Personality and ability have major implications for how people feel, think and behave in organizations. Based on your review of Chapter 4 and on individual personality differences – present your views on this quote
“Organizations should or should not select or hire prospective employees on the basis of their personality traits”

In a general sense, I completely agree with this statement. People are hired on credentials such as experience or education, so this is merely another criteria albeit an important one. It is always a good idea to hire people who will mesh well with the organizations values and beliefs. The values and beliefs are typically what will dictate the environment and thus culture of an organization. Take Google for example. Google’s unorthodox culture of having fun and being innovative probably wouldn’t mesh well with someone that has a high external locus of control as they prefer structured, directed work environments as explained by Daft & Lane (2011). However, I also feel that the level or degree of desirable traits versus undesirable and the extent of value placed in them should play a role in evaluating candidates. This is especially true in leadership roles. Daft & Lane (2011) conclude that a person with a high level of authoritarianism would not work well with a team with an equally high level of dogmatism which would typically result in lower productivity and morale. However, if both sides have a lower to moderate level of those two characteristics and excel in other traits such as agreeableness and high level of emotional intelligence, then things would probably be different. This is just one example of how personality traits can have an adverse impact when not carefully selected. A person can be a “good” person but not a good leader and this is why I completely agree with the above quote. Ultimately though, it really depends on what they are trying to accomplish in determining what traits and level of prevalence is acceptable or ideal.

References
Daft, R. L., & Lane, P. G. (2011). The leadership experience (5th ed.). Australia: South- Western Cengage Learning.

On page 159 of your textbook there is a case called The New Boss. Read it and respond to the questions.
Use the concept of the "ladder of inference" in your analysis.

1)- Describe the two different mental models represented in this story.
1. There is a stark contrast in mental models present in this story. Sam Nolan is forward thinking, innovative, and believes the use of technology will help in fostering and supporting teamwork. He believes it will encourage information sharing and gives the employees more control over their own jobs. He sees technology as a way to save time, money, and effort in addition to increasing efficiency and planning in the company. Tom Carr on the other hand, believes that the use of technology, such as Sam’s web-based projects, is a waste of time and money. He thinks that internal recruiting should be done with real people on a personal basis and not by a computer. He thinks it’s just as effective doing it that way and vastly cheaper. He sees computers as a number cruncher and nothing more. Tom Carr’s assumptions are based on surely his past assumptions which in Sam’s case, is not an accurate assumption of technology. It is not based on reality or the facts but rather his interpreted reality. He’s of an older school of thought that HR is a people department and not a technology department as he says “Technology is for the IS department” (Daft & Lane, 2011). 2. As a chief information officer, Sam Nolan’s job is to increase communication efficiencies between the workers. He had found that technology was the best solution to this and will greatly increase information exchanges in the organization which will help it grow and develop more efficiently than without the use of technology. Everything Nolan had done so far has been successful and had gained the trust of many that worked with him. He had seen the capability of the technology to increase the flow of information and collaboration. Tom Carr is clearly a person who became accustomed to how things used to be done. He thinks that technology should be used by the IS department and not the people department which is HR. He assumes that the technology cant be more effective than dealing with people on a face to face basis and is therefore a fruitless endeavor. He perceives the technology trend as an over hyped fad that will pass in time. 3. While anything is possible, shifting Tom Carr to a new mental model will likely be a difficult task. As assumptions based on our interpretations rather than facts, is in our inherent nature and a hard habit to shake. Tom Carr seems to have never been exposed to the true power of technology integration into systems or has never seen a successful deployment of such. However, if Sam was able to provide a physical demonstration or otherwise tangible evidence of how the technology can increase efficiencies to Carr, his perception of the utility of the technology could be altered as he would then have a new experience to base his assumptions on.
Thus, if I were Sam I would provide as much evidence and examples of how the web-based technology can achieve results previous methods could only hope for. I would also present the fact that through the integration of such technology, our company would have another competitive advantage. I would also display the success of the previously implemented systems and perhaps a comparison of savings and increased efficiency.

References

Daft, R. L., & Lane, P. G. (2011). The leadership experience (5th ed.). Australia: South- Western Cengage Learning.