Theory of Social Learning, NFs Work Performance - Case Study Example

UMАN RЕSОURСЕ МАNАGЕMЕNT Name: Course Instructor’s name Institution Date Scenario 1 Theories on team behavior Theories on team behavior do not look for trait that are inborn or abilities, instead they look into what is actually done by the leaders. In case success was defined in terms of actions that are describable then it could have been easier for people to act in a way that is the same. Behavioral theory assumes that leadership ability could be learned, instead of being inherent (Cartwright, 2002). Therefore this opens doors towards leadership development as opposed to psychometric evaluation that categorizes those with leadership potential from the ones that never had the chance. Thus the theories of behavior put emphasis on the learning of skills and facts which authorities for example managers have made a decision as being important. GS can employ the following theories in taking up the challenges to his new job (French and Schermerhorn, 2008). Theory of social learning According to this theory, change of behavior is determined by behavioral elements, personal, and environmental. Each of the factors influences the other factors. This theory will enable GS to influence the thought of his employees which in turn will impact their individual characteristics to elicit particular responses from the social environment (Derrington and Groom, 2004). In a like manner the environment of an individual will influence the development of individual traits in addition to the behavior of the person and at the same time the behavior of an individual might change the environment they are in together with the manner an individual feels or thinks. By this theory, reciprocal interactions amid those factors will be useful for GS in determining change of behavior. Learning theory This theory will help in modifying simpler behaviors through learning to develop complex behavior that will be significant to GS in carrying out his roles. It is worthy to note that individuals learn through duplication of behaviors they see in other people (Brabazon, 2016). Conversely, rewards are important to ensure the repetition of a behavior that is desired. When each simple behavior is developed via imitation and following reinforcement, the complex behavior is established in the organization. Establishment of verbal behavior will also assist GS to rule the employee through behavior of rule governed in creating a team environment. Theory of reasoned action This theory will enable in establishing assumptions that the people consider the consequences of a given behavior before doing that specific behavior (French and Schermerhorn, 2008). By this GS could be in a position of arousing the intentions of the individuals through perception of behavior either as negative or positive alongside the impression of the individual of the way the workplace views that similar behavior. In other words through the use of this theory intention could be shaped through social pressure and personal attitude and thus change of behavior (Wilson, 2003). Planed behavior theory This theory is useful to GS in developing his agendas as it will assist him to emphasize intention in the individuals who are not in control of any of the factors influencing the exact performance of behavior. Steps towards successful implementation of new customer service New customer service charter tends to focus on the skills that can be used (Brabazon, 2016). Therefore the steps towards the implementation of new customer service will entail: 1. First breaking down the information and skills to be implemented into small tasks or units. 2. Checking whether the employees are performing their duties regularly and provide feedback in addition to encouragement which will act a form of reinforcement. 3. Teach out what is expected to be done in the new customer service. The individuals will understand best when their focus is concentrated on the actual tasks that they are required to do. 4. The last step is to direct. Develop policies of what is expected to be done, and also develop training in which demonstration and drills form the most of the training (Tracy, 2013). Scenario 2 NF’s work performance might have decline due to the fact that he might have lost sense on how each members of the group are contributing to the objectives of the company. And by this some members in the team may have been rewarded for what they actually had not worked for. And this could be one of the sources of discouragement that may have demoralized the performance of NF. Another cause of the decline in the performance of NF could have been conflict among the individuals of the team members in the team reward system (Mondy, Noe and Gowan, 2005). Individuals usually seek recognition, acknowledgement and confirmation and want to feel secure and safe. But the big question is what happens when these are not fulfilled? What happens if the team members are not will to put much of their effort toward their work? This is the misguidance that results from such a rewarding system instead of individually. Such a rewarding system might have resulted into competition rather than cooperation. This could also have contributed to the declined performance of NF. This is the outcome of team reward, this is due to the fact that though cooperation and teamwork work in theory, it does not imply the same in the actual practice. Doing work corporately and getting group rewards together is efficient but in some instances it can become the contrary (Thorpe and Homan, 2000). Lack of motivation in the team which may resulted to social loafing (Mathis and Jackson, 2003). This reduces the desire to work together and the output an individual declines and the efforts of working together is little compared to that of working individually. Giving of rewards to groups by a company reduces the morale of some individuals who have the capability of working and generating less in teams than when working individually. In the event that a person, for instance, has greater expectation about a group member on her or him not performing well, the person’s tendency to loaf will decline (Wilson, 2003). This may have also been the reason that could have contributed to the decline in the performance of NF. Further individual systems that are not competitive disrupt any kind of teamwork, and when an individual hides his or behavior, the tendency of declined performance is the outcome. Therefore, such could have also led to the decline the performance. Also in case that the team attains the objectives of being given a reward, individuals in the team who do not struggle hard as the others or perform to realize the goals still are rewarded. This might have contributed to negative effects on the fellow workers in the team as an annoyance could be easily developed over such individuals who are not performing well enough (Erez, and Kleinbeck and Thierry, 2001). This could have contributed to the decline in the performance of NF as it may have caused him to feel as though he contributes and works more compared to the other members yet still gets little or profits as the other fellow team members do. Solution to the problem The problem can be alleviate by introducing rewarding systems, that motivate every individual in the organization feel comfortable and free to perform their best in their work (Armstrong and Armstrong, 2009). In the case that team work is implemented in an organization, then individuals that have the same qualities, abilities and attributes need to be grouped together so that the ones who are less hardworking do not demoralize the one that are industrious (Erez, Kleinbeck and Thierry, 2001). Fairness should also be practiced in order to reduce individual recognition and acknowledgement and confirmation. In addition a feeling of being secure and safe should be established in the organization so that every individual performs at his or her peak (Barrows and Neely, 2012). Further to get better results, an organization should develop a system of reward that is either purely team-based or purely based on individual rather than one which compensates at either level. This is due to the fact that when an individual works in a group, the individual wants to be rewarded as a team and if he or she works individually, then they prefer reward system based on individual (Mathis and Jackson, 2003). Scenario 3 Human resource decision The explanation of BD can be taken as not being reasonable and hence it will be unreasonable to allow BD to return to work. Explanation to the reasoning The reason behind this decision is based on the rules as stipulated by the company. To start with the incidences which befall BD are out of his individual takings. BD had presented a letter of abandonment of job that had already been received by the human resource and also he hand been previously absent from the job for a range of time. In addition, though in the past few years he had stopped drinking, presently BD is an alcoholic this is because the past life does not define the present. Further the events that befell him were out of his own doing. He drives a car that did not have a comprehensive insurance cover and when he gets an accident he is frightened by the financial loss which prompts him to start drinking. Rather he should have opted to get an alternative means of reinstating his financial position. Thus based on this reasoning and in addition to the rules of the organization, the human resource is justified to rule BD’s explanation as not being reasonable. References Armstrong, M. and Armstrong, M. (2009). Armstrong's handbook of human resource management practice. London: Kogan Page. Barrows, E. and Neely, A. (2012). Managing performance in turbulent times. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley. Brabazon, T. (2016). Play. Springer International Publishing. Cartwright, R. (2002). Mastering team leadership. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Derrington, C. and Groom, B. (2004). A team approach to behaviour management. London: Paul Chapman Pub. Erez, M., Kleinbeck, U. and Thierry, H. (2001). Work motivation in the context of a globalizing economy. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates. French, R. and Schermerhorn, J. (2008). Organizational behaviour. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Mathis, R. and Jackson, J. (2003). Human resource management. Mason, Ohio: Thomson/South-western. Mondy, R., Noe, R. and Gowan, M. (2005). Human resource management. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson Prentice Hall. Thorpe, R. and Homan, G. (2000). Strategic reward systems. Harlow, England: Financial Times/Prentice Hall. Tracy, B. (2013). Motivation. New York: AMACOM, American Management Association. Wilson, T. (2003). Innovative reward systems for the changing workplace. New York: McGraw-Hill. Read More