Perceptiile de rol – ceea ce indivizii vor sa faca sau cred ca le este cerut sa faca. Aceste perceptii sunt bune din punct de vedere al organizatiei daca corespund cu ceea ce crede persoana ca ar trebui sa faca. Ele sunt dificitare daca perspectivele individului si cele ale organizatiei nu coincid.

379 learning

Invatarea joaca un rol important in pregatirea individului pentru schimbare, oferindu-i posibilitatea acestuia sa faca fata acestei schimbari.Bechtold, 1997, Senge, 2000). Mai simplu, invatatul inseamna:

Capacitatea membrilor unei organizatii de a detecta si de a corecta erorile si de a cauta noi perspective care sa le permita sa faca alegeri care duc mai bine la rezultatetele cautate.

Martin 2000, p 379

Role modellingPeople can be motivated by basing their behaviour on a ‘role model’, that is, someone whoseapproach to work and ability to get things done is inspirational. This creates a desire to followthe example provided by the model. Managers and team leaders can function as role models,and performance management can enhance this process by dialogue and coaching.

Role profi le defi nitionRole profi les defi ne a role in terms of the key results expected, what role holders are expectedto know and be able to do, and how they are expected to behave in terms of behavioural competenciesand upholding the organization’s core values. Role profi les need to be updated everytime a formal performance agreement is developed, and provide headings under which goalscan be set. An example of a role profi le is shown in Figure 4.3.To develop a role profi le it is necessary for the line manager and the individual to gettogether and agree key result areas, defi ne what the role holder needs to know and beable to do, and ensure that there is mutual understanding of the behaviouralcompetencies required and the core values the role holder is expected to uphold.When introducing performance management it is probably best to abandon anyexisting job descriptions. They may well be out of date and probably go into far toomuch detail about what is to be done rather than focusing on what has to be achieved. (pag 65)

On-going role or work goals

All roles have built-in objectives that may be expressed as key result areas in a role profi le. Thedefi nition of a key result area states that this is what the role holder is expected to achieve inthis particular aspect of the role. For example: ‘Identify database requirements for all projectsGoal Setting 99that require data management in order to meet the needs of internal customers’ or ‘Dealquickly with customer queries in order to create and maintain high levels of satisfaction.’Good role or work objectives will clearly defi ne the activity in terms of the results and standardsto be achieved. They may be supplemented by quantifi ed targets or standards that may bequantifi ed or qualitative. Although described as on-going, role objectives need to be reviewedregularly and as necessary, modifi ed. (99)

ARMSTRONG’S HANDBOOK OF PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT

Armstrong, Michael, Armstrong’s Handbook of Performance Management,4th edition, Kogan Page, London, 2009, p 65

One of the great puzzles of organizational life isthat individuals with the same formal jobdescriptions often define their roles differently(Morrison, 1994). For example, some manufacturingemployees define their roles narrowlyin terms of completing assigned tasks, whereasothers take on broader roles in which they alsofeel responsible for improving production processesand satisfying customers (Parker, Wall,& Jackson, 1997); some employees includesafety behaviors in their role definitions, whileothers do not (Hofmann, Morgeson, & Gerras,2003); and some hospital cleaners define theirroles narrowly in terms of cleaning rooms,whereas others define their roles more broadlyto include caring for patients (Wrzesniewski &Dutton, 2001). These variations in role definitionshave important consequences for howemployees perform their jobs. Considerableresearch now indicates that those who definetheir roles broadly are rated by supervisors asmore effective (Morgeson, Delaney-Klinger, &Hemingway, 2005; Parker, 2007). Because theyincorporate a wide range of responsibilities andactivities into their roles, employees with

broad role definitions are motivated and ableto perform their tasks more proficiently,adaptively, and proactively (Griffin, Neal, &Parker, 2007), as well as engage in morefrequent helping and citizenship behaviors(Coyle-Shapiro, Kessler, & Purcell, 2004;Morrison, 1994; Tepper, Lockhart, & Hoobler,2001). In light of this evidence on the benefitsof broad role definitions, both scholars and practitionersare interested in understanding whenand how employees decide to expand their roles.Understanding role expansion is particularlyimportant in the context of recent dramaticchanges in the landscape of modern work. Asorganizational structures flatten, and worksystems become more dynamic, uncertain, andinterdependent, it becomes increasingly difficultto formalize roles into well-specified jobdescriptions (Griffin et al., 2007; Ilgen &Hollenbeck, 1991; Mohrman, Galbraith, &Lawler, 1998). Organizations depend on employeesto expand their roles to include citizenship,adaptive, proactive, and innovative behaviorsthat contribute to organizational effectiveness inoften unpredictable ways (Grant & Ashford,2008). To encourage such expanded role definitions,organizations are providing employeeswith increasing levels of latitude and freedom(Crant, 2000; Frese & Fay, 2001). The growthin autonomous workgroups (Morgeson, Johnson,Campion, Medsker,&Mumford, 2006), flexible,autonomous job designs (Parker et al., 1997),virtual teams and teleworking (Cascio, 1999),boundaryless careers (Arthur & Rousseau,1996), specialized knowledge work and independentcontracting (Barley&Kunda, 2004), temporarywork (Ashford, George, & Blatt, 2007),‘‘free agent’’ arrangements (Pink, 2001), andidiosyncratic employment deals (Rousseau, Ho,& Greenberg, 2006) has given employees morediscretion to define their roles in distinctive,unique ways than ever before. These trends haveprovided employees with more flexibility tochoose how broadly versus narrowly they wishto define their roles.Accordingly, organizational researchershave begun to systematically investigate thefactors that affect the breadth of employees’role definitions. Recent research has identifiedboth contextual and individual factors that affectrole definitions. From a contextual perspective,researchers have examined how broader roledefinitions are facilitated by job characteristicssuch as high autonomy, high control, and lowdemands (Morgeson et al., 2005; Parker, 1998;

Turner, Chmiel, & Walls, 2005), as well as byhigh-quality supervisor relationships andorganizational climates that provide support andprocedural justice (Hofmann et al., 2003;Kamdar, McAllister, & Turban, 2006; Tepperet al., 2001). From an individual perspective,researchers have examined how broader roledefinitions are predicted by higher levels ofproactive personality (Parker & Sprigg, 1999),prosocial value orientations (Nauta, De Dreu,& van der Vaart, 2002), and knowledge and skill(Morgeson et al., 2005). Together, these studieshave provided valuable insights into how roledefinitions are affected by job designs, organizationalcultures and climates, and individualdifferences in personalities, values, and abilities.As a result, researchers are beginning to understandthe job, relationship, and organizationalconditions that are generally likely to motivaterole expansion, as well as the types of employeesthat are more and less likely to expand their roledefinitions

Rolul este o constelatie de responsabilitati si asteptari de actiune incorporate intr-o pozitie sociala

Callero, P. L. (1994). From role-playing to roleusing:Understanding role as resource. SocialPsychology Quarterly, 57, 228–243.

(e.g., Callero, 1994; Kahn, Wolfe,Quinn, Snoek, & Rosenthal, 1964; Lieberman,1956). Role expansion occurs when individualschoose to incorporate a broader set of responsibilitiesinto their personal definitions of theirroles, treating these responsibilities as expectationsrather than discretionary activities(Morrison, 1994; Parker et al., 1997). Embeddedin this conceptualization are three keyfeatures that distinguish role expansion fromextra-role behavior. First, role expansioninvolves changing one’s view of a role, notmerely enacting a behavior (Morrison, 1994).Second, role expansion requires engagementin a role over time, rather than engaging in asingle act (Parker et al., 1997). Third, roleexpansion involves taking on new responsibilities

in addition to existing responsibilities,while extra-role behavior is sometimes undertakenas a substitute for existing responsibilities(Bergeron, 2007).Scholarly interest in role expansion can betraced back to theoretical perspectives on roleinnovation (Katz & Kahn, 1966; van Maanen &Schein, 1979). Whereas early work on roletheory assumed that roles were static objectsassigned by supervisors and accepted byincumbents, these perspectives on role innovationemerged when scholars recognized thatrole incumbents often exercise agency andproactivity by taking the initiative to modifyand enlarge their own role definitions (Grant &Ashford, 2008; Ilgen & Hollenbeck, 1991;Morrison, 1994; Nicholson, 1984; Parker et al.,1997; Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001). Fromthis viewpoint, role incumbents often havediscretion about whether or not to accept arequest for role expansion. Building on thisobservation, our goal is to explain how interpersonalinfluence processes affect roleincumbents’ decisions about whether or not toexpand a role. Our analysis does not apply tosituations in which role expansion is required orcoerced; our analysis is bounded to situations inwhich role incumbents have discretion or freedomof choice about whether or not to accept arole-expansion request. Our analysis is alsocircumscribed to situations in which roleincumbents are uncertain about whether or notto expand their roles, which is where persuasionand influence techniques are likely to have thegreatest leverage.A core tenet of role theory is that roles arecommunicated from a sender to a receiverthrough a social exchange process that occursover the course of a role episode (Katz & Kahn,1966). This social exchange constitutes anexercise of dyadic influence, as the sender isattempting to persuade the receiver to acceptthe role (Graen & Scandura, 1987; Ilgen &Hollenbeck, 1991). Surprisingly, this classicinsight from role theory has received littleattention in existing research on role definitionsand role expansion. In order to understand theinterpersonal influence dynamics of role definitions,it is critical to focus on the exchangebetween the sender and the receiver.In this exchange, both the sender’spresentation and the receiver’s values affect thereceiver’s decision about whether to expand arole. According to expectancy theories of workmotivation, individuals are most likely to devote

attention, time, and energy to an opportunitywhenthey believe that the opportunity allows them toexpress or fulfill their values (Vroom, 1964).Consider an illustration froma middlemanager ata hospital who was attempting to persuade othersto expand their roles to include taking action onissues that were not included in their jobdescriptions. The manager found it necessary totailor the presentation to receivers’ values:It depended on who I was talking to. If I wastalking to [the chief operating officer], I talkedabout why we should do it physically. If I wastalking to the physicians, I talked about how itwould improve their ability to care for theirpatients. If I was talking to the nursing staff,I talked about how it would improve theirwork. I didn’t talk about finances becauseI knew they didn’t want to hear it. (Dutton,Ashford, O’Neill, & Lawrence, 2001, p. 727)12 Organizational Psychology Review 1(1)Downloaded from opr.sagepub.com by Alexandra Tomescu on March 26, 2012

This observation is consistent with recenttheory and research on influence, whichsuggests that senders are most likely to succeedin altering the psychological states and behaviorsof receivers when the content of themessage matches receivers’ values (Barry &Crant, 2000; Clary, Snyder, Ridge, Miene, &Haugen, 1994). For example, Clary et al. (1994,1998) demonstrated that potential volunteersfound recruiting messages that matched theirown values more persuasive. Similarly, theself-concept-based perspective on charismaticleadership suggests that leaders can achieveinfluence and motivate action by appealing tofollowers’ values (Shamir, House, & Arthur,1993; see also Hogg, 2001; Lord & Brown,2001). Accordingly, we expect that receiversare most likely to expand their roles whensenders’ presentations emphasize reasons thatcorrespond with their values.In the following sections, we present atwo-stage conceptual analysis of senders’ effortsto persuade receivers to expand their roles. In thefirst section, we offer a descriptive analysis toilluminate the systematic mistakes that sendersoften make. We explain how senders often failto match their presentations to receivers’ values,and identify social factors that attenuate thiserror. In the second section, we offer a prescriptiveanalysis to illuminate the normative stepsthat can make senders more effective. Weexplain how senders can match differentpersuasion principles to different values.

Organizational Psychology Reviewhttp://opr.sagepub.com/content/1/1/9The online version of this article can be found at:DOI: 10.1177/2041386610377228Organizational Psychology Review 2011 1: 9Adam M. Grant and David A. Hofmannrole redefinitionRole expansion as a persuasion process : The interpersonal influence dynamics ofPublished by:http://www.sagepublications.comOn behalf of:European Association of Work and Organizational PsychologyAdditional

Adam M. GrantUniversity of Pennsylvania

David A. HofmannUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Status is based onperceived competence and credibility. Personal development is the employees’responsibility – individuals have to keep themselves employable whilst theorganization offers employability (the opportunity to develop marketableskills). High trust is still deemed desirable, but organizations accept thatemployees are less committed to them, but more committed to the project they

work on, their profession and their fellow team members. Organizationstherefore build attachment to proxies – such as the team – for whom employeeswill still perform. It is argued that managers’ loyalty to their employer hasdeclined45 and that commitment to type of work and profession appears to bestronger now than commitment to organization.46

Globalization therefore, has induced both organizations and employees totake a different perspective on the psychological contract and the way thechange agent manages these changes. In the light of the many changes takingplace in the nature of work, a number of writers such as Sparrow and Cooperhave argued that today, as the process of globalization continues and in theaftermath of downsizing, the increased levels of flexibility, more short-termcontracts, greater reliance on virtual workers and pursuit of more boundarylesscareers may be resulting in a new and very different psychologicalcontract.49 In line with this view, Hartley50 and Tetrick and Barling51 haveargued that new theories and approaches are therefore needed in the field oforganizational psychology. (17-18)

The Employment Relationship

Key challenges for HR

Paul R. Sparrow

and

Cary L. Cooper

Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford First published 2003

role  

A prescribed or expected behavior associated with a particular position or status in a

group or organization. See also roles.

Read more: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/role.html#ixzz2JZqodiePJobs or positions that have a specific set of expectations attached to them. See also role.

Read more: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/roles.html#ixzz2JZquYLoF

O condiție necesară, destul de importantă, pentru ca o organizație să fie pregătită de schimbare este existența unui grad ridicat de motivare din partea angajaților de a modifica aspect organizaționale. Această motivație rezultă, de obicei, dintr-o insatisfacție vizibilă a status quo-ului și din dorința individului pentru ceva mai bun. Un anumit nivel de nervozitate, frică sau disconfort trebuie să existe cu adevărat în atmosfera creată pentru ca schimbarea să aibă vreo șansă. Această idee este susținută de cercetarea lui Edwards Deming care a demonstrat, pe o scală largă, cum atitudinile indivizilor și a instituțiilor față de status quo pot deschide calea schimbării sau din potrivă o pot ține la distanță. (Luecke,Richard, Managing Change and Transitions,

Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Massachusetts, p.19)

(Luecke, Richard, Managing Change and Transitions, Harvard Business School Press, Boston,

Massachusetts, p 90)