Final Exam I pledge my honor that I have not violated the Honor Code during this examination. You are concerned that your organization does not take enough risk.
Using the principles covered in class, come up with a strategy for inducing more risk-taking. The strategy should not be something like: "increase the incentives for risk taking. " Instead, it should be inspired by psychology, reflecting some of the reasons why individuals in organizations might not naturally take as much risk as they should.Of course, you should be mindful of the costs (organizational, economic, or psychological) of introducing a new process.
In most organizations, performance is measured in outcome. If it is not so good, then it is seen as a mistake vs.. An investment in learning. As we know from the prospect theory, the pain from loss is greater than the happiness from gain. This compounded by anticipated regret makes people more cautious and emotionally coerces them to stick to the status quo.
A strategy to motivate more risk taking, needs to consider the emotional aspect of risk while balancing it with the growth of the organization.This can be achieved by This new method starts by recalibrating performance reviews to include process employed prior to implementation. Questions such as "What and how was data collect? What assumptions were used to come to conclusion? What uncertainty were ignored? " will be part of this evaluation. Involving both Manager and employee in these discussion ensures that risks were considered and losses, if any, anticipated.
Secondly, there needs to be a method of systematically breaking the project into smaller components, each with its own goals. Goals change how people take risks.Loss aversion from not meeting the goal leads to better performance. People experience more satisfaction the closer they are to the goals and therefore, setting ambitious but Judiciously achievable goals with employees can encourage risk-taking. Hence a structure that tolerates higher risks but confines it to only that component, allows the employee to experiment and experience risk but at the same time protects the organization for substantial financial cost or reputation loss. Secondly, there should be a meticulous recording keeping of everything that went right or failed in each component.
Giving employees regular feedback, as opposed to a review every 6 months, permits them to take immediate actions, and rectify or adjust, if needed. While this can serves a caution for those who are too conservative in taking risk and fell short, it can also be a springboard for the new risk-takers who have been successful. Keeping diary of the insights that created the process, the learning points and the adjustments made, will create a habit of constantly recalibrating Ana will tons allow employees to take rills In a systematic way. Finally, framing plays a big part on how the organizations views the risk.What is the lost opportunity cost for not taking the risk? Also, is it really a risk? Getting outside references and independent analysis can change perspective on risk.
Learning organizations that want to continuously progress and innovate, interpret risk as an "investment" in training and developing its employees. Research has shown that framing something as a gain vs... A loss can persuade risk-averse people to take risk. Paraphrasing risk as prospect and as an exercise in learning could induce a greater risk appetite.
Additionally, performance can be framed as a comparison with other achievements, and not Just goals.Future potential losses can be eliminated or reduced if the organization as a whole is proactive and encourages employees to push the boundaries instead of staying in he status because that is safe and risk free. One way to do so is to brain storm future threats and decide what risk needed to be taken now, to remove that loss in the future. Testing and simulating all options, even ones with risky, can once again functions as a training tool and motivates employees to implement the risky choice if simulations are successful.
(560 words) Research discussed in class shows that interviews are not nearly as predictive (e. . , about future performance at your firm) as most managers believe. Nevertheless, almost all firms spend a great deal of time and money conducting interviews every ear. A. With this result in mind, focus on one or two major biases that may influence the interviewing process in your firm, and propose a revised interviewing process that minimizes and corrects these biases.
Note: Of course, discussion of these biases should be informed by ideas from the course. B. How would you convince others in your organization to use this process, when the validity of the current interview process seems so obvious?Interviews can be nerve racking regardless of how prepared the candidate is, and it can be more so when it is a group interview and the candidate is being asked difficult questions. This can sometimes lead to poor performance during the interview. Even though hiring manager reviewed the resume earlier and thought it was great, the "regency effect" of the unfortunate interview can mislead the manager into believing that the candidate may not as skilful, even though the interview has nothing to do with his talent.
Most candidates are articulate and confident, so someone who is nervous and chokes on answers, can leave a negative impression. On the flip side, if the hiring manager likes the candidate regardless of the almost empty resume, and hey get on famously during the interview, then the candidate is more likely to get hired. The interview is an experience, good or bad that the manager had, vs... The resume which is cold hard data.
Interviews can lead to hiring decisions based on an 'experience; or a 30 minute impression.The "believing what you see" creates an availability bias which can prevent the organization from hiring the right talent. Additionally, wishful thinking for a preferred outcome can cause distortion of International. 10 Dick Nils echelon, a knelling manager may only KICK Tort data Ana confirming information that align with the preferred outcome. Since adeptness at work has little to do with how well a candidate answers questions during an interview, a skill testing should be done prior to interview.
Also, an interview should be used to determine things that cannot be understood from a resume.Talented employees can underperformed if there is no Job satisfaction and the working relationship with manager has gone sour. A telephone and/or informal interviews creates a reduced stress environment, where it can determine if the candidate can fit in the organization and have the right working 'chemistry with the manager. A third-person, outside the team, preferably from HER should be present ring this interview, to observe and monitor both manager and candidate performance.
Ideally the interviews should have an assigned weighted average on the hiring decision.Other things like recommendations, past experience, both hard and soft skills, should be factored into the decision, including feedback from other people who have interviewed the candidate. Data and analysis of that data drives most changes in organization. Before I try convince them to embrace any change, I need to gather information about what is working and conduct a contrary analysis. The first step in gathering data would be to ampere post interview feedback from hiring managers, with the employee performance.
Then, all potential hiring managers will be sent a survey to appraise their interview process and how much weight they assign to it. To see it all in action, monitor interviews conducted, request feedback from both managers and candidate right after interviews, and track hiring decision. The final step in gathering information will be to have interviews with hiring managers (after they have done survey) to assess their metalworking. It cost most organization a year worth of salary for hiring the wrong person and even ore so for not hiring the right talent. This direct loss of revenue can be rectified with simple measures.
A strategy which can prevent this cost, will be open to information which provides contrary analysis to existing interview process and may be ready to test other models. (566 words) We talked about confirmation bias in class. Identify and briefly describe a recurring decision situation from your work experience for which your organization routinely suffers from confirmation bias. Design one or two cognitive repairs that you believe will eliminate or minimize the effect of confirmation bias.
Be sure to explain why you believe that your cognitive repair(s) will be effective.Also pay attention to the benefits as well as the costs of implementing this repair. Prior to product launch, the Product Manager has to present at the Executive Committee to describe the product, details the support it needs from Client Services, II Ana Implementation team Ana teen requests Tort green nag' I. E. Permission to launch. Developing, testing and launching a products cost both time and money.
If it works according to defined criteria set by Product Manager, then it is a success. It is p to the Sales team to get as many clients as they can to sign up for it and then the Implementation team sets up the client on the product.Each team's success rate is set by different criteria and responsibility, and none of has to do with client need or client's satisfaction. The Client Services team support clients post implementation. They are routinely subjected to complaints about product. They also have a better understanding of clients' needs and the product failings.
The Executive Committee has representatives from every team except Client Services. Typically questions asked during these meetings are "What does your product do? What is your launch strategy? When is it ready to market? " etc.These routine questions seeks to confirm that the product launch will be successful. Individual team makes assumption about what entails success vs.
.. The organization as a whole. For the Product team, success meaner to launch the product. For the Sales team, it is the number of sales. Since majority of teams achieved their objectives, they saw nothing wrong with this recurring decision process.
In order to ensure progress of their own goals, they continued to support each other. Discomforting advice from any am outside the committee was either disregarded or interpreted as consist with their hypothesis.Confirmation bias also leads to overconfidence, and to compensate for that, corrective actions such as benchmarking and asking critical questions needs to be in place. Data such as client usage of product, revenue generated solely by product sale, trends in client needs, etc. Will not only provide benchmarks for future products but also help design questions that need to be asked.
While it is impossible to cater to and customize product for every client, it is necessary to understand their needs and et feedbacks about the products. Secondly, other teams that are impacted by product launch need to be involved.They will have rights to vote in green flag. This will ensure that discomforting beliefs are regarded seriously.
The product development stage should involve clients in addition to support teams, like implementation and IT help desk, so that errors, risk, ease of use, etc. Can be identified in early stages. It's a cheaper to adjust during development stages rather than repairs on a fully functional product. Also, there is no disruption to clients.
Only Product team only gets incentives for developing and launching a reduce, and this can create moral hazards.Sharing incentives with other teams reduces this. Finally, instead of full product launch, prototype model should be tested by both employees and clients, and use result these to determine if product should be fully developed or not. It costs much less for the organizations to develop a prototype than a full product. I nee cost to making tense changes Is ten allotment time need In ten Minimal stages.
However, time spent in correctly developing and launching a product will reduce both the cost and time for future repairs or changes.
