Organizational Behavior: Managing People and Organizations - Assignment Example

Organizational Behavior Total Number of Words 624 Lesson Frederick Taylors "scientific management" assumed that it is unlikely for each employee to work on their own without having a manager to monitor their expected work performances (Dehhardt, Denhardt, & Aristigueta, 2009, p. 153). It means that the use of authoritative leadership style is necessary to motivate each employee to increase their overall work productivity. On the contrary, Elton Mayo and his followers’ "Human Relations Movement" are totally different from Taylors "scientific management" in the sense that the "Human Relations Movement" strongly promotes social interaction within the business organization. It means that a participative management is preferred than the use of authoritative management approach. In most cases, a participative management can be done by ensuring that there is a two-way communication line between the lowest group of employees and the managers (p. 228). In other words, the use of less authoritative leadership approach is necessary to increase employees’ overall work satisfaction and work productivity (Wilson & Rosenfeld, 1990, p. 9). For example, instead of using authoritative leadership approach, the "Human Relations Movement" assumed that the use of transformational leadership style is more effective in terms of managing people within a business organization. Based on Fred Herzbergs motivation-hygiene theory, employees can be motivated using either “motivating or intrinsic rewards” (i.e. work recognition, achievements at work, the provision of challenging tasks, and career growth) or “hygiene or extrinsic rewards” (i.e. increased in monetary rewards, supervision, or work security, etc.) (Dehhardt, Denhardt, & Aristigueta, 2009, p. 161). Specifically Doug McGregors Theory X and Theory Y management theory assumed that Theory X employees avoid responsibilities related to work. This is because Theory X employees are “lazy, uninvolved, and motivated solely by money (p. 12). Therefore, managers who manage this group of employees are most likely to use extrinsic rewards. On the other hand, employees under the Theory Y are known for being self-directed (p. 160). Therefore, the use of intrinsic rewards such as work recognition is more effective when managing Theory Y employees (p. 160). Using transformational leadership approach, managers can effectively train a group of Theory Y employees to become leaders in their own little way (Shivers-Blackwell 2004). Accordigng to Heath and Sitkin (2001), the three definitions of organizational behavior includes the `Big-B, the `Contextualized-B, and the `Big-O. In general, each business organizations have a set of unique behavior that is accepted by its employees as a universally accepted conduct. In line with this, the `Big-B can be defined as the kind of organizational behavior that is necessary for a business organization to perform a set of required task. `Contextualized-B can be defined as a set of conduct that has already been set as part of the organizational culture. Lastly, the `Big-O can be defined as a set of organizational behavior that can be used in solving problems that can occur within a business organization. Lesson 2 According to Dehhardt, Denhardt and Aristigueta (2009, p. 22), "people who seek to manage others must first learn to manage themselves," and that "technical ability and intelligence are not enough for success; emotional intelligence is also required." It means that leaders should be able to have a good understanding of themselves and how their attitude, behavior, and values could significantly influence other people. By keeping in mind that each person has their own unique way of perceiving many things in this world, leaders can be more effective in terms of managing the emotional challenges of other people which is essential in terms of developing a mutual relationship with their employees. The individual-level behaviors and self-management in business organizations are important not only in terms of increasing the overall productivity of the workers but also its long-term profitability. By improving the work performance of each employee within the individual-level, Griffin and Moorhead (2012, pp. 20 – 21) explained that managers as leaders can effectively increase their overall performance and productivity, improve their work attitude, and reduces work-related stress, the rate of absenteeism, and employee turnover rate. As part of the organizations standard operations, organizations may have better structural opportunities for emotional and interpersonal development by using some theoretical models as a guide throughout the developmental process. In line with this, Rothstein and Burke (2010, p. 168) mentioned that managers can use “the abilities and mixed models” when monitoring the progress of each employee’s emotional intelligence or the “general emotional and social skill framework” when monitoring the progress of each employee’s interpersonal competencies. According to Rothstein and Burke (2010, p. 168), the general emotional and social skill framework clearly divides each employee’s emotional, social, and verbal skills into three major categories known as: (1) expression or sending; (2) sensitivity to other people’s emotions or actions; and (3) management of emotional and interpersonal behavior. Within an individual-level, the use of this particular framework can make it easier on the part of the managers to have a better understanding on how to monitor signs of progress in each employee’s emotional and interpersonal skills. Although the “general emotional and social skill framework” is useful when monitoring the progress of each employee’s interpersonal competencies within an individual-level, the problem with using this framework is that managers may have difficulty trying to decode employee’s facial expression or emotional expressions. Therefore, this framework may not be the best organizational practice when it comes to monitoring the emotional and interpersonal developmental progress of employees within a group or team level. Lesson 3 The three fundamental goals that Curtis and Dreachslin (2008, p. 113) identified for diversity training programs in organizations include: (1) “to create awareness of discrimination and bias in an organization and use this awareness to improve the work environment for employees”; (2) “to look toward having employees acknowledge their biases and prejudices and then learn skills such as conflict management to address these biases to improve the organization’s work relationships”; and (3) “to recognize and capitalize on diversity as an asset that can improve individual and organizational performance”. There will always be some challenges associated with training a group of diverse employees. To be able to get a group of diverse employees to work as a team, the unit leader should always consider several factors like the trainees’ demographic profile (i.e. gender differences, racial differences, age gap, and educational background among others) (Curtis & Dreachslin, 2008, p. 122). In most cases, the presence of racial and/or cultural differences can make employees feel uncomfortable participating in group trainings. Therefore, the unit leader should be able to develop organizational culture that embraces cultural and racial diversity. As a common knowledge, the presence of gender, cultural or racial discrimination can lead to a weak management of diversity. In general, there are quite a lot of different strategies that can be used in promoting organizational diversity. Some leaders may choose to focus on using the best leadership approach when managing organizational diversity whereas others may simply choose to focus on creating organizational culture that is open to work diversity. Since all these strategies are equally important when managing work diversity, it makes sense that the best practice for diversity management is to use either an observational method or a 360o feedback loop as a way to keep track whether or not a set of diversity intervention is successful in terms of increasing organizational performance or not. Lesson 4 Social perception is all about giving other people a first impression with regards to the capabilities or strengths and weaknesses of each person. Even though social perception creates a first impression, a lot of internal and external factors can influence causal attribution. According to Kreitner and Knicki (2007, pp. 206 – 207), the “physical appearance, mannerisms, actions and reactions” of each person to a stimuli can be interpreted, stored in the memory, and result to either accurate or false judgement towards a person. To win the respect and strong support of each employee, managers should understand the importance of maintaining a good physical appearance, attitude and behaviour. The same concept can be applied when making important management decision-making. For example, the HR managers can decide whether or not an applicant is qualified for a job post based on their physical appearance, the way they respond to the interview questions and their overall attitude and behavior (p. 212). Even though a job applicant may not be that good looking, other internal factors such as having charisma or special talent can create causal attribution. Thus, affecting the final judgement of the HR manager. Andrea’s reports were accurate but one week late. To understand what is going on with Andrea, consistency based on Kelley’s attribution model should be used. The reason why it is more applicable to use consistency more than distinctiveness or consensus is because the concept of consistency is more focused on judging each employee’s work performance and its consistency over time (Dehhardt, Denhardt, & Aristigueta, 2009, p. 225). Consensus is more focused on comparing the behavior of one employee with another whereas distinctiveness is more focused on comparing the behavior of each employee on a given task (pp. 224 – 225). Therefore, distinctiveness and consensus is not applicable in the case of Andrea. The fact that Nathans performance is declining represents a low consistency. The fact that Nathan’s performance is declining but his peers managed to maintain the same performance represents low consensus. His peers’ performance has not changed represents low distinctiveness. The decline in Nathans performance is occurring on several tasks and has occurred for the past six months represents a high consistency (Dehhardt, Denhardt, & Aristigueta, 2009, pp. 224- 225). The fact that other employees’ managed to maintain the same work performance, Nathan’s supervisor should make internal attribution to explain his declining performance. If Nathan’s decline in performance is caused by external factors, then, his peers’ overall work performance should also decline. References Curtis, E., & Dreachslin, J. (2008). Integrative Literature Review: Diversity Management Interventions and Organizational Performance:A Synthesis of Current Literature. Human Resource Development Review, 7(1), 107-134. Dehhardt, R., Denhardt, J., & Aristigueta, M. (2009). Managing human behavior in public and nonprofit organizations. 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication. Griffin, R., & Moorhead, G. (2012). Organizational Behavior: Managing People and Organizations. Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning. Heath, C., & Sitkin, S. (2001). Big-B versus Big-O: What is organizational about organizational behavior? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 43-58. Kreitner, R., & Knicki, A. (2007). Organizational Behavior. 7th Edition. Boston: McGraw-Hill Irwin. Rothstein, M., & Burke, R. (2010). Self-Management and Leadership Development. Glos GL: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd. Shivers-Blackwell, S.L. (2004). Using Role Theory to Examine Determinants of Transformational and Transactional Leader Behavior. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 10(3), 41-50. Wilson, D., & Rosenfeld, R. (1990). Managing Organizations. London: McGraw Hill Book Company. Read More