Organisational Behaviour and Organisational Culture - Assignment Example

?Organisation Behaviour Submitted by: XXXXXXXX Number: XXXXXXXXX of XXXXXXXX XX – XX – XXXXXXXX Subject: XXXXXXXXX Subject Code: XXXXXXX Explain what you understand by the term ‘organisational culture’. What factors might influence the development of an organisation’s ‘culture’? The term culture and organisational culture is growing extensively across organisations. Cultures as such define a group of people and helps differentiate the people of the group with similar identify. Hofstede explains that culture is a group of individuals with a collective mind programming. Schein (1992) explains the need for individuals to adapt to change without the need to impact the culture. It is crucial to understand the term culture before entering into the organisational culture. Cultures are deep-seated and pervasive. Schein (1992) explains that change is not possible without affecting the culture. Similarly, organisation culture is a concept used to explain the ‘similar collective mind programming’ of the individuals in the organisation. In most cases, when individuals work together in a wok environment, with the set down regulations and framework on the job, the approach to work becomes a common aspect for all employees, hence making them a group of people with similar mind programming. Based on Hofstede’s definition, this clearly makes an organisational culture. For around two and a half decades, the concept of organisational culture has been growing and being accepted to a great extent. Considering an open systems perspective, it is clear that the culture of an organisation is important element and environmental condition which affects the systems and the subsystems. The organisational culture is also a very valuable tool for analysis of a company and is very effective in getting a clear understanding of the company. To be able to understand the concept of culture better, it is essential to understand the definition. The next sub section details the definition of culture for organisations. Culture has been described in many different manners and various different ideas have been put forth to explain the concept. Anderson explains nations to be an ‘imagined community’ and Wallerstein explains that he is “skeptical that we can operationalise the concept of culture ... in any way that enables us to use it for statements that are more than trivial” (Wallerstein, 1990, p. 34). Another renowned author Hofstede has explained that there are four (later turned to five) main dimensions of culture (Hofstede, 1880, 1984, 1991). In 1998, he claimed that the true shift in paradigm was proved by the acceptance of the concept of unique, specific and powerful national cultures. Considering his theory, this model can be evaluated in a number of manners. The theory portrays to a great extent the national cultures that have emerged in the recent years and his theory has been more focused on the rich origin of the culture. This has been argued to be misleading as it is to a great extent considered to be immeasurable. The findings have been argued to be based mainly on the predictive value and the reviewing of smaller scale replications is also essential. Hofstede has provided a very different approach to the concept of culture. He classified culture based on dimensions. These are a) Power / Distance, b) Individualism, c) Masculinity, d) Uncertainty/Avoidance Index, and e) Long Term Orientation. There have been a number of arguments regarding the accuracy of the theory. As explained by Brendan McSweeney, “Hofstede's apparently sophisticated analysis of extensive data necessarily relies on a number of profoundly flawed assumptions to measure the 'software of the mind' as did Morton's measurement of the hardware, as it were, of the mind” (Mc Sweeney, 2002, p. 116). Mc Sweeney moves on to also explain, “Hofstede's claims are excessive and unbalanced; excessive because they claim far more in terms of identifiable characteristics and consequences than is justified; unbalanced, because there is too great a desire to 'prove' his a priori convictions rather than evaluate the adequacy of his 'findings'” (McSweeney, 2002, p. 116). Hence it is clear that there have been a number of arguments about the preciseness of the theory. Organisational Culture (5 Elements, 2011) When a group of employees work together in a particular organisation and tend to follow similar daily events and activities, these move on to develop a sense of work place understanding and also a culture is formed. The organisational culture tends to develop a sense within the individuals which in turn leads to the development of a value system within the company. Here the value system directly impacts the human thinking, feeling, acting and also the overall behaviour of the members within the organisation (Anbari, Khilkhanova, Romanova & Umpleby, 2000). It is however important to note that similar organisation might have different values in the same industry. Here just like individuals, this implies that the organisations have a different personality. The culture and the values within the organisation are the underlying factors for the determination of behaviour. However authors like Rapaiile (1999) have brought out a very important point, i.e. over a period of time the culture, values and patterns become a part of the organisation and hence these patterns tend to be invisible to the individuals within the company. For instance, like in the case of a entire culture, most people become oblivious to the culture being followed and the response and behaviour tends to become a natural trait. One of the best examples here is the culture developed at Hewlett Packard. The culture within the organisation is the need to develop three personal and three professional goals. Employees are encouraged to fulfil these goals. In a number of cases, this approach has been found to be followed even at home. The culture and the positive reinforcement of these cultures is so high that it leads to better acceptance and also makes the culture a natural trait of the employees. Clearly, culture plays a very crucial role in the overall working of organisations. The success or failure of an organisation is clearly based on the culture and the overall effectiveness of the employees working together. Different cultures view different aspects of life different as seen in the above examples. Hence, for a company to be effective as well as manage cultures (especially in cross cultural organisations), the essence of cross cultural training becomes imminent. Explain clearly what you understand by the terms ‘leadership’ and ‘leadership style’. Are all managers expected to be leaders? Leaders although might not be directly involved in the work process, act as change agents in the organisations. Here the role of a leader as crucial as these individuals that lead the entire organisation towards the goals and objectives. Leaders are the motivating factors and the trust and confidence building within the organisation. Leadership has been studied for several year and numerous theories have been developed in relation to the different types and styles of leadership. Of the numerous leadership authors and experts, the approach by Daniel Goleman is worth noting. Goleman (2006) explains in his book Primal Leadership, that there are six main styles of leadership which include: a) visionaries, b) Coachers, c) affiliative, d) pacesetters, e) democratic, and f) commanding. Leaders need to be very careful as the decision making for the organisations is in their hands. Here Goleman explains that a true leader is a combination of the decision he takes. An effective leader is one who considers all aspects of the issue, develops all permutations and combinations and thinks out every possibility before taking a decision. Over the years, there have been numerous theories that have been developed for the different leadership approaches. Authors and experts in the field have provided a range of different styles and techniques of leadership. Leadership literature has evolved and gained a number of schools of thoughts. These have grown from Great man theory and trait theory to the transformational leadership theory. These theories were developed with focus only on the characteristics and behavior of the leaders however; this has not begun to also take into account the role of the followers in terms of the leadership. To understand to a greater extent, the following table provides a clear presentation of the journey from the Great man theory and trait theory to the transformational leadership theory. Great Man Theory of Leadership: This theory focused on the belief that leaders are great people who are born with exceptional skills and qualities and are destined to lead. Here the term Man was used as this thought was developed before the twentieth century and then the leaders were primarily male oriented. Trait Theories of Leadership: Rooted from the Great Man theory, the Trait theory was then developed. Here the theory was based on the qualities that are related and associated to the positive human attributes. These include various attribute from ambition to zest for life. Behaviorist Theory: This theory focuses on what the leaders actually do more than the qualities that they might possess. The different behaviors of the different leaders are categorized into different styles of leadership. Situational Leadership: Here the leaders are looked at in special situations and the approach only focuses on the particular situation. This leadership theory expresses the need for different leadership styles in different occasions. This method also focuses on the need for being adaptive and adopts different methods for different situations. Contingency Leadership: This method was developed as a follow on and refinement of the situational viewpoint and this method focused more on the appropriateness and effectiveness of the best leadership style for each circumstance. Transactional Leadership: Here this approach focuses on the relationship between the leaders and the followers and also focuses on mutual benefits for both the parties. Here the relationship is based on a contract where the leader delivers to the employees, rewards, recognition. In most cases this is provided as a return for the loyalty shown by the followers and also for the commitment shown. Transformational Leadership: This style of leadership is focused on various aspects like the changes that the leader envisions for the organization or the followers. Here the main focus is implementing the transformation in the organization. Authoritative Leadership: This approach refers to individuals who are generally viewed to be bossy dictatorial, and often controlling. These leaders tend to be clear in their expectations and needs and make independent decisions with no inputs from the group. This approach of leadership is not a very well received approach as the style can be very difficult for employees to cope with. All managers are leaders however all leaders are not necessarily good managers. Managers are accountable for themselves as well as individuals below them which in turn makes the overall effectiveness much higher and effective. However a leader has no clear set down accountability that needs to be taken care of. It is important to note that a manager is one who is directly involved in the planning, organizing, staffing and also directing and controlling. These individually are directly involved in the decision making process and can be recognised to be the driving factors in enforcing into the organisations what the leaders think will be effective for the overall growth. Here the managers are the main point of contact between the employees and leaders. In short it can be said that leaders can be found anywhere and can be offered by anyone in the company, however a manager is a person assigned with responsibility. There are a number of leaders who are not great managers and are only good at providing a vision, and can also be just simple employees down the line in the business. However managers are individuals who need to be able to effectively manage the views, visions and also bring to life the vision set down by the leaders. Hence a manager who is a leader as well can be expressed to be ‘icing on the cake’. However, most leaders are found to have managers to help manage their business. An excellent article by John Wright explains that the best managers are leaders too. He explains that there are 5 C’s of leadership, i.e., Character, Caring, Commitment, Confidence and Communication. Hence managers with these qualities will also prove to be excellent leaders and will directly create a work environment were the employees will be willing to follow their lead (Wright, 2012). Compare and contrast two different theories of motivation. Critically asses the relevance of each of these theories to your chosen example organisation(s). Motivation of employees plays a very important role in any business and is one of the most important aspects of management. The management require understanding the needs of every employee and require designing methods of motivating the employees based on each employee individually. Thus the main role of the managers is to identify and analyse the needs of the employees which in turn ensures improved performance within the organisation (Buchanan, Huczynski, 2004). The two theories being compared here are equity theory and expectancy theory. Equity theory: The equity theory was coined and developed in 1962 by expert Satacy Adams. Here this was developed on the perception that fair treatment was among the main motivations for all team members. Here the focus was on building a balance between the social comparisons and overall satisfaction of the employees. Here Adams argues that there are numerous differences in the behavior of individuals both in relation to being over rewarded as well as under rewarded (Fitz - enz, 2000). It is common for employees to check their earnings and compare them with the other employees as well. The managers however need to effectively manage and resolve their issues that might arise. This theory however has a number of pitfalls as well. The rationale of different individual are different and it is not necessary that all individuals compare with the others. There is a lacking focus on capitalist economies. Here it is crucial to note that this theory has a major impact on the management. The managers are responsible for the development of a bridge between inequalities and employee performance (Adams, 1965, 1963). This can however create a wide range of tension within the organizations. The relationship however as has been explained is very useful in motivating the individuals and ensuring better performance within the organization. Hence managers can use this theory effectively to not only gain the employee confidence but also motivate employees to a great extent. Expectancy theory: The second theory in discussion here is Expectancy theory. Here this process focuses on the outcomes and how to make them more desirable. The theory was developed in 1930 by American Psychologist Edward C Tolman. Here the theory was developed as a means to answer the issue and challenges faced by the employee behaviour. Here Tolman explained that there process of motivation was a three stage approach, i.e. behaviour of the individuals, which is based on the expectation of behaviour which in turn leads to the achievement of the expected outcomes. Here this theory predicts that employees will be more motivated when the efforts that they put in show more results and better performance which in turn will lead to improved salaries and benefits. These two he believed are the motivating factor for almost every employee. It was in 1964 that American psychologict Victor Harold Vroom had developed the expectancy theory, which involved three main concepts, i.e. valence, instrumentality and expectancy. Here valence refers to the perception of the individuals for the particular outcome. Here this includes the preferences and the perceived value of individuals. Aspects like the emotional orientation impacts the outcome to a great extent. Also, the value for money, promotion, benefits and overall satisfaction are also important elements. Effectively understanding these and appreciating the employees accordingly are crucial for managers. Instrumentality is the second important aspect for the business. Here this refers to the probability that rewards will be earned based on good performance. It is crucial for the management to recognise the efforts and inputs from the employees and to reward the employees accordingly. Also, as in any case, it is important to keep up with the promises made to the employees and should be upheld at all times. The final element is expectancy. Here the theory brings out that employees believe that the probability of efforts will lead to good performance. Every individual is different and hence differences in the expectations and confidence is crucial based on the individual capabilities. All the three elements need to be well analysed and understood by the managers as these together will assist in improved capabilities as well as improved performance. Comparison: Equity theory is bases mainly on the employees performance to the returns that are payable for the performance. This however is always equitable to the rewards received by the peers at work and a comparison is always made by employees with their peers to ensure that the efforts are being recognized and being rewarded accordingly. This has become a very important aspect of the business and affects the motivational levels of the employees to a very great extent. The expectancy theory on the other hand the Expectancy theory is one which is based on the performance of employees based on the goals of the company. This is more advisable in all companies and this proves to work better even in large MNCs. The equity theory however is not advisable to be used in large scale companies, MNCs, and also in companies which do not have a well planned policy for the employees. Theories in Practice: The organisation taken into consideration here for the paper is a large scale organisation like Tesco. Here in a company with large operations like Tesco will prove to be more effective if the concept of Expectancy theory is adopted. Tesco deals with numerous employees from several different cultures, nations, and lifestyles. Vroom explains that to achieve a positive force it is essential that all the three factors are positive. He argued that working hard effects the work performance, social life, fatigue levels, current pay and future promotions (Fitz-enz, 2000). Managers in the practical world can use this theory to help improve the employee motivation and thereby improve the performance of the employees in the organisations. To do this, managers can take a few simple steps which might help get the desired results from the employees. Being clear in terms of the expectations from the employees can prove to be the first step towards successful operations. Using the Equity theory will not prove to be as effective as here the employees focus on others than themselves. In a large organisation, there is a need for employees to be self motivated and work well irrespective of their counterparts and co workers. Hence here the expectancy model tends to be more practical and effective. Although in theory these theories both seem to be equally effective, in the real world scene there is a need for a theory which not only focuses on the employee contribution to the job but also explicitly explains the expectations of the company from the employees as well. Discuss, using relevant theory and examples, the likely advantages and disadvantages of working in a group to undertake projects. How might a manager seek to improve the effectiveness of such work groups?   Groups form a very important part of every organization. Group work and undertaking projects involves a number of different aspects. Of these learning is among the most essential and crucial in projects and group efforts. Here the following sections deals with how effectively group work and learning are linked. Here the impact of positive and negative emotions impacts the overall effective of the groups. The advantages and disadvantages are in terms the positive impact that the individuals have on the overall team. Several authors and theories have been included in the following sections to discuss about groups, and the positive and negative influence of each individual in relation to learning within the groups. Organizations rely on teams and groups to a high extent in effectively responding to the demands of the external environment. People with different knowledge, skills, abilities and emotions come together in groups and are expected to learn and become effective in achieving their goals. Organizations are increasingly facilitating their members to learn continuously and in the process transform themselves. When individual group members create, acquire and share their skills and knowledge, team learning occurs (Sessa & London, 2011). In other words, the accumulation of the individual team members’ learning constitutes team / group learning. Though there is considerable debate about the distinction between the individual and organizational learning, this paper views the individual as the actor and learner and adopts the concept “that individuals are the primary learning entities in firms and it is individuals who create organizational forms that enable learning in ways that facilitate organization transformation” (Nicolini & Meznar, 1995, p. 730). Teams are increasingly becoming the major learning units of organizations. As the learning capacity of a team can be much higher than its individual members, groups are considered key learning units. A significant amount of research has been conducted on group learning as a construct on its own and its antecedents and consequences (Kozlowski & Illgen, 2006). The paradox of groups is that they can both perform well above and well below the capacity of any one of its members. Appelbaum and Goransson (1997) define group learning as the “process of aligning a team to avoid wasted energy and to create the results it members want” (p. 122). Here Appelbaum and Goransson (1997) take a slightly different view in defining group learning and focus on the level of coordination and balanced interactions among the group members. In the model discussed in this paper, team learning refers to the members learning the patterns of interaction among other members and fine-tuning the same through feedback. The process of pooling together the information, knowledge and also the overall individual learning together is a non linear change and not step wise progressive in nature. Kasl et al. (1997) explain that groups have the ability to be adaptive, generative, and also transformative in their overall interactions and methods of interacting. These however are a major reflection of maturity and growth within the groups. Emotional states are indicative of emotions, moods and attitudes. Given the rise of groups based work environments, research on influence has shifted to the group level. The shift from the individual level to the group level is explained by Bartel and Saavedra, 2000) as “work group moods are constructed socially, involving the complex interplay of contagion and comparison processes” (p. 202). This is termed as the dynamic path to group affect (Klep et al., 2011). The emotional and sentimental state of an individual is easily transferred to the group as a whole, given high susceptibility of the group members, i.e., the group affective state may be the result of the spillover effect from a single member’s affective state. Ilies et al. (2007) focus on developing a link between the affective states of individuals and that of the group over time. As a manager, there is a need to ensure that the groups work well together. Here keeping the group motivated would mean to ensure that the needs of each individual in the group is met. Here the impact of one individual can be quite positive as well as negative on the team and the overall performance. The extent to which the group affective state has an impact on the learning process as well as the cooperation is determined by the group’s readiness to learn (Sessa & London, 2011). Learning readiness is defined as the degree to which teams recognize that they need to learn and make a decision to take some sort of action (Pingor, 2010). Groups with high readiness to learn are characterized by a history of collaboration and are generally open to new ideas. On the other hand, low learning readiness leads to little collaboration and more importance to performance goals than learning skills. In such groups, members fear failure and hence focus on performance rather than learning. Hence it is crucial that the managers focus on developing a means of strengthening the groups by catering to the needs and keeping all individuals in a positive state of mind. Positive emotions broaden one’s awareness and encourage novel and varied thoughts and actions. However negative emotions prompt immediate survival – oriented behaviors. The argument made by Frederickson (1998) is that the skills and resources built by broadened behaviour enhance survival. Many negative emotions narrow the individuals’ momentary thought – action tendencies whereas positive emotions prompt them to widen their range of thoughts. Fredrickson (1998) also argues that broadened thought – action tendencies help build a variety of personal resources including intellectual resources. The resources gained during the positive affective states are likely to be durable. Bibliography Adams, S.J., 1963, 'Toward an understanding of inequity', Journal of abnormal and Social Psychology, Vol 67, no.4, pp422-36 Adams, S.J., 1965, 'Inequality in Social Exchange', in L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Academic Press, New York, pp 267 - 99 Appelbaum, S. H., & Goransson, L. (1997). Transformational and adaptive learning within the learning organization: A framework for research and application. The Learning Organization, 4 (3), 115-128. Beer, M., Lawrence, P.R., Quinn Mills, D., and Walton, R.E., 1985, ‘Human Resource Management: A General Manager’s Perspective’, Free Press, Glencoe, IL Buchanan D. and Huczynski A., 2004, ‘Organizational behavior’, 5th edn, Prentice Hall, Essex Fitz-enz, Jac, 2000, 'The ROI of Human Capital: Measuring the Economic Value of Employee Performance' 1st edition, AMACOM Fredrickson, B. L. (1998). What good are positive emotions? Review of General Psychology, (2), 300-319. Goleman, D., 2006, ‘Emotional intelligence: 10th Anniversary Edition: Why it can matter more than IQ’, 26 September 2006, 10 Anv edition, Bantam House, R. J., & Podsakoff, P. M. (1994). Leadership effectiveness: Past perspectives and future directions for research. In J. Greenberg (Ed.), Organizational behavior: The state of the science (pp. 45-82). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Ilies, R., Wagner, D. T., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007). Explaining affective linkages in teams: Individual differences in susceptibility to contagion and individualism–collectivism. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 1140–1148. Klep, A., Wisse, B., & Flier, H. V. (2011). Interactive affective sharing versus non-interactive affective sharing in work groups: Comparative effects of group affect on work group performance and dynamics. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41(3), 312–323. McSweeney, B. (2002), 'Hofstede's model of national cultural differences and their consequences: a triumph of faith - a failure of analysis', Human Relations, Vol. 55, No. 1, pp. 89-118 Nicolini, D., & Meznar, M. B. (1995). The social construction of organizational learning: Conceptial and practical issues in the field. Human Relations, 48 (7), 727-46. Rapaille, C. (1999). 'Cultural imprints'. Executive Excellence. 16 (10), 20 Schein, E. H. (1998). 'Organizational Culture'. Retrieved online May 5 2012 from: http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/1721.1/2224/1/SWP-2088-24854366.pdf Sessa, V. I., London, M., Pingor, C., Gullu, B., & Patel, J. (2011). Adaptive, generative, and transformative learning in project teams. Team Performance Management, 17 (3/4), 146-167. Read More