Organisations and Behaviour - Essay Example

? Organisations and Behaviour By of Institute Case Study Dimensions of Organisational Structure: Changing the Rules at Bosco Jill Thompson’s proposal to decentralize the rules and procedures for Bosco Plastics will work depending on certain conditions. First, there will be a need to have a meeting with all employees and inform them that they will be taking instructions from their departmental managers. Given that this is a deviation from the norm, employees may take time to adjust to the rules. As such, she should inform the departmental managers to arrange for a meeting with their departmental employees and chat a way forward together. When people have gotten used to following given rules and procedure, waking up one day and changing such rules and procedures could cause negative ripple effects. For the plans to work, sitting down together and identifying that there is a problem would be the first step to get employees to be more open minded to the formulation of new procedures. Involving employees in the formulation of the new policies serves to make sure that their opinions about the new rule and procedure are taken into account. This way, employees will feel that the new procedures have not been imposed on them but a product of their collective decision making and consensus. The managers should also give their departmental employees opportunity to express their opinions about regulations that they perceive as controversial. After that they should take time to explain to them why there is a need to have such regulations. Even so, decentralization for the rules should also leave room for employees to seek the indulgence of a higher office if they feel that they issues are not being addressed either fairly or elaborately at the departmental level. This way, making a transition from the old culture and restructuring the organization will be easy. It is vital to note that attempting to make the above changes without involving the employees may impact negatively on the organization (Kaiser, 2008, p. 104). Department managers will come up with various rules and procedures. As it emerged during the time that Jill Thompson took an evaluative walk around the company, there were several issues that need to be solved. First, the fact that repairing time has been left flexible to run between 8:00am and 10:00, production supervisors’ work has been made seemingly hard. It is hard for them to work with employees who may get to work at 10:00 and choose to leave for lunch at 11:00. This is because there is no ample time for doing anything productively significant. Probably the consequences of the old regulations were that production supervisors ended up doing so much work. This is because they have to be at work by 8:00pm for those employees who report at that time and stay as late as 7:00pm to be with those who reported to work at 10:00am. It is also possible that on some days they have had to take up the work they are mean to be supervising when employees who report at 10:00am chose to go for lunch at 11:00. As such, department managers may chat a way forward and come up with rules that ensure there is uniformity in time management. This way, flow of traffic in and out of the company will be tamed, giving production supervisors ample time to finish processes initiated and improving production and performance. Evaluation procedures are also likely to change depending on specialty. For instance, the research and development people may have a revised schedule for their evaluation as opposed to the unpopular monthly evaluation. Evaluation for other departments will depend on the nature of their specialization. When such rules have been adjusted, the departments that will be more formalized will be research and development department and production department. This is because the most notable problems emanated from the two departments. Such restructuring will help improve performance and morale of the workers. Reasonable evaluation period with also motivate employees rather that the yearly evaluation time (Schein, 2010, p. 127). The need for the departmental managers to first discuss together before drafting any rules is for the purposes of avoiding making the structural and policy adjustments risky. Behaviour at work is motivated by rewards and working environment. If the company establishes different procedures such as reporting time, one department may feel that they are being burdened more than the other. The department that leaves reporting time to be as flexible as it was may be perceived to be the most attractive under McGregor’s X theory of motivation. Under McGregor’s theory X of motivation, workers are seen as people that must be coerced in order to be productive. Failing to make uniform such rules may result in silent protests or go slows by employees in others departments. Employees from another department may also feel that they are not being given an opportunity to grow through reasonable evaluations that may see them rise uniformly with others. This may arise when other departments come up with rules perceived to be favouring them more than another department. As such, Jill Thompson should sit together with the department managers and agree on what regulations to standardize, such as reporting time. Other regulations that are department specific given specializations should just be left. Making the regulation regarding reporting time follow a mechanistic structure will ensure discipline and that production supervisors are not overwhelmed by unpredictable time schedules. After guaranteeing that all employees will report at work at the same time, departmental managers will then proceed with internal decisions as drafted jointly by departmental employees. Some of the risks the company may face could be dissatisfaction and increased employee turnover if it fails to consider everyone it its decision. As such, some employees may be demotivated while others will be motivated. For uniformity and to have uniform behaviour at work, departmental managers should re-align their rules and procedures to reflect the overall objectives of the company (Denison et al., 2012, p. 67). Case Study 2: Organizational Structure and Culture: Surviving Greenscape’s Hard Times The organization culture at Greenscape is one that one may say to have a baseball team culture. This is because the employer has demonstrated that the business treasures employees above everything else in the organization. Lita Ong sees employees as assets to the business and, therefore, makes provisions to keep them satisfied and motivated. One may observe from the leadership style that Lita Ong has employed in the organization. After starting the organization from a humble background of where she worked with volunteer friends as the firm picked up. Working with volunteers had seemingly made her develop excellent interpersonal skills and approach to the people around her. She developed a participative and delegative leadership style in which she worked with her employees and also assigned them tasks. As the firm grew, she found herself surrounded by employees that she had gotten too she had been relating with extremely closely. For instance, she knew the other non-work factors about Martina, Emily, Doris and Adrian. Probably according to her, she saw the success of the business through total employee satisfaction and involved herself in making sure that she also helped them respond to issues affecting their lives. On short, she established family of employees where workers related as though they were another small family doing a family business. This was the motivation for work at Greenscape rather than pay. Her leadership style and organization culture can be contrasted with authoritarian leadership and tough-guy culture where top management relate particularly strictly with junior employees. In many cases under such authoritarian leadership, employees usually work not because they enjoy doing the work, but probably because they fear the consequences of not doing as required. Leadership does not motivate employees in such scenarios but wages. This is unlike in Greenscape where leadership and organization culture are the key motivating factors (Robbins and Judge, 2009, p. 74). As the organization grows, the social units will be redefined and soon Lita will discover that she cannot relate to her employees as she used to. By the time the organization gets to a point where it over 400 employees, it will be difficult for Lita to apply the personal approach to management. She will need to departmentalize the organization and work towards departmental specializations. Under such circumstances, the organization will need to change its structure, culture and leadership style. Her organization will then require operating like other leading organizations. There will be a need for a human resource department and manager, supplies department, marketing department amongst others. It is essential to change culture and structure so that the real picture and status of a functional organization may be attained. For instance, given that Lita will not be sufficiently motivate such a large number using her leadership approach only, there will be a need for supervision thus creation of supervisor positions. Because the supervisors will need to communicate to their juniors and their seniors, establishment of a hierarchal structure of communication will have to be established for official matters. Other motivational strategies will also need to be established to ensure that employee turnover is reduced. In fact, Hawthorne’s theory supports the idea that supervision is necessary to stimulate employees’ productivity. Hawthorne contends that when workers know they are under supervision, they tend to increase their productivity. Productivity and output assessments will need to be taken into consideration so that production does not fall. The company will also need to structured decision making so that various departments know how to reach their decisions and to what limits they can transact on behalf of the family. As seen, a company must change its structure and culture when the numbers increase to a certain level that requires a new approach (Shahzad, 2012, p. 15). As Greenscape Company gears for its growth, it has quite some benefits and difficulties that it will have to cope with for changing its structure and culture. Starting with the difficulties, there will be problems coping with division of labour. Employees who had gotten used to working close together may find themselves in different departments. If care is not taken, this may affect productivity in the short run. It could be in the form of old cliques of friend moving from their departments to go catch up with a little chat with their friends. Besides, those who had gotten used to Lita being personally available to motivate them may find it hard working under their newly assigned supervisors. Shifting from the baseball team culture to a purely professional culture may be a tremendous setback to those who may not adapt fast enough to the new terms and conditions. The kind of culture that the organization had grown on was one that was open, friendly and personal. Establishment of employee departments will also substantially limit the freedom employees had enjoyed especially getting casual offs just by being honest. The kind of management that approach that Lita used may, therefore, not be the best one for a growing company that is increasing having many employees. Therefore, other management styles that Greenscape can employ are likely to offer the following benefits. The company may adopt human behavior approach as it sets its new culture. This will ensure that the concept of group dynamics is maintained. Changing organization culture and structure will ensure that there is professionalism at the work place. For instance, employees will not just leave work without a valid reason. Taming behaviors at work will help in increasing overall productivity. Employees will also be goal focused and aim at meeting established goals. Besides, the company may also benefit from increased credit regulation unlike where Lita had entered into a deal that almost shattered the company. This is because the creation of supplies and the finance departments will coordinate to see what quantities to supply before payments (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005, p. 287). Case Study 3: Leadership Models and Concepts: Right Boss, Wrong Company During the transition from one leadership to the next, there is likely to be an initial period in which employees relate with the new boss with reservations. The fact Hogan should have taken that into consideration the need to determine the pace at which to implement reforms. When she stepped in as the new boss at the Fancy Footwear, the idea of coming up with changes should have been approached more carefully. For example, Hogan should have taken into consideration that the former boss used a different leadership style at the company to get things done. For instance, the employees had seemingly got used to the boss communicating to them through memos but letting them do their work in a relaxed atmosphere. The fact that the boss was usually at the top of the building also made then got used to working without the top management around them. This is not to imply that former bosses never had to go down into the factory at all, but that if they did, it was usually on scattered incidences. Therefore, factors that could have alerted Hogan to the problems that eventually came up at the Fancy Footwear were straight from the time employees were reluctant to form groups. It is not that groups were being formed for the first time, but that this time right they were being formed under her organization during the 11:00am to 2:00pm. It is highly likely that the employees felt intimidated by her presence, or that they perceived that they were being organized too much, like children. Besides, when the formed groups turned out to be agonizingly slow, this could have rung a bell to Hogan. She did not find out why the response was slow, but rather took up the role of the facilitator. In short, she embarked with a proactive leadership style that was not employee-centered, as the previous boss had done. It appears that the organization culture with regard to leadership was one in which the top management related with employees within a reasonable distance. Perceptions at work are usually that bosses are strict and no nonsense people. As it appears, the problem in this case has more to do with the pace of implementation of changes rather than the changes themselves. The leadership style that Mr. Worthy had used was one that was not supervisory as one of the employees revealed to Hogan; he let them do their job as he also did his, whatever that was. This implies that the employees were motivated to produce in an environment where they perceived that they were in control of the situation. Hogan’s leadership style was one in which she wanted to work with employees so closely when employees were not used to this (Keltner et al., 2003, p. 276). It is possible that Hogan could have instituted her changes without eliciting a negative reaction from the workers. Having worked in the company awhile back before going for her MBA, she was well acquainted with the trends in the organization. She knew that the previous boss had adopted a backseat approach to leadership and that he spent time off during lunch hours to give employees some executive absence. With her wealth of knowledge and experience at the same place of work, she should have known that her employees had gotten used to that style of leadership. This is not to imply that she should not have instituted the changes, but that she could have worked on the right formula for introducing such changes. At the initial period of group formations when employees were reluctant to form groups, she ought to have re-strategized afresh. Most importantly, she could have adopted a gradual process of change. For instance, she could have probably conducted an analysis using questionnaires to get specific responses around the changes she intended to initiate. Alternatively, she could have organized meetings with departments one after another. In these meetings, she could let employees know the intended changes for which the company was bracing itself. Besides, Hogan’s plans appear too ambitious. She got the company by the end of the first month. This implies that she must have rushed her employees with the changes rather than first getting them to appreciate the changes. This transitions pace was too first for people who were previously used in carrying out their activities in a different way. This is way although her plan succeeded in stirring up the company; it also succeeded in scaring employees off the company. One may observe that her Hawthorne’s supervisory model worked negatively for this case. Mr. Worthy’s leadership style had created a functional McGregor’s theory Y of motivation where workers were self-motivated by independence left to them at the work place. In order to change this, her leadership approach should have considered gradual development rather than instant change. People are not like machines and they take a while to adjust (Cable and Judge, 2003, p. 209). Case Study 4: Need-Based Perspectives on Motivation: More Than a Pay Cheque From the fact that Samuel Gibson was unhappy despite high income, one may observe that the he felt less motivated along the way. According to him, he could not derive satisfaction from his seminars where he had to repeat the same things repeatedly. The first thing that one may observe is that he was trained to be a teacher and he reveal that he enjoyed literature. He was promoted to work in the training department but after a while, he got concerned that he was not needed since the executives had perfected their work and the memos were flawless. He also observed that the annual report was also coming turning out to be perfect. In short, he felt that his purpose was over with as far as the training department was concerned. He now preferred to try something new, something different. An analysis of his motivation using Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs reveal that Gibson was motivated at different stages by different needs. When he was first employed in the company, one may observe that Gibson was motivated by Maslow’s first level of physiological needs. By taking the job that involved writing and revising company brochures, Gibson was making sure that he secures a source of livelihood. He was motivated by the need to ensure that he has all the physiological needs such as food and water. After receiving the promotion to work in the training department, he was entitled to more income than the previous group. This was like a career advancement that enabled him to satisfy his needs beyond mere safeguarding of physiological needs. Therefore, working at the training department meant that he satisfied safety needs. He worked with various groups of managers to achieve certain goals that were fundamental to the company. He ensured that there was good task performance during his trainings, and that his group of executives achieved team viability by the time he was through with them. This is why there was improvement eventually as seen from company annual reports, memos and letters (Maslow, 2011, p. 2). While working in the company of the executives, Gibson also had a group with which he interacted therefore satisfying the belongingness and love needs through being in the company of others. After all these, Gibson can be said to have satisfied even the esteem needs. He was confident and certainly enjoyed a sense of self-worth given his achievements. He had self-confidence and self-respect. Even so, he could not reach self-actualization. His self-actualization lied on his perception of doing something related to what he was trained on. He was trained to train others and he felt the desire to be needed to do this. He finally agreed to do offer English classes at reduced salary. He derived satisfaction not from money, but by doing what he enjoyed most, and that is teaching. After working with the floor workers, the vice president later awarded Gibson a bonus for helping in improving productivity through his lessons. One may thus observe that there was poor motivation of the floor workers. This had seemingly hindered the development of effective teamwork in the organization given that employees normally work in a team. One may therefore deduce that factors that hinder effective teamwork are lack of motivation and negative attitude. The executive did not see the need to train the floor workers probably because they were high school dropouts. This was despite the fact that the same employees contributed to productivity of the company. Gibson must have motivated them given that he had worked with other executives closely in the training department. The fact that productivity had increased and employee turnover dropped reveal that it was the management’s attitude that inhibited effective development of teamwork in the organization’s floor workers. With the right motivation, teamwork is likely to be achieved from any group (Maslow, 2011, p. 2). Gibson is so far the most instrumental and talented employee in Britannia Home Manufacturers. As regards to whether teaching is an appropriate job for him, one may observe that teaching is the best job for him. Thus does not mean that he cannot do other tasks in the organization but just as far as how he derives satisfaction is concerned. Using Fredrick Herzberg’s motivation-Hygiene needs, one may observe that Gibson is motivated by all the three groups of need but most importantly by the growth needs. His personality is a self-motivate person who enjoys doing something that he perceives as productive. After training the executives and observed that reports, memos and letters were now up to the standard, he felt that his continued contribution in that the department was not adding any value anymore. He was motivated by the need to use his skills to be productive in another area. This was a need he was ready to satisfy even at a reduced income, something nit usually common among many people. Teaching and observing people improve from one level to the other gave him satisfaction than just doing the same thing repeatedly. He wanted to be creative and the training department was not giving him that opportunity. His vital needs using Fredrick Herzberg’s Motivation-Hygiene theory was growth. It was the unsatisfied growth need that operated towards pushing him to work with the floor workers so that he could derive satisfaction. In fact, it is also possible that Gibson’s needs suffered regression for a while. This was before Carta saw him and made a request on his behalf. He recorded growth with the floor workers, an indication that he successfully moved from the deficiency cycle to the enrichment cycle. Therefore, teaching is an appropriate profession for him. It does not matter whom he teaches, he just derives satisfaction from teaching (Miner, 2005, p. 93). Bibliography Cable, D.M., and Judge, T. A., 2003. Managers’ upward influence tactic strategies: The role of manager personality and supervisor leadership style. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 24, 197–214. Denison, D. et al., 2012. Leading Culture Change in Global Organizations: Aligning Culture and Strategy. New Jersey: Jossey-Bass. Kaiser, R.B., (2008). Leadership and the Fate of Organizations. American Psychological Association Vol. 63 (2) 96–110. Keltner, D. et al., 2003. Power, approach, and inhibition. Psychological Review, 110, 265–284. Kristof-Brown, A. L. et al., 2005. Consequences of individuals’ fit at work: A meta-analysis of person–job, person– organization, person– group, and person–supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58, 281–342. Maslow, A.H., 2011. Hierarchy of Needs: A Theory of Human Motivation. Retrieved from www.all-about-psychology.com. Miner, J. B., 2005. Organizational Behaviour 1: Essential Theories of Motivation and Leadership. New York: M.E. Sharpe. Robbins, S.P., and Judge, T.A., 2009. Essentials of Organizational Behaviour. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Schein, E.H., 2010. Organizational Culture and Leadership. New Jersey: Jossey-Bass. Shahzad, F., 2012. Impact of Organizational Culture on Organizational Performance: An Overview. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research In Business Vol. 3, No 9. Read More