Introduction
Arguably, when people in an organization interact, many factors come up. Individuals have to study group and individual dynamics, as well as organizational nature. Study of organizational behavior is gaining fame, because people from diverse cultures need to work together efficiently and effectively. In organizational behavior, there are numerous psychological terms that are mostly used interchangeably, this include self-concept and self esteem as well as self-efficiency and self-fulfilling; hence it is crucial to elaborate on its similarities and differences in meaning.
Compare and contrast for Self-concept and self-esteem
Self-concept is having knowledge about oneself. In most cases, people tend to know how other people think, their temperament, as well as what they enjoy, in the same perspective individuals know about themselves. Perhaps, some individuals have stronger self-concept as compared to others; this is because possessing knowledge on self-concept requires critical reflection on one’s own behavior and self (Mills, Helms, Bratton, & Forshaw, 248)
On the other hand, self-esteem, apart from being knowledgeable about you, it refers to the general attitude, towards oneself and overall appraisal of one’s worth. Its measurements are either positive or negative, and it is based on emotions and beliefs on how we view and think ourselves to be; for example, are we successful, smart, or trustworthy person. The entire analysis depends on recent events and situations, and the feedback we receive from people around us and the environment,
The main difference between self–esteem and self-concept is the addition of feelings. Self-concept is the information side of situations, where as an individual you know how you are like. On the other hand, self-esteem is more of how a person feels about the facts you know about oneself, for example, whether you enjoy being funny or talkative, or annoying others by your behavior. Self-esteem is the confidence individuals have in the society as well as convincing oneself that you are unique and better than you are, while self-concept is the inner image (Rumbles, Rayner, Ress, & Ray, 167-70). As a matter of fact, there are numerous effects of self-esteem that is brought about by self-concept.
Despite the existing differences, self-concept and self-esteem have a lot of issues in common. As a matter of fact, they are both personal, reflective processes. These psychological concepts are influenced by, observing reactions that other individuals have on your behavior and oneself. Furthermore, its influence comes as a result of, observing own behavior, and self objectively, what you would actually think of oneself if given a chance to analyze oneself from outside, as well as imaginations on how others think of you. Additionally, the two concepts can be developed by comparing oneself to others around you. With this comparison, we can then have high and low self esteem.
In real life situation, self-concept and self-esteem can be destroyed or developed well. It is indispensable to believe in oneself, and concentrate less on the comparisons other people make about you. Receiving rewards and praise in life may change inner self-concept, while inaccurate comments on your behaviors and oneself, reduces the level of self-esteem.
Compare and contrast for self-efficacy and self-fulfilling prophecy
Certainly, self-efficacy is the degree to which individual’s belief about her or his capacity and ability to achieve a goal, and accomplish the challenges of life. In most cases, it is essential to treating mental disorder and phobia. Without personal confidence, individuals cannot perform to their full potential. In organizational behavior, it is believed that confidence can help an individual with lesser ability to outdo others with higher ability (Schermerhorn, 27-9). Some of the sources of self-efficacy include social modeling, mastery experiences, psychological response, and social persuasion. It plays a tremendous role in how tasks, challenges, and goals are approached.
On the other hand, self-fulfillment prophecy is a unique and dynamic process. It entails, negative and positive expectation on events, people, and circumstances that usually affect the behavior of individual, which result to fulfillment of the expected goals (Schermerhorn, 85). For example, during the employment period, an employer who expects employees to work and act in a certain manner will treat them in a way that will draw out the precise response expected (Zerbe, Hartel, & Ashkanasy, 72-5).
There exist similarities between self-efficacy and self-fulfillment prophecy. Perhaps, the two concepts are driven by expectations. Self-efficacy entails expectations about ones capacity to achieve a certain goal. On the other hand, the action of individuals is driven by the expectations to work. Probably, expectations determine whether a certain behavior and attempts will be achieved.
On self-fulfillment prophecy, the changes and reactions are driven by another person who in one way or another is holding a false belief, and treating the other s as if the belief is true. The individual, who the false belief is held, must behave in a way unswerving with the false conviction. Self-efficacy begins with one self believing on own ability in achieving goals. What drives individuals to achieve their indented goals is their own belief (Rumbles, Rayner, Ress, & Ray, 212-18).
Self-fulfilling prophecies often work well with groups. In this perspective, it implies that the power of two people is stronger and better than that of an individual. It is mostly common is situations where there are more people; for example family, schools and workplace. Self-efficacy operates well on an individual base, which is ones perception to reaching the ultimate goal.
Work cited
Mills, A. Helms, M. Bratton, J & Forshaw, C. Organizational Behavior in a Global Context.
California: California Press.
Rumbles, S. Rayner, C. Ress, G. & Ray, F. Organizational Behavior. New York: John Wiley &
Sons, 2011.
Schermerhorn, J. Organizational Behavior. London: Wiley.2011.
Zerbe, J. Hartel, C & Ashkanasy, N. Emotions in Workplace, Research, Theory, and Practice.
London: Greenwood. 2000.
