Organizational Behaviors at Apple Inc - Literature review Example

? Leadership, Teambuilding, and Communication Harry R. DePollar Sophia A. Evans Strayer (Suitland, Md Campus Bus. 322 Organizational Behavior February 25, 2013 Leadership, Teambuilding, and Communication In every organization, there are certain defined trends that take place either in the subordinate employees or the managerial level. These trends are what comprise of the organizational behavior of certain companies and organizations, and therefore, an organization can be defined using these trends. Some of the trends concern the leadership styles being applied alongside teambuilding activities and, generally, the level of communication. These three characteristics are therefore an essential part of an organization, and from their study, one can come up with a conclusive understanding of an organization’s performance. This essay takes a look at some of the organizational behaviors at Apple Inc. The company has been a complete success to the extent of being a team leader in its line of production. Apple Inc. itself, however, has had a unique organizational behavior since its formation to its present status. This unique trend has been especially in terms of leadership, which has been attributed largely by the number of times the company has had to change its leaders in order to be able to reach a suitable leader and to deliver the company’s objectives. The following analysis gives an inside look into Apple Inc.’s organizational behavior focusing on the leadership trends, teambuilding activities, and communication level. Leadership theories and interpersonal forms of power at Apple Inc. Apple’s organizational behavior Right from its inception into the technology business, Apple Inc. has had a historic background in its leadership, leading it to become a market leader in its field. The achievement can only be linked to the organization’s dedication and severity when it comes to leadership. Over many years, there have been a number of developmental changes in the organization’s structure and leadership. The organization’s objective of changing the world through a provision of computers to the masses has led to multiple changes within the company that have either been positive or negative to the company’s growth (Freedman & Vohr, 1991). The company was first under a centralized organizational structure in 1983, being run by its co-founder Steve Jobs and CEO Markkula. Under this structure, authority was restricted only to higher levels of leadership which were all under Markkula (Schermerhorn, Hunt, Osborn, & Uhl-Bien, 2010). At its early stage, the organization was made up of five product divisions, an additional four divisions offering product support services and other several administrative departments (Freedman & Vohr, 1991). All the divisions and departments reported to Markkula and Jobs; however, this system was not an effective one. This is because, with time, there started to be divisions of interest within the divisions unto which the newly appointed CEO had to carryout re-organization and restructure of the management system (Apple Inc. 2010). Over the years, there have been several changes in the management of the company including the dismissal and re-appointment of the company’s co-founder Steve Jobs. This essay will forego all the changes that took place in the company and concentrate on the leadership of Steve Jobs and his influence over the company during his tenure as the company’s CEO. Traditional leadership theories The traditional leadership theory was first described by Marx Weber (1947). The leadership theory relates to a style that bases its belief in power being bequeathed to a leader as a way of maintaining tradition. According to Chun Hai (2007), Weber gave the characteristics of a traditional leader as: The leader’s followers gain favor in terms of promotions depending on the office politics. The leaders gain followers, owing to the fact that they are in their current position, but not due to their individual charisma. The leaders get respect and feel in control following the previous situation of those that were holding the same position who were seen as having power and control. Contemporary leadership theories In contemporary leadership, there are several theories with at least each research carried out giving two. However, the most common contemporary theories are two, and most of the other theories relate to these two. The theories have similar characteristics as they view leaders as an inspiration to their followers. The two theories include; transformational leadership and charismatic leadership (Goertzen, 2010). A charismatic leader was first discussed by Weber over a century ago, and he gave four characteristics, which include vision and articulation, sensitive, extraordinary behaviors, and a risk taker in achieving goals and visions (Quick & Nelson, 2013). The other theory describes transactional leader. This theory portrays such leaders as guides and motivators towards their followers in establishing goals sets. They are able to achieve this by ensuring that all the subordinates understand their roles and requirements pertaining to the task ahead. They are also likely to surpass their individual interest for the benefit of the organization which gains them extraordinary and profound effect towards their followers (Schermerhorn, Hunt, Osborn, & Uhl-Bien, 2010). Emerging leadership theories In the current business world and organizations, there are a lot of changes being carried out, especially in management, causing a great change in leadership traits. There are, therefore, several emerging leadership theories taking effect with every change in management. Some of the examples of these theories include attribution theory, charismatic theory, and transformational leadership theory. Ideal leader at Apple Inc Apple Inc., being a technology oriented company and being a market leader, it is required to have an ideal leader who is able to make the appropriate decisions and earn his followers trust. The late Steve Jobs was the kind of leader that had ideal characteristics that fit the leadership style that Apple Inc. requires. During his tenure, he was able to raise the company to the top and make it a market leader in its field (Feinberg, 2009). Jobs was a leader with three very unique leadership styles to which many reports only described as complex leadership. It is from this leadership styles he possessed that he was able to lead the company to its current high levels and standards. The three leadership styles that Jobs applied at Apple include charismatic, transactional, and autocratic leadership styles. These three were responsible for the positive feedback in the company’s performance which made it the fastest company to grow to the top within a very short period (Feinberg, 2009). Jobs’ interpersonal power comprised of expert power, which was part of his expert knowledge on innovation that was highly valued, which always gave him an upper hand. The other interpersonal power that Jobs had was information power. This is one of the tools that he utilized during his tenure. This power of information was one trait that always gave him an upper hand in the organization, and it is because of this that the company has very strict policies concerning information exchange. The last interpersonal power that made Jobs an ideal leader is Coercive power. This made the company employees to be very precise and discreet to the outside competitive environment. Jobs did not tolerate improper handling of information and outside contact with competitors, which meant that any person that broke these rules was right away shown the door (Feinberg, 2009). It is evident that the combinations of Jobs’ interpersonal power and leadership styles were able to lift the company’s performance to the top. After evaluation, it is evident that a combination of such power and leadership style would be ideal to bring growth any organization to the top. Organizational stressors At Apple Inc, it has been noted that the organizational stressors mostly come from task demand and role demand. The company sometimes requires its staff to work overtime and late night just to be able to finish a project (Feinberg, 2009). Role demands may be another major cause of stress in the company due to the high demand that is expected of project managers. Just like at Apple Inc., Organizational stressors are a major cause of disruptions and drop in morale, production, turnover, and the overall productivity of the organization (Quick & Nelson, 2013). The source for most stressors is usually apparent. With some cases, the impact may not be very obvious, causing delay in the necessary actions being taken on time. For this reason, there is always a need to often carry out a diagnosis to be able to curb the impact and sources of the organizational stress early (Chun Hai, 2007). There are several measures and objectives which can be enforced; however, there is a need for a follow-up, as these tend to be rather imprecise in identifying organizational stressors. Questionnaires and interviews can be effective in a provision of the specific sources and causes of stress in an organization. There are several designed methods that can be used to scan for stress in an organization. These include: life stressor check list, job content questionnaire, job stress survey, and hustles and uplifts scale. Organizational stress is an issue that ought to be addressed immediately once it has been identified. The ways of addressing stress are specific to each type of stress which calls for the need to first identify the source of the stress (Goertzen, 2010). In the case of Apple Inc, a stressor such as task demand can be addressed by allowing the company staff on breaks and office retreats. This can allow organizational members some time to cool off and have fun away from work at the same time creating a team building exercise. Effective group and work team performance To build an effective group and work team performance, there are certain elements that have to be enforced, leading to an ideal organizational behavior. To achieve this, there is the need to ensure there is the right organizational structure in place. Second, the right and appropriate leadership style has to be adopted. One thing one needs to understand is that not everyone can be a leader, and it requires time to come up with the best leader with admirable qualities that can put the organization at the top (Goertzen, 2010). Third and last is the issue of stress, which needs to be frequently detected and addressed in time to avoid decline in productivity. At apple Inc., most of these elements are already in place, which is a contributing factor to the company’s good performance. However, one element that needs to be enforced is the issue of detecting stressors in time and addressing them before they cause damage to the company. Once this is addressed, there will be no doubt that the working environment at Apple Inc. will be effective with top performance. Potential sources of conflict Apple Inc. is one company that may have the least cause of conflict within the organization. However, the potential sources of conflict within the organization could be stress attributed from the pressure to deliver. The diagram below addresses the five conflict management styles that can be applied effectively in any organization. The appropriate means of managing the potential sources of conflict at Apple Inc. would be to use accommodating and collaborating styles to handle conflict. This is because in both styles, there is involvement of teamwork and communication so that in the event one person fails to have the technical know-how of a certain task, accommodating an expert in the same field can take over the project. In the event a task is to be completed in a scheduled time, team members can collaborate and work as a team to ensure the task is finished on time. Potential barriers to communication At Apple Inc., discreetness is the key policy in the organization. The staffs at the organization are not allowed to disclose information concerning the company openly. Only a few management employees are able to access certain information. This is a protective means of ensuring that the company secrets do not leak to the competitors (Feinberg, 2009). As much as this is for the good of the company, it may pose as a potential barrier to communication in the organization. At some point, this barrier may become a threat to the overall teamwork, as issues are not openly addressed to the entire organizational personnel. To avoid this barrier, the company can incorporate the following recommendations. The first one is to address the issue openly to all the staff and allow any member to present their ideas freely instead of only limiting this freedom to the selected members. The second recommendation would be to educate the members on the seriousness and importance of why the company issue needs to be discreet and start allowing members to communicate freely as long as monitoring systems are put in place. References Chun Hai, J. (2007). Fundamental of Development Administration. Selangor: Scholar press. Feinberg, B. (2009). Design Thinking and Innovation at Apple. Boston: Havard Business Publishing. Freedman, R., & Vohr, J. (1991). American Express. New York: New York University Salomon center. Goertzen, B. (2010). Leadership Theory. New York: Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC. Quick, J. C., & Nelson, D. L. (2013). Organizational behavior. Mason, OH: Centage. Schermerhorn, J., Hunt, J., Osborn, R., & Uhl-Bien, M. (2010). Organizational Behaviour. New York: Wiley Plus. Read More