![]() |
||
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
OBNotes.HTM for ORGB 2110, by WILF H. RATZBURG
|
To begin this discussion, let's examine the notion of behavior first. For purposes of our discussion, we will assume that behavior is a function of the person and the environment, or B = f (P, E). Next, let's examine the person in an organizational environment. |
. | Like other inputs into an enterprise, the human beings employed by that enterprise constitute a resource -- in this case, a human resource. Other resources must be managed to ensure both the efficiency and effectiveness of the organization. It takes economists, accountants, and financial analysts to understand and utilize the firm's monetary resources. |
|
Similarly, technologists, engineers, and trades people serve to help management
utilize the firm's material and production facilities efficiently. It is the role of the
Human Resource Manager, and others, skilled in the analysis of human interaction with the
work environment, to assist management in the proper utilization of human resources. The study of Organizational Behavior facilitates the process of explaining, understanding, predicting, maintaining, and changing employee behavior in an organizational setting. |
. | To facilitate the study of Organizational Behavior, we will look at human behavior in the organization from three perspectives. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
. | ![]() |
. | In summary, to understand behavior in the organization, we must examine the interaction of individuals with the various factors the individuals encounter in that organizational setting. The behaviors encountered in the organization are, of course, very diverse. The diversity of personalities interacting with varied organizational environments results in considerable variation in concomitant behavior. |
. | |
. | |
|
It may be useful, in an introduction to Organizational Behavior, to ask some
questions about what human beings expect from an organization. The answers are, of
course, as varied as the people in organizations are diverse. However, some
generalizations may be made. Employees generally expect respect. Furthermore,
employees want meaningful work that uses their skills and respects their ability to
use their minds in efforts to organize their work. The organization, having a mission or mandate, has certain expectations of its employees. Most importantly, employees are hired to enable the firm to meet its production, service, and economic objectives. |
. | |
. | Less evident is the dependency relationship that exists between the firm and its employees. If employees depend on the firm for some reason (pay, as an example), then the firm can exert power over those employees. The result of this power relationship might be that the firm is able to demand even more of the employee in terms of task performance and obedience. |
. | It is apparent from an examination of employee and organizational expectations, that an incongruity may exist between these expectations. |
. | Employees naturally respond to this incongruity in a number of ways. Some may seek a promotion within the firm in the hope that, at higher levels on the hierarchy, they will be able to fulfill their various needs to grow and use their skills. However, if the prospects for promotion are limited or thwarted, there is a chance that employee response will be manifested more negatively. Such negative responses include withdrawal, militant unionism, reduction of output or, in extreme cases, theft or sabotage of product or equipment. |
. | ![]() |
. | |
. | For an interesting discussion of the differing expectations of employees and employers, see Peter Drucker's Employing the Whole Man |
. |
|
. | In conclusion, we recall that the employees of the firm are resources -- human resources. Just as accountants provide the expertise the firm requires to best manage its financial resources, so the Organizational Behavior specialist provides the expertise needed to manage the firm's human resources. |
. | |
. | To gain further insight into the field of Organizational Behavior, we will examine the multidisciplinary origins of the subject. |
. | ![]() |
. | |
. | ORIGINS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR |
. | Many of the important contributions to Organizational Behavior have come
from Psychology. Psychological theories have helped us explain and predict individual
behavior. Many of the theories dealing with personality, attitude, learning,
motivation, and stress have been applied in Organizational Behavior to understand
work-related phenomena such as job satisfaction, commitment, absenteeism, turnover, and
worker well-being. Sociologists, studying the structure and function of small groups within a society have contributed greatly to a more complete understanding of behavior within organizations. Taking their cue from Sociologists, scholars in the field of Organizational Behavior have studied the effects of the structure and function of work organization on the behavior of groups, as well as the individuals within those groups. Many of the concepts and theories about groups and the processes of communication, decision making, conflict, and politics used in Organizational Behavior, are rooted in the field of Social Psychology. The field of Political Science has helped us understand how differences in preferences and interests lead to conflict and power struggles between groups within organizations. Economics has assisted students of Organizational Behavior in understanding how competition for scarce resources both within and between organizations leads these organizations to increase their commitment to efficiency and productivity (with concomitant influences on the behavior of individuals and groups). Furthermore, Organizational Behavior draws on the field of Anthropology for lessons about how cultures and belief systems develop. |
. |
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
This site last updated 01/10/03