Organisational Behaviour of Apple Inc - Assignment Example

Introduction Organizational behaviour (O.B) refers to the actions and attitudes of people within organizations (Heath & Sitkin 2001, p.43), and it can be defined as the field of study that examines how individuals, groups, as well as the organizational structure affect behaviour within organizations (Delta Publishing 2006, p.1); OB knowledge is essential for enhancing organizational effectiveness (Ostroff & Schmitt 1993, p.1345). This definition encapsulates three crucial aspects of OB namely OB is an inquiry into individuals and groups, organizational structure affects human behaviour, and OB knowledge can be applied to enhance organizational effectiveness (Nijhof & Rietdijk 1999, p.41). OB is determined by numerous factors in the organization including individual characteristics, group mechanisms, as well as organizational mechanisms (Shanley & Langfred 1998, p.465); all these factors are directly responsible for both OB as well as organizational effectiveness eventually. Individual factors include levels of motivation, satisfaction, stress, which become the essential determinants of the levels of commitment of people to the organization (Sani 2013 p.57); personality and cultural values are the main variables of these individual mechanisms. Group mechanisms exert significant influence on individuals since people at the work place often belong and work in one or more work teams that are led by some formal leader; group dynamics influence motivation, satisfaction, stress, as well as trust and learning in the organization (Forsyth 2006, p.21). Eventually, individuals and teams are grouped into the larger organizational structure that also affects satisfaction, stress, motivation among other dynamics; the organizational structure determines the linkages between the various groups, which may either be decentralized or centralized around a central decision-making authority (Ross-Sherry 2006, p.193). Besides the organizational structure, organizations also possess an organizational culture that captures a shared knowledge concerning the fundamental values and believes about the way things are done in the organization thereby consequently influencing the attitudes and behaviours of employees significantly. This paper will conduct a case analysis of the OB of Apple Inc from the individual factors perspective, the group dynamics perspective, and the organizational mechanisms perspective; prior to the case evaluation, this paper will highlight the major challenges faced by Apple Inc and a theoretical framework. Following the case analysis, this paper will discuss the findings while recommending the way forward before concluding the case evaluation by summing up the key points addressed herein. Brief case description of organization and problem/issue(s) Apple Inc. is an American offshore company headquartered in Cupertino, California engaging in the designing, development and selling of personal computers, computer software, among other consumer electronics; the corporation is famed for its leading brands of the Mac line of computers, the iPad tablet computer, the iPod media player, as well as the iPhone smartphone. Additionally, the corporation is known for the manufacture of the leading computer software such as the OS X as well as the iOS operating systems; Apple was found in 1976 by Jobs, Wozniak and Wayne and was incorporated in 1977; in 2007, Apple Computer, Inc. was officially rebranded as Apple Inc. since it was now broadening its focus to the manufacture of consumer electronics. Apple Inc. like other companies in its sector faces numerous key challenges that continuously undermine its growth potential and which must be addressed effectively if the company has to achieve its growth potential while ascending to the uncertain future in the coming years. For instance, the company is increasingly facing the technological, leadership, competition, as well as economic challenges, which constantly present obstacles to growth and development (Mourdoukoutas, 2011); all these challenges must be effectively addressed to foster the corporates effectiveness. Technology wise, the company must constantly innovate its technology to retain its trademark radical innovator market recognition while in terms of leadership, the company must seek to nurture future leaders that will provide direction and solutions to its complex challenges to propel the corporation to even greater heights of success; the company encounters strong competition from avant-garde corporations, despite its unrivalled innovativeness, and it stands vulnerable to the volatile global economic atmosphere. An examination of Apple Inc.’s OB is the initial step in establishing the cause-effect relations that can be leveraged to address some of the corporates critical challenges affecting its growth and development both in the present and in the long term, particularly because OB is the single most significant variable of an organization’s effectiveness. Literature review /theoretical framework Organizational effectiveness, defined as the extent to which firms achieve their goals, is a desirable trait in organizations today (Van Dyne, Graham & Dienesch 1994, p.765; Gold, 1998, p.107); organizational effectiveness has been rated and understood from two broad dimensions namely the subjective and objective measures (Ashraf & Khan 2013, p.3). Affective commitment, collective identity, group unity, leadership, and product innovativeness are some of the subjective indicators of organizational effectiveness while market share, sales, as well as profitability are the objective indicators of organizational effectiveness. Organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB), considered to be some optional behaviour individuals possess that may not be recognized by the explicit formal reward systems of organizations (Sharma, Bajpai & Holani 2011, p.67), received significant attention in recent years as one of the critical determinants of organizational effectiveness (Anwar, Khawaja & Rasheed 2013 p. 129; Zaigham 2010, p.32). High level satisfaction among employees is more likely to translate to citizenship behaviour as highly satisfied employees are more likely to be committed to the organization and to promote it through positive word of mouth (Ince & Gül 2011, p.134; Garry, J. 1998 p.149). Implementation of knowledge management practices that can yield high organizational effectiveness is one of the primary components of leadership today (Khan et al 2013, p.296); critical antecedents of knowledge management include organizational culture and organizational learning. Organizational culture highlights the firm’s formal and informal expectations of individuals thereby somewhat describing the kinds of individuals that would perfectly fit into the organization; in that respect, organizational culture affects how individuals communicate inside and outside the organization. A culture of openness, faith and autonomy is essential for effective management since it increases the awareness of people’s satisfaction thereby indirectly contributing to organizational effectiveness. Organizational learning, on the other hand, refers to the process through which the corporation establishes and reinvents its prevailing knowledge; a learning culture within the organization enables employees to understand the knowledge creating and sharing activities more positively. Organizational learning culture is very essential for organizational effectiveness, particularly in a constantly shifting market environment, thus, organizations ought to focus more on learning behaviours that are highly correlated with organizational effectiveness (Hafidz, Hoesni, & Fatimah 2012, p.32). Numerous factors contribute to workplace stress including heavy workload, seclusion, lack of autonomy in tasks, long working hours, tensed environments, as well as poor management-employee relations, harassment by management, and stifling work environments that deny employees opportunities for growth and career development. Excessive work-related stress due to poor work organization, management, design, workplace conditions, as well as lack of support from groups and leadership damages employees health and work performance significantly thereby inhibiting organizational effectiveness (Talachi & Gorji 2013, p.50). Rapid technological changes demand that organizations must equally reinvent themselves alongside the changing technologies to remain competitive; the manner in which organizations respond to changes is the primary factor that determines organizational effectiveness (Rousseau 1997, p.515). Organizational culture, that is, the shared values, beliefs as well as expectations of individuals within the organization, is one of the critical antecedents of organizational change since it may determine both the success and failure of change initiatives respectively. Teamwork is increasingly becoming a prevalent norm in organizations today (Tan & Tan 2008, p.89), yet team effectiveness and satisfaction are greatly undermined by relationship conflicts, which emerge due to interpersonal issues, political values or norms as well as personal preferences (Carsten and Annelies 2001, p.309). Generally, the social interaction of individuals in working groups goes beyond the group task-related issues to encompass the relational issues between the group members; precisely, team members may disagree due to personal reasons and share or dispute each other political views, values and even beliefs. Group efficacy, the belief of group members in their ability to perform effectively, has been found to be a critical and measurable attribute; nevertheless, the effects of group efficacy are complex and moderated by numerous contingency factors at the workplace and high group efficacy may not always be an asset to groups (Gibson C. 1999 p.138). Leadership has to steer the organization towards effectiveness by planning and implementing an organizational vision while preparing people for greater responsibilities in the future of the organization (Powell 2007, p.2). Effective communication of the organizational vision is a critical antecedent of organizational success among many other variables such as the deliberate planning for growth, development as well as continuous innovation that continuously promotes achievement of organizational goals (Andreadis 2009, p.5). Organizational structure has been noted to be a crucial determinant of the ability of organizations to respond effectively to changes in their external environment as they reposition themselves for growth opportunities in the future (Baniasadi, Poorkiani & Amiri 2014, p.328). Organizational structure determines organizational effectiveness and performance, since it indirectly influences other factors such as organizational communications, power relations, decision making, and job strategies, among other things (Manzoor 2012, p.2). Analysis Individual factors perspective The Apple Inc. cool brand image has often drawn many people to seek employment opportunities at the firm but employees commitment to the corporation is driven by factors that employees have no control over, thus, a shift in these factors eventually undermine employees commitment to the firm. Nonetheless, the corporation is keen to counteract employees’ turn-over tendencies through offering perks and benefits that are offered by other employers; this has enabled the company to establish a strong workforce despite its relaxed demonstration of employment value due to its high-cost-of entry sense of identity perceived by its employees. Apple’s employees have an internalized motivation for hard work that intrinsically drives them to perform their tasks effectively; Apple Inc. emphasizes on hiring the right people with high performance who can match the organizational culture (Apple Inc. 2014). Similarly, the company has been known to accord employees’ autonomy in tasks; Apple Inc. employees generally feel valued because they have opportunities to be creative and to improve themselves through challenging assignments without harassment or discrimination (Apple Inc. 2012 p.5). The company’s employee career management strategy aims to help employees to identify skills and abilities that will prepare them for current and future leadership positions at the corporation; the corporation is keen to establish a pool of talent and skills that would enhance its effectiveness. Apple Inc. considers career self-management as a central component of its success since the program enables the corporation to attract, develop and retain highly qualified and adaptable employees that can guarantee its effectiveness. Individual performance at Apple Inc. is valued as one of the corporation’s critical success factors, thus each employee is expected to make a difference; in that respect, individuals have great influence on the character and strength of the Apple Inc. global brand. Clearly, since Apple Inc. emphasizes on employee-organization fit requirements, all the people who work at the corporation really want to be there, to be associated with the brand and to contribute to its innovative product developments (Arbo n.d, p.8), and this intrinsic motivation defines the high employee satisfaction and commitment, which translates to the huge firm success and effectiveness. Group Dynamics perspective Teamwork is also a significant antecedent of Apple Inc.’s success since the corporation’s tasks are too immense to be effectively handled by just one individual; in that respect, the firm encourages its people to interact with front managers at all levels of management while sharing ideas and suggestions to enhance Apple Inc.’s effectiveness and sustainability in the long term. The corporation has agile teams of technicians, mostly small engineer-led project teams, which are directly responsible for its operations rather than managers; having small teams and managers that understand the work is highly attributable to Apple’s effectiveness. Mutual respect is maintained between Apple managers and employees since typically both of them have engineering backgrounds thereby eliminating the code differences of the manager and the managed. The groups often work on challenging projects that prompt members’ growth while striving to hit tight deadlines by cooperating on task accomplishment and contributing innovative ideas that lead to innovativeness. Apple teams continuously develop new skills that enable them to remain effective and competitive and the skill development activities that help the teams to gain competitive advantage over competition help the teams to enforce team culture in the organization. Apple’s team building and learning process has enabled its teams to acquire soft-skills that put them above competition since they are able to improve productivity thereby enhancing and sustaining organizational effectiveness significantly. Organizational structure perspective Apple Inc.’s organizational culture derives from an ideal that self-motivated people can work harder if they are allowed autonomy in their tasks, thus, the organizations unique structure gives the company optimum flexibility in reacting or responding effectively to challenges in its external and internal environment (Apple Inc. 2012 p.5). Decentralization of the decision-making function in Apple Inc.’s organizational structure allows the company to save time unlike the highly bureaucratic organizations whose long hierarchical structures eventually undermine the decision making process leading to unnecessary delays. Nonetheless, Apple Inc. has suffered immense setbacks due to its nearly non-existent organizational structure especially because the organization’s top-down ideology eventually led to serious financial accountability and fiscal decision making challenges in the company’s regional areas. Precisely, Apple Inc.’s corporate office increasingly found it hard to keep track of spending and purchasing since different employees at different organizational levels were making decisions without involving the main office. Discussion and recommendations From the analysis above, it is clear that Apple Inc.’s organizational behaviour has been a critical factor in the corporation’s global success and effectiveness since its inception; from the individual factors perspective, the firm has established a strong force of human resources through strict selection that ensures that it only hires employees that naturally fit into its culture and strategy. Generally, the Apple brand attracts numerous employees with passion for innovativeness and great personal drive for growth and success since it provides its employees autonomy in tasks, which encourages them to explore their creative potential. Each employee is valued because they are continuously propelling the corporation to greater heights of success by enabling it to achieve its primary goals through their individual contributions on a daily basis. The company provides numerous opportunities for the employees to develop their careers since it engages them fully through challenging tasks that sometimes are beyond their expertise and through successful accomplishment of such tasks, employees eventually build a set of soft skills that are uniquely strategic to the company’s effectiveness. Eventually, the company has managed to build and sustain effective teams of workforce that are not only intrinsically motivated, but also strongly committed to the positive contribution to the corporation’s effectiveness through individual cooperation and effort in the project teams; the organization’s learning culture of innovativeness has been inculcated as the primary driver of teamwork effectiveness. The corporation’s teams are constantly evolving and acquiring new skills that are suitable for addressing emerging challenges and this greatly contributes to the organization’s overall effectiveness, which eventually leads to profitability and sustainability in the face of complex global challenges. Apple’s nearly absent organizational structure at the onset was greatly associated with the company’s immense success and rapid growth from the onset since it made the corporation very flexible and adaptable to changing environmental conditions unlike highly bureaucratic organizations whose highly hierarchical organizational structures often undermined the decision-making function. Nonetheless, Apple’s rapid growth and expansion to the multinational corporation brand status has inevitably made it impossible for the company to operate effectively with decentralized decision-making since it breeds challenges of accountability. In that respect, Apple Inc. has to reconsider its organizational structure to tackle its myriad leadership challenges by defining levels of decision-making and specifying decision-making authorities while retaining employee autonomy in tasks to reinforce its innovativeness. Similarly, the corporation should increase its external motivation initiatives as an overt demonstration of the value of its workforces to reinforce their satisfaction and commitment to their jobs, to eliminate turn up tendencies while promoting organizational effectiveness. Conclusion Ultimately, this case analysis concludes that Apple Inc. demonstrates a keen understanding of the relationship between organizational behaviour and organizational effectiveness through its numerous commitments to mediating the effects of individuals, groups as well as the organizational structure on behaviour. Generally, Apple Inc. has successfully promoted the establishment of behaviour that supports the achievement of its goals by nurturing positive individual and group perspectives of the organization while maintaining an agile organizational structure that allows for flexibility and adaptability. References Andreadis, N. 2009, "Learning and organizational effectiveness: A systems perspective", Performance Improvement,vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 5-11. Apple Inc. (2014). Working with People. [Online]. 3rd May, 2014. Available at: https://www.apple.com/about/workingwithapple.html Apple Inc. 2012. Business Conduct: The way we do business worldwide. shareholder Available at: http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/AAPL/0x0x443008/5f38b1e6-2f9c-4518-b691-13a29ac90501/business_conduct_policy.pdf Arbo, A. (n.d). Building a Company the Steve Jobs’ Way: A Positive Deviance Approach to Strategy. Available at: http://www.bus.umich.edu/NewsRoom/pdf/wootenjobspaperFINAL1.pdf Ashraf, F. & Khan, M.A. 2013, "Organizational Innovation and Organizational Effectiveness Among Employees of Cellular Companies", Pakistan Journal of Psychological Research, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 1-24. Baniasadi, L., Poorkiani, M. & Amiri, A. 2014, "A survey on the relationship between organizational structure and effectiveness;( case study; Melat bank branches in Kerman province)", Kuwait Chapter of the Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review, vol. 3, no. 7, pp. 328-340. Carsten K W De, D. & Annelies E M Van, V. 2001, "Managing relationship conflict and the effectiveness of organizational teams", Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 309-328. Carsten K.W De, D. & Annelies E M Van, V. 2001, "Managing relationship conflict and the effectiveness of organizational teams",Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 309-328. Delta Publishing. (2006). Understanding and managing organizational behaviour. Available at: http://www.apexcpe.com/publications/471001.pdf Forsyth, D.R. 2006. Group Dynamics, 4th ed. Belmont, CA: Thompson Wardsworth. Garry, J. 1998, "The nature of work, the context of organizational behaviour, and the application of industrial-organizational psychology", Canadian Psychology, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 149. Gibson, C.B. 1999, "Do they do what they believe they can? Group efficacy and group effectiveness across tasks and cultures",Academy of Management Journal, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 138-152. Gold, J. 1998, "Telling the story of organizational effectiveness", Career Development International, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 107-111. Hafidz, S.W.M., Hoesni, S.M. & Fatimah, O. 2012, "The Relationship between Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Counterproductive Work Behavior", Asian Social Science, vol. 8, no. 9, pp. 32-37. Heath, C. & Sitkin, S.B. 2001, "Big-B versus Big-O: What is organizational about organizational behavior?", Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 43-58. Ince, M. & Gül, H. 2011, "The Effect of Employees' Perceptions of Organizational Justice on Organizational Citizenship Behavior: An Application in Turkish Public Institutions", International Journal of Business and Management, vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 134-149. Khan, M.K., et al. 2013, "Association of Stress, Knowledge Management, and Change with Organizational Effectiveness in Education Sector of Pakistan", South Asian Studies, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 295-306. Manzoor, Q. 2012, "Impact of Employees Motivation on Organizational Effectiveness", Business Management and Strategy, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1-12. Mourdoukoutas, P. 2011. Apple's four challenges. Forbes. [Online]. Available at: http://www.forbes.com/sites/panosmourdoukoutas/2011/10/05/apples-four-challenges/ Nijhof, A.H.J. & Rietdijk, M.M. 1999, "An ABC-analysis of ethical organizational behavior", Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 39-50. Ostroff, C. & Schmitt, N. 1993, "Configurations of organizational effectiveness and efficiency", Academy of Management Journal, vol. 36, no. 6, pp. 1345. Powell, W.R. 2007, "The impact of managerial leadership in strategic direction on organizational effectiveness", Futurics, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 1-32. Rasheed, A., Jehanzeb, K., & Rasheed, M. F. (2013). An investigation of the antecedents of organizational citizenship behaviour: Case of saudi arabia. International Journal of Psychological Studies, 5(1), 128-138.  Ross-Sherry, J.K. 2006, "Ethical Decision Making and Organizational Behavior: A Case of Life and Death", HEC Forum, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 193-206. Rousseau, D.M. 1997, "Organizational behavior in the new organizational era", Annual Review of Psychology, vol. 48, pp. 515-46. Sani, A. 2013, "Role of Procedural Justice, Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction on job Performance: The Mediating Effects of Organizational Citizenship Behavior", International Journal of Business and Management, vol. 8, no. 15, pp. 57-67. Shanley, M. & Langfred, C. 1998, "The importance of organizational context, II: An empirical test of work group cohesiveness and effectiveness in two governmental bureaucracies", Public Administration Quarterly, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 465-485. Sharma, J.P., Bajpai, N. & Holani, U. 2011, "Organizational Citizenship Behavior in Public and Private Sector and Its Impact on Job Satisfaction: A Comparative Study in Indian Perspective", International Journal of Business and Management, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 67-75. Talachi, R.K. & Gorji, M.B. 2013, "Evaluating the relationship between job burnout and organizational citizenship behaviour: A study of industry, mine and trade organization employees", Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review (Oman Chapter), vol. 2, no. 8, pp. 50-61. Tan, H.H. & Tan, M.L. 2008, "Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Social Loafing: The Role of Personality, Motives, and Contextual Factors", The Journal of psychology, vol. 142, no. 1, pp. 89-108. Van Dyne, L., Graham, J.W. & Dienesch, R.M. 1994, "Organizational citizenship behavior: Construct redefinition, measurement, and validation", Academy of Management Journal, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 765. Zaigham, N. 2010, "Impact of Supportive Supervisors & Empowerment on Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) in The Private Sector of Pakistan", New Horizons, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 32-44. Read More