Organisational behaviour assesses the influence that individuals, associations, and structures have on conduct in an organisation in a bid to use such knowledge to boost efficiency in an organisation (Kopelman, Prottas & Davis 2008). Organisational behaviour further encompasses psychology, communication, sociology, and management. This paper analyses the issues arising from operations at Hawk Car Company with reference to different theories.
We will write a custom Essay on Organisational Behaviour and Its Influence specifically for you
807 certified writers online
Organisational structure and culture bear a dependent connection with each other. In a company like Hawk Car Company, management structure shapes the behaviours that give rise to work culture. Hawk Car Company was initially using hierarchical configuration and Taylorist techniques of production (Mullins 2007).
In the hierarchical structure, the power of decision-making was concentrated at the top, thus revealing no freedom and independence at the lower ranks. The company later decentralised the management structure with shared power at every level using teamwork where workers could now operate in teams. This move gave rise to a more personalised and responsible autonomous culture.
The manner in which a company assigns power influences the behaviour of employees. The initial hierarchical structure in Hawk Company encompassed a manager and workers and well outlined undertakings and reporting associations.
The hierarchical structure normally offers apparent formal and informal parameters on the behaviour anticipated from individuals at every stage of the hierarchy (Zheng, Yang & McLean 2010), and thus members in the group unconditionally accept orders from the manager. Owing to the use of the hierarchical structure, issues arose in the Hawk Car Company.
To start with, the company employees were experiencing dissatisfaction that resulted in high extents of absenteeism as well as high staff turn over. Hawk Car Company also encountered difficulties recruiting new workforce.
The issues arising from the hierarchical structure come up when employees fail to identify or agree to the management structure. With employees on assembly lines at Hawk Car Company initially having little say in designing and running of the production line, some workers were aggravated since the leaders would persistently disregard their recommendations (Zheng, Yang & McLean 2010).
Even minor differences pertaining to the manner in which employees perceive the hierarchical structure would hinder harmonisation and have a negative impact on performance. These hierarchical structure problems have a tendency of exacerbating as employees get to know each other. It is difficult for a manager to lead a group each day and generate new strategic plans.
Taylorist methods of production used at Hawk Car Company ensured that there was a standard way of carrying out every task. In the Taylorist method, certain employees could be chosen for particular tasks anchored in their capacity to do the job, and thus the manager could select an employee who had the essential skills for the task. In the Taylorist method of production, training could be offered to every hired individual.
The schedule could be designed for every worker in time to eradicate the interruptions that come up from the failure of proper planning. The work would be repetitive and boring while not considering individual differences (Zheng, Yang & McLean 2010).
However, what is suitable for an employee may not augur well with a different worker as evidenced by the fact that an increase in the production of a given worker could be a decrease in production of another workethe r.
The Taylorist method of production ignored the reality that the economic concerns of employees or managers are different. In such a case, the worker the manager that is not favoured by this method would resent and interfere with the Taylorist method of production.
The Tuckman’s model of teamwork theory explains the changes made at Hawk Car Company where the workers became disorganised in assembly lines and started working in teams. Rather than carrying out a particular undertaking repetitively, every employee was trained to perform every job set for his/her team.
The workers were now more effective as the application of teamwork gave every member of the team a chance to contribute and apply efforts towards attaining the objectives of the team (Zheng, Yang & McLean 2010).
Get your first paper with 15% OFF
In this case, there was reduced internal strife as there was no firm hierarchy and no single individual was monopolising the efforts of the team. Consequently, the environmental conditions of the workplace at Hawk Car Company improved among other benefits brought about by teamwork.
The initial management style shown at Hawks Car Company was the autocratic style that involved managers making decisions devoid of much consideration for subordinates. For this reason, ideas would reveal views and character of the manager that could portray the image of a thriving and well managed company.
On the contrary, powerful and effective employees might fail to work to their level best owing to restrictions on the autonomy of making decisions as witnessed in Hawk Car Company. Due to the autocratic management style at Hawk Car Company, the company experienced restricted inventiveness from managers and turnover amid employees was high.
The managers of Hawk Car Company sought a change in the management style in a bid o triumph over the problems brought about by the autocratic management style. After consulting with workers and managers from all their plants, they resulted to a democratic management style. In the democratic style, managers permitted the workers to partake in judgment making.
In this style, everything involved working as a team. There was thus wide-ranging communication between supervisors and the employees (Kopelman, Prottas & Davis 2008).
The democratic style proved to be very significant in making of complex decisions in the operations of the company. Due to the application of democratic management style in Hawk Car Company, job satisfaction amid employees and the excellence of work improved owing to increased participatory involvement of employees.
Organisational theory can explain different standards and practices of organisation and management as revealed by the different categories of job design for the manufacture of cars. For instance, in the bureaucratic theory as initially applied in Hawk Car Company, hierarchical structure was followed.
The company employees were normally trained in the suitable area of specialisation under the bureaucracy with the positions within the company following a particular set of general regulations. In the Taylorist method of production in Hawk Car Company, scientific management had an impact on both employees and managers and emphasised the control of workforce by managers (Kopelman, Prottas & Davis 2008).
As evident in the scientific management theory and applied in Hawk Car Company, emphasis was directhe ted to the training of employees by managers with equal division of an labour between the management and employees.
As stated by McGregor, there exist two management styles in accordance with the way managers consider the work potential of their workers. The theory X and theory Y created by McGregor have been applied in organisational behaviour, organisational development, and human resource management among other areas. The two theories denote contrasting representations of motivation of ethe mployees.
These theories deal with the concepts that managers have concerning their workers and not regarding their behaviour, viz. attitude as opposed to attributes. According to theory X, management teams hold that employees are naturally lazy and will stay away from work whenever possible, as they naturally dislike working.
In this regard, the management is convinced that employees require close monitoring with the establishment of ample systems of control requiring a hierarchical structure that has a narrow span of control at every stage. This scenario is similar to the management style applied at Hawk Car Company before the change.
In accordance with theory X, workers will express little hope devoid of an attractive incentive agenda and will evade tasks whenever possible (Kopelman, Prottas & Davis 2008). Due to applying theory X, managers at Hawk Car Company had to depend on threat as well the as compulsion to mthe ake the workers comply.
Managers who apply this theory build up mistrust, thus greatly limiting control and a punitive environment as they have a conviction that everything has to conclude in blaming an individual. These managers believe that every potential employee is out for himself/herself and that the only goal of an employee in a job is money. This management style did not work in the favour of Hawk Car Company, as it caused diseconomies of scale.
On the other hand, in accordance with theory Y, management holds that workers might exercise self-discipline as they could be determined and self-motivated. This management style was employed at Hawk Car Company after the change, and it assumed that workers could take pleasure in their intellectual and physical work tasks.
According to this theory, working is as effortless as playing and employees have the capacity for innovative problem solving capacity, though their abilities are not fully used in most organisations. Managers making use of theory Y assume that the fulfilment of carrying out an excellent task is a well-built motivation.
In theory Y, McGregor simply urges managers to allow a more constructive perception of employees and the potential that this move generates (Kopelman, Prottas & Davis 2008). For Hawk Car Company, the management style, in accordance with theory Y, worked better when judged against the management style according to theory X.
This assertion holds, as the management style according to theory Y was more liable of generating an environment of trust with workers, which is necessary for human resource advancement. This management style allowed the managers of Hawk Car Company to hold discussions with employees, thus reducing the difference between the ranks of the senior and junior workers (Mullins 2007).
This way, the managers create a comfortable atmosphere where employees can develop and apply their talents. In this kind of environment, decision-making is easy where employees have a say, thus improving the gains of the company.
According to the incentive theory of motivation, employees are motivated to carry out their tasks by use of external rewards. For instance, workers may be motivated to carry out their responsibilities effectively by payment of monetary incentives. Behavioural learning perceptions like relationship and empowerment play a key role in motivation of employees.
In Hawk Car Company, employees were offered relatively high wages that were boosted by bonuses or an excellent work. This incentive theory of motivation was applied in the company after the change of job design and management style in a bid to try to better the effectiveness of employees.
A reward (incentive) could be tangible or intangible and it is offered after an excellent performance (behaviour) with the aim of making the behaviour to come up repeatedly through the connection of positive meaning to the behaviour. Research has confirmed that if employees obtain the incentive immediately, the impact is bigger and it reduces as the delay increases.
Consistent behaviour-incentive combination could make the excellent performance become a routine. Motivation can come from two areas, viz. from within an individual (intrinsic) and from other individuals (extrinsic) (Dartey-Baah & Amoako 2011). In psychology, incentive theory handles motivation and behaviour of employees as they are controlled by convictions, like taking part in tasks that generate profits.
As witnessed in Hawk Car Company before and after change, it is evident that the performance of an employee at all times bear social implications. If the performance of an employee is constructively received, employees are liable of acting in an excellent manner. Likewise, if the performance of an employee is unconstructively received, employees are liable of acting in a poor manner.
According to Herzberg’s two-factor theory, some aspects at the place of work bring about job satisfaction’ however, if they are not provided, there is no dissatisfaction but lack of satisfaction. The aspects that motivate employees may constantly change, but respect is among the key motivating aspects at any level of life.
This theory differentiates motivators from hygiene factors where motivators are such things as demanding work, identification, and accountability that yield constructive satisfaction and hygiene factors include rank, job security, remuneration, and fringe benefits that do not necessarily yield motivation, but their lack would definitely cause de-motivation (Dartey-Baah & Amoako 2011).
The term hygiene was applied in hygiene factors because similar to hygiene, the provision of it does not make an individual healthier, but its lack would definitely result to health deterioration. Herzberg’s motivation theory is applicable in Hawk Car Company motivators as freedom was provided with the change of management style and hygiene factors like salary were availed.
Herzberg’s theory focuses on the significance of internal job aspects as motivators of workers and he intended it to better job improvement for workers. Like the change in Hawk Car Company, Herzberg desired to create a chance for workers to participate in planning, operations, decision-making, and assessment of their work.
There are four ways proposed by Herzberg in the achievement of this endeavour. To begin with, the decrease of some command over employees to enhance responsibility over their tasks could in return improve independence and authority of workers. Secondly, Herzberg suggested generation of comprehensive and natural work entities whenever appropriate.
This goal would be achieved by permitting workers to form a full unit rather than just letting them to form a section of it. Thirdly, Herzberg recommended the provision of direct, regular, and consistent response on efficiency to workers rather than doing it through supervisors (Dartey-Baah & Amoako 2011). Fourthly, Herzberg recommended motivating workers to take up challenging tasks in a bid to become professionals at an undertaking.
In Hawk Car Company, motivational tactics improved the performance of workers, increased their morale, promoted teamwork, and inculcated a positive attitude whenever challenges came up (Mullins 2007). Workers with a high degree of motivation characteristically put more efforts and triumph over normal challenges at the place of work with ease, which assists the organisation to attain its objectives and better the general processes.
Motivators work to enhance excellent performance as the incentive is given to workers not just for carrying out a given task, but also for carrying it out excellently and with zeal. In an organisation, management assists in the provision of both motivators and hygiene factors.
Where there is a chance for cooperation, people should capitalise on the opportunity instead of working individually. Teamwork results in a much more productive work as compared to individual work. The members of a team broaden their horizons by combining the logical as well as critical thinking of every member without suffering from shackles of restriction.
The most convincing idea of teamwork is the genuine conviction that the workload would be equally shared amid the members of a team and they would not require as much effort and time as an individual to make a greater achievement (DeChurch & Mesmer-Magnus 2010).
In this regard, an organisation looking for highly trained and motivated personnel to hire could allocate them in teams having experienced workers to allow the incoming employees to learn from each other for greater effectiveness. In short, teamwork does not just improve the entire performance, but it as well helps in decreasing the workload while permitting workers without experience to get an excellent commencement of their profession.
On the other hand, individualism also has its advantages over teamwork. To start with, suitable speed and level is easier to apply in individual work than in teamwork. In addition, individual interests and notions can be easily pursued in individual work with easier decision-making.
Even though some managers may find that teamwork is sometimes distracting and time wasting, its benefits over individual work are much more than its slight inconveniencies.
The impact of teamwork in Hawk Car Company was increased motivation and effectiveness of workers. When teamwork was used in Hawk Car Company, the company achieved what its individual workers had failed to achieve. For instance, through teamwork, the difficulties experienced earlier by the company were reduced and the problems of high absenteeism, high turnover of employees, and difficulties in hiring workers were eliminated.
When the members of a team employed different skills, they arrived at more productive solutions than an individual working on a similar problem alone (DeChurch & Mesmer-Magnus 2010). The production manager was thus quick to note that employees were becoming more educated, thus making the industry more interesting.
These effects can further be explained by Tuckman’s teamwork theory, which is well known as a foundation for successful team building. Moreover, this theory holds four stages that arise in team building for an excellent performance. The establishment of the group is the initial stage where members familiarise with one another.
Storming denotes the second stage were members of the team start to view themselves as a team and form necessary ranks of leadership. In the third phase, viz. norming, the team begins its operations, forms its rules, and comes up with the objectives of the team (DeChurch & Mesmer-Magnus 2010).
Performing is the fourth stage where the team starts to concentrate not only on the undertaking but also on the relations of the members. In the fourth stage, the team begins to grow together. The advantages of teamwork encompass higher effectiveness, the capacity to concentrate different minds on a particular problem, and mutual support.
In the Hawk Car Company, the management structure forms the behaviors that bring about work culture and the management style, in accordance with theory Y, which works better when judged against the management style according to theory X. Motivated workers put more efforts and triumph over normal challenges at the place of work with ease. Finally, teamwork in Hawk Car Company caused motivation and effectiveness of workers.
Dartey-Baah, K & Amoako, G 2011, ‘Application of Frederick Herzberg’s Two-Factor theory in assessing and understanding employee motivation at work: a Ghanaian Perspective’, European Journal of Business and Management, vol. 3 no. 9, pp. 1-8.
DeChurch, L & Mesmer-Magnus, J 2010, ‘The cognitive underpinnings of effective teamwork: A meta-analysis’, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 95 no. 1, pp. 32-35.
Kopelman, R, Prottas, D & Davis, A 2008, ‘Douglas McGregor’s Theory X and Y: toward a construct-valid measure’, Journal of Managerial Issues, vol. 4 no. 5, pp. 255-271.
Mullins, J 2007, Management and organisational behaviour, Prentice Hall, Harlow.
Zheng, W, Yang, B & McLean, G 2010, ‘Linking organisational culture, structure, strategy, and organisational effectiveness: Mediating role of knowledge management’, Journal of Business Research, vol. 63 no. 7, pp. 763-771.