A Review of Status Characteristics Theory
Status Characteristics Theory
There are several human behavior characteristics that should be evaluated when studying the behavior of organizations. In studying how human behavior effects the organization as a whole, a look at the status characteristics theory is warranted. This theory states that there are differences in status characteristics that create status hierarchies within groups (Robbins & Judge, 2009). The term “status” refers to a position or rank in relation to others (Merriam-Webster, 2010). In simpler terms, people assign a status to individuals within groups based on differing reasons. The status that is assigned to an individual can have both positive and negative effects. This theory is important to understand because it is inherent in human behavior and may have wide spreading effects on organizational goals and commitments. The status characteristics theory states that status is derived from one of three sources. The sources are identified as (Robbins & Judge, 2009):
1) The power a person yields over others
2) A person’s ability to contribute to a group’s goals
3) An individual’s personal characteristics
Beginning with the first source, the power a person yields over others, reveals that people within an organization that have the ability to control the organization’s functions have distinct status. For instance, a manager who schedules and provides direction has a distinct status as a decision maker. The organization as whole generally assigns a higher status to people who are of a higher position. The next source that is addressed by the theory involves a person’s ability to contribute. People who are considered experts and those that perform at higher level than the organization overall are usually assigned a higher status. Peers may view someone in this category as being more valuable and therefore less likely to suffer consequences of workplace turnover. Lastly, the theory addresses an individual’s personal
There are several human behavior characteristics that should be evaluated when studying the behavior of organizations. In studying how human behavior effects the organization as a whole, a look at the status characteristics theory is warranted. This theory states that there are differences in status characteristics that create status hierarchies within groups (Robbins & Judge, 2009). The term “status” refers to a position or rank in relation to others (Merriam-Webster, 2010). In simpler terms, people assign a status to individuals within groups based on differing reasons. The status that is assigned to an individual can have both positive and negative effects. This theory is important to understand because it is inherent in human behavior and may have wide spreading effects on organizational goals and commitments. The status characteristics theory states that status is derived from one of three sources. The sources are identified as (Robbins & Judge, 2009):
1) The power a person yields over others
2) A person’s ability to contribute to a group’s goals
3) An individual’s personal characteristics
Beginning with the first source, the power a person yields over others, reveals that people within an organization that have the ability to control the organization’s functions have distinct status. For instance, a manager who schedules and provides direction has a distinct status as a decision maker. The organization as whole generally assigns a higher status to people who are of a higher position. The next source that is addressed by the theory involves a person’s ability to contribute. People who are considered experts and those that perform at higher level than the organization overall are usually assigned a higher status. Peers may view someone in this category as being more valuable and therefore less likely to suffer consequences of workplace turnover. Lastly, the theory addresses an individual’s personal
References: Foschi, M. (2000). Double standards for competence: theory and research. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 21-42. Haas, A., Gregory, Jr., S. (2005). The impact of physical attractiveness on women’s social status and interactional power. Sociological Forum, 20 (3), 449-471. Robbins, S., Judge, T. (2009). Organizational behavior. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall