be prosecuted.
HLTH 556 Discussion Board Rubric
Criteria
Levels of Achievement
Content 70%
Advanced 92-100% (A)
Proficient 84-91% (B)
Developing 1-83% (< C)
Not present
Demonstrates content mastery and a well-rounded understanding
of the issue.
18 points
18- 16.5 points
All posts display clear content mastery, and relate precisely to
the assigned topic.
16.49- 15.0 points
All posts are related to the assigned topic, but do not provide
evidence of subject mastery.
14-1 points
Posts are loosely related to the assigned topic, and do not
effectively contribute to the development of the discussion.
0 points
Does not provide evidence of subject mastery.

Articulates a clear position on the topic with academic support.
18 points
18- 16.5 points
Posts are balanced in their approach to the topic, but provide
evidence of a clear, well-researched position on the topic.
16.49- 15.0 points
Posts are mostly balanced, but do not provide evidence of a firm
position derived from research or current literature.
14-1 points
Posts show a clear bias, or do not provide a discernable position
on the issue. Evidence of research is not present.
0 points
Does not display evidence of individual thought or topical
research.
Contributes to the overall discussion through relevant,
substantive posts.
17points
17-15.5 points
Unique contributions are made to the discussion in both the
original thread and two responses.
15-14 points
Contributions are made through an initial thread and two
responses, but are definitional in nature.
13-1 points
Contributions made are minimal, and are derivative in nature.
0 points
Contributions to the discussion are nominal.
Structure 30%
Advanced 92-100% (A)
Proficient 84-91% (B)
Developing 1-83% (< C)
Not present
Grammar and
Spelling
8 points

8-7.4 points
Correct spelling and grammar used throughout essay. Posts
contain fewer than 2 errors in grammar or spelling that distract
the reader from the content.
7.3 – 6.7 points
Posts contain fewer than 5 errors in grammar or spelling that
distract the reader from the content.
6.6-1 points
Posts contain fewer than 8 errors in grammar or spelling that
0 points
Posts contain greater than 8 errors in grammar or spelling that
APA Format
Compliance
8 points
8-7.4 points
Minimal errors (1-2) noted in the interpretation or execution of
proper APA format.
7.3 – 6.7 points
Few errors (3-4) noted in the interpretation or execution of
proper APA format.
6.6-1 points
Numerous errors (5+) noted in the interpretation or execution of
proper APA format.
0 points
Notable absences in required APA formatting.
Assignment
Requirements
6 points
6 points
Minimum word count of 400 words for the initial thread and
200 words for each response is met or exceeded. Initial post

includes one unique, relevant scholarly reference
5 points
Minimum word count for each post is within 10% of the
requirement. References to outside sources are included, but do
not provide unique insight to the overall discussion.
4-1 points
Minimum word count for each post is within 20% of the
requirement. Sources referenced are not scholarly or relevant.
0 points
Word count for each post is not within 20% of the requirement.
No outside references are provided.
Short quiz on syllabus (graded)
It is not necessary to make an appointment to meet the prof (T /
F)
Circle all 3 of the main objectives in this course:
(a) evaluate claims critically; (b) theorize creatively; (c) think
simply; (d) develop an open mind; (e) diversity; (f) participate
actively
Session A is when the prof lectures to review basic concepts (T
/ F)
How many unexcused absences do you get in this course?
(a) none; (b) 1; (c) 2; (d) 3; (e) 4; (f) 5
To encourage participation, the prof will rely primarily on:
(a) cold-calling; (b) intrinsic motivation; (c) team leaders; (d)
magic
The due date for the first draft of the individual paper is:
Mar 9; (b) Mar 19; (c) Mar 29; (d) depends on team; (e) Apr 26
Which of the following are you not allowed to have in the
classroom?
(a) Water; (b) coffee; (c) food (i.e., solid); (d) laptop; (e) all of
above

Z302 – Spring 2013 Time Management Fundamentals
Once again:
If you anticipate legitimate absences during the semester, and
you have written documentation of them (e.g., specific sporting
events where you’re on the roster), feel free to bring them to me
very early in advance.
I will record the specific dates in my notebook accordingly.
Critical thinking training
3
Source:
Rick Ligthelm
© 2017 by McGraw-Hill Education. This is proprietary material
solely for authorized instructor use. Not authorized for sale or
distribution in any manner. This document may not be copied,
scanned, duplicated, forwarded, distributed, or posted on a
website, in whole or part.

Critical thinking tools
Can be grouped into four:
Tool #1: Ambiguous causality
Tool #2: Trivial magnitude
Tool #3: Misinterpretation of evidence
Tool #4: Lack of practical utility
4
Tool #1: You say that A causes B. But, could it be the case that
A does not cause B (or that A has only a small effect on B),
because evidence more strongly supports an alternative model
of the relationship between A and B? There are mainly two
types of such alternative models:
Reverse causality: B causes A instead of the other way around.
Buying expensive suits (A) will make you rich (B).

Playing basketball (A) makes you over 6”6 tall (200cm) (B).
Supreme confidence (A) makes you a competent employee (B).
5
Confound (i.e., “third”) variable: C causes both A and B.
Eating fat makes you fat. A possible “C” is _________.
Egalitarian policies (e.g., same pay) improves unit performance
(e.g., firm revenue). A possible “C” is _________.
Job satisfaction is positively correlated with job performance. A
possible “C” is _________.
6

Confound (i.e., “third”) variable: C causes both A and B.
Advanced examples of using Tool #1 (either model applies):
Our research team identified 11 companies that became good
(i.e., average) to great (i.e., outperforming the market average
by multiples over many years). From these 11 companies, we
distilled 7 characteristics that make good companies great.
We asked each employee to rate both their manager’s charisma
and one’s own performance. As a result, we found that
employees with charismatic managers tend to outperform other
employees.
7

Tool #2: Even if A does cause B, what is the magnitude of this
relationship? Is it large enough to be important?
Is it large enough? A correlation refers to the strength of the
relationship between two variables.
Perfect positive relationship (i.e., upper limit): 1
Perfect negative relationship (i.e., lower limit): -1
Rule of thumb: r = .10 is weak, .30 is moderate, and .50 is
strong in the organizational behavior context. But ultimately the
question of whether .30 or even .50 is large enough depends on
the context (e.g., cost to implement the newly proposed training
program).
You have to square the r value to be able to say that a predictor
explains x% of the variance in the dependent variable.
8

9
This virtually never happens in OB research. Perhaps the
correlation gets pretty close to 1 (e.g., .995) in certain
literatures in physics that rely on high precision measurement
and extremely controlled (i.e., sanitized) lab experiments.
10

On average, in the social sciences (including education, OB,
social psychology), the typical correlation is around .20 to .30.
11

xx
12
Which of the predictors would you say have trivial magnitudes
based on their correlations you see below?
The screenshot of Schmidt & Hunter (1998, psych bulletin)
table 1.
Another example of trivial magnitude:
Deliberate practice: “practice that focuses on tasks beyond your
current level of competence and comfort. You will need a well-
informed coach not only to guide you through deliberate
practice but also to help you learn how to coach yourself”
(Ericsson et al., 2007, HBR).
Proponents, including Malcolm Gladwell (author of Outliers),

argue that deliberate practice accounts for performance
differences even among elite performers.
So, let’s look at the hard evidence to evaluate Gladwell’s claim.
13
xx
14
Overall, deliberate practice accounted for 18% of the variance
in sports performance. However, the contribution differed
depending on skill level.
Most important, deliberate practice accounted for only 1% of
the variance in performance among elite-level performers.
This finding is inconsistent with [Gladwell’s] claim that
deliberate practice accounts for performance differences even
among elite performers.

Tool #3: You say that A causes B, and the magnitude of this
relationship is non-trivial. In doing so, you cite these various
studies as your evidence. However, I remain skeptical because
you might have failed to interpret the evidence correctly. For
instance:
You confused a positive correlation with a negative one (or vice
versa).
Your citations consist of anecdotes (i.e., “anecdotal evidence”)
rather than experiments or statistical analyses of data.
You failed to mention the caveat that your claim is based on one
or few studies, as opposed to an entire body of findings (e.g.,
meta-analyses).
You only look at linear trends, while ignoring non-linear trends,
heteroskedasticity, and other informative information from the
data.
15

16
Larger variance among the lower annual salary countries means
more risk/uncertainty as to how happy you’ll be. Smaller

variance among the higher annual salary countries mean a better
guarantee of happiness.
studies as your evidence. However, I still remain skeptical
because you might have failed to interpret the evidence
incorrectly.
Another exercise: Planes that survive and come back from battle
tend to have most bullet holes near their ‘bellies,’ so we should
reinforce those areas to increase their defenses against enemy
fire. What do you think officer? (Answer on next bullet point)
The misinterpretation is based on an incorrect understanding of
the correlation’s sign.
17
Answer: Bullet holes around the belly positively relates to
survival, not negatively.
18

studies as your evidence. However, I still remain skeptical
because you might have failed to interpret the evidence
incorrectly.
Yet another exercise: We collected data on 16,422 newcomer
players in Major League Baseball and 3,649 players in the
National Basketball Association—belonging to 135 batter
cohorts (from year 1871 to 2005), 135 pitcher cohorts (1871-
2005), and 60 basketball cohorts (1946-2005). Results indicated
that allocating varying amounts of opportunities does not lead
to the emergence of star performers. (Answer on next bullet
points)
Range restriction refers to the artificial reduction of a predictor
or outcome’s variance. It tends to deflate (i.e., attenuate)
correlations, thus often explaining why a relationship is found
to be weak or non-existent.
Often occurs when the sample is too narrow/specialized and/or
small.

19
Caveat: It could be that this null correlation was obtained from
data collected in a unique context that suppresses X from
causing Y (e.g., lifting weights lead to muscle growth, but if
you limit data collection period to 2 days, you’ll get zero
correlation).
20

Graphical illustration of range restriction
21
relationship is non-trivial. Also, you do not misinterpret the
underlying evidence. That’s all great. But I’m still skeptical
because the relationship between A and B seems to lack
practical utility. There are mainly two forms of this criticism:
Some findings are so obvious or vague that they don’t translate
to practical actions. Or, in the least, their usefulness only
applies to very limited circumstances.
For example, hindrance stressors (i.e., stressors that tend to be
appraised as thwarting progress) negatively impacts job
and, therefore, uninformative.

22
practical utility. For instance, some findings are so obvious or
vague that they don’t translate to practical actions. Or, in the
least, their usefulness only applies to very limited
circumstances.
An exercise: Goal setting theory states that assigning employees
(1) specific and (2) difficult goals will result in higher levels of
performance than assigning no goals, easy goals, or do-your-
best goals. E.g.,
Sign up 30 new gym members this month.
Raise $50,000 for a charity by June 20, 2017.
Reduce employee theft by 50% in the next financial year.
Finish the landscaping project within 1 week.
In what ways might goal setting not be very useful for a
manager?

Goal: A certain outcome or level of proficiency to obtain within
a specified time period.
23
practical utility. For instance, some findings are so obvious or
vague that they don’t translate to practical actions. Or, in the
least, their usefulness only applies to very limited
circumstances.
An exercise: Goal setting theory states that assigning employees
(1) specific and (2) difficult goals will result in higher levels of
performance than assigning no goals, easy goals, or do-your-
best goals.
In what ways might goal setting not be very useful for a
manager?
What constitutes “specific” and “difficult” may not be clear in
advance, but instead only in hindsight (i.e., depending on the
outcome). This is especially so in high-complexity jobs (i.e.,
cannot be easily scripted). (Next slide for graphical illustration)

Drills for critical thinking in OB
24
If goals are used in highly repetitive task situations, and if
employees are more or less similar in terms of knowledge,
skills, and abilities, then it may be reasonable to predict goal
difficulty for someone else in advance. Otherwise, experience
and intuition developed through trials and errors may be needed
to truly find the “right balance” for oneself.
Another quick exercise: Replace the x-axis with
conscientiousness (a personality trait). Assume the same non-
linear trend in the figure. Would you use the resulting
information to hire employees among applicants? Would you
apply the same criticism based on lack of practical utility (i.e.,
finding the “right balance” is obvious only in hindsight)?
My reasoning on the follow-up exercise: No, because I could

measure existing employees’ levels of conscientiousness and
then use that to predict their job performance. The
conscientiousness score (or score range) that predicts the
highest level of job performance would be the “right balance”.
There is no need for involving subjective judgment (e.g.,
regarding how specific and difficult something is).
25
underlying evidence. But I still remain skeptical because I’m
concerned that the relationship between A and B may lack
practical utility. There are mainly two forms of this criticism:
Some findings are so obvious or vague that they don’t translate
to practical actions.
The finding is redundant with prior research (“old wine in new
bottles”).
The definitions are highly similar or essentially identical when
examined closely.
When measured, the concept correlates very highly with one or
more other existing concepts (Cole et al., 2012; Harter &
Schmidt, 2008).

Examples of concepts that demonstrate signs of redundancy—
both conceptually and empirically:
Various leadership styles redundant with each other
Engagement and motivation
Emotional intelligence redundant with cognitive intelligence
Organizational commitment redundant with job satisfaction
26
For example, Le, Schmidt, Lauver, and Harter (2007) showed
that after the appropriate corrections for measurement error, the
lower bound correlation between job satisfaction and
organizational commitment was .92, and this value was the
same whether the corrections were made via structural equations
modeling methods or a newer method derived from
generalizability theory. Moreover, Harrison, Newman, and Roth
(2006) pointed out that the pattern of correlations found in

individual studies and in meta-analyses makes it ‘‘reasonable to
treat job satisfaction and attitudinal [organizational]
commitment as specific reflections of a general attitude, as each
is a fundamental evaluation of one’s work experiences’’
(emphasis in original). Also see Harter & Schmidt (2008)
published in Industrial and Organizational Psychology.
For counterproductive work behaviors, see Hershcovis (2011,
JOB).
Pop quiz on critical thinking tools (not graded)
“Playing the computer game Starcraft increases one’s IQ. That
is, we found that people with higher IQs tend to play more
Starcraft. Thus, we recommend that employees play more
Starcraft to boost their IQ and therefore their job performance.”
This is potentially a misleading statement because it ignores the
possibility of ____ caused by ____. Fill in the two blanks by
choosing two of the following options:
(a) Lack of practical utility; (b) misinterpretation of evidence;
(c) self-selection; (d) trivial magnitude; (e) reverse causality;
(f) redundancy
What is the general effect of range restriction on correlations?
(a) inflation; (b) deflation; (c) more practical; (d) less practical;
(e) none of the above.
“I’d recommend that you smile less as a leader. One time, I had
a leader who never smiled, and he was super effective.” This is
a dubious claim because it relies on:
(a) Trivial magnitude; (b) one study only; (c) anecdote; (d)
intuition; (e) goal-setting theory.

Pop quiz on critical thinking tools (not graded) [continued]
Which of the following is NOT one of the main critical thinking
tools that you should apply to a claim put in front of you?
(a) Trivial magnitude; (b) misinterpretation of evidence; (c)
lack of practical utility; (d) ambiguous causality; (e) value
compatibility.
“In our research, we found a .30 correlation between managerial
feedback and employee job satisfaction.” This is traditionally
seen as a _____ correlation, and it means that managerial
feedback explains _____% of the variance in employee job
satisfaction. Fill in the two blanks by choosing two of the
following options:
(a) weak; (b) strong; (c) moderate; (d) trivial; (e) 30; (f) 9; (g)
3; (h) .30
Draw a figure to represent heteroskedasticity.
Pop quiz on critical thinking tools (not graded) [continued]
Joe said, “The consultant talked a lot about the importance of
creating new policies to reduce workplace incivility. But I read
this meta-analysis showing that workplace incivility has a .91
correlation with with workplace aggression, against which we
already have company policies.” Joe’s concern is essentially
based on _______

(a) redundancy with prior research; (b) self-selection; (c)
confound (i.e., “third”) variable; (d) vague findings; (e) obvious
findings.
Which of the following correctly uses the confound variable
argument to critique the claim that A causes B?
(a) C causes A; (b) C causes A and B; (c) C causes B; (d) C
causes A, which in turn causes B; (e) all of the above.
True or false: The typical correlation in the social sciences is
around .40 to .50.
True or false: A meta-analysis is a study of studies conducted to
summarize the findings (e.g., correlations) in a research area.
Why do people (i.e., consumers of research) buy into sloppy
arguments?
30
Source:
Rick Ligthelm

Causes of uncritical thinking
Mental shortcuts (i.e., minimization of effort; cognitive biases).
People use and crave them (e.g., Mike Chang’s “six pack
shortcuts”).
Similar to me error: Similarity leads to attraction, so we tend to
favor those who are similar to us.
“I went to UD. The presenter also went to UD. I like what what
he’s saying.”
Halo error: If an employee receives a high score on one
characteristic, she also receives a high score on other
characteristics, even though her true scores may not be even
across all of those characteristics.
“The pharmaceutical sales rep is good-looking and, therefore,
what she is saying must be true. I will sign the contract and
prescribe these drugs to my patients.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQZ2UeOTO3I (3:40-5:30)
31

Sources: Black Swan by Nassim Taleb (2007); Thinking, Fast
and Slow by Daniel Kahneman (2011); Cascio & Aguinis (2011)
Confirmation bias: The tendency to search for, readily accept,
and/or recall information that is consistent with your beliefs.
Also, the tendency to discredit or ignore information that is not
consistent with your beliefs. Illustration:
Cult leader says: “The Martian gods have told us that the world
will end on Dec. 31, 2012! We must begin performing the ritual
Martian dance so that we will shoot straight up into Mars
heaven when Earth explodes.”
[The planet Earth continues to exist just fine into the year
2013.]
Cult members ask the cult leader: “Hey man, what happened?
We thought the world was supposed to end yesterday.”
Cult leader states: “The gods were so pleased with our dancing
that they decided to spare us! This is proof that the gods are
kind and generous!”
Cult members: “Yay!”
32

Fundamental attribution error: Takes place when a supervisor
attributes poor performance to an employee’s dispositional
tendencies (e.g., personality, abilities) instead of the situation
(e.g., poor equipment).
Causes of worldwide obesity: People all over the world deciding
to get lazy all at the same time vs. significant change in the
global food supply post-WW2.
Self-serving bias: Attribute bad events to external factors, while
attributing good ones to internal factors. For instance, if Eugene
suffers heavily from self-serving bias, he would say things such
as the following:
Eugene says: “I bombed that test because the professor is such a
jerk and won’t help me.”
Eugene says in an alternate reality: “I aced that test because I’m
like so smart.”
33

Hindsight bias: The tendency to think that you totally saw an
event happening—but only after the event has occurred and
even if you had no basis for predicting the event before its
occurrence. AKA: “I knew it all along.” “Creeping
determinism.”
History is pretty much one giant set of hindsight biases.
An economist argues in 2008: “I’ve been telling the media and
policy-makers that a financial crash was coming. All the
economic indicators were there. More importantly, the system is
set up in a way that crashes are inevitable. Yet, people did not
listen to me. Invest in gold.”
A skeptic: “Hey, I’ve been listening to your predictions for
quite some time, and you always say a crash is coming, though
never precisely when. So, you’re basically like a doomsday
prophet who has to be right just once. Anybody can do that and
it requires no exceptional skill.”
34

Representativeness heuristics: Guessing an event’s probability
based on its similarity with a description of the event, while
ignoring base rates (e.g., Is Tom W a computer science major)?
Availability heuristics: Guessing an event’s probability based
on how easily one can recall examples of the event (e.g.,
suicides at Cornell U.).
35

People love telling and listening to stories (i.e., anecdotes)
because they are more entertaining than statistics and
experiments. Stories can provide the illusion of order to what
may be random, and people prefer order to chaos.
This is also known as the narrative fallacy.
36
People love telling and listening to stories because they are
more entertaining than statistics, experiments, and lectures.
Stories can provide the illusion of order to what is purely
random, and people prefer order to chaos. For example:

Centralization versus decentralization among intelligence
agencies
Pearl Harbor (Dec 7, ‘41): Seen as due to decentralization.
Arguments and competitions between Army vs. Navy. Led to the
creation of CIA.
Bay of Pigs Invasion (Apr ‘61): Seen as due to centralization
(e.g., “groupthink”). Not enough arguments and competition.
FBI and CIA made to compete with each other.
Twin tower attacks (Sep 11, 2001): Seen as due to
decentralization. Led to the creation of the Terrorist Threat
Integration Center (which combines the anti-terrorist activities
of both the FBI and CIA).
37
“Why was the Pacific fleet at Pearl Harbor so unresponsive to
signs of an impending Japanese attack? Because, in the week
before December 7, 1941, they had checked out seven reports of
Japanese submarines in the area–and all seven were false.”
Intelligence agency failures described by Malcolm Gladwell
(http://gladwell.com/connecting-the-dots/). Search term is:
centraliz

People love telling and listening to stories because they are
more entertaining than statistics and experiments. Stories can
provide the illusion of order to what may be random, and people
prefer order to chaos. Another example:
What was the secret behind Victor Niederhoffer’s financial
success?
The probability may not be different from a coin flipping
experiment / scam.
38
Second illustration (http://gladwell.com/blowing-up/). Search
term is: luck
To boost ratings, the media is incentivized to take serious
research and translate it to entertaining tidbits (that are
unfortunately misleading).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Rnq1NpHdmw (5:36-7:48
&14:05-14:57)

39
Distorted incentives affecting producers of research
$: Funding from an entity w/ a clear agenda
Coca Cola helps Chicago get fit:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zBcT5lvY7w
Tenure and promotion pressures, as well as desire for fame,
etc.:
File drawer problem: The suspected tendency of researchers to
cherry pick what to submit for research, as well as the tendency
of reviewers and editors to cherry pick what research they will
accept for publication.
Outright fraud, though presumably rare (e.g., making up data)

40
Other things that producers of research do
Various forms of sloppy, imprecise, and uncritical thinking by
producers of research
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Rnq1NpHdmw (9:55-
11:57)
Rationalizations if they mess up (we’re only human!)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuTuWCSTnkE
In short, science and the communication of it is riddled with
problems. The antidote is to use the critical thinking tools to
voice your skepticism.
But, do so in a polite and diplomatic manner to avoid creating
haters.
41

Pop quiz on the causes of uncritical thinking (not graded)
Which of the following is a cause of uncritical thinking?
(a) Mental shortcuts; (b) various biases/heuristics; (c) the
preference for stories; (d) oversimplification by the media; (e)
all of the above
“We identified 11 companies that became good (i.e., average) to
great (i.e., outperforming the market average by multiples over
many years). From these 11 companies, we distilled 7
characteristics that make good companies great.” This research
team is most likely suffering from the following cause of
uncritical thinking:
(a) Halo error; (b) confirmation bias; (c) hindsight bias; (d)
self-serving bias; (e) funding from an entity with an agenda
Stories can provide the illusion of order to what is purely
random, and people prefer order to chaos. This statement refers
to:
(a) Narrative fallacy; (b) file drawer problem; (c) distorted
incentives; (d) goal-setting theory; (e) decentralization

Illustration of applying critical thinking
43
Source:
Rick Ligthelm
Illustration
44
How does all the material so far help me practically?
Narrow down your future actions from a variety of options!
Apply the critical thinking tools to eliminate dubious options.
"Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no
matter how improbable, must be the truth.” – Sherlock Holmes –
Conduct cost-benefit analyses to weigh remaining options.
Especially if you have many options left after step #1, and if
you want to prioritize among the remaining options and perhaps
further eliminate options.

Illustration
45
If you want to get in better shape, you’ll notice that there are so
many options out there, such as:
Running
Caloric restriction
Weightlifting
Intermittent fasting
Elimination of processed carbs
Low fat diet
Low carb diet
Green coffee bean pills
Steroids (Don’t do it kids)

Illustration
46
Apply the critical thinking tools to eliminate dubious options.
Intermittent fasting removed because of ambiguous causality
(e.g., caloric restriction may lead to both intermittent fasting
and weight loss)
Green coffee bean pills removed because of trivial magnitude
(e.g., “clinical studies revealed that the relationship is close to
nill”).
Low fat diet removed because of misinterpretation of evidence
(e.g., Ancel Keys’ seven countries studies)
Low carb diet removed because of lack of practical utility (e.g.,
“I’m on a budget, and carbs are cheap”).

For example, look for meta-analyses. Don’t rely on one or few
studies.
Illustration
47
There are two key criteria you can consider in your cost-benefit
analyses.
First, consider the causes of uncritical thinking, and then either
eliminate or reduce the importance of one or more remaining
options.
E.g., “I really want steroids to be the solution. But I realize I’ve
been engaging in confirmation bias by only recalling instances
when people got in shape with the use of steroids—but not those
who didn’t despite its use or those who actually gained more
weight while on it.”

Illustration
48
There are two key criteria you can consider in your cost-benefit
analyses.
Second, options that involve removing potentially harmful
things should be weighed more heavily than options that involve
adding potentially beneficial things because new things often
come with side effects (i.e., iatrogenesis)
E.g., “I have a funny left ankle. So, even if running offers
tremendous benefits for getting in shape, it would not be worth
it for me.”

Personality – Session B
Attendance
Review of research on personality
The problems with the MBTI personality test (and, more
generally, profile analyses)…
How trustworthy is the research on cultural dimensions (e.g.,
individualism-collectivism, masculinity-femininity)?
Explanation of final individual paper
1

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
Four continuums
Extraversion vs. Introversion
Sensing vs. Intuition
Thinking vs. Feeling
Judging vs. Perceiving
This leads to 16 categories because…(do the “tree branch
thingy”)
2
Source:
ND Strupler

Extraversion: You direct your energy toward the outside world
and get energized by interacting with people and taking action.
Introversion: You direct your energy toward you own inner
world and get energized by reflecting on your ideas and
experiences.
3
Source:
ND Strupler
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OiKLD4Sb-X4

Sensing: You take in information that is real and tangible and
focus mainly on what you perceive using your five senses.
Intuition: You take in information by seeing the big picture and
focus mainly on the patterns and interrelationships you
perceive.
4
Source:
ND Strupler
Thinking: You base your conclusions on logic, with accuracy
and objective truth as the primary goals.
Feeling: You base your conclusions on personal and social
values, with understanding and harmony as the primary goals.

5
Source:
ND Strupler
Judging: You approach the world with decisiveness and tend to
like planning and closure.
Perceiving: You approach the world with flexibility and tend to
like spontaneity and openness.
6
Source:
ND Strupler

Four main problems with the MBTI
Poor reliability
Lack of predictive validity
Categories polarize people into extremes
Categories are not comprehensive enough
MBTI is about as useful as a polygraph for detecting lies. One
researcher even called it an “act of irresponsible armchair
philosophy.”
7

Source: Grant, A. (Sep 18, 2013). Goodbye to MBTI, the Fad
that Won’t Die. Retrieved from:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/give-and-
take/201309/goodbye-mbti-the-fad-won-t-die
Poor reliability
Reliability means getting consistent results over time.
Research shows “that as many as three-quarters of test takers
achieve a different personality type when tested again.”
“If you retake the test after only a five-week gap, there's around
a 50% chance that you will fall into a different personality
category.”
Not surprisingly, “the sixteen distinctive types described by the
Myers-Briggs have no scientific basis whatsoever.”
8

Poor reliability
There is no convincing body of evidence that types affect job
performance or team effectiveness.
As management researchers William Gardner and Mark
Martinko write in a comprehensive review, “Few consistent
relationships between type and managerial effectiveness have
been found.”
9

Poor reliability
For example, thinking and feeling are opposite poles of a
continuum. In reality, they’re independent: Three decades of
evidence indicate that if you like ideas and data, you can also
like people and emotions. (In fact, more often than not, they go
hand in hand: people with stronger thinking and reasoning skills
are also better at recognizing, understanding, and managing
emotions
intelligence are highly correlated.
Like all personality traits, introver-extraver follows a bell
curve: It’s most common to be in the middle. The vast majority
are are ambiverts. Most people are “neither overly extraverted
nor wildly introverted
10

Poor reliability
For example, the judging component in the judging-perceiving
scale captures whether I’m an organizer and a planner, but
overlooks the industriousness and achievement drive that tend
to accompany these characteristics—together, they form a
personality trait called conscientiousness.
11

Why does MBTI remain popular despite its problems?
Thousands of people have invested time and money in becoming
MBTI-certified trainers and coaches.
It’s taken by more than 2.5 million people a year, and used by
89 of the Fortune 100 companies.
The other is the “aha” moment that people experience when the
test gives them insight about others—and especially themselves.
“Those who love type,” Murphy Paul writes, “have been
seduced by an image of their own ideal self.” Once that occurs,
personality psychologist Brian Little says, raising doubts about
“reliability and [predictive] validity is like commenting on the
tastiness of communion wine. Or how good a yarmulke is at
protecting your head.”
12
If MBTI sucks, what should we rely on?
Big 5! (i.e., CANOE or OCEAN—pick your favorite)

Big 5 personality traits are (a) reliable; (b) have decent
predictive validity (e.g., job performance); (c) mutually
distinctive from one another; and (d) comprehensive. Even
better when other-rated.
Not surprisingly, the Big 5 traits even have genetic and
biological bases, and researchers in the emerging field of
personality neuroscience have begun mapping the Big Five to
relevant brain regions.
The Big Five are far from perfect, and there’s growing support
for a HEXACO model of personality that adds a sixth trait:
honesty-humility (e.g., sincerity, fairness, greed avoidance).
13
Profile analysis is similar to the MBTI in nature
An emerging trend in organizational behavior (OB) is to take
existing variables, derive categories of people who fall on
various values of the variables, and then use the categories to

predict outcomes. This is called profile analysis (or, latent
profile analysis—which is just a fancier way of calling it).
E.g., Profile analysis has also been applied to the Big 5
But the very act of departing from an variable-based approach
to a category-based approach by artificially dichotomizing
variables is flawed because it loses information about people in
the middle of two extremes..
By the way, criminal profiling (e.g., FBI) is pseudo-science
(http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/11/12/dangerous-
minds)
14
Source: Attending scholarly presentations
Cultural Values
Shared beliefs about desirable end states or modes of conduct in
a given culture
Cultural values provide societies with their own distinctive
personalities
15
Source:
John Wick

16
Potential counter to critiquing this: I can think of many
examples that fit this description. -> But are you engaging in
confirmation?
These are analogous to the Big 5 for individuals

Power Distance
1712345STRONGLY
DISAGREEDISAGREENEUTRALAGREESTRONGLY
AGREE1. A company’s norms should be followed, even if an
employee disagrees with them.__________2. Letting employees
have a say in decisions eats away at managerial
authority.__________3. A good manager should be able to
make decisions without consulting employees.__________4. If
employees disagree with the company’s actions, they should
keep it to themselves.__________5. Employees should not
question the decisions that top management
makes.__________6. Managers lose effectiveness when
employees second-guess their actions.__________7. Managers
have a right to expect employees to listen to them.__________8.
Efficient managerial decision-making requires little employee
input.__________
20
Bonus Assessment: Power Distance. The PowerPoints for our
text now include 26 Bonus Assessments to supplement the 16
OB Assessments in the chapters. When combined with the 30

Self-Assessments in Connect, there are a total of 72 assessments
that can be used to help your students learn where they fall on
OB concepts.
This brief survey can be used to give students a feel for how the
cultural value of power distance manifests in the workplace.
The average score for this scale is shown on the slide (20 in this
case). Recognize that this is an admittedly arbitrary way of
classifying “high” vs. “low”. I use a show of hands to see how
many students fall above and below the average, and I then see
if students will volunteer any extremely high or low scores.
Source: Original items. For a published version of this
assessment, see Earley, P. C., & Erez, M. 1997. The
transplanted executive: Why you need to understand how
workers in other countries see the world different. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Please see the Connect assignments for this chapter for
assessments on Collectivism and Locus of Control. Please email
me at [email protected] for any questions about these
assessments.
Why research on cultural values is highly questionable
Data collection & use: Hofstede’s data were based on employee
surveys completed around 1967 and 1973 within IBM
subsidiaries in 66 countries.
But the data from only 40 countries were used in characterizing
national cultures.
In only six of the included countries (Belgium, France, Great
Britain, Germany, Japan and Sweden) were the numbers of
respondents more than 1000 in both surveys. In 15 countries
(Chile, Columbia, Greece, Hong Kong, Iran, Ireland, Israel,
New Zealand, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan,
Thailand and Turkey) the numbers were less than 200.
The data used to construct national cultural comparisons were

largely limited to responses from marketing-plus-sales
employees.
18
Source: McSweeney, B. (2002). Hofstede’s model of national
cultural differences and their consequences: A triumph of faith-
a failure of analysis. Human relations, 55(1), 89-118.
Narrative fallacy: He lists a wide range of national institutions,
events, and artifacts – including ‘architecture’, ‘religion’,
‘literature’, ‘industrial relations systems’, ‘family structures’,
‘religious organizations’, ‘scientific theories’, and ‘social
stratification’ which he claims are ‘consequences of’, or
‘crystalliz[ations] of’, national cultures. Indeed he seems to
suggest that the list is unlimited: ‘no part of our lives’, he
states, ‘is exempt’.
But these are simply anecdotes.
And anecdotes do not constitute evidence.
19

Ambiguous causality: Hofstede credits strong, often absolute,
institutions, etc.
Yet what about reverse causality? What about a confound
variable? Not enough evidence to rule out these alternative
explanations.
Let’s do an exercise: Wotherspoon and Satzwich (1993)
describe a study that determined that aboriginal Canadian
people do not value cars, televisions, and other such material
goods. This was considered to be a cultural phenomenon. (One
answer on next bullet.)
However, Wotherspoon and Satzwich point out that it may
simply be the lousy roads and reception band in their area that
have rendered the commodities valueless.

20
Misinterpretation of evidence: “What is true for a part is true
for the whole" is an assumption that needs to hold for the use of
a single MNC (i.e., IBM) to be generalizable. However, this
assumption leads to ridiculous conclusions—i.e., reductio ad
absurdum.
Following the [re]integration of Hong Kong into China are we
to believe that what was measured in the IBM subsidiary in
Hong Kong is also true for the entire Chinese nation?
If Germany and Austria were to unite into one Germanic
country, which national culture scores should be applied to the
whole, especially since the two are actually quite different
despite both countries speaking German? Germany versus
Austria: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3r61EcyegBM
21

Final individual paper: overview
I will ask you to read four sources:
Ericsson et al. (2007, HBR) – Deliberate practice
Gladwell (Dec 15, 2008) – Predicting performance
Gladwell (2008, Outliers) – Practical intelligence
Gladwell (July 22, 2002) – Talent myth
See the “Final individual paper (sources)” folder on Isidore
You will then write half a page per source. In total, the paper
should be no more than 2 pages.
All critiques must be typed. Use 1-inch margins all around and
double-spacing with a 12-point font based on Times New
Roman. I will only accept electronic copies.
22

1. Ericsson et al. (2007, HBR) – Deliberate practice
The article states: “This kind of deliberate practice can be
adapted to developing business and leadership expertise.”
To what extent may their recommendations lack practical
utility?
23
1. Ericsson et al. (2007, HBR) – Deliberate practice
Suggestions for critiquing this article based on lack of practical
utility:
What might be some jobs where you face significant pressure to

work/performance and often play, but not many opportunities to
engage in deliberate practice?
What if you are a working parent of multiple children, and your
spouse works too? Would that impact your ability and/or
motivation to engage in deliberate practice?
Other
24
2. Gladwell (Dec 15, 2008) – Predicting performance
The author claims that the “quarterback problem” means that
the profession should keep the gates wide open.
But is predicting quarterback performance in the NFL truly
inherently unpredictable? Is the author incorrectly or
incompletely interpreting the situation?
After all, elite levels in science, art, music, etc. all seem vastly
different from non-elite levels, but for these, the author
emphasizes the importance of deliberate practice in other works.
Explain how the article suffers from misinterpretation of
evidence when discussing the unpredictability of which college

players will do well in the NFL.
25
2. Gladwell (Dec 15, 2008) – Predicting performance
Hints/suggestions for critiquing this article:
One possibility: Range restriction
Another possibility: Structured versus unstructured
Other
26

3. Gladwell (2008, Outliers) – Practical intelligence
I agree with the author’s conclusion that IQ alone cannot
explain who succeeds and who do not. Job knowledge also
counts above and beyond IQ.
But even if the conclusion happens to be sound, the way he
makes this argument may not. Why? Explain how the author
potentially commits the narrative fallacy.
27
4. Gladwell (July 22, 2002) – Talent myth
I agree with the author that talent mind-set had a direct impact
on Enron’s decline.
But, I strongly suspect that the relationship between the talent
mind-set and organizational decline is largely inflated because
of a third (i.e., confounding variable).

Explain how the article potentially suffers from ambiguous
causality.
Hints: Leadership by top management, environmental factors
exerting pressure on the organization, personality of leaders.
28
Overall comments
· Please double-check that there is no unnecessary summarizing
of the four articles/chapters. Ideally, per article/chapter, it’s
best to state the causal claim you critique in 1-2 sentences in
the very beginning of the paragraph, and then spend the rest of
the paragraph explaining why/how the critical thinking tool at
hand applies to the causal claim. As a result, your paper should
have a total of four paragraphs.
· For each of the four paragraphs in your article, make sure that
you state the claim first, and then talk about the critical
thinking tool—not the other way around.
· The page limit is 2 pages. If you end up exceeding this as you

12MGT 301Individual paper.docx

12MGT 301Individual paper.docx

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

Similar a 12MGT 301Individual paper.docx

Similar a 12MGT 301Individual paper.docx (14)

Más de moggdede

Más de moggdede (20)

Último

Último (20)

12MGT 301Individual paper.docx