Faith in Supervision and the Self-Enhancement Bias: Two Psychological Reasons Why Managers Don't Empower Workers

This study provides evidence for 2 psychological processes that may help explain managers' reluctance to use worker empowerment practices such as delegation or self-managing teams: (a) a faith in supervision effect, which reflects the tendency of observers to see work performed under the control of a supervisor as better than identical work done without as much supervision; and (b) a self-enhancement effect, which reflects the tendency of mangers to evaluate a work product more highly the more self-involved they are in its production. Because empowerment practices dilute managers' individualized supervision of work, they can also reduce managers' biased perceptions of work quality. Support for this argument was obtained in that (a) participants assigned higher quality to the identical work product as supervisory involvement increased, (b) they did so at elevated levels when they had more self-involvement in supervising the work, and (c) a team-based, empowerment orientation curtailed both biases.

[1]  Fabio Giulio Grandis.  Culture, and commitment: motivation and social control in organizations , 1990 .

[2]  The conceptualization and measurement of mental health in terms of self-identity theory , 1969 .

[3]  R. Florida,et al.  Beyond Mass Production: The Japanese System and Its Transfer to the U.S. , 1993 .

[4]  Chester A. Insko,et al.  Balance Theory, The Jordan Paradigm, and The Wiest Tetrahedron , 1984 .

[5]  D. Kipnis.  Unanticipated consequences of using behavior technology , 1993 .

[6]  T. Kochan,et al.  COMPUTER-AIDED MONITORING: ITS INFLUENCE ON EMPLOYEE JOB SATISFACTION AND TURNOVER , 1989 .

[7]  Jeffrey B. Arthur,et al.  Effects of human resource systems on manufacturing performance and turnover , 1994 .

[8]  Vimla L. Patel,et al.  Viewpoint: Science and Practice: A Case for Medical Informatics as a Local Science of Design , 1998, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[9]  R. Cialdini,et al.  Sense of personal control and attributions about yielding and resisting persuasion targets. , 1976 .

[10]  James P. Womack,et al.  The Psychology of Lean Production , 1996 .

[11]  F. Schoorman,et al.  Escalation bias in performance appraisals: An unintended consequence of supervisor participation in hiring decisions. , 1988 .

[12]  Kathleen Holt,et al.  Maintaining Consistency between Self-Serving Beliefs and Available Data , 1985 .

[13]  F. Heider.  The psychology of interpersonal relations , 1958 .

[14]  Jonathon D. Brown,et al.  Self-Serving Attributions: The Role of Physiological Arousal , 1991 .

[15]  L. Strickland.  Surveillance and trust1 , 1958 .

[16]  Rafik I. Beekun,et al.  Performance Evaluation in a Dynamic Context: A Laboratory Study of the Impact of a Prior Commitment to the Ratee , 1982 .

[17]  Scott T. Allison,et al.  Cognitive Factors Affecting the Use of Social Decision Heuristics in Resource-Sharing Tasks , 1994 .

[18]  C. O'Reilly.  Corporations, Culture, and Commitment: Motivation and Social Control in Organizations , 1989 .

[19]  Sanford B. Ehrlich,et al.  The Romance of Leadership and The Evaluation of Organizational Performance , 1987 .

[20]  Michael E. Enzle,et al.  Surveillant intentions and intrinsic motivation. , 1993 .

[21]  Gary Johns,et al.  CONSTRAINTS ON THE ADOPTION OF PSYCHOLOGY‐BASED PERSONNEL PRACTICES: LESSONS FROM ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION , 1993 .

[22]  Jon R. Katzenbach,et al.  The Wisdom of Teams: Creating the High-Performance Organization , 1992 .

[23]  John Paul Macduffie.  Human Resource Bundles and Manufacturing Performance: Organizational Logic and Flexible Production Systems in the World Auto Industry , 1995 .

[24]  Philip E. Tetlock,et al.  Accountability and complexity of thought. , 1983 .

[25]  Kipling D. Williams,et al.  PROCESSES Social Loafing: A Meta-Analytic Review and Theoretical Integration , 2022 .

[26]  Itamar Simonson,et al.  The effect of accountability on susceptibility to decision errors , 1992 .

[27]  C. Sedikides.  Assessment, enhancement, and verification determinants of the self-evaluation process. , 1993 .

[28]  J. Shepperd.  Student Derogation of the Scholastic Aptitude Test: Biases in Perceptions and Presentations of College Board Scores , 1993 .

[29]  R. Cialdini,et al.  Attributional bias and the easily persuaded other. , 1974 .

[30]  R. Drago,et al.  Quality Circle Survival: An Exploratory Analysis , 1988 .

[31]  Edward L. Deci,et al.  Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior , 1975, Perspectives in Social Psychology.

[32]  S. Harkins,et al.  Social loafing and self-evaluation with a social standard. , 1987 .

[33]  Mark R. Lepper,et al.  Turning play into work: Effects of adult surveillance and extrinsic rewards on children's intrinsic motivation. , 1975 .

[34]  Dale T. Miller,et al.  Self-serving biases in the attribution of causality: Fact or fiction? , 1975 .