Business Management - Organisations and Behaviour - Assignment Example

Organisations and Behaviour Contents Task 3 1 3 2 3 3 4 Task 2 4 2 4 2.2 5 2.3 6 Task 3 6 3 6 3.2 7 3.3 8 4 8 4.2 9 4.3 9 References 10Task 1 1.1 Royal Dutch shell is a Netherlands based Oil and Gas Company. The organizational structure of the company is highly centralized. Most of the strategic decisions are being taken by the top management. Innovation and creativity is deep rooted into the culture of the organization. Social responsibility and customer centricity is also an important part of their organizational culture. For the purpose of this part of the paper, companies like Royal Dutch Shell and Indian Oil have been chosen. On the other hand, the organizational culture of Indian Oil Corporation is decentralized. Different strategic decisions are being made at different level of the organization. Profitability and inclusive growth is deep rooted into the culture of Indian Oil Corporation. As Royal Dutch Shell has highly centralized organizational structure, so the organization has very less hierarchy. On the other hand, Indian Oil Corporation is far more decentralized and so level of hierarchy is also high with the company. In case of Royal Dutch Shell span of control of management is high. But in case of Indian Oil Corporation span of control is less. 1.2 Relationship between organizational structure and culture can have significant impacts on the business performance of Royal Dutch Shell. The centralized organizational structure means that the different decisions are being taken by the top level management of the organizations. It has strong implications. As the organization structure is centralized, so top level management has firm control over the performance of the organization. It shows that the company’s top level management is highly and very much directly involved with the business performances of the organization. This kind of centralized organizational structure is very effective as far as the time and money is concerned. The organization has to spend less money in terms managing hierarchy and it can be directly reflected in the business performance of the company. It reduces the distance between management and employees of the company (Northouse, 2012). Employees can easily share their thoughts with the top level management. A suitable friendly organization culture prevails in Royal Dutch Shell, which increases business performances of the company. 1.3 There are lots of factors that influence individual behaviour at work. Abilities and skill is a very significant factor that influences individual behaviour in the organization (Schabracq, 2009). If abilities and skill levels are high then people feel confident about their works and it becomes very evident from their behaviour. Perception is also a very important factor that can influence individual behaviour at work place. Factors like attitude towards a work also influence individual behaviour at work (Edexcel Foundation, 2007). It shows how one person is responding towards a given task. Positive attitude of an individual towards a task is very much required for any organization. Working environment is also an important factor that influences individual behaviour at work. Working environment of Royal Dutch Shell is very good (Mullins, 2010). It encourages employees significantly and it motivates people in the organization to behave properly. Sense of values and ethics is also significant factor for the employees of the company. The workforce of the organization is highly guided by transparency and moral ethics. Task 2 2.1 Here in this section of the study two chosen organizations are Apple and Facebook. In case Apple, Steve Jobs was a visionary and charismatic leader. On the other hand in case of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg is a situational leader. In the past with the help of visionary and charismatic thinking, Steve Jobs has been able to take Apple to a separate level. It was possible by his visionary thinking and innovative mind set (Schein, 2010). On the other hand Founder of Facebook, Zuckerberg has shown situational leadership when he acquired very famous mobile application Whatsapp. It has changed the business scenario of Facebook. It is very clear from the above two organizations that they are related with different businesses. Leaders are different. Their leadership styles are very different but both leadership styles are very effective for their own organizations (Schyns and Meindl, 2005). Steve Jobs, being visionary charismatic leader always motivated his subordinates to go for innovations and creativity due to that Apple is one of the most significant innovation driven companies in the world. On the other hand, Mark Zuckerberg was able to understand the gravity of the situation very well and acquired rampaging Whatsapp. 2.2 Organizational theories underpin management practices greatly. Systems theory is such an organizational theory which underpins Apple in a significant manner (Singh, 2009). In the relevance with this theory the management of Apple is highly underpinned. The theory talks about the interconnection of different elements and their importance towards management practices. Over the years the management of Apple has always encouraged systematic thinking, shared vision and team learning. All these are very similar to the organizational theory called as Systems theory. In every aspect of management practises the organization has followed all these basic concepts. All the management decisions in Apple are being taken on the basis of these factors. The characteristics of Systems theory can be found in the management decisions of the organization. On the other hand in case of Facebook Contingency theory has its great influences. The management of the organization believes that there is no fixed way to organize. It also believes that no particular managerial action is suitable for all situations (Tavana, 2014). Different decisions of the company are the indicators that, the organization is greatly underpinned by this organizational theory i.e. Contingency theory. 2.3 Different approaches taken by Apple and Facebook are very much effective for these two organizations. Systems theory helps Apple to perform in a better manner in this highly competitive market. This approach has increased the loyal customer base of the company. It has awarded a global brand image to the organization. As the management of Apple over the years has encouraged team performances and individual excellence, so each and every employee has been able to contribute very significantly towards their common goals. It has increased the performance of the company. The management of Facebook has chosen contingency approach in their management practices. It has helped them immensely to fight against any contingency (Winkler, 2010). It has made the organization more prepared and ready to respond according to different uncertain market conditions. Task 3 Here in this section of the study the chosen organization is Apple. 3.1 Different leadership styles have different impacts on the motivation, especially when a company is going through some changes. Here Apple may consider situational leadership style during any change. Situational leadership style may have great impact on the motivational aspects of Apple. This kind of leadership will guide and motivate the whole organization to accumulate any changes. This kind of leadership style will inspire and motivate the whole organization to embrace different changes. This kind of leadership will prepare the organization for any upcoming change. Democratic leadership style also may be very suitable for Apple in periods of changes. In this leadership style, leaders of Apple can ask for lots of suggestions and advices from their subordinates. This kind of leadership facilitates thought sharing. It has great positive impact as far as managing motivation is concerned during the periods of changes. Here in this kind of leadership style, leaders of Apple can manage easy communication with their followers. Followers feel highly motivated as their advices are taken care of. In this way democratic leadership style may impact the organization in a very positive way during changes. 3.2 According to the motivational theory of Maslow’, low level employees and their psychological need should be taken as an important priority. Over the years the organization has applied it very professionally. It has fixed a level of average salary which takes care of psychological needs of low level employees and has ensured their survival. The organization also has provided a wide range of systems to maintain the safety and health needs of workers. It has developed health and safety standards in the organization. It has provided different trainings to employees to ensure their safety and security. The company very successfully has managed belonging level needs of motivation. It has provided assistance of social networks and good worker supervisor relationship. The organization has managed higher order motivational needs very appropriately. It has offered substantial financial bonuses to its executives. All these have satisfied esteem needs of work forces of Apple. It has also given the freedom of self actualization to the employees, where they are encouraged for innovation and creativity. Maslow’s theory shows the path to Apple for full-filling someone’s potential and Herzberg’s motivational theory talks about to get most out of an employee of Apple. These two motivational theories are significantly overlapping each other at lower level of needs. 3.3 Maslow’s motivational theory is significantly useful for the managers of Apple. It has helped the managers of the organization to understand different motivational needs of employees at different levels of the company (Ashkanasy, Wilderom and Peterson, 2011). Motivational factors generally differ at different levels of the organization. No single need is suitable for all levels of the company. It is very important for managers of Apple to identify different needs at different levels of the organization. That reason makes Maslow’s motivational theory more important for the management of Apple. Once, with the help of this theory different needs at different levels of the organization have been identified then the management can design their strategies for motivating the people (Gill, 2006). These strategies are very suitable and appropriate. It helps the organization to allocate their resources more intelligently. Apart from that, the management can motivate their people more successfully to achieve different objectives of the company. 4.1 Apple has very successful groups consisting of highly innovative and dedicated group members (Maxwell, 2009). People of all groups behave very systematically and have very positive attitude towards their works. All the groups try to maintain deep rotted organization culture. Being a learning organization all the groups of the company believe in continuous learning. As innovation is there in the DNA of the company, each and every group thinks out of the box to increase their efficiency and productivity. Mutual understanding and helping each other is also a positive aspect of all groups in the organization. 4.2 There are different factors that promote effective teamwork in Apple. Mutual trust is a very significant factor for Apple to promote effective teamwork in their organization. It helps the organization to share different responsibilities to different team members. Proper communication is utterly important for effective teamwork. It provides proper flow of information among all team members of the company. Different team building exercises are also very important for Apple to promote effective teamwork in their organization. 4.3 Technology has great impact on team functioning of Apple. Technology provides different facilities through which team members of Apple can perform long distance communication with each other. Technologies like video conferencing, cloud computing, mobile communication and email has impacted the team functioning of the company in a significant way. It has helped the team members of the organization to share their thoughts and also has helped them to solve a common problem very easily within very short period of time. References Ashkanasy, M. N., Wilderom, P. M. C. and Peterson, F. M. 2011. The Handbook of Organizational Culture and Climate. London: SAGE. Edexcel Foundation. 2007. BTEC First Business: Study Guide. London: Edexcel Foundation. Gill, R. 2006. Theory and Practice of Leadership. London: Pine Forge Press. Maxwell, C. J. 2009. Teamwork 101: What Every Leader Needs to Know. New York: Thomas Nelson Inc. Mullins, J. 2010. Managements & Organisational Behaviour. (Ninth Ed). Essex: Pearson Education. Northouse, P.G. 2012. Leadership: Theory and Practice. London: SAGE. Schabracq, J. M. 2009. Changing Organizational Culture: The Change Agents Guidebook. London: John Wiley & Sons. Schein, E. H. 2010. Organizational Culture and Leadership. London: John Wiley & Sons. Schyns, B and Meindl, R. J. 2005. Implicit Leadership Theories: Essays and Explorations. New York: IAP. Singh, K. 2009. Organizational Behaviour: Text and Cases. New Delhi: Pearson Education India. Tavana, M. 2014. Analytical Approaches to Strategic Decision-Making: Interdisciplinary Considerations. New York: IGI Global. Winkler, I. 2010. Contemporary Leadership Theories: Enhancing the Understanding of the Complexity, Subjectivity and Dynamic of Leadership. Copenhagen: Springer Science & Business Media. Read More