Topic: Individual behaviour in an Organisational context- A critical analysis
Task details: The task requires completing a group report. Students must start the work by reading the following case:
The Nice Trap?
It has already been noted that one downside of agreeableness is that agreeable people tend to have lower levels of career success. Though agreeableness doesn’t appear to be related to job performance, agreeable people do earn less money. Though we’re not sure why this is so, it may be that agreeable individuals are less aggressive in negotiating starting salaries and pay raises for themselves.
Yet there is clear evidence that agreeableness is something employers value. Several recent books argue in favour of the ‘power of nice’ (Thaler & Koval, 2006) and ‘the kindness revolution’ (Horrell, 2006). Other articles in the business press have argued that the sensitive, agreeable CEO—as manifested in CEOs such as GE’s Jeffrey Immelt and Boeing’s James McNerney—signals a shift in business culture (Brady, 2007). In many circles, individuals desiring success in their careers are exhorted to be ‘complimentary,’ ‘kind’ and ‘good’ (for example, Schillinger, 2007).
Take the example of 500-employee Lindblad Expeditions. Lindblad emphasises agreeableness in its hiring decisions. One senior manager commented, ‘You can teach people any technical skill, but you can’t teach them how to be a kind-hearted, generous-minded person with an open spirit.’
So, while employers want agreeable employees, agreeable employees are not better job performers, and they are less successful in their careers. One might explain this apparent contradiction by noting that employers value agreeable employees for other reasons: They are more pleasant to be around, and they may help others in ways that aren’t reflected in their job performance. While the former point seems fair enough—agreeable people are better liked—it’s not clear that agreeable individuals actually help people more. A review of the ‘organisational citizenship’ literature revealed a rather weak correlation between an employee’s agreeableness and how much he or she helped others.
Moreover, a 2008 study of CEO and CEO candidates revealed that this contradiction applies to organisational leaders as well. Using ratings made of candidates from an executive search firm, these researchers studied the personalities and abilities of 316 CEO candidates for companies involved in buyout and venture capital transactions. They found that what gets a CEO candidate hired is not what makes him or her effective. Specifically, CEO candidates who were rated high on ‘nice’ traits such as respecting others, developing others, and teamwork were more likely to be hired. However, these same characteristics—especially teamwork and respecting others for venture capital CEOs—made the organisations that the CEOs led less successful.
Questions
1. Do you think there is a contradiction between what employers want in employees (agreeable employees) and what employees actually do best (disagreeable employees)? Why or why not?
2. Often, the effects of personality depend on the situation. Can you think of some job situations in which agreeableness is an important virtue? And in which it is harmful?
MGT200 ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR T120 2/03/2020 3:28 PM ’AUSTRALIAN INSTITUTE OF BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT PTY LTD ©
Approved by KOI Academic Board for T1 2020
IAKOI
King's Own Instltut*
3. In some research we’ve conducted, we’ve found that the negative effect of agreeableness on earnings is stronger for men than for women (that is, being agreeable hurt men’s earnings more than women’s). Why do you think this might be the case?
The work should be in the format of a business report as you would submit to the CEO or management of any business, in a professional style. The report must contain:
• Cover Page
• Executive Summary
• Table Of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Sections and Sub Sections Covering Question 1 (You Must Choose Suitable Headings)
3. Sections and Sub Sections Coverino Question 2 (You Must Choose Suitable Headmost
III
12:29 Q ?
MGT200 ORGANIS...IOUR T1 2020 (3) - Read-only

respecting others for venture capital CEOs—made the organisations that the CEOs led less successful.
Questions
1. Do you think there is a contradiction between what employers want in employees (agreeable employees) and what employees actually do best (disagreeable employees)? Why or why not?
2. Often, the effects of personality depend on the situation. Can you think of some job situations in which agreeableness is an important virtue? And in which it is harmful?
MGT200 ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR T120 2/03/2020 3:28 PM •AUSTRALIAN INSTITUTE OF BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT PTY LTD ©
Approved by KOI Academic Board for T1 2020
MGT200 K KOI
Kinfl'i Own Inttihrt*
3. In some research we’ve conducted, we’ve found that the negative effect of agreeableness on earnings is stronger for men than for women (that is, being agreeable hurt men’s earnings more than women’s). Why do you think this might be the case?
The work should be in the format of a business report as you would submit to the CEO or management of any business, in a professional style. The report must contain:
• Cover Page
• Executive Summary
• Table Of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Sections and Sub Sections Covering Question 1 (You Must Choose Suitable Headings)
3. Sections and Sub Sections Covering Question 2 (You Must Choose Suitable Headings)
4. Sections and Sub Sections Covering Question 3 (You Must Choose Suitable Headings)
5. Sections and Sub Sections Covering Question 4 (You Must Choose Suitable Headings)
6. Conclusion
7. List of References That Align With Approved Referencing Format
8. Appendices as required
The report will be marked based on the criteria listed in the assessment rubric. It is very important to note that research is a key criterion that will influence the mark you earn. Research is considered appropriate when students develop the report by using peer-reviewed journal articles. While using a minimum of sixteen (16) journal articles is expected, students will only achieve a top mark in their research component when they use between twenty (20) and twenty eight (28) research sources. Please note that many of the references you use must come from peer reviewed journal articles and that these articles should not be the same as the ones provided in the textbook and tutorials. Furthermore, please note that using WIKIPEDIA and other online encyclopedia is not allowed and may result in being given a fail grade for the work. If you need help in finding suitable sources for the work, please seek assistance by booking an appointment with a librarian.
The assessment’s length is 2,500 words (+/-) 10%. The word count excludes the cover sheet, table of contents page and references.
Important Notes: o The assessment must be Harvard (Anglia) referenced, typed Arial 12 font and 1.5 spaced.
o Referencing is only considered adequate when the sources that are used in the work are acknowledged both in-text and in the references list.
Ill