NOTES ON ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR

MPA 719 - ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR

Introduction

Organizational behavior is the study of the many factors that have an impact on how people and groups act, think, feel and respond to work and organizations, and how organizations respond to their environments (George & Jones, 2008).It is important to understand how people behave in an organization because most people work for an organization at some point in their lives and are affected both positively and negatively by their experiences on it. Organizational behavior matters because it can help you become more engaged organizational member, getting along with others, making more effective decisions and working effectively within an organization (Bauer, 2012). Organizational behavior consists of different aspects such as conflict, leadership, organizational culture, change, structure and development.

In a simple term, organisational behaviour refers to the behaviour of persons in an organisation.

Topics

1. Nature and functions of Organisational Behaviour

2. Level of Analysis of Organisational Behaviour

3. Genesis of Organisational Behaviour

4. Need for the Study of Organisational Behaviour

5. Goals of organisational behaviour

6. Organisational Goals

7. Personality Theories

8. Organisational Leadership

9. Organisational dynamics of change.

Recommended Textbooks

Handy, C. B. ( 1993 ). Understanding Organizations, ( Fourth Edition ) London : Penguin

Mullins . L. J ( 2000 ). Management and Organizational Behaviour, ( 4th Edition ) . London : Pitman Publishing.

Luthams, F. ( 1992 ) . Organizational Behaviour , ( Sixth Edition ) . New Jersey ; Mc Graw -Hill

NATURE AND FUNCTIONS OF ORGANISATIONAL THEORY

In a simple term, organisational behaviour refers to the behaviour of persons in an organisation. Everybody wants to understand others behaviour. Moreover, managers have been grappling with the idea of the channelisation of human energy towards the attainment of the organisational goals. The understanding of human behaviour play very important role in this endeavour as well. Thus, the study of organisational behaviour provides guidelines for influencing the behaviour of persons in the organisation.

Concept of Organisational Behaviour

To understand the concept of organisational behaviour, let us first take the two terms involved: organisation and behaviour.

Organisation is a place where two or more people work together in a structured way to achieve a specific goal or set of goals. Goals are fundamental elements of organisations. According to Gary Johns, (1980) organisations are social interventions for accomplishing goals through group efforts. Various environmental forces influence organisations. There are two types of environmental forces, vis: direct and indirect. Some of the main direct forces are: economic, technological, socio-cultural, political and international.

Behaviour is anything that the human being does. Behaviour is a response to stimulation that can be observed, thus, it is any response or reaction of an individual. The basic unit of behaviour is activity. According to Luthans, in understanding the variable, it is extremely important to separate the actual behaviour events from the outcomes of the events. Specific observable behavioural events and their patterns provide useful data in order to analyse the interaction, which precedes the behaviour and the consequences that follow the behaviour.

Behaviour provides many helpful insights into understanding the complexities of people‘s behaviour on the job. Organisational Behaviour is the study and application of knowledge about how people act within organisations. The key elements in an organisation are: people, structure, technology and external environment in which the organisation operates. When people join together in an or ganisation to accomplish an objective, some kind of structure is required. People also use technology to get the job done so there is an interaction of people, structure and

technology. In addition, these elements are influenced by the external environment, and they influence it.

According to Keith Davis(1980 ), Organisational Behaviour is an academic discipline concerned with understanding and describing human behaviour in an organisational environment. It seeks to shed light on the whole complex human factor in organisations by identifying causes and effects of that behaviour. According to Joe Kelly,(1970 ) Organisational Behaviour is the systematic study of the nature of organisations: how they begin, grow and develop, and their effect on individual members, constituent groups, other organisations, and large institutions.

According to Luthans, Organisational Behaviour is directly concerned with the understanding, prediction and control of human behaviour in organisations. According to Robbins, Organisational Behaviour is a field of study that investigates the impact that individuals, groups, and structure have on behaviour within organisations for the purpose of applying such knowledge towards improving an organisation‘s effectiveness. According to Baron and Greenberg, Organisational Behaviour is the field that seeks knowledge of behaviour in organisational settings by systematically studying individual, group, and organisational processes.

Organisational Behaviour focuses on five levels of analysis. They are:

o Individual behaviour;

o Interpersonal behaviour;

o Group behaviour and group dynamics;

o Organisational issues;

o Environmental issues.

Genesis of Organisational Behaviour

Behavioural science or Organisational Behaviour is not an elemental subject; rather it is like a compound subject, with integrated weaving of various disciplines. In modern terminology, Organisational Behaviour is an interdisciplinary approach to the study of human behaviour in organisations. The study of behaviour can be viewed in terms of various main disciplines. All disciplines have made an important contribution to the field of Organisational Behaviour.

These disciplines are:

Psychology:

Psychology is, broadly speaking, concerned with the study of human behaviour, with traits of the individual and membership of small social groups. The main focus of attention is on the individual as a whole person. Organisational Behaviour learns a great deal in issues like personality, perception, emotions, attitude, learning, values, motivation and job satisfaction etc. from the field of psychology.

Sociology: Sociologists are more concerned with the study of social behaviour, relationships among social groups and societies, and the maintenance of order. The main focus of attention is on the social system. Organisational Behaviour has developed by taking many issues from sociology. Some of them are: group dynamics, communication, leadership, organisational structures, formal and informal organisations, organisational change and development etc.

Social Psychology:

Social psychology examines interpersonal behaviour. The social psychologists are concerned with intergroup collaboration, group decision making, effect of change on individual, individual‘s responsiveness to change, and integration of individual needs with group activities.

Anthropology:

Anthropologists are more concerned with the science of mankind and the study of human behaviour as a whole. Issues like, individual culture, organisational culture, organisational environment, comparative values, comparative attitudes, cross-cultural analysis, are common to the fields of anthropology and organisational behaviour. As far as organisational behaviour is concerned, one of the main issues demanding attention is the cultural system, the beliefs, customs, ideas and values within a group or society, and the comparison of behaviour among different cultures. People learn to depend on their culture to give them security and stability, and they can suffer adverse reactions to unfamiliar environments.

Political Science:

Political science as a subject has many ingredients, which directly affect human behaviour in organisations since politics dominates every organisation to some extent. Certain themes of interest directly related to organisational behaviour are, power and politics, networking, political manipulation, conflict resolution, coalition and self-interest enhancement.

Public Administration:

Public Administration is the implementation of government policy and also an academic discipline that studies this implementation and prepares civil servants for working in the public service. As a "field of inquiry with a diverse scope" whose fundamental goal is to "advance management and policies so that government can function". Some of the various definitions which have been offered for the term are: "the management of public programs"; the "translation of politics into the reality that citizens see every day"; and "the study of government decision making, the analysis of the policies themselves, the various inputs that have produced them, and the inputs necessary to produce alternative policies."

Behavioral public administration is the analysis of public administration from the micro‐level perspective of individual behavior and attitudes by drawing on insights from psychology on the behavior of individuals and groups.

Economics:

Economic environment influences organisational climate. Organisational behaviour has learned a great deal from such economic factors as labour market dynamics, cost-benefit analysis, marginal utility analysis, human resource planning, forecasting and decision making.

Engineering:

Industrial engineering area has contributed a great deal in the area of man-machine relationship through time and motion study, work measurement, workflow analysis, job design, and compensation management. Each of these areas has some impact on organisational behaviour.

Medicine:

Behaviour issues like work-related stress, tension and depression are common to both: the area of medicine, and organisational behaviour.

Semantics: Semantics helps in the study of communications within the organisation. Misunderstood communication and lack of communication lead to many behaviour-related problems in the organisation. Accordingly, adequate and effective communication is very important for organisational effectiveness.

Need for the Study of Organisational Behaviour

A study of organisational behaviour is beneficial in many ways. Some of the benefits of studying organisational behaviour are listed below:

• It helps an individual understand oneself. It is a systematic study of the actions and attitudes that people exhibit within organisation.

• It helps managers in getting the work done through effective ways.

• It emphasises the interaction and relations between the organisation and individual

behaviour, thus making an attempt to fulfill psychological contract between individuals and the organisation.

• It helps to develop work-related behaviour and job satisfaction.

• It helps in building motivating climate.

• It helps in building cordial industrial relations.

• It helps in the field of marketing through deeper insight of consumer behaviour, and managing and motivating field employees.

• It helps in predicting behaviour and applying it in some meaningful way to make

organisations more effective.

It implies effective management of human resources.

It helps to improve functional behaviour leading to productivity, effectiveness, efficiency,

organisational citizenship, and also helps to reduce dysfunctional behaviour at workplace like

absenteeism, employee turnover, dissatisfaction, tardiness etc.

The study of organisational behaviour can be said to be most important contributor towards

building managerial skills. After studying this whole subject, you would realise that

contributions of organisational behaviour towards building the following skills and values are

unparalleled:

• Self development

• Personality development

• Development of human values and ethical perspective

• Managing stress and achieving mental hygiene

• Creative use of emotions

• Creating learning individual and learning organisation

• Managing creativity and innovation

• Motivation and morale

• Job satisfaction

• Effective communication

• Interpersonal effectiveness including persuasion, coaching, counselling, mentoring, goal setting, decision making, politicking, negotiation, conflict handling.

• Team building

• Leadership

• Creating effective organisational culture

• Managing change

• Continuous development through behavioural interventions.

There are mainly three goals of organisational behaviour:

Understanding behaviour:

• Which variables are important?

• How strong are they?

• How do they interrelate?

Predicting behaviour:

• What patterns of behaviour are present?

• What is the cause-effect relationship?

Controlling behaviour:

• What solutions are possible?

• Which variable can be influenced?

• How can they be influenced?

ORGANISATIONAL GOALS

Organisational goals are derived from the mission; corporate strategy is derived from the

organisational goals. Developing SMART Goals for your Organisation - You‘ve got to be very careful if you don‘t know where you‘re going, because you might not get there. Successful organisation set long and short terms goals for service development, and improving quality, reducing errors, becoming more customer-focused, better internal management and public relations. Individuals may set goals to achieve a personal objective such as career advancement just as Organisations can also set goals to achieve corporate success.

Defining “Goal”

A goal is a statement of a desired future an organisation wishes to achieve. It describes what the

organisation is trying to accomplish in strategic terms. Goals serve as an internal source of motivation and commitment and provide a set action as well as a means of measuring performance (Barton, 2000). Defining organisational goals helps to conceptualise and the future direction of the organisation, thus allowing those responsible for setting that direction to develop a common understanding of the organisation and where it is heading. Goals provide a way of assuring that an organisation will get to where it wants to go.

Setting Goals

How goals are set is as important as the goal itself. Thus, it is important that goals meet

specific criteria that can be used to ease them. One way of doing this is to use the ―SMART as a way of evaluating the goal.

SMART goals provide a greater framework to improve your goal setting. SMART GOALS mean:

• Specific

• Measurable

• Attainable

• Relevant

• Time-bound

Specific:

A goal is specific when it provides a description of what is to be accomplished. A specific goal

is focused goal. It will state exactly what the organisation intends to accomplish. While the

description needs to be specific and focused; it also needs to be easily understood by those

involved in its achievement.

It should be written so that it can be easily and clearly communicated. A specific goal will make

it possible for those writing objectives and action plans to address the following questions:

• Who is to be involved?

• What is to be accomplished?

• Where is it to be done?

• When is it to be done?

Measurable:

A goal is measurable if it is quantifiable. Measurement is accomplished by first obtaining or

well as benchmarks to measure progress along the way.

A measurable goal states questions such as:

• How much?

• How many?

• How will you know when it is accomplished?

Attainable:

There should be a realistic chance that a goal can be accomplished. This does not mean or imply

that goals should be easy. On the contrary, a goal should be challenging. It should be set by or

in concert with the person responsible for its achievement.

The question of leadership, and where appropriate its stakeholders, should agree that the goal is

important and that appropriate time and resuscitate and focused on its accomplishment. An

attainable goal should also allow for flexibility. A goal that can no longer be achieved should be

discarded or abandoned.

Relevant:

Goals should be appropriate to and consistent with the mission and vision of the organisation.

Each goal adopted by the organisation should be one that moves the organisation toward the

achievement of its vision. Relevant goals will not conflict with other organisation goals.

As noted earlier, goals are set by or in concert with the person responsible for achievement. It is

important that all short term goals must be relevant (e.g. consistent) with the longer-term and

broader goals of the organisation.

Time-bound:

Once a timeline is set, it helps to focus effort toward the achievement of such task or goal.

PERSONALITY THEORIES

Individuals are unique in terms of their skills, abilities, personalities, perceptions, attitudes,

values and ethics. These are just a few of the ways individuals may be similar to or different because no two individuals are completely alike. Managers face the challenge of working with

people who possess a multitude of individual characteristics, so the more managers understand

individual differences, the better they can work with others. This idea has been developed by the interactional psychology approach (Lewin, 1951).

Basically, this approach says that in order to understand human behaviour, we must know

something about the person and something about the situation. There are four basic propositions of interactional psychology, namely:

1. Behaviour is a function of a continuous, multidirectional interaction between the person

and the situation.

2. The person is active in this process and both is changed by situations and changes

situations.

3. People vary in many characteristics, including cognitive, affective, motivational, and

ability factors.

4. Two interpretations of situations are important: the objective situation and the person‘s

subjective view of the situation.

Figures showing Variables influencing Individual Behaviour

Personality

Personality is an individual difference that lends consistency to a person‘s behaviour.

Personality is defined as a relatively stable set of characteristics that influence an

individual’s

there are several origins. One determinant is heredity, and some interesting studies have

supported this position. Identical twins who are separated at birth and raised apart in very

different situations have been found to share personality traits and job preferences. For example,

about half of the variation in traits like extraversion, impulsiveness and flexibility was found to

be genetically determined, that is, identical twins who grew up in different environments shared

these traits. In addition, the twins held similar jobs. Thus, there does appear to be a

genetic

Another determinant of personality is the environment a person is exposed to. Family

influences, cultural influences, educational influences, and other environmental forces shape

personality. Personality is, therefore, shaped by both heredity and environment.

Personality Theories

Four major theories of personality are the trait theory, psychodynamic theory, humanistic theory

and the integrative approach. Each theory has influenced the study of personality in

organisations.

Trait Theory

Some early personality researchers believed that to understand individuals, we must break down

behaviour patterns into a series of observable traits. According to trait theory, combining these

traits into a group forms an individual‘s personality.

Gordon Allport, a leading trait theorist, saw traits as broad, general guides that lend consistency

to behaviour (Gross et. al., 1958). This definition is predicated upon thousands of traits which

have been identified over the years. Gattell, another prominent trait theorist, identified sixteen

traits that formed the basis for differences in individual behaviour. He described traits in bipolar

adjective combinations such as self-assured/apprehensive, reserved/outgoing and

submissive/dominant.

More recently, researchers have argued that all traits can be reduced to five basic factors. The

―big five‖ traits include extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability and

openness to experience (Taylor, 1912). Although there is evidence to support the existence of

the big five traits, research is needed to see whether these five traits actually predict behaviour.

Psychodynamic Theory

Based on the work of Sigmund Freud, psychodynamic theory emphasises the unconscious

determinants of behaviour (Kets and Miller, 1986). Freud saw personality as the interaction

between three elements of personality; the ID, Ego and Superego. The ID is the most primitive

element, the resource of drives and impulses that operates in an uncensored manner. The

Superego, similar to what we know as conscience, contains values and the ―should and should

The compromises, and the results is the individual‘s use of defense mechanisms such as denial of

reality. The contribution of psychodynamic theory to our understanding of personality is its

focus of unconscious influence on behaviour.

Humanistic Theory

Carl Rogers believed that all people have a basic drive toward self-actualization, which is the

quest to be all you can be. The humanistic theory focuses on individual growth and

improvement. It is distinctly people-centred and also emphasises the individual‘s view of the

world. The humanistic approach contributes an understanding of the self to personality theory

and contends that the self concept is the most important part of an individual‘s personality.

Integrative Approach

Recently, researchers have taken a broader, more integrative approach to the study of

personality. To capture its influence on behaviour, personality is described as a composite of the

individual‘s psychological processes. Personality dispositions include emotions, cognitions,

attitudes, expectancies and fantasies (Elkind, 1931).

Dispositions, in this approach, simply mean the tendencies of individuals to respond to situations

in consistent ways. Influenced by both genetics and experiences, dispositions can be modified.

The integrative approach focuses on both person (dispositions) and situational variables as

combined predictors of behaviour.

Locus of Control

An individual‘s generalised belief about internal (self) versus external (situation or others)

control is called locus of control (Foss and Rothenberg, 2007). People who believed they

control what happens to them are said to have an internal locus of control, whereas people who

believe that circumstances or other people control their fate have an external locus of control.

Research on locus of control has strong implications for organisations. Internals (those with an

assume managerial positions, and to prefer participative management styles. In addition,

internals have been shown to display higher work motivation, hold stronger beliefs that effort

lead to performance, receive higher salaries and display less anxiety than externals (those with an

external locus of control) (Ilgen, 1990).

Knowing about locus of control can prove valuable to managers, because internals believe that

they can control what happens to them, they will want to exercise control in their work

environment. Allowing internals considerable voice in how work is performed is important.

Internals will not react well to being closely supervised. Externals, in contrast, may prefer a

more structured work setting, and they may be more reluctant to participate in decision making.

Self-Esteem

Self-esteem is an individual‘s general feeling of self-worth. Individuals with high self-esteem

have positive feelings about themselves, perceive themselves to have strengths as well as

weaknesses, and believe their strengths are more important than their weaknesses. Individuals

with low self-esteem view themselves negatively. They are more strongly affected by what other

people think of them, and they compliment individuals who give them positive feedback while

cutting down people who give them negative feedback (Shambaugh, 2001).

A person‘s self-esteem affects a host of other attitudes and has important implications for

behaviour in organisations. People with high self-esteem perform better and are more satisfied

with their job. When they are involved in a job search, they seek out higher-status job. A work

with lower average self-esteem.

Very high self-esteem may be too much of a good thing. When people with high self-esteem

find themselves in stressful situations, they may brag inappropriately. This may be viewed

negatively by others, who are spontaneous boasting as egotistical.

Self-Efficacy

An individual‘s believes and expectancies about his or her ability to accomplish a specific task

effectively are known as self-efficacy. Individuals with high self-efficacy believe that they have

the ability to get things done, that they are capable of putting forth the effort to accomplish the

task, and that they can overcome any obstacles to their success. There are four sources of self-

efficacy: prior experiences, behaviour models (witnessing the success of others), persuasion from

other people and assessment of current physical and emotional capabilities. Believing in one‘s

own capability to get something done is an important facilitator of success. There is strong

evidence that self-efficacy leads to high performance on a wide variety of physical and mental

tasks (Dickson, 1939). High self-efficacy has also led to success in breaking addictions,

increasing pain tolerance and recovering from illnesses.

Self-Monitoring

A characteristic with gr eat potential for affecting behaviour in organisation is self-monitoring. ,

that is, the extent to which people base their behaviour on cues from people and situations. High

self-monitors pay attention to what is appropriate in particular situations and to the behaviour of

other people, and they behave accordingly. Low self-monitors, in contrast, are not as vigilant to

situational cues and act from internal states rather than paying attention to the situation. As a

result, the behaviour of low self-monitors is consistent across situations. High self-monitors,

because their behaviour varies with the situation, appear to be more unpredictable and less

consistent.

Researches currently focusing on the effects of self-monitoring in organisations revealed as

follows: In one study, the authors tracked the careers of 139 MBAs for five years to see whether

high self-monitors were more likely to be promoted, change employers, or make a job-related

geographic move. The results were ―yes‖ to each question. High self-monitors get promoted

because they accomplish tasks through meeting the expectations of others. However, the high

self-monitor‘s flexibility may not be suited for every job, and the tendency to move may not be

the same for every organisation (Frandi and Bell, 2000).

Understanding Cultural Differences

One of the keys for any company competing in the global market place is to understand the

diverse cultures of the individuals involved. Whether managing culturally diverse individuals within a single location or managing individuals at remote locations around the globe, an

appreciation of the differences among cultures is crucial.

Individualism versus Collectivism

In cultures here individualism predominates, people belong to loose social frameworks, but their

primary concern is for themselves and their families. People are responsible for taking care of

their own interests. They believe that individuals should make decisions. Cultures characterized

by collectivism are tightly knit social frameworks in which individual members depend strongly

on extended families and clans. Group decisions are valued and accepted.

The North American culture is individualistic in orientation. It is a ―can-do‖ culture that values

individual freedom and responsibility. In contrast, collectivist cultures emphasise group welfare

and harmony. Israeli and the Japanese cultures are examples of societies in which group loyalty

and unity are paramount. Organisation charts show these orientations. In Canada and the United

States, which are individualistic cultures, organisation charts show individual positions. In

Malaysia, which is a collectivist cultures, organisation charts show only sections or departments

(Redding and Martyn-Johns, 1979).

This dimension of cultural differences has other workplace implications. Individualistic

managers, as found in Great Britain and the Netherlands, emphasise and encourage individual

achievement. In contrast, collectivistic managers, such as in Japan and Colombia, seek to fit

harmoniously within the group. They also encourage these behaviours among their employees.

Masculinity versus Femininity

In cultures that are characterised by masculinity, assertiveness and materialism are valued. Men

should be assertive, and women should be nurturing. Money and possessions are important and

performance is what counts. Achievement is admired. Cultures that are char acterised by

assume both assertive and nurturing roles. Quality of life is important, and people and the to

environment are emphasised.

Masculine societies, such as in Austria, define gender roles strictly. Feminine societies, in

contrast, tend to have gender roles that are blurred. Women may be the providers, and men may

stay at home with the children. The Scandinavian countries of Norway, Sweden and Denmark

exemplify the feminine orientation.

Time Orientation

Cultures also differ in time orientation, that is, whether the culture‘s values are oriented toward

the future (long-term orientation) or toward the past and present (short-term orientation). In

China, a culture with a long-term orientation, values such as thrift and persistence, which focus

on the future, are emphasised. In Russia, the orientation is short-term. Values such as respect

for tradition (past) and meeting social obligation (present) are emphasised.

Traditional and New Approaches to Organisational Behaviour

Study of human behaviour, being a part of general management, can be traced back to 4,000 B.C, when the Egyptian pyramids were built or even the dawn of mankind when people hunted in groups and protected their families or communities against hostile environmental forces.

However, for the purpose of our study, we need to evaluate how organisational behaviour developed during the last two centuries.

• The Scientific Management Theories and the School: mainly developed by Frederick W.

Taylor, H.L. Gnatt, Franker and Lillian Gilberth.

• Classical Organisation Theory School: mainly developed by Henri Fayol, Max Weber, Mary

Parker Follet, Chester Barnard.

• The Human Relations School: mainly developed by Abraham Maslow, Douglas McGregor, James March, Herbert Simon.

• The Systems Approach.

• The Contingency Approach.

• Contemporary Approach.

After studying the historical development of organisational theories, you might have noticed that

with passage of time, the following issues occurred:

• Human factor became more important successively.

• Focus shifted from individual performance to both individual as well as group (team) performance.

• Emphasis given on actualizing the human potential.

• Emphasis on developing managerial and human skills on continuous basis.

• Emphasis on human relationship and informal organisation.

• Emphasis on creating synergy through teamwork.

• Treating employees with more dignity as a wholesome person.

• Increasing importance to environmental factors influencing organisation.

• Importance to psychological contract between individuals and organisation.

• Increasing concern for people in organisation.

• Continuous effort to establish effective organisational culture and climate.

According to Robert Baron, four major features characterise modern organisational behaviour.

They are:

• It has adopted a somewhat more positive view of human being in work settings than prevailed in the past.

• By drawing on several related fields, it has attained a degree of sophistication about human behaviour.

• It has adopted a contingency approach to behaviour in organisation – assuming that there is nothing like permanent way of arriving at a particular solution effectively.

• It is integrative in nature. It seeks to comprehend behaviour in organisations by combining information from several different levels of analysis.

Apart from the description above, modern organisational behaviour is concerned with the issues like: managing intelligence quotient, emotional quotient, and spiritual quotient, improving mental hygiene and overall health of members, continuous improvement of skills and values through training, managing ethical practices, accomplishing fulfillment of psychological contract between individuals and the organisation, quest for quality, behavioural intervention in merger and acquisition as well as in rightsizing, cross-culture management, managing multinational

organisations etc.

According to modern thoughts on organisational behaviour, it is necessary to understand the interrelationships between human behaviour and other variables, which together comprise the total organisation. These variables provide parameters within which a number of interrelated dimensions can be identified – the individual, the group, the organisation, and the environment – which collectively influence behaviour in work organisations.

Individual Perspective

Organisational behaviour deals with individual behaviours in organisations, apart from dealing with group behaviours and behaviours in organisations. You will get exposure to individual perspective of organisational behaviour in detail as the study continues. However, it should be clear to you now that there is need to find answers to the following: Why we study individual perspective of organisational behaviour? An organisation is as good as its people. For organisations to grow continuously there is need for keeping its individuals growing through the following measures:

1. Continuous learning;

2. Creating right perception;

3. Building positive attitudes and values;

4. Having personality and emotions compatible at workplace;

5. Maintaining stress-free individuals and environment;

6. Keeping individuals and teams motivated and providing job satisfaction.

These are discussed individually below:

1. Continuous learning:

There are many ways through which an individual learns. Learning is any permanent change in behaviour, or behaviour potential, resulting from experience. In order to be effective, organisations need to promote that behaviour, which are functional and need to discourage that behaviour, which are detrimental to effective organisation. The ways learning take place and the methods through which learning can be converted

2. Creating right perception:

Perception is the process through which we select, organise and interpret input from our sensory receptors. Your five senses (eyes through sight, ears through audition, nose through smell, mouth or tongue through taste, and skin through touch) are continuously gathering information from your surroundings. Now, it is your perception, which gives meaning to various combination of information that

you gather. The field of organisational behaviour helps to create right perception, which is pre-requisite for working effectively with people.

3. Building positive attitudes and values:

Attitudes are lasting evaluations of people, groups, objects, or issues – in fact, of virtually any aspect of the social or physical world. Positive attitudes are important ingredient of effective relationship. Values are the basic convictions that a specific mode of conduct or end-state of existence is personally or socially preferable to an opposite or adverse mode of conduct or end-state of values in organisational behaviour.

4. Having personality and emotions compatible at workplace:

Personality is an individual’s unique and relatively stable patterns of behaviour, thoughts and feelings. There is need in organisations to create a right combination of person and job, so that full potential of an individual can be utilised. According to the requirements of the work, personality can also be developed.

Emotions are reactions consisting of subjective cognitive states, physiological reactions, and expressive behaviours. Cognition is the mental activities associated with thought, knowledge, and memory. An understanding about emotions helps for self-development of individuals.

5. Maintaining stress-free individuals and environment:

Stress is a dynamic condition in which an individual is confronted with an opportunity, constraint, or demand related to what he or she desires and for which the outcome is perceived to be both uncertain and important. With growing competition and survival, and excellence becoming tougher, stress is the managerial discomfort of modern era.

6. Keeping individuals and teams motivated and providing job satisfaction:

Motivation can be described as perhaps the most important intangible resource of the organisation. Motivation is an inferred internal process that activates; guides and maintains behaviour over time. Job satisfaction is a general attitude towards one‘s job. It also depends on the difference between the amount of rewards workers receive and the amount they believe they should receive.

Small and Large Group Perspective

In an organisation, an individual does not exist alone. Plurality of people is the essential ingredient of an organisation.

An organisation makes continuous effort to create synergy in the group or team, in order to make the team more productive and more effective. Some of the important measures that organisational behaviour suggests at group level interventions are:

1. Group formation and structure;

2. Communication;

3. Conflict management;

4. Team building and leadership; and

5. Power and politics.

• Group Formation and Structure:

Group explains the situation where two or more individuals are interacting and

interdependent, who have come together to achieve particular objectives. It deals with issues like, how groups are formed, how groups develop, when groups become more effective, what are the undercurrents of group dynamics, and how group decisions are taken.

• Communication:

Communication deals with transference and understanding of meaning. Organisations make effort through formal structure as well as through informal interaction to establish sound communication system within and outside organisation. Establishing effective communication climate through right attitude of people and through modern technology is the subject of subsequent sections in this Unit.

• Conflict Management:

Conflict is a process that begins when one party perceives that another party has negatively affected, or is about to negatively affect, something that the first party cares about. Conflict may arise at various levels, like within the person (intrapersonal level), between two persons (interpersonal level), intradepartmental level, interdepartmental level, inter-organisational level etc. Conflict is not necessarily bad, as it promotes difference of opinions, which may help for improving quality of decision. Skillful managers make creative use of conflict by turning challenges into opportunities.

• Team Building and Leadership: These two are highly sought after issues of organisational behaviour. Team building leads to high interaction among team members to increase trust and openness. For team building, effective leadership styles are required. Leadership is the ability to influence a group toward the achievement of goals.

• Power and Politics:

Some amount of pushes and pulls are inevitable where more than two persons exist.

Individual tends to exercise power to influence behaviour of others, so that others act in accordance with the wishes of the individual. Political behaviour deals with use of informal networking to make an attempt to influence others. When others are influenced for narrow gains, politics is dysfunctional, but when influence is used for achieving overall goals in larger interest, political behaviour is functional, and also desirable for organisation.

Organisational Perspective

Organisational perspective of organisational behaviour deals with larger issues of the organisations. Such issues influence an organisation in broader ways. Organisational perspective of organisational behaviour deals with the following issues:

1. Organisational culture and climate;

2. Organisational change; and

3. Organisational development.

Organisational culture and climate:

Organisational culture explains a common perception held by the organisation‘s members. It depicts a system of shared meaning. A sound culture leads to conducive organisational climate. For long term effectiveness, organisations need to investigate into, as well as need to take measures for improving organisational climate and culture.

Organisational change:

Now, the mantra itself has changed. We are passing through shorter duration

of stability. In subsequent discussions, you will learn about strategies to implement change management for building effective organisations.

Organisational development:

Organisational development explains collection of planned-change interventions, built on humanistic-democratic values that seek to improve organisational effectiveness and employee well-being. Such interventions may be applied at individual level, group level as well as organisational level.

Integrative Perspective

As individuals do not exist in isolation, organisations also do not exist in isolation. There is constant influx of environmental impact on organisations which in turn stimulate behaviour pattern within the organisation. The boundaries of organisations are becoming more transparent rather than more fragile. Organisations are required to focus on many emerging issues.

Some of them are:

• Continuous improvement of people and process.

• Integrating human factor with grand objectives of the organisation.

• More emphasis on quality of products, services and process.

• Restructuring to suit requirements of service organisations, taskforce teams, as well as, in the case of rightsizing and acquisition and merger.

• Managing diversity.

• Product innovation.

• Managing creativity and innovations.

• Cross-cultural management.

• Managing multinationals.

A CONCEPTUAL MODEL OF HUMAN BEHAVIOUR

Before discussing this topic, perhaps it is necessary to ask the following questions so as to give

learners a better understanding of issues that might be raised:

• What separates human from animal or other objects in the universe

• What are people really like?

• What is their real nature?

These questions have been debated since the beginning of civilization. Philosophers, politicians,

scientists, managers and the person on the street have begun and still are preoccupied with these

questions. Are people good or evil, rational or irrational, free or determined? The true nature of

human behaviour is largely undefined and still open for discussion and research. Is nothing

known about human behaviour? Whether scholar or pay person, ever yone has had abundant

experience in living and dealing with, reading about and observing fellow human beings.

Everyone has a definite opinion about common-sense approaches to human behaviour, and when

understanding, not an evaluating approach to the overall nature of human behaviour. These

models serve as important background information for developing a specific model for

organisation behaviour.

3.2 Freudian Psychoanalytic Model

The Freudian approach relies on a psychoanalytic or conflict model of humans. The conception

of people being in constant inner conflict is one of the oldest explanations. The conflict model

portrayed primitive – constant inner struggle between good and evil.

Good (angels) and evil (devils) were believed to be competing for the domination of the body

and soul. Under this model, individuals are merely innocent by standards and the situation

completely overwhelms them. Obviously, the primitive good-evil conflict model cannot be

substantiated by scientific methodology.

A meaningful, comprehensive and systematically-based conflict model stems from the theories

of Sigmund Freud. These theories can be summarised into what can be called the

Psychoanalytic model. Although, Freud is most closely associated with the model, others such

as Carl Jung, Alfred Adler, Karen Honey and Eric Erom, made additional contributions and

extended the model.

Clinical techniques were used primarily to develop the psychoanalytic model. Though the

clinical techniques of free association and psychotherapy. Freud noted that his patient‘s

behaviour could not always be consciously explained. This clinical finding led him to conclude

that the major motivating force in human is unconscious in nature. The personality structure can

be explained within the unconscious framework. Freud‘s belief was that of three interrelated, but

often conflicting psychoanalytic concepts, namely: the ID, the Ego and the Super Ego.

3.2.1 The I.D.

The ID is the core of the unconscious. It is the unleashed, raw, primitive, instinctual drive of the

Freudian model. The ID, constantly struggling for gratification and pleasure, is manifested

mainly through the libido (sexual urges) or aggression. The libido strives for sexual relations

and pleasure, but also for warmth, food and comfort. Aggressive impulses of the ID are

the ID incorporates life instincts that compete with its death instincts. As individuals develop and mature, they learn to control the ID, but even then, it remains a driving force throughout life

and an important source of thinking and behaving.

3.2.2 The Ego

Whereas the ID represents the unconscious, the ego is the conscious. It is the logical part of the

Freudian model and is associated with the reality principle. The ego keeps the ID in check

through the reality of the external environment. The ego is constituted so that it can interpret

reality for the ID through intellect and reason. Instrumental behaviours such as: dating or

looking for food are developed by the ego to satisfy the needs of the ID.

However, many conflict situations arise between the ID and the Ego because the ID demands

immediate pleasure while the ego dictates denial or postponement to a most appropriate time and

place. In order to resolve the conflict, the ego gets support from the superego.

3.2.3 The Super Ego

conscience. The superego, as the conscience, provides the norms that enable the ego to

determine what is right or wrong. Absorption of the cultural values and morals of a society

develop from the conscience. Accordingly, the parents have the most influence on the

development of the superego.

The superego aids the person by assisting the ego to combat the impulses of the ID. However, in

some situations, the superego can also be in conflict with the ego. An example is the

situation

ego and superego cause this to be considered a conflict model of behaviour.

3.2.4 The Freudian Model in Perspective

Freud‘s model is characterised b y the conflicting personality constructs (ID, Ego, Superego) and

unconscious motivation. Psychological adjustment occurs only when the ego properly develops

to resolve the conflicts stemming from the ID and Superego. The ego concept implies that

humans are rational, but the ID, the Superego and unconscious motivation give the impression

that humans are very irrational.

In the Freudian model, behaviour is based on emotion. If the personal cannot control the ID, the

person is an aggressive, pleasure-seeking menace to the society. On the other hand, if the ID is

abnormal sex life and be extremely passive (frigid). Moreover, if the Superego is very strong, the

result may be acute anxiety and guilt.

Criticism of Freudian model is not based on empirical verifiable facts because the psychoanalytic

elements are largely hypothetical constructs and not measurable, observable items for scientific analysis and verification.

Existentialistic Model

Existentialism, broadly defined as the search for meaning, is based on the analysis of existence

and being. The existentialistic model is not a behavioural science. Its root lies more in the realm

of philosophy and literature and not scientifically based. Among the philosophers with an

existentialist orientation are Martin Heidegger, Martin Huber and Jean-Paul Satre. The best

known American spokesman has been Rollo May, Mayland Satre in particular, have been critical

of the scientific approaches that are employed to gain an understanding of humans. They are

afraid that a scientific behavioural analysis may destroy or lose sight of the person‘s true nature

or Being. Existentialists see a breakdown of traditional norms and ties that individuals have

traditionally had with the society. For example, Rollo May views people as suffering from

unconstructive anxiety. He defines ―unconstructive‖ or ―neurotic‖ anxiety as the ―stringing of

consciousness, the blocking off of awareness, and when it is prolonged, it leads to a feeling of

depersonalization and apathy‖, which is the state, to a greater or lesser degree, of most who have

lost, or never achieved the experience of their own identity of the world. In modern times, the

individual is faced with a very large, urbanized environment. The existentialists believe that

depersonalizing effects of this environment force individuals to determine their own destiny.

People shape their own identify and make the ―existence‖ meaningful and worthwhile to

themselves. This process is accomplished through the individual‘s experience of being, in

Coleman‘s views, this being as a matter of commitment to increased self-awareness and self

direction to true communication with others, to concern with values and evaluation, and to

acceptance of the responsibility for making choices and directing his own destiny.

The emphasis attached to self-awareness and action in the existential scheme is different from

that in the psychoanalytic model. Existential people seek self-awareness, direction and control.

The existentialist approach maintains that people have freewill to chart their existence and being.

3.3.1 The Impact of Existential Model

The existentialist approach becomes very relevant in a society suffering from environmental and

moral decay. In a world that is overpopulated, undernourished, polluted, ravaged by war and

crime with poverty rampant amidst affluence and material excess, it is extremely difficult for an

individual to carve out a meaningful existence. Similarly, on a micro level, human behaviour in

organisations seems appropriate for existentialist study and analysis. Determining a meaningful

occupational existence may be a severe challenge for an individual faced with the characteristics

of the modern formal organisation.

3.4 Cognitive Model

The cognitive model came about as a reaction to the other models of human behaviour. In particular, pioneering psychologists such as Edward Tolman became disenchanted with the

psychoanalytic and early behaviouristic models. They felt that the Freudian conception placed

too much emphasis on negative, irrational and sexually-motivated behaviour.

The cognitive model emphasised the positive and freewill aspects of humans. The work of

Tolman, in particular, can best demonstrate the cognitive approach. He felt that behaviour was

learned to expect that certain events will follow one another. For example, rats learned to behave

if they expected food when a certain cue appeared. Thus, to Tolman, learning consisted of the

expectancy that a particular event will lead to a particular consequence. This expectancy

concept, of course, implies mentalistic phenomena.

In other words, the cognitive explanation implies that the organism is thinking about or is

conscious of or aware of the goal. Behaviour is based on these cognitions.

3.5 Behaviouristic Model

The roots of behaviouristic school of thought can be traced to the work of Pavlov and Watson.

These pioneering behaviourists stressed the importance of dealing with observable behaviours

instead of the elusive mind. They used classical conditioning experiment to formulate the

stimulus response (S-R) explanation of human behaviour. Both Pavlov and Watson felt that

behaviour could be best understood in terms of S-R. A stimulus elicits a response. They

concentrated mainly in the impact of the stimulus and felt that learning occurred when the S-R

connection was made. Modern behaviourists mark its beginning with the work of B.I. Skinner.

Skinner is generally recognised as the most influential living psychologist. He felt that the early

behaviourists helped to explain respondent behaviours but not the more complex operant

behaviour. In other words, the S-R approach helps to explain physical reflexes e.g. when stuck

by a pin (S), the person will flinch (R).

For Skinner, behaviour is a function of its consequences. It is important to understand that the

behaviouristic model is environmentally based. It implies that cognitive processes such as

thinking expectancies and perception do play a role in behaviour. Nevertheless, as the cognitive

model has been accused of being mentalistic, the behaviouristic model has been accused of being

deterministic.

3.6 The Goals of Organisational Behaviour Model

On the basis of Thorndike‘s classic law of effect, the behaviourist model would say that

organisational behaviour followed by a positive or reinforcing consequence will be strengthened

and increase in subsequent frequency.

In other words, organisation behaviour can be predicted and controlled on the basis of managing

the contingent environment. Both the internal causal factors which are cognitively oriented and

the external environmental factors, which are behaviouristically oriented are important to the

understanding, control and prediction of organisational behaviour.

3.7 A Conceptual Framework for the Study of Organisational Behaviour

The S-O-B-C model can serve as the conceptual framework for the study of organisational

behaviour. The model attempts to synthesize the cognitive and behaviouristic explanations of human behaviour. In a very simplified summary, the S-O represents the causal, mainly cognitive

factors in behaviour and the B-C represents the modern behaviouristic emphasis on the role that

consequences play in behaviour. The S-O portion of the model primarily contributes to the goal

of understanding organisational behaviour and the B-C primarily contributes to the goals of

prediction and control of organisation‘s behaviour.

Power and Authority – Definition

Power and authority are very important topics in understanding organisations and management,

Since they tend to be ignored by economic accounts. A standard definition of power is that given

by Dahl . The basic idea is that we have power over someone else to the extent that we can get

that person to do something that otherwise they would not want to do. That is, we can get

someone to act in a way that he/she considers to be contrary to his/her interests.

Traditional

Traditional and charismatic authority are vested in particular individuals. Rational/legal authority

is vested in an office (or the person occupying it for the time being). Traditional authority is

vested in someone by virtue of tradition and custom. The most obvious examples are ro yalty.

They are considered to be able to give orders (and have them obeyed) purely by virtue of their

"station in life," and not as a result of any abilities they might have.

Charismatic

Charismatic authority is vested in someone by virtue of his personality. A religious leader, for

example, might generate strong feelings of loyalty and commitment among his or her followers.

thought to be more "rational" than traditional authority. The authority rests purely with the

individual concerned.

Rational/Legal

Rational/legal authority is that which Weber associated with bureaucratic organisations. It is

vested in the holder of an office. An important source of the legitimacy of the authority

comes Minister derives from the democratic process by which he or she is selected. The legitimacy of was be suitable, and fair methods were used to determine which of the applicants best met these

criteria. The authority of a politician is undermined if he or she is thought to have lost the

confidence" in the House of Commons must resign. The authority of an official would be

undermined if it was felt that a fair process was not followed -for example, that personal

connections were more important than qualifications.

Where someone has authority, however, it is clearly a particularly useful form of power since

you can expect your orders to be carried out without the implicit bargaining that is involved in

the dependency model. Nevertheless, there are limits even to authority. If people make demands

that are seen as unreasonable, this will eventually undermine their authority. If people give subordinates reason to believe they are not in fact well qualified for the job, their authority will

be undermined. Authority is rarely, if ever, granted unconditionally.

It is important not to confuse this formal definition of authority with "being in a position of

authority," meaning only that someone occupies an elevated position in an organisation's

hierarchy. We would normally expect such a person to have authority, but we can easily think of

examples where senior managers do not in fact have the authority we would associate with their

formal position. Manager's authority can be undermined if they are seen to be ineffectual, to lack

expertise, or generally to be undeserving of 'respect."

Power and Legitimacy

Power is the ability, whether personal or social, to get things done -either to enforce one's own

will or to enforce the collective will of some group over others. Legitimacy is a socially

constructed and psychologically accepted right to exercise power. A person can have legitimacy

but no actual power (the legitimate king might reside in exile, destitute and forgotten). A person

can have actual power but not legitimacy (the usurper who exiled the king and appropriates the

symbols of office). Here, now, we begin to approach an understanding of what authority is

because in all social situations a person is treated as an authority only when they have both

power and legitimacy. We might consider, for example, the phrase uttered so often when

someone intrudes into our business in order to give commands: "You have no authority here."

What does that mean? It might mean that the person has no legitimate claim to be heard or

heeded.

CENTRALISATION AND DECENTRALISATION

Centralisation and decentralization refer to the extent to which decision among power is

devolved in an organisation or the degree of delegation of duties, power and authority to lower

levels of an organisation (Hicks and Guliett, 1981). Organisations which have a high degree of

delegation of power are thought to be decentralized. Organisation which have a lower degree of

delegation of power end to be centralized. A decentralized structure often means power over

both operational issues and strategic direction is devolved to lower levels in the hierarch y.

The terms centralization and decentralization, however, are used to give various connotations.

The semantic variations range from administrative, physical and functional centralisation to

decentralisation.

At the same time, decentralisation is taken to mean separation of facilities, a type of organisation

structure, and delegation of decision-making power. It is more commonly used in management

literature, however, shows extent of delegation of authority. Thus, decentralisation can be

defined as the delegation of authority to the lowest levels of management.

Centralisation Vs Decentralisation

Centralisation is the process by which the activities of an organization, particularly those

regarding decision-making, become concentrated within a particular location and/or group.

Decentralisation is where the decision making responsibility is given to more operational

managers, lower down the organisation.

Advantages and Disadvantages

Centralisation – Advantages

(a) There is uniformed decision making;

(b) Duplication of effort is eliminated;

(d) Greater control;

(e) Economies in staffing;

(f) Economies of Scale e.g. negotiation of better rates for office supplies etc.,

(g) Easier communication.

Centralisation – Disadvantages

(a) The organisation is bureaucratic;

(b) Power is concentrated within the upper management levels with key decisions taken by a

few top managers;

(d) Delays in decision making;

(e) Stifles personal development.

Decentralisation – Advantages

(a) Lower levels of management will have the power to make decisions;

(b) The decisions are made by people who know and understand he situation; There is

recognition of local conditions;

(d) There is personal development due to he increased responsibility;

(e) The organisation is more responsive to the environment.

Decentralisation – Disadvantages

(a) There is a lack of uniformity of decision making;

(b) People have different views and so individuality may affect those decisions made; Inter-

unit conflict may arise;

(d) There is a loss of control at the top of the organisation structure;

(e) Loss of some economies of scale;

(f) Development of a narrow departmental view.

One example of a function becoming centralised could be filing with the organisation creating a

central filing department. Procedures become standardised for filing those documents, there will

be greater security of those records than if spread out over several regional offices; maintenance

of these files.

Guiding Principles in Centralisation versus Decentralisation

(a) Appropriate interoperability – where needed;

(b) Where costs would be significant to decentralize e.g. email Compliance, legislation

requires it e.g. F.O.I;

is insufficient local knowledge e.g. security officer;

(d) Where outages cannot be tolerated e.g. telephone systems/other 24x7 services Where

common access for all stakeholders is required and or access would be hindered e.g.

shadow systems and document interchange;

(e) Standards and central control are required e.g. Finance system/student records Business

drivers require it e.g. website -common look and feel.

Centralisation Desirable

Where accountability would be unclear e.g. common teaching spaces There are procurement

benefits to the university Access difficulties

Reduction of cost (business case) e.g. parallel systems

A coherent experience is needed for users e.g. web, student experience, online learning Quality of services will be demonstrably higher Industrial strength solutions are needed

Standardisation necessary for defined performance scalability Integration

Where it is practical to purchase bulk licensing/contracts

Decentralize

(a) Central control is not necessary;

(b) Faster response can be gained;

(d) Local conditions are different e.g. particle physics; and in all cases we should work

towards.

ORGANISATIONAL LEADERSHIP

Leadership has been described as the ―process of social influence in which one person can enlist

the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task‖. Definitions more

inclusive of followers have also emerged. Alan Keith of Genentech states that, "Leadership is

ultimately about creating a way for people to contribute to making something extraordinary

happen." According to Ken "SKC" Ogbonna, "effective leadership is the ability to successfully

integrate and maximize available resources within the internal and external environment for the

attainment of organizational or societal goals."

Leadership Styles

Leadership style refers to a leader's behaviour. It is the result of the philosophy, personality and

experience of the leader.

Autocratic or authoritarian style

Under the autocratic leadership style, all decision-making powers are centralized in the leader, as

with dictator leaders.

They do not entertain any suggestions or initiatives from subordinates. The autocratic

management has been successful as it provides strong motivation to the manager. It permits

quick decision-making, as only one person decides for the whole group and keeps each decision

to himself until he feels it is needed to be shared with the rest of the group.

Participative or democratic style

The democratic leadership style favors decision-making by the group as shown, such as leader

gives instruction after consulting the group.

They can win the co-operation of their group and can motivate them effectively and positively.

The decisions of the democratic leader are not unilateral as with the autocrat because they arise

from consultation with the group members and participation by them.

Laissez-faire or free rein style

A free-rein leader does not lead, but leaves the group entirely to itself. Such a flows with the tide.

Different situations call for different leadership styles. In an emergency when there is little time

to converge on an agreement and where a designated authority has significantly more experience

or expertise than the rest of the team, an autocratic leadership style may be most effective;

however, in a highly motivated and aligned team with a homogeneous level of expertise, a more

democratic or laissez-faire style may be more effective. The style adopted should be the one that

most effectively achieves the objectives of the group while balancing the interests of its

individual members.

Toxic leadership

A toxic leader is someone who has responsibility over a group of people or an organization, and

who abuses the leader-follower relationship by leaving the group or organization in a worse-off

condition than when s/he first found them.

ORGANISATIONAL DYNAMICS OF CHANGE

Change is one of the facts of life. In organisational behaviour, the manager, in creating change,

creates conflicts. The repercussions and implications of change and conflict must be well

understood so that they may be managed and controlled.

In extreme cases, poorly managed conflict and change can completely wipe out the ability of

team members or department to work effectively together, improperly introduced changes can

also nurture resentment and sabotage.

Change as a Process

Change can (and does) occur haphazardly. It can be considered as a process, a series of related

should be made, they must plan on how the change will be done, modify the organisation of the

firm to incorporate the change most effectively, hire or replace members (with obsolete abilities)

with newly appropriate skills and retain those with required abilities and finally make the change

work.

The central focus in the concept of organisational change is the reduction of forces that lower the

probability of the change‘s successful implementation, while increasing the effects of the forces

that favour the change.

Forces Favouring Change

Probably the most immediate and apparent factor influencing change is recognition that a

problem exists. Forces for change can be conveniently classified as belonging to external and

internal forces.

External Forces for Change

There are many external forces bombarding the modern organisation, which make change

inevitable. These forces can be categorised into three broad areas, namely:

1. The highly competitive market place in the private and also in many respects the public

sectors of the economy.

2. The tremendous accelerating rate of technological advance.

3. The highly volatile changes that are occurring in both the physical and social environment In order to remain competitive, organisations must forge ahead on all the three fronts. The

external open system environment will have a tremendous impact on organisations and the

behaviour of their participants.

Internal Forces for Change

Many internal forces are also precipitating change in the modern organisation. The most usual

types of internal change have to do with machinery and equipment, methods and procedures,

work standards, personnel and organisational adjustments, and interrelationships with those who

hold power, authority, status and responsibility. This list shows that internal change affects both

organisational and human variables. One of the best ways to understand the internal aspects of

change is through the study of the organisational dynamics through the change and human

resistance to it.

Human Resistant to Change

The role of human resistance to change is important to the study of organisational change.

Human resistance to change is part of the dynamics of change. Resistance to change is a fact of

organisational life and takes many forms. Three major categories are used, namely: work-

related, individual and social factors. These three factors influence resistance to change to

function in each sub-system in organisational behaviour.

1. Work-related Factors

(a) Fear of technological unemployment

(b) Fear of changes in work conditions

2. Individual Factors

(a) Fear that the need for level or type of skill and ability will be reduced or

eliminated.

(b) Fear that greater specialisation will occur, resulting in boredom, monotony and a

decreased sense of personal worth.

(d) Inconvenience of having to learn a new method.

(e) Fear that harder work will be required.

(f) Fear of uncertainty and the unknown.

Social Factors

(a) Dislike of having to make new social adjustment.

(b) Fear that the new social situation will bring reduction in satisfaction.

(d) Dislike of those initiating the change.

(e) Resentment of lack of participation in setting up the change.

(f) Perception that the change will benefit the formal organisation more than the

individual, the work group, or the society.

Despite the widespread resistance to change found at all levels of the modern organisations, it

should not be automatically assumed that participants will resist change, or if they do resist, that

it is inherently bad for the organisation. As indicated above, resistance will occur when the

change is viewed as a threat or barrier to individuals‘ survival.

The Manager’s Role as a Change Agent

Regardless of the change model used, the manager plays a crucial role in organisational change.

As Blake and Mouton points out, it is absolutely essential for managers to lead the way when

changing a company. Anything managers do that suggests uncertainty and indecisiveness causes

a ripple effect throughout the organisation. This rest in its foot-dragging and also causes

employees to question how committed to change top management really is. Effective leadership

does not mean that managers cannot use consultant, but it is clearly the duty of top management

to be a visible instrument in the change process.

often, they deny the need for change altogether. This is especially true when other organisational

members strongly resist change. An alternative is to try to accommodate the change this usually

involves preserving as much of the status quo as possible; while attempting piecemeal, quick fix

solutions. The third and preferable way is for the manager to be truly an agent for change. This

means recognising the need for change and accepting primary responsibility for paving its way.

Depending on the problem, facilitating change may involve intervention, development programs,

or other activities designed to improve an organisation‘s effectiveness and health. Various

intervention techniques and organisational development approaches are discussed later in this

unit.

Managing Resistance to Change

The most needed and best-planned change carries no guarantee that it will be accepted. The

following statement accurately summarises people‘s natural resistance to change. As common as

change is, the people who work in an organisation may still not like it. Each of those ―routine‖

changes can be accompanied by tension, stress, squabbling, sabotage, turnover, subtle

undermining behind the scenes, foot-dragging, work slow downs, needless political battles, and a

drain on money and time – in short, symptoms of that every present bugaboo, ―resistance to

change.

Sources of Resistance

Understanding the sources of resistance to change is the first step in designing a programme to

help an organisation to accept change. These are the most common causes for resistance:

1. Ignorance

When people have insufficient knowledge, they are uncertain about the causes and effects

of change. This uncertainty, in turn causes stress and resistance. As with walking in the

dark, most people would rather stay put than venture into the unknown. Also, when

people are uncertain about reality they try to guess about it, sometimes adding imaginary

problems to the real ones. For example, if employees learn via the grape vine that

management is considering merging departments to streamline operations and cut costs,

they are likely to resist the change because they fear losing their jobs of having new

reporting relationships.

2. Desire for Security

People often want to retain the status quo even when they know it is inferior. The

security of the ―known‖ makes them resist change. The faster or more major the change,

the more powerful the lure of the comforting status quo. Maven Loffler first discuss the

phenomenon extensively in his best-selling future shock. Loffler and another futurist,

John Maismith, vividly describe our changing society and suggest ways that

organisations will adapt to change. Maismith and Loffler think that as America becomes

an information society, the results will be widespread use of microcomputers, listening

word processors and electronic mail. They predict the emergence of a global economy

which will spawn new industries such as space or science and molecular biology. Loffler

predicts attend to assembly lines, fewer mass-produced goods and a move towards

customised products. He also foresees the development of new sources of energy,

extensive use of robotics in manufacturing and continued movement toward greater

participatory management.

3. Fear and Lack of Ambition

Another source of resistance to change is people‘s unwillingness to learn the new skills or

behaviours that change may require. There are two reasons for this: First, workers fear

inability to learn the skills of behaviour therefore change will mean failure. This fear is

especially prevalent in older workers who have developed their skills over a long period.

Second, some workers simply may not want to exert the energy, time and mental effort

required.

4. Informal Group Pressure

Most organisational changes have some informal networks in the formal organisation.

Breaking up a closely-knit group or changing social relationship can provoke a great deal

of resistance. Organisation managers often overlook these sources of resistance because the informal network is not the focal point of organisational change. This often

unplanned, secondary spillover effect can cause resistance to a change.

5. Eroding Power Bases

The fifth source of resistance to change results from its effect on personal power base.

When people expect their status or power to decline, resistance is inevitable. Besides the

direct loss of status or power from a change, there are powers and status considering in

the change process itself. That is, change often invites criticism from other employees

and causes workers to question their own abilities and self-worth.

6. Potential Loss of Job Security

Advances in technology have made this concern for job security strong sources of

resistance. A change that can eliminate jobs is threatening to employees. Two examples

are the worker whose job will be taken over by a machine or a middle level manager who

is afraid that computers will eliminate his or her duties.

7. Personality Conflict

The last source of resistance is caused by personality clashes. These conflict – often are

the result of misunderstandings, lack of trust or mistrust or past resentments. For

instance, if employees whose personality conflict must have daily personal contact

because of a structural change, they are likely to resist the reorganisation. This resistance

can be strong enough to override the best of changes conflict among workers, between

positions or with managers. Generally, all can inhibit acceptance of change.

Overcoming Resistance

Managers often underestimate both the amount of resistance a proposed change can provoke and

the negative effective that this resistance can have on progress. There are certain ways to

minimise the resistance, however, Kotter and Schlesinger‘s approaches, are among the most

effective methods that managers can use in dealing with resistance to change.

1. Proper Communication

One of the best ways to overcome resistance is through education and communication.

All the people who may be affected by a change need advance information about the

reason for the change, its nature, its planned timing, and the impact it is likely to have on

the organisation and personnel. When lines of communication are kept open, people can

get the information they need as well as communicate their concerns. For

communication to effectively reduce resistance, good superior-subordinate relationship is

necessary so that people will believe what they are told.

Participation

Basically, participation means involving affected workers in the change process. People

affected by a proposed change can be encouraged to provide their opinions and

suggestions. If employees participate in an activity such as collecting performance data,

they may be convinced of the need for change. This approach requires that management

show genuine interests in what others have to say and whenever possible, give credit to

the right people or their valuable input. Why is this method so effective? Because

change is threatening when done to us but exciting when done by us.

3. Empathy

Facilitation and support is the third method for overcoming resistance to change. This

method recognises that resistance can come from good and rational concerns. By being

supportive may involve extra training in new skills, or simply listening and providing

emotional support, management can also smoothens the change process by emphasizing

its most personal benefits and giving people time to adjust. A change can also be

implemented in phases in an effort to minimise the upheaval.

4. Negotiation and Incentive

Managers can use this approach for specific sources of resistance. For instance, if

workers fear is allayed that they won‘t be fired as a result of the change. Another way to

use negotiation and agreement is to offer incentive to those who support the changes even

if the change results in the loss of jobs. Exxon Corporation, for example, offered its

employees bonuses to take early retirement when it decided to cut its workforce by forty

thousand in 1980. Coca-cola offered attractive prices to the seller it was trying to buy out

during its restructuring.

5. Manipulation

Some managers try to reduce resistance by manipulation and co-optation. Manipulation

usually involves the selective use of information and the conscious structuring of events.

For example, when Exxon announced its plans to reduce its workforce by one fourth, it

realised that forty thousand people might not want to retire voluntarily, even with the

inducement, so Exxon informed its employees that apart of its announcement that

involuntary retirements and firings with regular severance pay would make up the

balance. Exxon manipulated its employees by creating uncertain conditions.

Co-optation is a form of manipulation in which potential resisters or leaders of resisting

groups are given a role in designing or implementing change. The basic difference

between co-optation and the participation referred to earlier is that co-optation looks for

help merely to silence potential dissenters, not for the sake of valuable information that

may be gained.

Coercion

The last method for overcoming resistance is explicit and implicit coercion, which force

acceptance. Explicit coercion often takes the form of firing or transferring resisters.

Issuing statement designed to create fear of the business going bankrupt is an example of

implicit coercion. Choosing a method to minimise or eliminate resistance depends on the

sources of the resistance and the time constraints for implementing the change. The

objectives of all these methods are to turn resistance into commitment.

Search This Blog

Prof. Olanrewaju Olu-Adeyemi

NOTES ON ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Public Administration in Nigeria

Short Notes on POS 407 - Politics and Law in Africa

NOTES ON NIGERIAN GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS