Solutions to Assignments
MCO-01 - Organisation Theory and Behaviour
Master of Commerce (M.Com) - 2nd Year
Question No. 3 Write short notes on the following:
(a) Bureaucratic theory
Bureaucracy is defined in the dictionary as, “a system for controlling or managing a country, company, or organization, that is operated by a large number of officials employed to follow rules carefully”.
These days the word bureaucracy is often associated with negative connotations, but at the time bureaucratic theory was developed by Weber it was designed to solve some big problems with the way organizations were being run.
What is Bureaucratic Theory?
Because of the problems Weber saw with traditional authority he favored a more rational approach to running an organization and helping it to achieve its goals. There are two parts to Weber’s Bureaucratic Theory:
1. A clear organizational hierarchy
An organizational hierarchy defines how people are structured and fit within an organization. For example, a typical company will have the CEO at the top of the hierarchy, followed by the executive board. Each board member will then be responsible for managers, who in turn will manage employees.
Weber wanted each hierarchy to have what he called legal-rational authority. This means that defined authority sits with a position, not with a person. For example, your subordinate would never be able to tell you what to do even if they happened to be the son of the CEO because their formal position doesn’t hold that power. Basically, your authority comes from the position you hold in the hierarchy.
2. Clear rules for decision making
Weber referred to this as rational-legal decision-making rules. This means that there should be a set of explicit rules and procedures defining how the organization functions, and that these rules should be consistent with the rules and laws of wider society.
six characteristics of bureaucracy in turn.
1. Hierarchical Management Structure
One of the hallmarks of a bureaucracy is a hierarchical management structure. In a hierarchy, each level within the organizational structure controls the level below but is controlled by the level above.
Power and authority are clearly and explicitly defined for each position within the hierarchy. Job responsibilities and duties are also clearly defined for each position.
2. Division of Labor
Division of labor means that tasks are divided between the employees of the organization. Each employee will be responsible for specific tasks and each department will be responsible for specific functional areas.
As an example of this think about how your salary is set and paid within a large organization. Your salary will be set by your line manager, but you will be paid by the Payroll department, rather than the money being paid to your boss who would then give it to you. There are advantages to breaking things up in this way. First, your manager is the person in the best position to set your salary as they observe your performance much more closely than the payroll department. Second, the payroll department are specialists in payroll and ensure you get paid on the same day each month.
3. Formal Selection Process
All employees are treated equally and are hired and promoted on the basis of qualifications, expertise, performance, and experience. There are formal rules and regulations to ensure this selection process isn’t abused. For example, your manager can’t hire someone simply because they’re friends from the golf club.
4. Career Orientation
The organization is career orientated, meaning that if you follow the rules and regulations and perform well you will not be arbitrarily fired. In fact, if you perform well you may even have the chance to be promoted or receive a pay rise. In this way, the organization offers each employee the opportunity for a long term career, provided they follow the rules and perform well.
5. Formal Rules and Regulations
There are rules in place that govern how all employees should behave. Managers cannot simply appraise their employees according to their whims. Instead, they must assess employees according to the rules. For example, if you’ve been set a target to make 10 widgets and you make 10 widgets then you’ve achieved your target. Your manager can’t simply decide retrospectively that you should have really made 15 widgets and then fire you for not making 15 widgets. The rules protect employees against this type of behavior.
Similarly, there are rules surrounding how we behave, treat, and interact with other employees.
6. Impersonality
The rules are well defined and clear and are applied in the same way to everyone. The rules are there to prevent favoritism or nepotism.
If two employees were to enter into a relationship together whilst working within the same department, then often one of them will be moved to a different department or different part of the organization to avoid favoritism and help keep in-work relationships impersonal.
(b) Team effectiveness
Team effectiveness is the capacity of a group of people, usually with complementary skills, to work together to accomplish goals set out by an authority, members, or leaders of the team. Team effectiveness models help us understand the best management techniques to get optimal performance from our teams. There are several critical factors to achieve maximum group effectiveness as the six models of team working below will show.
Smart leaders and project managers should be aware of unique dynamics and relationships within their teams and create room to consistently improve team performance. Google, a company known for their innovative models of team effectiveness, spent years analyzing what makes some teams better than others. Their findings? It's less about who's on the team and more about how well they work together.
Understanding these team effectiveness models will help you figure out which of the team models would be best to optimize your team by shedding a light on what works and what needs to be improved.
Rubin, Plovnick, and Fry's GRPI Model of Team Effectiveness
This model of team effectiveness was proposed by Rubin, Plovnick, and Fry as early as 1977. It is also known by the acronym GRPI, which stands for Goals, Roles, Processes, and Interpersonal relationships. Represented as a pyramid diagram, this model outlines four parts teams need to be effective:
Goals: well-defined objectives and desired results, plus clearly communicated priorities and expectations
Roles: well-defined responsibilities and acceptance of a leader
Processes: clear decision-making processes as well as work procedures
Interpersonal relationships: good communication, trust, and flexibility
Because of its simplicity, the GRPI model is great when starting a team or when encountering a team-related problem with an unknown cause.
Choosing the right team effectiveness model for your team
If you have read this far, you may be wondering why there are so many team effectiveness models. Yet this list only scratches the surface. High-performance teams are a unique blend of individual perspectives, group dynamics, and organizational support.
The different team effectiveness models help you identify specific gaps that hinder your team from collaborating and producing successful results. Remember that the way a team works together determines their success much more than the strength of individual team members.
Therefore, leaders who focus on creating effective teamwork models elevate the work of everyone involved, and thus the success of their organizations.
(c) Theory of Attribution
Attribution theory is intended to help a person understand the causes of human behavior, be it their own or someone else's. The basis of attribution theory is that people want to know the reasons for the actions that they and others take; they want to attribute causes to behaviors they see rather than assuming that these behaviors are random. This allows people to assume some feeling of control over their own behaviors and over situations. Psychologist Fritz Heider (1896–1988) first developed attribution theory in his 1958 book The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. Heider proposed that what people perceived and believed about what they saw dictated how they would act, even if their beliefs about what they perceived were invalid.
Heider's proposed theory of attribution was further developed by psychologist Bernard Weiner and colleagues in the 1970s and 1980s, and this new theoretical framework has been used primarily in current attribution research. A final development to attribution theory was provided by psychologist Harold Kelley, who examined how consistency, distinctiveness, and consensus could be used by individuals to establish the validity of their perceptions.
Attributions are critical to management because perceived causes of behavior may influence managers' and employees' judgments and actions. For instance, managers must often observe employee performance and make related judgments. If a manager attributes an employee's poor performance to a lack of effort, then the outcome is likely to be negative for that employee; he or she may receive a poor performance appraisal rating or even be terminated from the job. Conversely, if a manager perceives that an employee's poor performance is due to a lack of skill, the manager may assign the employee to further training or provide more instruction or coaching. Making an inaccurate judgment about the causes of poor performance can have negative repercussions for the organization.
Attributions also may influence employee motivation. Employees who perceive the cause of their success to be outside of their control may be reluctant to attempt new tasks and may lose motivation to perform well in the workplace. Conversely, employees who attribute their success to themselves are more likely to have high motivation for work. Thus, understanding attributions that people make can have a strong effect on both employee performance and managerial effectiveness.
ATTRIBUTION PROCESS AND THE CAUSES OF BEHAVIOR
Attribution is considered to be a three-stage process. First, the behavior of an individual must be observed. Second, the perceiver must determine that the behavior they have observed is deliberate. That is, the person being observed is believed to have behaved intentionally. Finally, the observer attributes the observed behavior to either internal or external causes. Internal causes are attributed to the person being observed, while external causes are attributed to outside factors. The two internal attributions one can make are that a person's ability or a person's effort determined the outcome. Task difficulty and luck are the external causes of behavior. When perceiving behavior, an observer will make a judgment as to which of these factors is the cause of behavior. However, when making a determination between internal and external causes of behavior, the perceiver must examine the elements of consistency, distinctiveness, and consensus.
Consistency describes whether the person being observed behaves the same way when faced with the same set of circumstances. If the person being observed acts the same way in the same type of situation, consistency is high; if they act differently each time, then consistency is low. Distinctiveness is whether the observed person acts the same way in different types of situations. If the person being observed exhibits the same behavior in a variety of contexts, then distinctiveness is low; if they have different behavior depending on the context, then distinctiveness is high. Finally, consensus is the degree to which other people, if in the same situation, would behave similarly to the person being observed. If the observer sees others acting the same way that the person being perceived acts, then consensus is high. However, if others behave differently in the type of situation, then consensus is low. Consistency, distinctiveness, and consensus are evaluated when observing behavior, and then a judgment about an internal versus external cause of behavior is made. When consistency, distinctiveness, and consensus are all high, the perceiver concludes that there is an external cause of behavior. When consistency is high, distinctiveness is low, and consensus is low, the perceiver will attribute the cause of behavior to internal factors.
To better understand consistency, distinctiveness, and consensus, consider a workplace example. Nancy, a manager, has assigned a team of employees to develop a custom sales training program for a client. As the project progresses, Nancy continues to see problems in the work produced by Jim, one of the team members. In order to determine why Jim's performance is not satisfactory, Nancy first considers consistency, or whether Jim has performed poorly on other similar team projects. A review of his past performance appraisals indicates that he has not had prior performance problems when creating custom sales training programs. This would lead Nancy to conclude that there was an external cause of the poor performance. Second, Nancy considers distinctiveness; she wants to know if Jim has performed poorly on different types of tasks. Again, in checking Jim's performance reviews, she finds that when he is on a team to accomplish a different type of task, such as developing a selection interview, he has excelled. This further points to an external cause of Jim's poor performance. Finally, Nancy assesses consensus, or the behavior of others in this similar task. In asking the team members about their experiences with the current project, she finds that many of them have had difficulty in developing this custom sales training program. Thus, all indicators point to Jim's poor performance being caused by an external factor, such as a difficult task or a demanding client. Based on this attribution, Nancy may explore ways in which to minimize the negative effects of the external factors on Jim's performance rather than attempting to influence his level of effort or ability.
The prior example illustrated how consistency, distinctiveness, and consensus might point toward an external cause. However, these three factors also may lead an observer to attribute behavior to an internal cause, such as the observed person's effort or ability. Nancy, the observer from the previous example, also has experienced difficulties with a secretary named Kelly. Another manager has complained to Nancy that Kelly has not completed work on time and turns in work full of errors. Nancy observes Kelly for several days and finds that, when given work by this particular manager, Kelly continues to perform poorly, which indicates an internal cause (i.e., high consistency). Second, when performing work for other managers on other tasks, Kelly continues to do substandard work; this is distinctiveness, and it again points to an internal cause. Finally, Nancy observes that when other secretaries perform the work assigned by the manager who complained about Kelly, they are able to successfully perform their duties in a timely manner. This is consensus, and it also points to an internal cause. Based on these observations, Nancy can attribute Kelly's poor performance to an internal cause, or namely to Kelly's own lack of skill or effort.
(d) Models of men
The five important models of individual behavior, i.e, (1) Rational Economic Man, (2) Social Man, (3) Organizational Man, (4) The Self Actuating Man, and (5) Complex Man.
1. Rational Economic Man:
From the organisational perspective, managers had, for a long time, viewed their employees as rational beings who are primarily motivated by money. They took the ‘ECONOMIC MAN’ and ‘RATIONAL MAN’ approach to understand and predict the human behaviour. This model is based on classical organisation theory.
The Scientific Management Movement was based on the belief that by rationally explaining the one best way to do things and offering incentives to workers in the form of piece rates and bonuses, organisational output can be increased. Psychologists have also studied this model for predicting human behaviour. For example, McGregor’s assumptions of Theory X reflect this model.
The basic assumptions of the concept of ‘Rational Economic Man’ are as follows:
(i) People are motivated primarily by economic incentives. They will do things which get them the greatest economic gain.
(ii) As the organisation controls the economic incentives, human beings are essentially passive agents, who are manipulated, motivated and controlled by the organisation.
(iii) The feelings of the people are essentially irrational and must be controlled to achieve rationality and self interest.
(iv) Organisations can and must be designed in such a way so as to neutralize and control people’s feelings and therefore their unpredictable traits.
In this model, people are induced to produce more by providing them with economic incentives. In this case, there is no organisation-employees conflict because both are satisfying their needs simultaneously. Management is getting more production and people are getting more money.
2. Social Man:
With the passage of time, the advocates of human relations school recognized that there is a lot more to human behaviour than just being social man economic and rational. Advocates of this school considered the worker as a social man. They recognized that man is a part of the social group he is influenced by the social forces and seeks satisfaction of the needs which are related to the maintenance of his social relationships. Eltan Mayo conceived the concept of the social man when he carried out Hawthorne studies during 1927-32.
From the reports of Hawthorne experiments the following assumptions about human beings can be drawn:
(i) Human beings are basically motivated by social needs and all their efforts are directed towards getting this satisfaction by maintaining relationships with others.
(ii) A human being is more responsive to the pressures and sanctions of his social group than to the incentives and controls of the management. The reason is that he values social relationship higher than his economic motives which are directly under the control of management.
(iii) The amount of work to be done by a worker is not determined by his physical capacity or by the management but by the social norms.
(iv) Generally people do not act or react as individuals but as members of a group.
(v) Informal leaders play an important role in setting and enforcing the group norms.
(vi) Management should change and organize work in such a way that it provides more belongingness not only in terms of interpersonal and group relationships, but also man’s relationship with his job.
The type of managerial strategy that is to be applied in the case of social man is quite different as compared to the strategy to be applied in case of Economic-Rational man. The total system of social man is directed towards people.
3. Organisational Man:
Organisation man is an extension of social man. The concept of organisation man was introduced by William Whyte. He believed that it is very important for a person to be loyal to the organisation and cooperative with the fellow workers. Any person who believes in this value system and acts in this way is an organisation man. The basis of this concept is and that every individual should sacrifice his individuality for the sake of the group and the organisation.
This idea was initially suggested by Henry Fayol, when he suggested that individual interest should be subordinated to the general interest. Whyte had explained three major propositions, on which this concept of organisation man is based.
These propositions are as follows:
(i) The first proposition is that individual by himself is isolated and meaningless. The group is the source of activity. Individuals create only when they move in a group. A group helps to produce a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts.
(ii) The ultimate need of every individual is belongingness. He wants to belong to his families, friends, relatives, colleagues and other members of the society as a whole. Whyte says that there should be no conflict between man and society.
(iii) The goal of belongingness is achieved with the help of science. Whenever there is a conflict between the needs of the society and the needs of the individual, an equilibrium can be created by applying the methods of science. Science can help in removing all the obstacles to consensus.
The organisation man concept emphasis, that there is no conflict between the individual interest and the interest of the organisation. Even if there is any conflict, individual interest will be sacrificed in favour of the group interest to remove the conflict. However, there is a basic assumption behind this concept.
The assumption is that management will take care of the individual interests. It would be the duty of the management to satisfy the needs of the individuals. People will be willing to sacrifice their interests for the organisation only if they are positive that the organisation would take care of them.
4. The Self Actuating Man:
The concept of self actuating man is a further extension of social man and the organisation man models. The social man concept assumes that the formation of social groups is the basis of satisfaction for the individuals. But as against this the self actuating man assumes that man’s inherent need is to use his capabilities and skills in such a way that he should have the satisfaction of creating certain things. The earlier models do not allow him to satisfy his self actuating needs.
Following are the main assumptions about the self actuating man:
(i) The basic assumption about this concept is that the various needs of a man can be put in the order of priority. For example, MASLOW has put various needs in a hierarchy: Every unsatisfied need is a motivational factor for him. Self actualization according to this diagram is the ultimate goal, because it is last in the hierarchy and by the time his goal is achieved, all the other needs of the man are also satisfied.
(ii) In the process of self actualization, there are various changes in the behaviour of the individual and he moves from immaturity to maturity.
(iii) Another assumption is that a man is primarily self motivated and self controlled. Any incentives given by the management cannot motivate him after a certain level and any control imposed on him cannot threaten him.
(iv) The earlier models were based on the assumption that a man has got immature personality. However, the reality is that if a man is left free, he will put in his maximum efforts.
These assumptions are generally based upon McGregor’s theory Y and Argyris’s immaturity-maturity theory. To satisfy a self actuating man what are required are all the managerial actions meant to satisfy the social man with some additional features.
5. Complex Man:
Complex man presents the real picture of human picture of human behavior. All the previous models make very simplistic assumptions about people and their behaviour.
Researchers have proved that these assumptions are not correct as explained below:
(i) The earlier models assume that man will always behave according to certain set patterns. But research has indicated that there are many complex variables, which determine the human behaviour. These variables are quite unpredictable. So the human behaviour which is based on these variables cannot follow a set pattern.
(ii) The behaviour of man can be understood and predicted in the given conditions, depending upon the assumptions made. But research has indicated that even if cause-effect relationship is established between the variables and behaviour, it is not easy to understand and predict the individual behaviour because of the individual differences. It is not necessary that everyone will behave accordingly.Most behaviour in the organisation can be understood by taking assumptions of complex man.
No comments:
Post a Comment