Impact of Behaviour on Organizational Deviance and Misbehaviors - Term Paper Example

Organizational Behaviour Name Institution Course Date Executive Summary The subject of organizational behavior has become of increased interest in modern businesses. The increased interest in the study of organizational behavior is triggered by businesses increased recognition of the fact that the behaviors of managers and employees have a direct impact on organizational performance. This reflective report has indicated that the behaviors of a manager has a direct impact on the managers approach to organizational deviance and misbehavior and how a manager deals with people with different personalities. According to the findings, deviance behavior is triggered by a number of factors that include stressful environment and the development of an organizational culture that celebrates deviance behavior. Additionally, the findings indicate that lack of ethics in management of an organization also promotes deviance behavior. At the same time, the reflective report indicates that different people have different personalities that have an influence in their behaviors and how they work. The personalities include openness (bring it on), extrovert, introvert, agreeable and rollercoaster personalities among others. Based on the analysis, the report suggests that managers take into account the personality of every employee they deal so as to increase satisfaction and productivity. Table of Contents Executive Summary 2 Table of Contents 3 1.0 Introduction 4 2.0 Analysis and Discussion 4 2.1 Impact of Behaviour on Organizational Deviance and Misbehaviors 4 2.2 Impact of Behaviour on Working with Different Personalities 8 3.0 Conclusion 11 References 12 1.0 Introduction The subject of organizational behavior has become of increased interest in modern businesses. The increased interest in the study of organizational behavior is triggered by businesses increased recognition of the fact that the behaviors of managers and employees have a direct impact on organizational performance (Parker & Ritson 2005, p. 176). Basically, to create an efficient business organization, it is important that managers of those organizations understand organizational behavior issues in an organization and how they are likely to impact the organization. Managers in particular play a critical role in ensuring the success of an organization. The key roles played by any manager include planning, staffing, organizing, leading, controlling and motivating. These roles are very important and have a direct impact on organizational performance (Wilson, 2014, p. 4). However, to perform these roles, managers do not work in isolation; rather has to work with teams. However, the behaviors displayed by a manager also have an impact on how followers would react in an organization. For this reason, it is suggested that managers need to displayed sets of behaviors that promote team work and inspire followers to increase their efforts to ensure the success of an organization. The objective of this paper is twofold. The paper will begin by reflecting on how manager’s behavior impacts on organizational deviance and misbehavior. The second part of the paper will reflect on how a manager’s behavior can impact the manner in which he approaches working with different personalities. 2.0 Analysis and Discussion 2.1 Impact of Behaviour on Organizational Deviance and Misbehaviors There is increased recognition that by observers that organizational deviance and misbehavior have not only become common, but also costly. Wilson (2014, p. 74) indicate the existence of many cases of sabotage, embezzlement of company funds and resources, misleading customers, cheating the government and harassing others among other forms of misbehaviors. However, whenever managers or employees misbehaves by engaging in activities that violate organizational policies, values and ethics, such businesses usually suffer not just financially, but also in terms of image. The term deviance behavior is defined as the behaviors that violate organizational policies, norms and internal rules (Bryant & Higgins 2010, p. 249). The term also means intentional desire to cause harm to an organization or in the workplace. Deviant behaviors are a commonplace thing in organization. According to Harper (1990), about 33-75% of employees have at one time or the other engaged in deviant behavior. As indicated earlier, there are many different kinds of deviant behaviors that employees usually engage in an organization. These include acts such as stealing, cyber loafing, and absconding duties or going slow among others. For instance, McGurn (1988) study found that at approximately 75% of workers have stolen from their employers. Bryant and Higgins (2010) study also found that there have been increased cases of employees engaging in technology-facilitated deviance behaviors, such as cyber loafing that targets their employers. The unfortunate thing, however, is that deviance behaviors are very costly to an organization whenever they occur (Wilson 2014, p. 14). The fact major effect of deviance behavior is that it affects the performance of an organization. For instance, when employees decide to reduce their effort or abscond duties in protest against harassment by the employer, this results in lower productivity, thus declined organizational performance. Deviance behaviors also impacts negatively on an organization as it can result in huge financial losses, such as in cases where an employee steals from the employer. The financial cost associated with workplace theft has been documented by Bourke (1994) and Murphy (1993) whose study found that employee organizational theft is costing employers an estimated $10-$120 billion every year. Additionally, deviance behavior cost an organization through reputation damage. However, from the coursework on organizational behavior, I have learned that the behaviors of managers have a direct impact on deviance and misbehavior in an organization. The behavior portrayed by a manager can promote the development of deviance behavior among employees or minimize the possibility of employees and teams developing deviance behavior Wilson (2014, p. 21) First, I have learned that deviance behavior can develop in an organization if a manager creates a stressful working environment for employees. There are behaviors that if demonstrated by a manager can create a stressful working environment for employees. First, I have learned that a manager can create a stressful environment for employees through the management style that the manager adopts in managing the team. According to behavioral theorists like Kirt Lewin, there are four main management styles adopted by managers. These include autocratic, democratic, and laissez-fare management styles. Autocratic management style is that kind of management approach in which the manager makes decisions unilaterally without involving the input of the subordinates (Adeniyi 2007, p. 12). Democratic management style is a management approach where the manager allows the subordinates to participate in the decision making process, though the final decision still rests with the manager. Lastly, Laissez-fare is a management style where the manager delegates all the decision making responsibilities to subordinates with expertise (Adeniyi 2007, p. 17). Nonetheless, of the three management styles, I have learned that the adoption of autocratic style is often associated with the emergence of deviance behavior among employees. Most employees have been shown to prefer working for employers who empower them to take part in the decision making process, such as democratic and laissez-fare managers (Parker & Ritson 2005, p. 178). For this reason, managers who adopt an authoritarian approach to manager are often seen as a dictator because they dictate to the employees everything to do. Autocratic leaders also keep close supervision on what the employees do without giving them room to think on their own (Ball & Wilson 2000, p. 541). However, this has the potential of promoting deviance behavior in an organization especially by employees who see this as dictatorship. For example, creative and innovative employees have been shown to have interest in working for employers who create room for creativity and autonomy as far as decision making and thinking are concerned (Bryant & Higgins 2010, p. 251). Therefore, autocratic management approach can result in deviance behavior by such employees who might construe such a management approach to create stress in their work environment and this might trigger low morale and dissatisfaction, thus resulting in behaviors such as go slow and laziness in an organization. Managers also play a role in the development of deviance behaviors through their influence on organizational culture. I have learned from the course that managers play a big role in the development of organizational culture. Organizational culture refers to a set of values, believes and norms that a group of people subscribe to, which shapes individual and group behavior (Wilson, 2014, p. 224). In the organizational context, organizational culture means ‘the way we do thing here.” The role of managers in creating a culture that promotes deviance behavior is demonstrated by Enron. Enron was one of the most successful American companies up to the late 90s when the company was rocked with financial scandal that brought it to its knees. Analysis of the events that led to the scandal at the company points to the fact that, the then CEO of the company Skiing created an organizational culture that promoted the acts of rule-bending through subversion of management controls. In this respect, it is noted from Enron that Skiing created a performance-oriented culture that institutionalized and embraced deviant behavior. For instance, the fact that Skiing tolerated creating risk-taking and “revolution” resulting in employees felt that they were free to circumvent the legal and ethical boundaries, which resulted in the company losing billions of dollars through fraud, effectively bring the company to its knees (Ball & Wilson 2000, p. 544). Therefore, from the Enron case, it emerges that the culture that a manager promotes in a company has an impact on the deviance behavior development. Ethics is another behavioral aspect that has an impact on organizational deviance and misbehavior. Ethic refers to the ability to separate the good from the bad. Behaviors that are considered acceptable is what is termed ethical behavior; otherwise unethical behavior. In the recent years, ethical leadership has become a topic of increased interest. Ethics is generating increased interest from observers, managers, industry analysts and scholars because ethics shape the behavior of people in an organization (Kanai 2009, p. 210). In this respect, evidences indicate that when a manager behaves in a responsible and upright manner, this would trickle down to the staff. This is justified by Robert K. Merton role model that that suggests that people often look at their superiors who demonstrate good behavior as their role models. At the same time, when superiors such as managers engage in unethical behaviors, this can make the subordinates to see unethical behaviors as being acceptable and a good thing thus resulting in deviance behavior in an organization (Bryant & Higgins 2010, p. 254). The influence of managers’ unethical behaviors on the development of deviance behaviors was demonstrated recently at the German largest automaker Volkswagen. In 2010, the CEO of the company, Martin Winterkorn was found that have engaged in an emission scandal in which he colluded with the company engineers to install an emission cheating device on its automobiles. Accordingly, this allowed more than 11 million cars to pass the tough United States emission tests despite the cars emitting more than the set standard. The scandal not only resulted in the recall of all the 11 million cars that were affected, but also resulted in massive financial and non-financial damage to the automaker. In this respect, it could be seen that, it was the fact that the CEO of the company believed that, to make huge profits, the company had to bend the environmental laws by engaging in unethical conducts. For this reason, it is evident that engaging in unethical behaviors by managers has a direct impact in the development of deviance behaviors. 2.2 Impact of Behaviour on Working with Different Personalities Managing people with different personalities is one of the most challenging tasks that managers face today. Every person is created uniquely and the personality of an individual has an impact on how the person behaves, responds to issues and work and even how they communicate (Wilson, 2014, p. 189). Besides, the modern workplaces have people from different generations, including baby boomers, Generation X and Generation Y all of which have different personalities. This implies that, for a business to success, managers must be able to understand the personalities of all the individuals they have in a company so as to be able to manage them effectively and contribute to increased productivity and organizational success. Research shows that failing to understand and manage the different personalities of individuals is a recipe to organizational failure. In a typical organization, there are six major personalities that might exist at any given time based on five factor model. These include openness, conscientious, extrovert, agreeable and emotional stability (Huy 2002, p. 40). Openness describes people who are open to new things and experiences and are interested in creativity and innovation (Wilson, 2014, p. 191). Individuals with a ‘bring it on’ attitude are said to be highly industry dependent. However, they cannot thrive in work environments slow-paced organizations and where creativity and innovation is curtailed (Ball & Wilson 2000, p. 549). Although there positive attitude towards work is invaluable asset, especially in time of uncertainties, the fact that they are fearless and are highly risk takers can made them different to manage. However, I have learned that the behavior of a manager cans an impact on how the manager would work with an employee with ‘bring it on’ attitude. Because employees with this kind of personality are highly creative and want work environments that promote creativity and innovation, they would not feel comfortable working in a company where managers control everything (Parker & Ritson 2005, p. 179). For instance, because autocratic managers are not willing to promote creativity by making unilateral decisions for everyone, this approach to management is likely to conflict with employees who posses openness attitude and this is likely to result in antagonism and even turnover because such employees cannot feel comfortable working with autocratic leaders (Mulholland 2004, p. 710). For this reason, it emerges that such employees are more likely to work effectively with managers who adopt democratic and laissez-fare management approaches, where they are allowed to come up with creative and innovative ideas (Huy 2002, p. 42). This suggests that, to work effectively with employees with a ‘bring it on’ attitude, managers need to adopt a more open and participative approach, where employees are not only involved in the decision making process, but also empowered to come to make autonomous decisions. Besides, it becomes clear from the description that employees with a ‘bring it on’ attitude are high risk takers. Accordingly, this affects the kind of behaviors that they expect to be demonstrated by managers in an organization. In this respect, because they are not afraid of uncertainties and risks, employees with openness personality they are comfortable working with managers who are risk-takers. Moore (2009, p. 651) noted that, although risk taking is an important trait that managers needs to possess because the business environment is all about uncertainties, there are some managers who are highly risk averse and would do everything to ensure that risks are minimized by preventing employees and an organization from undertaking risky projects. Evidently, managers who are highly risk averse would find it difficult working with employees with a ‘bring it on’ attitude because conflicts are likely to arise between the manager and the employee because of behavioral and personality differences. The other personally that managers usually encounter in any typical organization are the extroverts. Extroverts are people with outgoing personality who are willing to share idea and opinions (Wilson 2014, p. 190). These people are also assertive and are always looking for ways to interact with colleagues. From the coursework covered thus far, I have learned that extroverts are highly witty, clever, lively and energetic. However, the behavior of a manager certainly affects how he/she works with employees with extroversion personalities (Mulholland 2004, p. 713). First, because these employees are lively, outgoing and seeks to relate with colleagues, managers need to create a team work environment to make such employees comfortable. Team work is an element of organizational behavior that has a huge impact on organizational performance. It is stated that organizations where employees go along well as a team achieves greater success than those that promotes individualism because of the synergies that results from teamwork. As for an extrovert, being confined to a work environment where they work on their own without colleagues is likely to result in low morale, thus low productivity (Gratton &Ghoshal 2003, p. 214). Therefore, it is important that managers working with employees with extroversion personalities to ensure that they embrace team work by promoting teamwork in an organization; otherwise such employees might feel demoralized and result in turnover. Brainstorming is another feature displayed by employees with extroversion personalities. Therefore, this personality trait affects how they behave in an organization and the kind of management style they would be feeling comfortable with. As indicated earlier, there are different management styles that managers can use in managing the subordinates, including autocratic, democratic and laissez-fare. However, because extrovert employees prefer environments where they brainstorm and take part in decision making (Wilson, 2014, p. 194), adopting an autocratic management style would not suit such employees. This is because autocratic managers are sole decision makers and as such do not involve subordinates in the decision making process. Accordingly, a conflict is likely to emerge between an autocratic manager and extrovert employees who seek where their opinions can be appreciated and factored in when making decisions. For this reason, democratic and laissez-fare management styles are likely to have a positive impact when working with extroverts. This is because, these management styles appreciates the contributions of employees by involving then in brainstorming and coming up with a solution to issues affecting a company. Based on this, I am been made to understand that managers needs to adopt a participative management approach when dealing with extroverts in order to motivate and inspire them to bring their best rather than dictate to them everything. An organization can also have introverts and managers needs to be able to understand how their behaviors impacts on such employees so as to be able to properly manage employees with these kind of personality. Introverts are the opposite of extroverts as they are more reserved, but are focused and thoughtful. Such employees are commonly referred to as lone rangers because they thrive well when working independently as opposed to groups (Gratton &Ghoshal 2003, p. 211). This implies that to work effectively with introverts in an organization, managers must demonstrate behaviors that can be appreciated by such employees. For instance, managers must ensure that such employees are assigned roles that require such employees to execute on their role. Adopting a team work approach is likely to affect the morals of introverts thus making them loose interest in the job they have been assigned because introverts prefer doing their jobs by themselves without involving others (Adeniyi 2007, p. 24). Accordingly, as a manager, I would certainly ensure that I avoid putting introverts into teams in order to ensure that they produce their individual efforts, which they are comfortable with. However, supervision would be necessary to ensure that such employees do their jobs effectively. Additionally, in an organization, managers can have employees with rollercoaster or emotional stability personality. Rollercoaster people are those individuals who most often go through emotional rollercoaster. In an organizational setup, these are employees who are highly pessimistic and feel negative emotions most of the time. Such employees are highly temperamental and easily get upset even with simple things. As such, because they their behaviors are driven by mood swings, they are very difficult to work with. Besides, they have a negative attitude towards tasks Moore 2009, p. 681). Like other employees with other personalities, the behaviors of a manager would have an impact on how they deal with rollercoaster type of employees. In this respect, because rollercoaster employees are pessimistic and have a dislike for jobs, the best thing I would do as a manager is to use motivational strategies to inspire them to work hard to ensure the achievement of organizational goals. This includes avoiding dictating to them things because they get easily irritated and ensuring that there needs is met. 3.0 Conclusion The analysis indicates that deviance and misbehavior are some of the major issues that managers have to tackle through effective management. Deviance behaviors, such as theft not only have financial impacts on an organization, but also have the potential of damaging the reputation of an organization. However, the behaviors of managers such as management styles, and unethical leadership have a role in the development of deviance behavior. Additionally, the analysis has indicated that different people have different personalities that influence their behaviors in an organization. As such, managers need to ensure that personality of every employee is understood, embraced and proper management styles adopted in line with the personalities of the employees to ensure high motivation and satisfaction in the workplace. References Adeniyi, M. A 2007, Effective leadership management: An integration of styles, skills & character for today's CEOs. AuthorHouse, London. Ball, K., & Wilson, D. C 2000, “Power, control and computer-based performance monitoring: repertoires, resistance and subjectivities,” Organization Studies, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 539-565. http://ezproxy.lib.swin.edu.au/login?url=http://oss.sagepub.com/content/21/3/539.full.pdf+html Bourke, A. J 1994, “Get smart about getting ripped off”, HR Focus, vol.71, p.18. Bryant, M. & Higgins, V 2010, “Self-confessed ‘troublemakers’: An interactionist view of deviance during organisational change,” Human Relations, vol. 63, no. 2, pp: 249-277. http://hum.sagepub.com/content/63/2/249.full.pdf+html Gratton, L., & Ghoshal, S 2003, ‘Improving the quality of conversations,” Organizational Dynamics, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 209-223. http://ezproxy.lib.swin.edu.au/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0090-2616(02)00110-9 Harper, D 1990, “Spotlight abuse-save profits, “Industrial distribution, vol. 79, pp. 47-51. Huy, Q. N 2002, “Emotional balancing of organizational continuity and radical change: The contribution of middle managers,” Administrative science quarterly, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 31-69. http://ezproxy.lib.swin.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=6753469&site=ehost-live&scope=site Kanai, A 2009, “Karoshi (work to death)” in Japan,” Journal of business ethics, vol. 84, no. 2, pp. 209-216. http://ezproxy.lib.swin.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=36385926&site=ehost-live&scope=site McGurn, J 1988, “Spotting the thieves who work among us,” Wall Street Journal, March 7 p. A16. Mulholland, K 2004, “Workplace resistance in an Irish call centre: Slammin’, scammin’ smokin’ an’ leavin” Work, Employment & Society, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 709-724. http://ezproxy.lib.swin.edu.au/login?url=http://wes.sagepub.com/content/18/4/709.full.pdf+html Murphy, K. R 1993, Honesty in the workplace. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing. Wilson, F 2014, Organizational behaviour and work: A critical introduction 4th Ed. Oxford University Press: Oxford. Moore, S 2009, “No matter what I did I would still end up in the same position,” Age as a factor defining older women’s experience of labour market participation,” Work, Employment & Society, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 655-671. http://ezproxy.lib.swin.edu.au/login?url=http://wes.sagepub.com/content/23/4/655.full.pdf+html Parker, L. D., & Ritson, P. A 2005, “Revisiting Fayol: anticipating contemporary management” British Journal of Management, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 175-194. http://ezproxy.lib.swin.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=17922626&site=ehost-live&scope=site Read More