Organizational Behavior - Essay Example

? 4 March, Case Analysis: Brief summary: Tech Depot is suffering from changes in organizational culture induced by newer policies of newer managers from time to time. Frequent development and implementation of newer and different policies has stirred up controversial views among the employees which has made the organizational culture murky. Employees are too inspired by the policies of the founder of the organization, Andre Waters, who has served Tech Depot as CEO for 23 years. Andre Waters provided the employees with extreme flexibility and kept the organizational structure loose, though the organization suffered from lack of sales growth. Aiken, equipped with a 30 years experience of working in management culture, disapproved the former CEO’s loose organizational structure as he replaced him and began to quantify every aspect of employees’ performance. The employees got irritated. Within 3 years, Aiken was fired because of dangerously high employee turnout rate. Meryl Francoli, the third CEO introduced the Output Matters Environment (OME) touchy feely system that provides employees with all the flexibility they have been longing to get for 3 years, though Francoli initially decides to implement the system in just 3 units, namely the Extended Warranty unit, logistics unit and a store in Victoria. This has raised controversies among various employees. A vast majority of employees disapprove the new CEO’s idea, and expose Franklin to new challenges of gaining employee satisfaction. Franklin needs to defend her decision, estimate its long term effects on the organizational culture, assess ways to implement it widely and make the process effective. Problem: Problem is the identification of nail head to hit upon. Aiken and Francoli have been sincere in their efforts of modifying the organizational culture. Whatever steps they took, they did so with an intention of making the employees more productive and improving their performance. We can not say about Francoli because the results of her decision are yet to reveal, though Aiken remained unsuccessful in his approach because he had implemented an altogether change in the organizational culture. Employees found his attempt of implementing management culture in the organization very tough and strict to comply with, and left the organization in large numbers. On the other hand, Francoli has been criticized heavily for her decision of implementing the OME system in just three units. Taking into consideration the number of employees and managers who have criticized her, it can be estimated that her decision is going to create more tension than ease, though the true picture can only be defined with time. Aiken directed his efforts at increasing workers’ productivity but ended up increasing their turnover rate whereas Francoli directed her efforts at decreasing workers’ turnover rate but is quite like to end up decreasing their productivity. Something needs to be done that would increase their productivity while decreasing the employee turnover rate. That is the nail head that Francoli needs to find and hit upon to solve the problem. This is exactly the problem, which, if solved, will make the other issues go away. Analysis: CEOs are not identifying employees’ needs. They need to understand that they need to mould their policies according to the demands of employees. They can not expect employees to act according to their decisions without winning their confidence. The problem is fundamentally occurring because the CEOs have been implementing their decisions without checking their suitability to the needs of employees who have remained part of the organization for a long time and have been following different policies in different times. There are certain factors that are fundamentally the drivers of employees’ performance that include but are not limited to money, reward, appreciation, security and health benefits. All of these factors mutually function to develop job satisfaction in the employees. Organizational behavior theories: Organizational behavior theory is based upon numerous domains that contribute towards the development of employees’ competency in an organizational setup. Understanding the underlying factors that lead to the development of an organizational theory is the first and foremost requirement of the development and implementation of principles conducive for improving the organizational behavior. The employees can not be expected to give their maximum output unless there are made satisfied with their job. This can be explained with the help of theories of organizational behavior, some of which are discussed below: The systems based theory: The fundamental principle of the systems based theory is that there is a system in every organization that is characterized by its boundaries, outputs and inputs. An organization develops on the basis of these critical factors. Theory X and Theory Y: A set of theories proposed by McGregor in 1960 have been largely understood and applied as the fundamental attributes to define the organizational behavior (“Organizational Behavior”). They are known as Theory X and Theory Y and are frequently employed in the development of the human resources policies and the organization as a whole. According to the Theory X proposed by McGregor, employees are generally quite immature and irresponsible towards their respective duties. In order for them to display rational attitude at job and show better performance, it is imperative that they are supervised through micro-management by the managers. Directive leadership requires the managers to set rewards for employees upon display of a particular level of performance, and Theory X is a subset of that. Theory X emphasizes that employees should be motivated by managers for improving their performance. Managers can achieve this by providing employees with rewards upon display of good performance. Conventionally, managers that have taken measures in order to improve the organizational behavior have ended up getting into the blame game instead of investigating the problems and identifying the root cause of issues. By enforcing a system based on rewards, they can easily improve employees’ motivation for work without having to waste their energy on unnecessary issues. Theory Y speaks in favor of loose organizational structure by emphasizing that employees best develop competency in their jobs without an external influence on them. In contrast to Theory X, the Theory Y favors the associative leadership style and considers it conducive for healthy organizational behavior and greater productivity on the part of the employees. Theory Y makes it compulsory for managers to take such actions that would make the employees satisfied and contented with their individualistic roles in the organizational setup. Creation of a workforce that cultivates a team spirit is necessary for healthy organizational culture and behavior. A deep analysis of the Theory X and Theory Y suggests that both the theories highly conflict with each other. Theory X supports the organizational behavior Aiken had introduced while the Theory Y speaks in favor of the strategies implemented by Francoli in the three units. However, the two theories proposed by McGregor talk of extremes that may as well work in some cases. But the case study under consideration, neither Theory X nor Theory Y can bring the ultimate results in the best interest of Tech Depot. Tech Depot requires the managers to use a blend of the two theories so that a middle way can be worked out that would promise the benefits of both of them and obviate their differences. McClelland’s Theory of Needs: David McClelland proposed the Theory of Needs, which is often referred to as the Learned Needs Theory or Three Need Theory in which he emphasized that employees develop their needs over the course of time depending upon the experiences they happen to go through. McClelland classified all needs of employees into three fundamental types, namely achievement, affiliation and power needs (NetMBA). According to McClelland, employees derive their motivation through fulfillment of these needs. The three needs identified by McClelland are briefly discussed below: Achievement: People who value achievement above all other needs are known as the (nAch). These people gain motivation from achievement of their goals, and are quite hard working generally. The nAch people tend to keep distant from situations which are either too low or too high in risk. In situations where risk is too low, achievement of goal is quite easy for them and they feel little motivation having achieved them. On the other hand, they do not consider that they are capable enough to handle situations too high in risk because of their obsession with achievement. Therefore, these people work best in settings where risk is moderate. The nAch employees like managers to monitor their performance and comment on it so that they may take necessary measures to improve it and gain achievement. Affiliation: People valuing affiliation are known as (nAff). The nAff people value relations, association, teamwork and friendship. They are good at socialization and work best in a setting in which they can frequently interact with their coworkers. They derive their motivation from socialization. They easily develop affiliation with others. Teamwork is the best way for such employees to show productivity. They are perfect for client dealing because they know how to entertain people and respect their emotions. Power: People for whom power is the most important are known as (nPow). There are two types of nPow employees. First, the employees who strive to gain personal power and the second are employees striving for institutional power. People striving for personal power are encouraged neither on the managerial level nor on the subordinate level. However, people striving for institutional power tend to organize their own and others’ efforts in the best interest of the institution or organization. Hence, nPow people gain their motivation from availing the opportunity to direct others. They can be made team leaders. Criteria: The most fundamental criterion for success of a manager in the Tech Depot is enhancement of job satisfaction of the employees so that they may improve their productivity and reduce the employee turnover rate. Alternatives: A deep analysis of the case study suggests that employees have been lately fed up of the quantified system existing in the management culture brought in Tech Depot by Aiken. They want flexibility. However, it is a big challenge for Francoli because employees can not be trusted to be responsible enough or self sufficient in their mannerism. There has to be hold of a manager, though the new system has to be considerably different from what it was in Aiken’s time. Here, Theory X and Theory Y are fully applicable, though McClelland’s Theory of Needs has limited application. This is so because employees’ affiliation and power needs can be addressed by making the first line managers examine the psychology of individual employees, and take necessary decisions. Here, only the strategy that a top level manager like a CEO should implement in the conditions of the Tech Depot are discussed. As first line managers can adjust the work setting to meet the power and affiliation needs of their workers, a top manager should largely worry about meeting the achievement needs of employees. In light of the theories discussed above, three alternative solutions can be worked out. First alternative: 1. Francoli should keep the management culture introduced by Aiken with the addition of reward. The first alternative can provide Francoli with full control of the organization. She can keep measuring employees’ performance along with reducing their turnover by providing them with rewards or benefits. Francoli has two options; either she can estimate the amount of money that was averagely wasted during Waters’ period by comparing the employees’ productivity in his period to that which happened in Aiken’s period, and divide it equally among all employees’ salary increments while maintain close supervision on them like Aiken did, or else, instead of increasing their salaries, she should reserve the sum for monetary rewards that should be offered only to those employees who meet the set target. 2. Francoli should revert to the old all-time-favorite culture of Andre Waters along with the addition of penalty system. Francoli can make everyone happy by implementing Andrew Waters’ loose organization structure. However, she can make sure that employees do not take it non-seriously by implementing a penalty system. 3. Francoli should maintain the characteristics of both a loose organization structure and a strict management culture along with the introduction of both penalty and reward system. Francoli should reduce the extent to which everything was quantified and estimated in Aiken’s period while maintaining some features of it as such. In addition to that, Francoli should reward the employees upon display of good performance and penalize them for breaking the rules or not meeting targets. Evaluation: 1. The first alternative would provide Francoli with the control any manager would long for, though she would have to compromise upon the added benefits, that were brought about by Aiken’s policy. 2. The second alternative would deprive Francoli of her control of employees considerably, though employees themselves would be careful so as to avoid being penalized. 3. The third alternative would keep both Francoli and employees happy without having Francoli to compromise upon company’s benefits. Recommendation-choice: Benefits of the third alternative outweigh those of the first and the second. So, the third alternative is recommendable. Implementation: Many of the units have been showing resistance against Francoli’s decision of selecting only three units because they think that the three units are being privileged. The other units would not make fuss if they come to know that there is also penalty system for not achieving targets. Other managers who are against provision of employees with unnecessary leverage would find the third alternative justified in that there is a strong sense of management control in it also. Therefore, Francoli should keep her approach as such! She should implement the third alternative on the three units she selected herself, and widen the implementation by evaluating the results thus obtained. Works cited: “Organizational Behavior Theory.” 2011. Web. 3 March 2011. . “McClelland’s Theory of Needs.” 2010. Web. 3 March 2011. . Read More