74599587 ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR

Change management involves thoughtful planning as well as sensitive implementation, in particular, consulting and involving the people bound to be affected by these changes. If change is forced on people there are chances that problems will arise. Change needs to be realistic, measurable and achievable. These features are mostly applicable to personal change management.

Before embarking on organizational change one ought to ask himself some important questions; what one would want to accomplish by means of this change, why the change will be achieved, and how people would know that it has been accomplished? On which people will the change have effect on and how are they likely going to react on it? To what capacity is the change achievable, and in what areas is assistance needed?  These aspects will not only relate to organizational change but also to personal management.

Some modern principles necessary for change management in organizations as well as effective training in addition to development on employees will not look appealing to organizations that still are rooted to the old X-Theory culture not unless they be willing to change to enhance themselves. Nevertheless, any organization that is emotional mature and forward thinking, an organization that values integrity more than results, and on the other hand values people more than profit will apply these principles.

Employees, customers and the global market will assess a modern organization using the criteria for the sustainability of the organization, its corporate responsibility, fair trade and its three-piece bottom line comprising the profit, the people and the planet. This does not imply that results as well as profit are not of substance, of which they are, it is only emphasized that when people and integrity are valued, results as well as profit will come naturally.

Managers, business owners and organizations assume that employees and the people under their management are paid to work and follow orders. We are habituated from childhood to suppose that telling people or persuading them to do something is the way followed in teaching, training along with motivating people in the direction of change. From our practices at school the majority are trained to deem that skills, understanding, as well as expectations are put into individuals by teachers, later by managers and superiors at the workplace.

However, it does not have to be because the manager says so. In this modern age people have developed different perspectives. Enforcing change along with new skills on people will not work for the reason that it presupposes that the wishes and personal aims of people are directly aligned with the business needs. Worse still it will also assume that such alignment is not needed. In addition the process might also assume that people have accepted change and are willing to assimilate into personal lives the new developments or change introduced by the organization, besides every one of  their other diverse priorities.

As an alternative, bosses, business owners, managers and organizations would improve if they first think on ways of aligning the business aspirations or plans with the needs of their individuals. Most workers are under no fantasy that their key purpose is to achieve what their superior says, with the intention that their organization can, when the year ends, pay despicably great rewards to gluttonous directors on the one hand, and on the other hand a full-size fat bonus to shareholders. Workers work for the benefit of the fortunate, aggressive or more gifted people.

 

 

A fact remains that people will under no circumstances support bad aims. Some of this aims are open to all the parties concerned. For instance if they realize that the company or the management suffers environmental damage, has executive greed, practices inequality, exploits or betrays its people, then it is more obvious that its workers will not bend to change. Most of the workers will fake acceptance and approval yet inwardly oppose the idea. The manager should therefore re-assess as well as re-align the aims of the organization, integrity and beliefs with his people in mind. Through this, they might gain interst and begin to chip in new ideas and change.

The second fact is that people will not simply drop everything and embrace change or else learn novel skills for reasons that the manager or business owner has said so. Though they might be willing to adopt new skills and change they have other greater issues in the organization that keep them completely occupied. Therefore, making consultations with people is crucial so that one will have a better understanding on the feasibility or implications of what needs to be done. It also adds up to acquiring other ideas from the participants who will be in a position to perceive things from all sides, of the workers and the management.

The third fact is that organizations find themselves in crisis as a result of ignoring the first and the second facts stated above. Instead they claim that they lack time to re-assess as well as re-align their values, aims and others. They also add that there is inadequate time  to carry out proper consultations with the people owing it to being on

Organizations commonly say they don’t have time to re-assess and re-align their aims and values, etc., or don’t have time to consult with people properly, because the organization is on the periphery of crisis. However, they need not blame the crisis on any of the factors mentioned since they get themselves into crisis as a result of ignoring the two facts mentioned earlier which will further deepen the fatality of the situation rather than improving it.

Organizations should by no means use crisis as an excuse to compromise integrity. In its place it should be the most excellent motive to re-align the aims of the company or organization in addition to consulting with people. Crisis should act as a wake-up call into changing the organization as well as its purpose and not changing the people. During organizational crisis, it is the organization that suffers loss and pain and not the people.

Therefore, business owners ought to begin with looking at the purposes, the values and the aims of their organizations. A manager should seek to know what his organization really aims at and who are deemed to be the beneficiaries. In addition he should also find out the people who could be exploited by his company as he finds out the winners and the losers. Moreover, he should try to discover if his organization practices real integrity asking himself if he is confident of the consequences as well as the implications his organization has on its people. He should seek to know from his people about his impact on the organization and how they perceive his ability of managing change.

Organizational describes the values, attitudes, psychology, beliefs and experiences of organizations. It is also the definite set of values as well as norms shared by individuals and groups in a given organization which control their personal interactions one with another as well as stakeholders not within the organization. Ravasi and Schultz (2006) define organizational culture as laid down mutual mental assumptions guiding interpretation as well as action carried out in organizations by classifying appropriate behavior needed in different situations.

Although it is hard to get to an agreement as far as defining organizational culture is concerned, several construct have been universally agreed upon, that the term is holistic along with being historically determined with a relationship with concepts in anthropology, soft, socially constructed and hard to change. The definition continues to describe it as ideas or beliefs regarding the type of goals to be pursued in an organization by its members along with the ideas concerning the behavioural standards that organizational members need to achieve the set goals. Certain norms develop from organizational for instance guidelines and behavioural expectations for employees along with organizational norms.

Strong culture exists where the staff acts in response to stimulus due to their position to the values within the organization. In such settings, strong cultures will help firms function similar to well-oiled machines, journeying along with stupendous execution and possibly minor alterations of procedures that are already existing. Conversely, weak culture entails little alignment or association with the values of the organization. To exercise control over it bureaucracy and extensive procedures need to be undertaken.

Research reveals that firms that endorse strong cultures encompass clear values that bestow the workforce a cause to take in the culture. Strong culture especially benefits firms that operate in service sectors. This is because the organizations’ members are in charge of delivering services and making important evaluations about firms. There are benefits that the organization enjoys as a result of developing cultures that are strong as well as productive.

These ways are namely; bringing into line the company in a better way with an aim of achieving its goals, mission and vision. The employees should be highly motivated and the business managers need to be loyal to them as well. Llevels of team cohesiveness should be raised among the divisions and the departments of the company. Consistency should be maintained and control along with coordination encouraged in the company. Efficiency and effectiveness will be achieved in the organization through shaping the behavior of the employees at work.

In organizations that experience strong culture people will do things for the belief that it is what is expected to be done, the noble thing to do. However, Irving L. Janis describes a risky phenomenon which he termed as “Groupthink.” He gave it a definition as “…a quick and easy way to refer to a mode of thinking that people engage when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when members’ strive for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternatives of action.” In this state people may have different ideas but fail to challenge the thinking of the organization thus reducing chances of having innovative thoughts incorporated into the organization.

Groupthinking is evident in cases where for instance people heavily rely on a fundamental figure within the organization or exercise evangelical belief on the values of the organization. It is also climax in cases where there is an evasion of conflict for instance groups with friendly climate at the base This could occur, for example, where there is heavy reliance on a central charismatic figure in the organization, or where there is an evangelical belief in the organization’s values, or also in groups where a friendly climate is at the foot of their personality or identity.

Groupthinking is mostly common in all groups and defiant members are perceived as of negative influence and are turned down to avoid conflict. Innovative organizations are in need of prepared individuals armed to face up to the given status quo; bureaucracy or group-think. They also require procedures to put into practice new ideas in an effective way. Organizations will increase their efficiency, growth and productivity once they strive to achieve organizational culture that is healthy. An organization comprising a healthy culture will reduce the turnover of its employees as well as other behavior that is counterproductive.

The characteristics that describe this type of culture in an organization are accepting and appreciating diversity, giving fair treatment to every employee and respecting the contributions they make towards the company. Employee pride plus passion for not only the organization but also the work performed. Equal opportunities to each employee that they may realize their maximum potential in the company along with strongly communicating to all employees about policies and issues in the company add up to healthy culture.

In addition, healthy culture will be present if a company has strong leaders who have a powerful sense of purpose and direction. A healthy cultured organization is capable of competing in price, customer service and industry innovation. The healthy culture will perpetuate turnover rates that are below average and will invest in training, learning as well as employee knowledge.

Cultures that are performance oriented have proved to possess enhanced financial growth. Such cultures have far above the ground employee involvement, well-built internal communications as well as a recognition and support of a hale and hearty level of taking risks in realizing innovation. Furthermore, organizational cultures that openly put emphasis on factors coupled with the demands positioned by the technology as well as growth of the industry will perform better in their organizations.

According to Kotter and Heskett (1992), the performance for organizations that have adaptive cultures is better than those that have unadaptive cultures. Adaptive culture leads to organizational success. It is considered to include managers who closely pay attention to the entire group of constituencies, in particular, customers, they instigate change when necessary, and take risks. A culture that is unadaptive can significantly trim down the effectiveness of a firm, disabling it from chasing after all its options in operations and competition.

A number of methods have been applied to categorize organizational culture. Despite the fact that any single variety of  culture in organizations lack, these cultures vary extensively from one given organization to another, commonalities are seen and several researchers have gone ahead to develop  models that give descriptions of  diverse organizational cultures.

Hofstede (1980) verified that national as well as regional cultural alliances or combinations affect the organizations’ behavior. In efforts to unearth cultural aspects influencing business behavior, Hofstede used a sample of more than 100,000 employees from IBM companies worldwide and searched for national differences amidst them. Hofstede came up with four culture dimensions during his national influences study.

Power distance is the dimension in which the society looks forward to differences in the power levels. High score will advocate that that a number of individuals will be expected to exercise larger quantities of power in comparison with others. Low scores will reflect the outlook that every single person should possess equal rights.

Uncertainty avoidance will be a sign of the level in which humanity accepts doubt and risk. In addition, the third dimension individualism which is in contrast with collectivism refers to the degree in which individuals are supposed to fight for themselves. They are also on the other hand expected to mainly act as a group member or organizational member. Research shows that these two notions are actually not related. Some people as well as cultures may possess high collectivism as well as high individualism and high.

Masculinity against femininity gives reference to the worth positioned on usually male values or female values. Male values will include accumulation of material and wealth, ambition, assertiveness and competitiveness. O’Reilly et al along with Denison developed a pair of common models together with their related measurement tools.

O’Rielly, Chatman & Caldwell (1991) came up with a model whose basis was on the principle that cultures are distinguished by values reinforced in organizations. Their OCP[1] is a tool that is self reporting and it clearly defines distinctions in accordance with seven categories namely; innovation, stability, admiration for people, being keen and attentive to detail, outcome and team orientations, and aggressiveness. The intention of the model is not measuring the effects of organizational culture on organizational performance but to a certain extent it measures the relations between the character of individuals in both the organization as well as the culture of the organization.

Daniel Denison’s model (1990) states that it is possible to describe organizational culture using four universal dimensions namely mission, adaptability, consistency and adaptability. Each of the dimensions is described extensively by some sub dimensions. Mission is further broken down into strategic direction as well as intent, goals along with objectives, vision. Adaptability focuses on creating change, focusing on the customer plus organizational learning. Involvement comprises empowerment, team orientation as well as capability development.

Consistency on the other hand is strengthened by core values, coordination or integration along with agreement. This model also permits broad and extensive descriptions of cultures. The descriptions can be focused on the external or on the internal in addition to being flexible to be described broadly as externally- or internally-focused as well as flexible v stable. Denson’s model has been characteristically used to make a diagnosis of existing cultural problems within organizations.

Deal and Kennedy gave the following definition of organizational culture; “the way things get done around here.” In relation to its feedback this would mean a quick response and also measured organizations in firms such as oil prospecting or military aviation. Process Culture takes place in organizations with little levels or else none at all of feedback. People are slowed down by ways in which things are accomplished rather than what is supposed to be accomplished. It is most a times linked with bureaucracies. Though these cultures are criticized for being excessively cautious, they actually generate consistent results, ideal in sectors offering public services. .

Operational strategy defines strategies execution thus business leaders need to identify and record priorities of several programs collection so as to convey the necessary strategy. Alternatively the execution that involves programs implementation follows as businesses or organizations pursue on improving the approach of categorizing the already undertaken programs. Successful strategies execution is brought about through creating links between a number of business benefits and capabilities via portfolio configuration (Franken, Edwards, & Lambert, 2009).

Operational strategies furthermore try to identify risks while evaluating them. The strategies establish ways in which risks are significant to businesses as they find means in which they can be prevented or cured. This is achieved through declaring the intensity of  as well as come up with the preventive or curative measures. It is done by stating the intensity in which risk is likely to occur stating the consequences as well. Risk maps are used to classify them into scales. This is essential for plotting the implications of risks occurrence (Cranfield University, n.d).

Strategic management offers essential framework designed to support thriving performance management. Performance management from time to time augments strategic planning by clarifying strategy along with finding strategy. For example, continuous experience in performance management systems informs the planners of realistic expectations, opportunities, and limitations experienced in intensification of the programs performance within their contexts of operation. Performance reports in addition help in making out strategies that would turn out to have great effects in particular areas at the same time as they identify those areas that cannot feel the effects (Poister, 2010).

Strategic planning categorizes the company’s corporate mission of a company. It evidently defines the place in which a company or organization is headed and the pressures therein. Strategic planning involves formulation strategies in the course of concepts that have been laid down, tools as well as processes. Strategic planning has its aims directed to endorsing strategic thinking, operations plus progressive learning. It thus makes sure that the life of a business continues to exist, its effectiveness along with its capacity to append to communal value (Poister, 2010).

Hofstede Model, used to study organizations has been of great benefits to the involved researchers owing to its accessible nature. It shows how values are distinct in four levels or layers. Culture according to him looks like an onion. It is that structure which is peel able, one layer followed by another with the intention of revealing what is actually contained inside. The most hidden layer is that which represents different people’s ideas on diverse things. These are diverse individual inclinations to different circumstantial dealings over others (Barling & Cooper, 2008).

In Hofstede model noticeable practices carrying unseen connotations of culture broaden transversely the three external layers. Hofstede reveals how exogenous manipulations for instance nature forces have an effect on cultural origins historically or else technologically. He as well argues that outside forces influences rarely have effects on norms instead affect cultural origins like technology (Barling & Cooper, 2008).

The multilevel nature designed by Hofstede is important for it eases the burden of an organization in identifying a noticeable area in conjunction with the concealed one. However, this is merely achieved through acquiring keen interest as well as understanding those perceptible elements in the culture (Barling & Cooper, 2008).

Combining processes of outlining integrative strategy amid equal consistency as well as materialization smoothes the advancement of high effective management of work in particular complex sorts of work. When organizations consent to elevated participation degrees by members improvements are encouraged as far as the performance results are concerned. This mostly pertains to professional works, managerial works as well as engineering works (Lavarda, Giner, & Bonet, 2011).

 

 



[1] Organizational Profile Model

term papers to buy
research papers

此站点使用Akismet来减少垃圾评论。了解我们如何处理您的评论数据

 
QQ在线咨询
售前咨询热线
QQ:3554475127
售后咨询热线
QQ:3042439236