Understanding Organizational Behaviour - Research Paper Example

Running Head: Organizational Behaviour Quantitative Study Analysis: Organizational Behaviour [Client’s Name] [Affiliation] The issues that organizations face are not only limited to the objective problems encountered in the involved functions and operations. Organizations are also vulnerable to ever present subjective issues particularly those relate to workforce management (Mochal, 2006). With subjective issues like employee dissatisfaction, organizations are bound to face difficult issues in handling them because there is no clear-cut definition of the methods of resolving such issues. More importantly, employee-related issues have their way of blowing out of proportion so as to interfere with the productivity and efficiency of the organization. Understanding how organizations behave as a whole is important for managers. This is because the understanding of complex issues pertaining to the workforce would allow them to apply the right forces on the proper areas in order to increase productivity, increase workplace efficiency, or to resolve employee-related work issues (Schnurr, 2008). One of the social areas where understanding of productivity, efficiency, and workplace socialization can be evaluated is in the context of group cohesion. Understanding group cohesion Sodpraset (2001) attempted to investigate the impact of group cohesion on the productivity of sales agents through a combination of survey and correlational research designs. The research tried to answer three fundamental questions which are: (a) what is the degree of group cohesiveness of the sales agents of American International Assurance Company (AIA); (b) how do the sales agents of AIA perceive the importance of group cohesion on group productivity; and (c) what is their perception of the most important attribute of group cohesion. The null hypothesis of the research is H0:= there is a significant difference in the perception of the sales employees of AIA towards the importance of the relationship between group cohesion and group productivity. That is H0 ≠ Ha. The alternative hypothesis is that there is no significant difference in the perception of sales employees of AIA towards the importance of the relationship between group cohesion and group activity. In equation form, H0=Ha. In order to gather data and information, the researcher conducted the study on 379 sales agents of AIA through a survey questionnaire. The data was subjected to one-tail ANOVA, sample t-test, and statistical analysis of central measures of tendency like frequency distribution, discussion of the characteristics of the sample mean, and so on. The researcher provided a brief conceptual background as well of group cohesiveness. She discussed the ten attributes of group cohesion and how these concepts fit in her research. The researcher also provided a thorough discussion on group productivity and how this is important in organizations. In effect, the researcher created a conceptual paradigm for the research, outlining the possible theoretical discussions that would be included in the research. The research operationally defined the perception of group cohesion as its dependent variable while productivity as its independent variable. The research aimed to study how group cohesion affects group productivity. In order to gather data and information, the paper presented the respondents with a questionnaire with two sections. The first section of the questionnaire consists of two questions pertaining to the social demographics of the respondents. The second question is composed of three sections where part 1 is a five-point scale which examined the respondents feeling on the degree of cohesiveness of the group they belong to; part 2 is a five-point scale on the respondents’ feelings, perceptions, and attitudes towards the relationship between group cohesion and group productivity; and part 3 is the respondents’ ranking of the attributes of group cohesion in relation to group productivity. The researcher has defined her method of interpreting the numerical data from the respondents’ responses. The collected data and information were analyzed using students’ package for social science (SPSS) version 9.0 for Windows. The program draws relevant information on frequency distribution, percentages, independent samples t-test, and analysis of variance (ANOVA). The result for the section 1 of the questionnaires indicates that 59.1% of the respondents are female. The most frequent work tenure is 1-5 years employee with 39.3% distribution followed by employees that have spent 10-15 years with the company with a 26.9% distribution (See Appendix A for details). The research statistically evaluated the mean score of the sample population. Descriptive statistical analysis indicates that the sales workforce of AIA perceives that group cohesion is important in achieving group productivity with a mean score of 4.29. This mean score represents a significant inclination towards the affirmative of the thesis statement. Descriptive analysis for the responses on part 3 of section 2 shows that the clarity of the goal of the group is central to the success of the group cohesion with 39.3% of the respondents choosing this. This is followed closely by commitment to group’s goals (35.1%), history of group success (13.2%), and trust (13.2%). The independent t-test of AIA’s perception is carried on using gender as the dependent variable. The result indicates that the perception of the individuals towards the effects of group cohesion on group productivity is independent of gender. Analysis of variance indicates that there is a significant difference in opinions based mainly on the degree of work experience. Results indicate that at 95% confidence level, there is a significant level of differences in the perceptions of sales agents working within 1-5 years tenure compared to those that have worked with the company for more than 5 years. Agents working for less than 5 years have the lowest perception on group cohesion and group productivity. The result of multiple ANOVA affirms this finding. Conclusion The results of Sodpraset’s research shows the relevance of tenure in determining group cohesiveness and hence productivity. The results indicate that individuals that have worked with the company for a few years was not able to align themselves completely with the goals, visions, and objectives of the firm, allowing them to have a different perception towards social harmony in the workplace. On the other hand, individuals that were able to spend more time with the company has learned to adapt to the company’s culture and thus, group cohesion becomes a very important factor for them to attain individual and organizational goals. This is somewhat consistent with Strodder’s discussion on the importance of group cohesion of the workforce in the attainment of success of the organization (2009). Group cohesion can only be achieved if social equilibrium is achieved which does not necessarily occur instantaneously. Those who are able to adapt easily profit from the positive impact of group cohesion on their performance. References Mochal, T. (2006). Top Five Reasons Why Organizations Fail at Project Management. November 2009 Accessed from http://articles.techrepublic.com.com/5100-10878_11-6088950.html  Sodpraset, P. (2001). The Impact of Group Cohesiveness on Group Productivity: A Case Study of Sales Agents of the American International Assurance Company Inc (AIA). Retrieved online http://library.utcc.ac.th/onlinethesis/onlinethesis/M0213260.pdf Stodder, G. (2009). “Making people count: Southwest Airlines – Company Profile.” Retrieved November 2009, http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0DTI/is_n9_v25/ai_19892335/  Schnurr, S. (2008). Leadership Discourse at Work: Interactions of Humor, Gender, and Workplace Culture. Palgrave McMillan.  Appendix A. Frequency Distribution B. Respondents’ Mean Score C. Ranking of Attributes D. Student T-Test Result E – ANOVA E- Multiple ANOVA Read More