Management and Organisational Behaviour - Assignment Example

? Management and Organisational Behaviour by of 21 November Tableof Contents 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 How Influential Are Motivation and Job Satisfaction in Directing OB? 1-2 3.0 How Successful is Apple Inc. in Terms of Workers’ Attitudes and Job Satisfaction? 2 3.1 Dispositional theory of job satisfaction 2-3 3.2 Herzberg's motivation-hygiene theory 3 3.3 Equity theory and job satisfaction 3-4 3.4 Importance of the range of affect theory 4-5 4.0 How Successful Is Apple Inc. in Terms of Employee Motivation? 5 4.1 Vroom’s expectancy motivation model 5-6 4.2 Application of the Lewin’s Change Management Model 6 4.3 Motivation with the reinforcement theory 6-7 4.4 Application of the cognitive dissonance theory 7 4.5 Application of the Cohen-Bradford Influence Model 7-8 5.0 Conclusion 8-9 References 10-13 1.0 Introduction The importance of having shrewd knowledge about organisational behaviour (OB) cannot be stressed enough because of its close association with company’s success and customer satisfaction. Job satisfaction and motivation at work are among the most frequently analysed themes in relevance to OB and its management. Strong interest in the subject of OB due to its highly dynamic nature has led to development of many strategies that can play a momentous role in culmination of poisonous factors such as reduced motivation among employees and job dissatisfaction. Basically, discussion presented in this report aims at scrutinising such major approaches related to job satisfaction and motivation at work in order to evaluate the extent to which they can be decisively implemented on the globally reputed American corporation Apple Inc. A myriad of factors which contribute to chaos in an organisational setup and tarnish OB will also be identified. High absenteeism rate and rotten work attitudes are among the basic factors for polluting an organisation’s environment and stem from negative OB. On the other hand, involvement of staff in the change process amidst other steps can foster a culture that has a high rate of workers’ satisfaction and will to achieve big feats. For this purpose, this report will stress a deep understanding of OB in relevance to job satisfaction, motivation and work attitudes by taking example of Apple Inc. 2.0 How Influential Are Motivation and Job Satisfaction in Directing OB? It is an undeniable reality that a motivated and satisfied workforce is a critical asset for any organisation (Chen 2010, p. 66). Such a workforce helps in sustaining the richness of OB yielding multiple benefits for a business. Numerous grave repercussions in reference to OB start dominating the scene when nonchalant managers do not make wise investments in inculcating a sense of organisational commitment in the employees (Perry 2010). In contrast, motivated employees are more satisfied with their jobs, are happier personally, and show a staggering tendency to improve their organisation’s productivity. It is because of the highly deterministic role played by job satisfaction and motivation that leaders and managers should invest more time in implementing various valuable theories of OB to steer the workforce in the right direction. The type of attitudes employees have towards work and how content they are speaks a lot about how likely are any infringements on OB. 3.0 How Successful Is Apple Inc. in Terms of Workers’ Attitudes and Job Satisfaction? Apple Inc. is a well-reputed and widely popular example of OB management done right because this large business organisation has made significant contributions to making employees feel included and valued at the workplace. Founded in 1976 by Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak, this company originally only specialised in personal computers (Harrigan 2003, p. 258) but due to constant hard work and never undermining emotional and psychological needs of its employees, it soon became a symbol of sophistication and one of the most influential names on the face of Earth. A good social welfare attitude is an important element of OB management and driving force behind job satisfaction. The management at Apple has over the years exhibited an enhanced understanding of different kinds of issues faced by workforce, though there are some weaknesses to that effect, too, which are frequently criticised in research reports. However, different useful OB and management ideas have been employed over years in the business world, some of which will be discussed below. 3.1 Dispositional theory of job satisfaction This theory operates on the belief that regardless of external factors, it is actually an employee’s inner emotional dispositions that decide how satisfied he/she will be with a job. According to Saari and Judge (2004, p. 395), the most important work attitude is job satisfaction. This explains why most contemporary researches focus on ‘the dispositional bases of job satisfaction’ (Buchanan & Bryman 2009, p. 206) to scrutinise how this attitude is related to OB. It is suggested that irrespective of job type, a more sociable person high on positive affectivity is more likely to be satisfied with his/her job than a person high on negative affectivity. So, the message conveyed by this theoretical concept is that job satisfaction is a stable attitude and nothing much can be changed by extrinsic factors such as reward structures within an organisation. Under same job circumstances, one group of workers can be satisfied and other can be judgmental and disapproving because of differences in innate dispositions. Now, Apple leaders have used this concept of job satisfaction abundantly by explicitly indicating in their hiring ads that such people are required to fill vacancies who have friendly and passionate personalities (Adams 2012). Such hiring approach certainly mirrors this concept of dispositional theory that content and happy employees with positive attitudes towards work and life will definitely try to exert themselves to benefit their organization and OB will be strengthened, but listless employees with no passion to drive them will be least interested in completing their assignments and OB will drastically suffer. 3.2 Herzberg's motivation-hygiene theory Herzberg’s theory digs with acute intelligence into differentiating factors which cause job satisfaction from factors causing dissatisfaction for the workers in an organisation. According to his two-factor theory, employees are satisfied by motivation factors such as achievement, recognition or reward, interest in the job etc and dissatisfied by hygiene factors such as working condition, quality of supervision, salary, status, security etc. (Value Based Management.net 2013). This suggests that in contrast to the dispositional approach, Herzberg stresses that different external factors can be responsible for driving satisfaction and dissatisfaction at a workplace. Smart management of OB in relevance to correct combination of the hygiene and motivation factors is critically important to ensure high job satisfaction. Implementation of this model at Apple has resulted in one of the four scenarios where there are low hygiene and high motivation. This means that Apple employees do consider their jobs exciting and different, but still have many valid complaints regarding pays and work atmosphere etc. Apple managers never snatch opportunities from employees to share ideas and convey concerns; rather, they try to be the ones who provide brilliant chances to let the employees grow into credible professionals. However, even if employment experience at Apple for an average worker is laden with interesting challenges, ‘that doesn’t mean the company is always an insanely great place to work’ (Fiegerman 2012). Apple managers can use this theory as a guide to create an ideal scenario of high motivation and high hygiene. 3.3 Equity theory and job satisfaction This is a very important concept underlining OB and explicating that job dissatisfaction is made emphatic by discriminatory attitudes at work, which objectionably make one employee more advantaged than another (Hersen 2004, p. 475). The workplace environment will not be distressed when two employees doing the same job are awarded in a matching manner, but there will be noticeable distress when one of the two gets promoted or receives some monetary benefit. An organisation should be equity-sensitive believing all should be treated on equal basis, regardless of gender, colour, race etc, to sustain a high rate of job satisfaction and positive work attitudes. The general consensus is that even healthy conflicts can swiftly take a negative turn if managers are detached from their workers and do not pay attention to the message conveyed by equity theory. Now, working conditions in Apple’s main retail stores do not display equality among workers, and much controversy surrounds the subject. Though much is promoted by Apple leaders in terms of workplace equality through different media, it is complained by an Apple employee in one report that life seems really distraught ‘when you look at the amount of money the company is making and then you look at your paycheck’ (Golson, cited in Denning 2012). It is because of such workplace inequality that Apple employees seem at a loss to decide if working for this organisation is hell or heaven. Instead of considering employees disposable, Apple should view them as an invaluable asset in accordance with the equity approach of management. 3.4 Importance of the range of affect theory Recognised as the most popular job satisfaction model, the idea underlying affect theory is that a certain feature of a job and the amount of value attached to it by an employee determine how satisfied/dissatisfied he/she will be when his/her desires will/won’t be met. It really comes down to the difference or the gap between one’s expectations and what is offered by a job that identifies the rate of job satisfaction at work. But this is criticised as an oversimplification of things by Locke according to whom, ‘employees differ in the importance they place on various facets of work’ (cited in Jex & Britt 2008, p. 138). So, the range of affect theory actually claims that an employee valuing control more than another will be more depressed working at a low-paying position than another working on the same level, but indifferent to the notion of autonomy. Apple’s managers have tried to implement this management approach to satisfaction by reducing the gap between what is wanted by an employee from a job and what the job has to offer to that person. When such gap is bridged through various effective measures, a strongly satisfied workforce is created and provides ‘an exceptionally high level of customer service’ (Gallo 2012). Among other things, social connections are most often prioritised by employees because man is a social animal and Apple has at least always been disapproving of a fragmented workplace culture which suppresses socialisation. 4.0 How Successful Is Apple Inc. in Terms of Employee Motivation? As job satisfaction and workers’ attitudes, motivation is equally important. It is claimed that ‘motivation is the basic concept in human behaviour’ (Evans et al. 2009, p. 4). Passion and ambitiousness are described as the driving forces of motivation, which explains why research suggests that ‘if they are absent, motivation is absent too’ (Sasson 2013). According to one former Apple employee, when he worked for the company in the late 1980s till the early 1990s, ‘people were given amazing opportunities to stretch themselves and grow and do amazing things’ (cited in Heskett 2012, p. 192). Such a riveting welfare attitude for employees has remarkably helped Apple in reaching the heights of success. Companies claiming employers’ welfare attitudes to be irrelevant to employee motivation and business performance do not consider their employees’ concerns their basic priority and do not invest wisely to improve their living conditions as opposed to the ideology of Apple. Over the years, business analysts have witnessed amazing use of a myriad of motivation management concepts by Apple Inc.’s leaders and managers to motivate employees. 4.1 Vroom’s expectancy motivation model When analysing the subject of employee motivation, it is worth mentioning the expectancy theory which suggests that even when people have drastically different targets, they can be made equally motivated if they are ensured that their efforts will lead to performance and good performance will be desirably rewarded. This approach maintains that employees can be motivated if they are educated about the importance of roles they can play in the process of achieving something important, because then they will know that their work will lead to high performance (Chiang 2006, p. 188). Employees are more compelled to work strenuously if they know that ‘their efforts will be reflected in high performance’ (Kumar & Sharma 2000, p. 492). When ingenious efforts of employees sink into anonymity because of indifference of leaders, the chances of improved work performance become really minimal. Employees cannot commit themselves to the rules of OB until they understand how their work will affect their organisation (Green & Butkus 1999, p. 182). Now, interestingly, employee surveys are conducted by Apple in each of its organisations every other year to educate workers about their roles and assess how well they understand the company’s mission (Schneier 1995, p. 70), which proves smart implementation of Vroom’s unique motivation approach by insightful managers. 4.2 Application of the Lewin’s Change Management Model Lewin’s change management model has significant positive repercussions for employee motivation. According to this three-stage model, first, the unwanted issues as those experienced by Apple in the form of abuse of power in some Asian factories (Elsdon 2013, p. 31) among others need to be unfrozen, then they should be changed, and finally they should be refrozen once they attain the desired form (Blokdijk 2008, p. 16). In order to apply this captivating model at Apple, its managers first broke down worrisome issues, such as abuse towards workforce, by terminating all business activities with the abusive suppliers who failed to commit themselves to the Asian workforce’s issues and establishing 24/7 care centres for the workforce letting people know why change is necessary, and motivating them to participate. Then in the second stage, they compelled the suppliers to conform to the international code of conduct and confirmed change without using coercive prods. Finally, the change was refrozen when signs of improved employee motivation, stable middle management, and responsible use of power began to be appreciated (Elsdon 2013, p. 33). However, Lewin’s model is also criticised for not properly analysing ‘the after-effects of the change on the employees’ morale’ (Blokdijk 2008, p. 17). 4.3 Motivation with the reinforcement theory This theory is the confluence of two streams: rewards and punishments. Implementation of this particular approach at Apple Inc. has been widely appreciated considering how this company generously rewards its productive employees through Corporate Gifting and Rewards Program (Pride et al. 2010, p. 292). Compensation and benefits in the form of casual dress codes, discounts, training courses etc have played a prodigious role in improving work performance because ‘behavior is a function of its consequences’ (Gitman & McDaniel 2008, p. 245), as stressed by the reinforcement approach. Research signifies that ‘funny, brilliant, relaxed co-workers and modern spacious beautiful offices filled with comfortable equipment are some of the major benefits of working in Apple Company’ (Qumer 2009). At the same time, Apple Inc. has also never hesitated in punishing the guilty employees. Nadler and Nadler (1997, p. 11) argue in their research that downsizing occurred in Apple Computers in the ‘80s and ‘90s because of the absence of real organisational change. In other words, Apple Inc. demoted many employees who were found to be ineffective with respect to company standards. This proves that both rewards and punishments are used judiciously by Apple Inc. for motivating employees and refining its OB. However, all critics agree that extreme care should be taken while dispersing rewards and punishments. 4.4 Application of the cognitive dissonance theory Research identifies that diversity is good in that it motivates individuals to both positively criticise others and expect favourable attitudes from others (April & April n.d, p. 20). Apple’s managers fully acknowledge how multiple practical managerial applications of the cognitive dissonance approach can be used to keep diverse employees engaged (Borkowski 2009, p. 44). This theory basically serves as a motivator and contends that resistance to diversity at the workplace develops when people refuse to allocate space for new things from other cultures in their minds. Leach and Westbrook (2000, p. 8) maintain in their discussion that improper or low motivation at the workplace due to mishandled diversity may decrease morale and satisfaction levels of the employees, and their punctuality and attendance could be seriously damaged. Such resistance, which triggers poor motivation, can be plummeted down by relying on effective cognitive dissonance instruction that changes workers’ attitudes (Cooper 2007, p. 8). This strategy compels both managers and diverse employees to contemplate different precarious issues encountered by them, and offers innovation proposals in a friendly environment. Likewise in case of Apple too, employees are encouraged to be innovative in their work, and those who stress being demotivated are given no guarantee of employment. 4.5 Application of the Cohen-Bradford Influence Model The Cohen-Bradford Influence Model is worth mentioning here in reference to how employees are motivated at Apple. The bedrock of this model is formed by this belief that ‘all of the positive and negative things we do for (or to) others will be paid back over time’ (Mind Tools 2013). It is claimed by Cohen and Bradford that an influence model is only necessary when people at the giving end find a big burden to give what is asked by employers and when the other group turns out to be resistant (Cohen & Bradford 2011). This model has been found quite applicable by Apple managers because of this belief that when positive things are done for employees, those good actions are repaid by high motivation as suggested by Cohen and Bradford. Such employees would think about working harder and staying longer than necessary at the workplace to lend strength to their organization, because they would feel motivated to act in that particular manner. People abusing power at work to look after their interests and ignoring important concerns of employees are critically recognised as major reasons behind diminished organisational commitment and motivation observed in workers, because bad actions are paid back over time (Whetten & Cameron 1993, p. 31). 5.0 Conclusion In conclusion, discussion included in this report makes this claim more forceful that OB is heavily dependent on factors such as motivation, workers’ attitudes and job satisfaction. Employees develop positive attitudes towards work and workplace when they are happy with their jobs. In contrast, employees demonstrate negative attitudes when they fail to derive any mental or emotional satisfaction from their jobs. It is one of the principal duties of any organisation to make sure that all employees are sufficiently motivated to present the best work possible. Apple Inc. has established a good name for itself by motivating its employees through different measures, and has kept implementing important management theories to that effect. By incorporating concerns about employee motivation into main business agenda, managers at Apple Inc., for the most part, have maintained their reputation for making the most out of a highly driven workforce. Economic crisis can result if thinking patterns of people working for an organisation are channeled into individual modes rather than are channeled into a mode of common welfare for that organisation. Apple Inc. leaders have been able to introduce change and influence people on different levels by keeping in mind the implications of such important management models as analysed above. References Adams, S 2012, ‘How to get hired at an Apple store’, Forbes, viewed 22 November 2013, http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2012/04/03/how-to-get-hired-at-an-apple-store/. April, K & April A n.d., ‘Responsible leadership ethics’, pp. 1–24, viewed 22 November 2013, http://www.ashridge.org.uk/Website/IC.nsf/wFARATT/Responsible%20Leadership%20Ethics/$File/ResponsibleLeadershipEthics.pdf. Buchanan, D & Bryman, A 2009, The Sage handbook of organizational research methods, SAGE Publications Ltd, Great Britain. Blokdijk, G 2008, Change management 100 success secrets - the complete guide to process, tools, software and training in organizational change management, Lulu.com. Borkowski, N 2009, Organizational behavior in health care, Jones & Bartlett Learning, USA. Chen, TF 2010, Implementing new business models in for-profit and non-profit organizations: technologies and applications, Idea Group Inc (IGI), USA. Chiang, C 2006, An expectancy theory model for hotel employee motivation: the moderating role of communication satisfaction, ProQuest. Cohen, AR & Bradford, DL 2011, Influence without authority, 2nd ed, John Wiley & Sons, Canada. Cooper, J 2007, Cognitive dissonance: 50 years of a classic theory, SAGE, London. Denning, S 2012, ‘Apple’s employees have a hell of a ride’, Forbes, viewed 22 November 2013, http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2012/06/25/apples-employees-have-a-hell-of-a-ride/. Elsdon, R 2013, Business behaving well: social responsibility, from learning to doing, Potomac Books, USA. Evans, M, Jamal, A & Foxall, G 2010, Consumer behaviour, 2nd edn, John Wiley & Sons. Fiegerman, S 2012, ‘Actually, sometimes it sucks to work at Apple – here’s why’, Business Insider, viewed 22 November 2013, http://www.businessinsider.com/the-biggest-complaints-employees-have-about-working-at-apple-2012-6. Gallo, C 2012, ‘Three surprising questions apple store asks about every job candidate’, Forbes, viewed 22 November 2013, http://www.forbes.com/sites/carminegallo/2012/07/10/three-surprising-questions-apple-store-asks-every-job-candidate/. Gitman, LJ & McDaniel, C 2008, The future of business: the essentials, Cengage Learning, USA. Green, TB & Butkus, RT 1999, Motivation, beliefs, and organizational transformation, Greenwood Publishing Group, USA. Harrigan, KR 2003, Vertical integration, outsourcing, and corporate strategy, Beard Books, USA. Hersen, M 2004, Comprehensive handbook of psychological assessment, industrial and organizational assessment, John Wiley & Sons, USA. Value Based Management.net 2013, ‘Two factor theory’, viewed 22 November 2013, http://www.valuebasedmanagement.net/methods_herzberg_two_factor_theory.html. Heskett, J 2012, The culture cycle: how to shape the unseen force that transforms performance, FT Press, USA. Jex, SM & Britt, TW 2008, Organizational psychology: a scientist-practitioner approach, John Wiley & Sons. Kumar, A & Sharma, R 2000, Principles of business management, Atlantic Publishers & Dist, India. Leach, FJ & Westbrook, JD 2000, ‘Motivation and job satisfaction in one government research and development environment’, Engineering Management Journal, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 3–8. Mind Tools 2013, ‘The influence model: using reciprocity to gain influence’, viewed 22 November 2013, http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/influence-model.htm. Nadler, DA & Nadler MB 1997, Champions of change: how CEOs and their companies are mastering the skills of radical change, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. Perry, BA 2010, ‘Abuse of power...Bullying at work’, Pittsburgh Courier, viewed 22 November 2013, http://www.newpittsburghcourieronline.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3184:abuse-of-powerbullying-at-work&catid=39:national&Itemid=2. Pride, WM, Hughes, RJ & Kapoor, JR 2010, Business, 11th edn, Cengage Learning, USA. Qumer, SM 2009, ‘Apple Inc’s corporate culture: the good, the bad and the ugly’, viewed 22 November 2013, http://www.icmrindia.org/casestudies/catalogue/Human%20Resource%20and%20Organization%20Behavior/HROB124.htm. Saari, LM & Judge, TA 2004, ‘Employee attitudes and job satisfaction’, Human Resource Management, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 395–407. Sasson, R 2013, ‘What is motivation and how to strengthen it?’, viewed 22 November 2013, http://www.successconsciousness.com/strengthen_motivation.htm. Schneier, CE, Shaw, DG, Beatty, RW & Baird, LS 1995, Performance measurement, management, and appraisal sourcebook, Human Resource Development, USA. Whetten, DA & Cameron, KS 1993, Developing management skills: motivating others, HarperCollins. Read More