Organizational Behaviour: Analysis of a direction practician article utilizing relevant organizational behavior theory.
Several theories have been proposed to try to explicate what motive is and to depict how it affects people’s behavior. The most relevant to this study are seen to be the work of Maslow, Hertzberg, McClelland and Vroom. Maslow identified what he termed a hierarchy of demands. These ranged from the basic demands of nutrient, heat and shelter to the highest degree of self-actualisation. Maslow’s theory was that persons are motivated to accomplish their unsated demands. The chief unfavorable judgments of Maslow’s theory include the positions that foremost, persons do non carry through their demands through work entirely and their societal and personal lives can supply some of the degrees. Second, some facets of work may carry through demands on several degrees at the same time. Mullins ( 2005 ) uses the illustration of a payrise or publicity to exemplify this. Stum built on the work of Malsow and made it more applicable to the work environment by proposing a “Performance Pyramid” in which the five degrees are “safety/security, wagess, association, growing and work/life harmony” ( Stum 2001, p. 5 ) .
Hertzberg approached the theory of motive otherwise by placing what he referred to as “hygiene or maintenance” and “motivators or growth” factors ( summarised from Hertzberget Al1959 ) . . His research suggested that there were factors which although non motivational in themselves would be demotivating if they were non present e.g. work conditions or occupation security, whereas facets such as acknowledgment and duty would be actuating.
McClelland’s work was based on the construct of four “motives” . these are accomplishment, power, affiliative and turning away ( summarised from McClelland 1988 ) . McClelland identified that persons with a strong accomplishment demand had four features: “a penchant for moderate undertaking trouble ; personal duty for public presentation, the demand for feedback ; and innovativeness” ( Mullins 2005, p. 488 ) .
Vroom’s work is considered to be of import as he espoused the construct of anticipation in that persons were motivated into certain classs of action on the apprehension that there would be a specific result as a consequence and therefore “ ( T ) he pick of behavior is based on the anticipation of the most favorable consequences” ( Mullins 2005, p. 489 ) . Adams built on this by developing equity theory which “focuses on people’s feelings of how reasonably they have been treated in comparing with the intervention received by others” ( Mullins 2005, p. 496 ) .
Learning and cognition theories.
It is non considered appropriate to this paper to discourse the assorted theories of acquisition and cognition. Emphasis will be given to current positions on best pattern for these topics. Knowledge direction has been seen as a desirable scheme for modern administrations. In its simplest signifier, knowledge direction involves larning from the experiences of co-workers and sharing information and accomplishments. It is seen as a procedure to “identify and formalize the significance of knowledge” that exists within an administration ( Mullins 2005, p. 395 ) and it is suggested that there are “distinct advantages…for those companies who are able to do effectual usage of their rational assets” ( Mullins 2005, p. 395 ) . Santosuset Alagree with this stating that a “creative attack to knowledge direction can ensue in improved efficiencies, higher productiveness and increased grosss to practically any concern function” ( Santosuset Alday of the month non known, p. 1 ) . Coulson-Thomas stated that “given contemplation, focal point and an appropriate and trim combination of alteration and support elements, effectual cognition direction can enable corporate reclamation, larning and transmutation to occur” ( Coulson-Thomas 1998, p. 24-25 ) . Cohen suggests that cognition direction is closely linked with the communicating by stating, “ ( I ) nformation no longer filters from the top down ; it branches out into every conceivable way and it flows off from the information Godheads and towards the information users” ( Cohen 1998, p. 52 ) .
A farther construct identified as current best pattern is that of the learning administration. Pedleret Aldefine this as “an administration which facilitates the acquisition of all its members and continuously transforms itself” ( Pedleret EL1988, p. 1 ) . Senge expands on this by stating that a learning administration is one “where people continually expand their capacity to make the consequences they genuinely desire, where new and expansive forms of thought are nurtured, where corporate aspiration is set free, and where people are continually larning to larn together” ( Senge 1990, p. 1 ) .
In the instance of motive, Crawford recognises that directors need to be cognizant of motive to be able to depute and authorise employees. He suggests that giving duty to persons will take to a positive reaction and warns that the arbitrary remotion of it “can be improbably demotivating” ( Crawford 2006, p.** ) . He besides recognises the demand to promote people to accomplish their full potency in stating “spend clip understanding your employees demands and aspirations” ( Crawford 2006, p. ** ) . This can be seen as a acknowledgment of Malsow’s motive theory and the importance of helping persons in accomplishing their higher degree demands. This is seen once more in the point on promoting employees to “have fun” ( Crawford 2006, p. ** ) as it could be seen as a manner of accomplishing “love” demands. Crawford’s point on promoting a work-life balance besides acknowledges Stum’s development of Maslow’s theory.
Crawford’s article shows most alignment with McClelland’s motive theory in that he cites the importance of supplying challenges, deputation and giving feedback. Crawford besides shows acknowledgment of anticipation theory demoing the demand for directors to carry through the second-level results in footings of congratulations, acknowledgment and publicity although he seems to presume that the higher public presentation will automatically be achieved. Similarly, he assumes the fulfillment of equity theory in neglecting to foreground the demand to use his ain recommendations reasonably to all employees.
Crawford makes small expressed mention to acquisition and cognition in his article. It is possible to propose that there are implied mentions, for illustration, in the subdivision entitled “learn to allow go” , one would presume that the procedures of deputation and authorization would be superceded by guaranting that the persons possess the right accomplishments sets to be able to be successful. Similarly, under the header “discuss calling paths” it could be assumed that “helping them to take the stairss necessary to gain their dreams and ambitions” ( Crawford 2006, p. ** ) , would affect a grade of formal preparation and/or development. Where Crawford makes the most specific reference of cognition is in the subdivision entitled “recognise people’s strengths” . In this subdivision he notes that “ ( m ) ost administrations have a wealth of possible endowment that remains untapped” ( Crawford 2006, p. ** ) . He suggests that it is due to “unimaginative leading and restraining organizational practices” and recommends that the director “ ( s ) eek ( s ) to unlock this potency, even if it means ambitious organizational protocol” ( Crawford 2006, p. ** ) . Crawford does besides advert the demand to “communicate honestly” , which could be seen as encouragement to portion knowledge peculiarly as he notes specifically that it “helps let go of the latent potency within the workforce” ( Crawford 2006, p. ** ) .
With respect to the construct of the acquisition administration, Crawford makes no specific mention to uninterrupted acquisition and transmutation except in the thought of holding a “structured calling path” ( Crawford 2006, p. ** ) which he identifies as being merely applicable to certain persons. It should be noted, nevertheless, that Mullins suggests that a learning administration “values single development, unfastened communicating and trust” ( Mullins 2005, p. 399 ) and that the latter two of these points are mentioned by Crawford.
Crawford fails to advert the demand to guarantee that Hertzberg’s hygiene factors are in topographic point and it is possible that he has assumed that in the mark administrations, factors such as safety and security, occupation security and wage and conditions are all acceptable. Similarly, Vroom’s point on anticipation and Adam’s point on equality are besides assumed in that no specific point is made on the demand to guarantee wages for public presentation other than stating thank you or the demand to use his points to all staff. It would hold been wise for Crawford to hold including an gap set of premises as an debut to his composing to guarantee the basic foundations were in topographic point for anyone want to pattern his suggestions. Although three of McClelland’s accomplishment demands factors are mentioned, Crawford does non advert the importance of leting invention: “ ( the ) changeless hunt for assortment and for information to happen new ways of making things“ ( Mullins 2005, p. 488 ) . It is possible that these are assumed in the subdivisions on deputation and acknowledgment, but the importance of leting persons the chance to be originative should hold received more accent. Crawford does non specifically advert the demand for directors to place single employees incentives and seek to supply an environment in which they can be fulfilled and Mullins advises that “ ( T ) he director, hence, must judge the relevancy of these different theories, how best to pull upon them, and how they might efficaciously be applied in peculiar work state of affairss. The director must be cognizant of at least the chief theories of motivation” ( Mullins 2005, p. 479 ) .
In the countries of acquisition and cognition, Crawford has failed to recognize the significance of these in the procedure of animating staff. Although briefly noticing on the topic of cognition direction, he does non supply a practical solution to tapping this potency other than through communicating. Knowledge direction enterprises are said to necessitate to include the undermentioned points: acknowledgment of its benefits and application, specifying the end, leting the procedure to of course germinate and guaranting that cognition overload does non happen ( summarised from Santosuset Alday of the month non known ) .
If, as it seems, the article’s mark audience is those at a direction degree, the of import constructs of coaching and mentoring should hold been included. Seen as being a anchor of the acquisition administration ( Mullins 2005 ) , these patterns are of import as “a scheme for uninterrupted, changeless betterment in footings of both employee and concern development” ( Kalinaukaset Al1994, p. 11 ) . Furthermore, the point on holding calling waies for employees should be extended to let for the proviso of a robust preparation and development scheme within the administration to guarantee the employees have the necessary accomplishments to be able to make their occupations good prior to looking at calling promotion. The same can be said for the director trying to implement Crawford’s points.
Overall, Crawford has suggested ten points which he feels will animate employees. Whilst it can non be argued that the points he has made are non valid, there remains a big grade of ambiguity sing how the director can implement these thoughts in what would necessitate, in many cases, a complete cultural displacement for the administration. Whilst it may be valuable for those smaller concerns where a individual or little figure of directors have the ability to do these alterations or for the main executive of a major administration who can exert the necessary power, Crawford’s suggestions fall far short of being a formula for success on their ain.
Probably the chief barrier to being able to use Crawford’s recommendations to an administration is the deficiency of practical thoughts he puts frontward. Whilst, as stated, his points are valid, implementing them in a big administration would be hard for an single director. This leads us to oppugn the utility of using organizational behavior theory to practical state of affairss in general.
Crawford’s article is a good illustration of how this procedure of is a hard one necessitating certain patterns to be in topographic point which can so be built on. Similarly, the economic clime can impact the ways in which concerns operate and strong degrees of competition with accent on net income maximization make it hard to incite many organizational behavior theories as the longer term benefits may non be instantly obvious. In general, the easiness with which alteration can happen within an administration depends strongly on the civilization of the concern and neutering civilization itself is a long and hard procedure. Therefore, for one director to one-sidedly present new organizational behavior theories into their employees concern would run into with even more barriers. As an illustration, Mullins advises us of the troubles in going a learning administration in stating that “ ( T ) he truism that cognition is power agencies that those people within the administration who wish to retain their power and control may experience really discombobulated ( at the chance of sharing cognition ) ” ( Mullins 2005, p. 397 ) . Her concerns are echoed by other authors ( Garvin, Harrison, Mumford and Coopey ) who question the easiness of execution, the procedure of transmutation, the difference between single acquisition and a learning administration and the effects of the political and power bases within administrations. This is merely one illustration of the jobs faced in using organizational behavior theory to practical state of affairss.
In decision, an apprehension of organizational behavior theory is indispensable for today’s directors and an article such as the one by Crawford can function to promote persons to do efforts to change their ain behavior towards their employees to be able to see the benefits of application. However, the procedure of presenting new ways of working frequently involves a alteration in the civilization of the concern and external forces, such as competition, may intend that the alterations are viewed as impractical by those with the power to originate them. , this does non intend that a director within a big concern should non, where appropriate, adapt their ain behavior to guarantee that those who report to that director have a more fulfilling work life but besides that the attendant public presentation of their staff helps promote others to follow the same rules.
Mentions and bibliography:
Adams, J.S.“Injustice in Social Exchange”in Berkowitz, L. ( ed. )Progresss in Experimental Social Psychology,Academic Press ( 1965 ) . Abridged in Steers, R.M. Porter, L.W. Motivation and Work Behaviour. Pp. 107-24. New York: McGraw-Hill.
CIPD ( 2006 ) .Contemplations on the 2006 acquisition and development study. London CIPD.
Cohen, S. ( 1998 ) . “Knowledge Management’s Killer App”Training and Development, vol. 52, no. 1, January.
Coopey, J. ( 1996 ) .“Crucial Gaps in the Learning Organization. Power, Politics and Ideology”in Starkey, K. ( ed. )How Organizations Learn. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Coulson-Thomas, C. ( 1998 ) .Knowledge is Power.Chartered Secretary, January 1998, pp. 24-25.
Crawford, D. ( 2006 ) .“…animate your staff”.Peoples Management May 2006 p. **
Garvin, D. A. ( 1993 ) .Constructing a Learning Organisation.Harvard Business Review, July-August, pp. 24-27.
Harrison, R. ( 2000 ) .Employee Development.London: Institute of Personnel and Development.
Hertzberg, F. Mausner, B. Snyderman, B.B. ( 1959 ) .The Motivation to Work.New York: John Wiley & A ; Sons
Kalinaukas, P. King, H. ( 1994 ) .Coaching: Gaining the Potential. London: Institute of Personnel and Development.
Legge, K. ( 2005 ) .Human Resource Management: Rhetorics and Worlds. Basingstoke: Palgrave McMillan.
McClelland, D.C. ( 1988 ) .Human Motivation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mullins, L.J. ( 2005 ) .Management and Organisational Behaviour. Harlean carpenter: Prentice Hall.
Mumford, A. ( 1993 ) .Management Development: Schemes for Action. London: Institute of Personnel and Development.
Pedlar, M. Boydell, T. Burgoyne, J. ( 1988 ) .Learning Company Project: A Report on Work Undertaken October 1987 to April 1998. Sheffield: Training Agency.
Robbins, S.P. Judge, T.A. ( 2006 ) .Organizational Behaviour. Concepts, Controversies and Applications.Harlean carpenter: Prentice Hall FT
Santosus, M. Surmacz, J.The ABCs of Knowedge Management. Accessed at: hypertext transfer protocol: //www.cio.com/research/knowledge/edits/kmabcs.html on 29/02/2007.
Senge, P. ( 1990 ) .The Fifth Discipline. New York: Doubleday.
Stum, D.L. ( 2001 ) . “Maslow revisited: edifice the employee committedness pyramid”.Strategy and leading, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 4-9.
Vroom, V. H. ( 1994 ) .Work and Motivation. New York: Jossey-Bass.