Misplaced Pages

Organizational behavior: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 22:49, 28 November 2016 editHappydaise (talk | contribs)121 edits I took time to work out all the steps how to list this at the dispute resolution noticeboard← Previous edit Latest revision as of 02:56, 22 October 2024 edit undo59.97.251.96 (talk) →Organization theoryTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit 
(302 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Study of human behavior in organizational settings}}
{{redirect|Organization Studies|the academic journal|Organization Studies (journal)}}
{{redirect| Organization Studies|the academic journal|Organization Studies (journal){{!}}''Organization Studies'' (journal)|the academic field|Organizational studies}}
{{Multiple issues|
{{original research|date=September 2010}} {{Use American English|date=July 2020}}
{{refimprove|date=June 2014}} {{Use dmy dates|date=July 2020}}
}}

{{Business administration}} {{Business administration}}


'''Organizational behavior''' ('''OB''') or '''organisational behaviour''' is "the study of ] in organizational settings, the interface between human behavior and the organization, and the organization itself."<ref name = "Moorhead">Moorhead, G., & Griffin, R. W. (1995). ''Organizational behavior: Managing people and organizations'' (5th edition). Boston. Houghton Mifflin, (p.4)</ref> '''Organizational behavior''' or '''organisational behaviour''' (see ]) is the "study of ] in ]al settings, the interface between human behavior and the organization, and the organization itself".<ref name = "Moorhead">Moorhead, G., & Griffin, R. W. (1995). ''Organizational behavior: Managing people and organizations'' (5th edition). Boston. Houghton Mifflin, (p.4)</ref> Organizational behavioral research can be categorized in at least three ways:<ref>Management which is the process of stated Objectives, Planning, Organizing, Directing, Controlling, and Staffing to achieve stated (formalized) objectives.
Wagner, J. A., & Hollenbeck, J. R. (2010). ''Organizational behavior: Securing competitive advantage''. New York: Routledge.</ref>
* individuals in organizations (micro-level)
* work groups (meso-level)
* how organizations behave (macro-level)


] recognized that individuals behave differently when acting in their organizational role than when acting separately from the organization.<ref name=Barnard1938 /> Organizational behavior researchers study the behavior of individuals primarily in their organizational roles. One of the main goals of organizational behavior research is "to revitalize organizational theory and develop a better conceptualization of organizational life".<ref>Simms, L.M., Price, S.A., & Ervin, N.E. (1994). ''The professional practice of nursing administration''. Albany, NY: Delmar Publishers. (p. 121)</ref>
OB can be divided into three levels.<ref>Wagner, J. A., & Hollenbeck, J. R. (2010). ''Organizational behavior: Securing competitive advantage''. New York: Routledge.</ref> The study of:
# individuals in organizations (micro-level),
# work groups (meso-level),
# how organizations behave (macro-level).

==Overview==
] recognized that individuals behave differently when acting in their organizational role than when acting separately from the organization.<ref name=Barnard1938 /> Organizational behavior researchers study the behavior of individuals primarily in their organizational roles. One of the main goals of organizational behavior is "to revitalize organizational theory and develop a better conceptualization of organizational life".<ref>Simms, L.M., Price, S.A., & Ervin, N.E. (1994). ''The professional practice of nursing administration''. Albany, NY: Delmar Publishers. (p. 121)</ref>

== Contributing disciplines ==
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]<ref name="Fielder1"/>
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]


==Relation to industrial and organizational psychology== ==Relation to industrial and organizational psychology==


Miner (2006) pointed out that "there is a certain arbitrariness" in identifying "a point at which organizational behavior became established as a distinct discipline" (p.&nbsp;56), suggesting that it could have emerged in the 1940s or 1950s.<ref name = "Miner">Miner, J.B. (2006). ''Organizational behavior, Vol. 3: Historical origins, theoretical foundations, and the future''. Armonk, NY and London: M.E. Sharpe.</ref> He also underlined the fact that the industrial psychology division of the American Psychological Association did not add "organizational" to its name until 1970, "long after organizational behavior had clearly come into existence" (p.&nbsp;56), noting that a similar situation arose in sociology. Although there are similarities and differences between the two disciplines, there is still much confusion as to the nature of differences between organizational behavior and organizational psychology.<ref>Jex, S. & Britt, T. (2008). ''Organizational psychology: A scientist-practitioner approach. 2nd ed''. New York: Wiley.</ref> Miner (2006) mentioned that "there is a certain arbitrariness" in identifying a "point at which organizational behavior became established as a distinct discipline" (p.&nbsp;56), suggesting that it could have emerged in the 1940s or 1950s.<ref name = "Miner">Miner, J.B. (2006). ''Organizational behavior, Vol. 3: Historical origins, theoretical foundations, and the future''. Armonk, NY and London: M.E. Sharpe.</ref> He also underlined the fact that the industrial psychology division of the American Psychological Association did not add "organizational" to its name until 1970, "long after organizational behavior had clearly come into existence" (p.&nbsp;56), noting that a similar situation arose in sociology. Although there are similarities and differences between the two disciplines, there is still confusion around differentiating organizational behavior and organizational psychology.<ref>Baden Eunson: ''Behaving – Managing Yourself and Others.'' ], Sidney 1987, {{ISBN|978-0-0745-2022-2}}.</ref><ref>Jex, S. & Britt, T. (2008). ''Organizational psychology: A scientist-practitioner approach. 2nd ed''. New York: Wiley.</ref>


==History== ==History==
{{unreferenced section|date=June 2014}}
As a multi-disciplinary field, organizational behavior has been influenced by developments in a number of allied disciplines including sociology, psychology, economics, and engineering as well as by the experience of practitioners.


As a multi-disciplinary science, organizational behavior has been influenced by developments in a number of related disciplines, including ], ], and ].
The ] is the period from approximately 1760 when new technologies resulted in the adoption of new manufacturing techniques, including increased mechanisation. The industrial revolution led to significant social and cultural change, including new forms of organization. Analysing these new organizational forms, sociologist ] described bureaucracy as an ] of organization that rested on ] principles and maximized technical efficiency.<ref name="Weber1947">]. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. Translated by A.M. Henderson and Talcott Parsons. London: Collier Macmillan Publishers, 1947.</ref> However, Weber also raised concerns about the ]: that the efficiency of bureaucracy came at the cost of individuality.


The ] is a period from the 1760s where new technologies resulted in the adoption of new manufacturing techniques and increased mechanization. In his famous ] metaphor, ] raised concerns over the reduction in religious and vocational work experiences. Weber claimed that the Industrial Revolution's focus on efficiency constrained the worker to a kind of "prison" and "stripped a worker of their individuality".<ref>Weber, M. (1993). ''The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism'' (T. Parsons, Trans.). London, England: Routledge. (Original work published 1904–1905)</ref> The significant social and cultural changes caused by the Industrial Revolution also gave rise to new forms of organization. Weber analyzed one of these organizations and came to the conclusion that bureaucracy was "an organization that rested on ] principles and maximized technical efficiency."<ref name="Weber1947">]. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. Translated by A.M. Henderson and Talcott Parsons. London: Collier Macmillan Publishers, 1947.</ref>
A number of practitioners documented their ideas on management and organisation. Perhaps the best known today are ], ], and ]. Each developed a theory of organization and management, drawn from their experience. These theories all include the idea that human behaviour and motivation are essential for understanding effectively managing organisations.<ref name=Barnard1938>{{cite book |title= The Functions of the Executive |last= Barnard |first= Chester I. |authorlink= Chester Barnard |year= 1938 |publisher= Harvard University Press |location= Cambridge, MA |oclc= 555075}}</ref><ref name=Fayol1917 >{{citation | last=Fayol | first=Henri | year=1917 | title=Administration industrielle et générale; prévoyance, organisation, commandement, coordination, controle | publisher =Paris, H. Dunod et E. Pinat | language=French | oclc=40224931}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|title=Dynamic Administration: The Collected Papers of Mary Parker Follett|last=Follett|first=Henry C.|publisher= Routledge|isbn=0415279852}}</ref>


One of the first ], ] was an engineer and applied engineering principles to increase the efficiency of human work. Taylor advocated the scientific study of work tasks to identify the most efficient way of conducting the task – an approach known as ] in the late 19th century.<ref name="Taylor1911">{{Citation | last = Taylor | first = Frederick Winslow | authorlink = Frederick Winslow Taylor | year = 1911 | title = The Principles of Scientific Management | publisher = Harper & Brothers | location = New York, NY, USA and London, UK | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=HoJMAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA3#v=onepage&f=false | oclc = 233134 | doi = | ref = harv | postscript =. ''.'' | lccn = 11010339}}</ref> ] and ] extended Taylor's ideas to develop the ] to further improve worker efficiency.<ref name="price1989">Price, B 1989, ‘Frank and Lillian Gilbreth and the Manufacture and Marketing of Motion Study, 1908-1924’, Business and Economic History, vol. 18, no. 2</ref> In the early 20th century, ] – named for ] – relies on the standardisation of products and the use of assembly lines allowing unskilled workers to operate efficiently. While not explicitly based on either Weber's or Taylor's work, Fordism can be seen as the application of bureaucratic and scientific management principles to the entire manufacturing process. The success of both scientific management and Fordism in general led to the widespread adoption of assembly lines and the use of scientific methods to improve the productivity of workers. A number of organizational behavioral practitioners documented their ideas about management and organization. The best known theories today originate from ], ], and ]. All three of them drew from their experience to develop a model of effective organizational management, and each of their theories independently shared a focus on human behavior and motivation.<ref name=Barnard1938>{{cite book |title= The Functions of the Executive |last= Barnard |first= Chester I. |author-link= Chester Barnard |year= 1938 |publisher= Harvard University Press |location= Cambridge, MA |oclc= 555075}}</ref><ref name=Fayol1917 >{{citation | last=Fayol | first=Henri | year=1917 | title=Administration industrielle et générale; prévoyance, organisation, commandement, coordination, controle | publisher =Paris, H. Dunod et E. Pinat | language=fr | oclc=40224931}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|title=Dynamic Administration: The Collected Papers of Mary Parker Follett|last=Follett|first=Henry C.|publisher= Routledge|isbn=978-0415279857|year=2003}}</ref> One of the first ], ], was a 19th-century engineer who applied an approach known as the ]. Taylor advocated for maximizing task efficiency through the scientific method.<ref name="Taylor1911">{{Citation | last = Taylor | first = Frederick Winslow | author-link = Frederick Winslow Taylor | year = 1911 | title = The Principles of Scientific Management | publisher = Harper & Brothers | location = New York, NY, USA and London, UK | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=HoJMAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA3 | oclc = 233134 | postscript =. ''.'' | lccn = 11010339}}</ref> The scientific method was further refined by ] and ], who utilized ] to further improve worker efficiency.<ref name="price1989">Price, B 1989, ‘Frank and Lillian Gilbreth and the Manufacture and Marketing of Motion Study, 1908-1924’, Business and Economic History, vol. 18, no. 2</ref> In the early 20th century the idea of ] emerged. Named after automobile mogul ], the method relied on the standardization of production through the use of assembly lines. This allowed unskilled workers to produce complex products efficiently. Sorenson later clarified that Fordism developed independently of Taylor.<ref>Sorensen, C. E. (1956). ''My forty years with Ford''. New York, NY: Collier Books.</ref> Fordism can be explained as the application of bureaucratic and scientific management principles to whole manufacturing process. The success of the scientific method and Fordism resulted in the widespread adoption of these methods.


In the 1920s, the ], a ] factory, commissioned the first of what was to become known as the ]. These studies began in the tradition of scientific management, investigating whether workers would be more productive with higher or lower lighting levels. The results showed that regardless of the lighting levels, the worker's productivity increased; when the studies ended, productivity declined. Further studies adjusted a range of environmental conditions, all of which resulted in a short-lived increase in productivity. The cause of the so-called ] is widely debated, but the results led ] to conclude that job performance was dependent on social relationships as well as job content.<ref name = "Cullen">Cullen, David O'Donald. ''A new way of statecraft: The career of Elton Mayo and the development of the social sciences in America, 1920–1940.'' ProQuest Dissertations and Theses; 1992; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text.</ref> The One consequence of the Hawthorne Studies was to focus on ] in organisations. A range of theories of motivation in organisation emerged in the 1950s and 1960s, including theories of ], ], ], ], and ]. These theories explored what motivated individuals to work in organizations and how to improve both their ] and ].<ref name = "Miner"/> In the 1920s, the ] ] factory commissioned the first of what was to become known as the ]. These studies initially adhered to the traditional scientific method, but also investigated whether workers would be more productive with higher or lower lighting levels. The results showed that regardless of lighting levels, when workers were being studied, productivity increased, but when the studies ended, worker productivity would return to normal. In following experiments, ] concluded that ] and the so-called ] was strongly correlated to social relationships and job content.<ref name = "Cullen">Cullen, David O'Donald. ''A new way of statecraft: The career of Elton Mayo and the development of the social sciences in America, 1920–1940.'' ProQuest Dissertations and Theses; 1992; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text.</ref> Following the Hawthorne Studies ] became a focal point in the Organizational behavioral community. A range of theories emerged in the 1950s and 1960s and include theories from notable Organizational behavioral researchers such as: ], ], ], ], and ]. These theories underline employee motivation, ], and ].<ref name = "Miner"/>


]'s ] introduced a number of important concepts to the study of organizational behaviour, most notably decision making. Simon - along with ] - argued that people make decisions differently in organizations than outside of them. While classical economic theories assume that people are rational decision makers, Simon argued that limits on cognition mean that decision were made using ] where decision makers ]: by finding a solution that was acceptable, rather than optimal.<ref name = "Simon1997">] (1997) ''Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organizations, 4th ed., The Free Press.</ref> Simon was awarded the ] for his work on organizational decision making.<ref>{{cite web|title=Press Release: STUDIES OF DECISION-MAKING LEAD TO PRIZE IN ECONOMICS|url=http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/1978/press.html|publisher=Nobelprize.org|accessdate=11 May 2014|date=16 October 1978}}</ref> ]'s '']'' introduced a number of important Organizational behavior concepts, most notably decision-making. Simon, along with ], argued that people make decisions differently inside an organization when compared to their decisions outside of an organization. While classical economic theories assume that people are rational decision-makers, Simon argued a contrary point. He argued that cognition is limited because of ] For example, decision-makers often employ ], the process of utilizing the first marginally acceptable solution rather than the most optimal solution.<ref name = "Simon1997">] (1997) ''Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organizations'', 4th ed., The Free Press.</ref> Simon was awarded the ] for his work on organizational decision-making.<ref>{{cite web|title=Press Release: Studies of decision-making lead to prize in economics|url=https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/1978/press.html|publisher=Nobelprize.org|access-date=11 May 2014|date=16 October 1978}}</ref> In the 1960s and 1970s, the field started to become more ] and ]. This gave rise to ], ], and ].<ref>{{cite journal
| author= Covaleski, Mark A.; Dirsmith, Mark W.; Samuel, Sajay

| title= Managerial Accounting Research: The Contributions of Organizational and Sociological Theories
In the 1960s and 1970s, the field became more ] and produced such ideas as the ], and ]. ], ], and ] also emerged.{{Citation needed|date=June 2014}}
| journal=Journal of Management Accounting Research

| year=1996
Starting in the 1980s, cultural explanations of organizations and organizational change became areas of study. Informed by ], ] and ], qualitative research became more acceptable in OB.{{Citation needed|date=June 2014}}
| volume=8
| pages=1–35
}}</ref> Starting in the 1980s, cultural explanations of organizations and organizational change became areas of study, in concert with fields such as ], ] and ].


==Current state of the field== ==Current state of the field==
Research in and the teaching of OB primarily takes place in university ] departments in colleges of business and in schools of social work. Similar micro OB topics are taught in ] graduate programs. Research in and the teaching of Organizational behavior primarily takes place in university ] departments in colleges of business. Sometimes Organizational Behavioral topics are taught in ] graduate programs.


There have been additional developments in Organizational behavior research and practice. ] has become increasingly influential, and led to the idea that one can understand firms as communities, by introducing concepts such as ], organizational rituals, and symbolic acts.<ref name="Moorhead"/> ] have also become part of Organizational behavior, although a single unifying theory remains elusive.<ref>{{Cite journal| url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S104898432300036X| journal = The Leadership Quarterly|volume=101710|access-date=2023-07-06|doi=10.1016/j.leaqua.2023.101710|title= Eight puzzles of leadership science|year=2023|last1=Banks|first1= George C.| issue = 4| page = 101710}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232476947|journal=Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research|volume=63|pages=6–25|access-date=2018-12-13|doi=10.1037/a0023053|title=Toward a "grand unifying theory" of leadership: Implications for consulting psychology|year=2011|last1=Kilburg|first1=Richard R.|last2=Donohue|first2=Marc D.}}</ref> Organizational behavioral researchers have shown increased interest in ethics and its importance in an organization.{{Citation needed|date=June 2014}} Some Organizational behavioral researchers have become interested in the aesthetic sphere of organizations.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Taylor | first1 = S. | last2 = Hansen | first2 = H. | year = 2005 | title = Finding form: Looking at the field of organizational aesthetics drawing on theories and methods from the humanities, including theater, literature, music, and art. | journal = Journal of Management Studies | volume = 42 | issue = 6| pages = 1211–1231 | doi=10.1111/j.1467-6486.2005.00539.x| s2cid = 143896605 }}</ref>
{{unreferenced section|date=June 2014}}
During the last 20 years, there have been additional developments in OB research and practice:
*] has become increasingly influential, and led to the idea that one can understand firms as communities, by introducing concepts such as ], organizational rituals, and symbolic acts.<ref name="Moorhead"/>
*] became part of OB.
*OB researchers have shown increased interest in ethics and its importance in an organization.{{Citation needed|date=June 2014}}
*OB researchers have become interested in the aesthetic sphere of organizations,<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Taylor | first1 = S. | last2 = Hansen | first2 = H. | year = 2005 | title = Finding form: Looking at the field of organizational aesthetics | url = | journal = Journal of Management Studies | volume = 42 | issue = 6| pages = 1211–1231 | doi=10.1111/j.1467-6486.2005.00539.x}}</ref> drawing on theories and methods from the humanities, including theater, literature, music, and art.


==Methods used== ==Research methods used==
A variety of methods are used in organizational behavior, many of which are found in other social sciences. A variety of methods are used in organizational behavior, many of which are found in other social sciences.


===Quantitative research=== ===Quantitative methods===
{{Main|Quantitative research}} {{Main|Quantitative research}}
Quantitative research allows organizational behavior to be studied/compared through numerical data. A key advantage of quantitative studies is that their efficient examinations of large groups can be studied at lower costs and in less time. This form of research studies more of the broad study.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal |last1=Schmiedel |first1=Theresa |last2=Müller |first2=Oliver |last3=vom Brocke |first3=Jan |date=October 2019 |title=Topic Modeling as a Strategy of Inquiry in Organizational Research: A Tutorial With an Application Example on Organizational Culture |url=http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1094428118773858 |journal=Organizational Research Methods |language=en |volume=22 |issue=4 |pages=941–968 |doi=10.1177/1094428118773858 |issn=1094-4281}}</ref>
Statistical methods<ref name = "Brewerton">Brewerton, P.M., & Millward, L.J. (2010). ''Organizational research methods: A guide for students and researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.sagepub.com/journals/Journal200894/title|title=Organizational Research Methods|publisher=}}</ref> commonly used in OB research include:

:* ]
Statistical methods used in OB research commonly include ], ], ], ]ing, ], ], and ]<ref name="Brewerton">Brewerton, P.M., & Millward, L.J. (2010). ''Organizational research methods: A guide for students and researchers''. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.</ref><ref></ref>
:* ]
:* ]
:* ]ing
:* ]
:* ]
:* ]
:* ]


===Computer simulation=== ===Computer simulation===
{{Main|Computer simulation and organization studies}} {{Main|Computer simulation and organization studies}}


Computer simulation is a prominent method in organizational behavior.<ref>Harrison, Lin, Carroll, & Carley, 2007</ref> While there are many uses for ], most OB researchers have used computer simulation to understand how organizations or firms operate. More recently, however, researchers have also started to apply computer simulation to understand individual behavior at a micro-level, focusing on individual and interpersonal ] and ]<ref name="Hughes et al (2012) JOOP">{{cite journal | last1 = Hughes | first1 = H. P. N. | last2 = Clegg | first2 = C. W. | last3 = Robinson | first3 = M. A. | last4 = Crowder | first4 = R. M. | year = 2012 | title = Agent-based modelling and simulation: The potential contribution to organizational psychology | doi = 10.1111/j.2044-8325.2012.02053.x | journal = Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology | volume = 85 | issue = 3| pages = 487–502 }}</ref> such as the thought processes and behaviors that make up ].<ref name="Crowder et al (2012) IEEE TSMCA">{{cite journal | last1 = Crowder | first1 = R. M. | last2 = Robinson | first2 = M. A. | last3 = Hughes | first3 = H. P. N. | last4 = Sim | first4 = Y. W. | year = 2012 | title = The development of an agent-based modeling framework for simulating engineering team work | doi = 10.1109/TSMCA.2012.2199304 | journal = IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics – Part A: Systems and Humans | volume = 42 | issue = 6| pages = 1425–1439 }}</ref> Computer simulation is a prominent method in organizational behavior.<ref>Harrison, Lin, Carroll, & Carley, 2007</ref> While there are many uses for ], most Organizational behavioral researchers have used computer simulation to understand how organizations or firms operate. More recently, however, researchers have also started to apply computer simulation to understand individual behavior at a micro-level, focusing on individual and interpersonal ] and ]<ref name="Hughes et al (2012) JOOP">{{cite journal | last1 = Hughes | first1 = H. P. N. | last2 = Clegg | first2 = C. W. | last3 = Robinson | first3 = M. A. | last4 = Crowder | first4 = R. M. | year = 2012 | title = Agent-based modelling and simulation: The potential contribution to organizational psychology | doi = 10.1111/j.2044-8325.2012.02053.x | journal = Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology | volume = 85 | issue = 3| pages = 487–502 }}</ref> such as the thought processes and behaviors that make up ].<ref name="Crowder et al (2012) IEEE TSMCA">{{cite journal | last1 = Crowder | first1 = R. M. | last2 = Robinson | first2 = M. A. | last3 = Hughes | first3 = H. P. N. | last4 = Sim | first4 = Y. W. | year = 2012 | title = The development of an agent-based modeling framework for simulating engineering team work | doi = 10.1109/TSMCA.2012.2199304 | journal = IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans | volume = 42 | issue = 6| pages = 1425–1439 | s2cid = 7985332 }}</ref>


===Qualitative research=== ===Qualitative methods===
{{Main|Qualitative research}} {{Main|Qualitative research}}
Qualitative research<ref name = "Brewerton"/> consists of a number of methods of inquiry that generally do not involve the quantification of variables. Qualitative methods can range from the ] of interviews or written material to written narratives of observations. Some common methods include: Qualitative research<ref name = "Brewerton"/> consists of several methods of inquiry that generally do not involve the quantification of variables.This procedure builds and structure patterns of individual behavior.<ref name=":0" /> An advantage of qualitative research is that it provides a clearer picture of an organization. Qualitative methods can range from the ] of interviews or written material to written narratives of observations. Meaning that qualitative research goes more in depth of their studies as opposed to the entirety.<ref name=":0" /> Common methods include ], ], historical methods, and interviews.
:* ]
:* Single and multiple ]
:* ] approaches
:* Historical methods
:* Interviews
:* Visual methods such as photo elicitation or participant created drawings
:* Phenomenological Approach.<ref name=LAAT-01>{{cite journal |url=http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11213-015-9350-7|title= A Phenomenological Approach to the Study of Social Systems|accessdate=April 3, 2016 | doi=10.1007/s11213-015-9350-7 |volume=28 |journal=Systemic Practice and Action Research |pages=613–627}}</ref>


==Topics== ==Topics==

=== Consulting ===
Consultants use principles developed in organizational behavior research to assess clients' organizational problems and provide high quality services.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://ob.blogsite.org/index.php/2018/02/06/how-to-work-with-a-demanding-client/|title=How to work with a demanding client – Organizational Behavior Guide for Consultants|date=2018-02-06|work=Organizational Behavior Guide for Consultants|access-date=2018-02-09}}</ref>
A robust framework to analyze the consultant-client relationship is key in the success of any consulting engagement.<ref>{{cite web|author = H. Chalutz Ben-Gal, Tzafrir, S. S., (2011)|title = Consultant-Client Relationship: One of the Secrets to Effective Organizational Change? |url = https://english.afeka.ac.il/media/1360239/10229.pdf|publisher = Journal of Organizational Change Management, vol. 24(5), p. 662-679.}}</ref>


===Counterproductive work behavior=== ===Counterproductive work behavior===
{{Main|Counterproductive work behavior}} {{Main|Counterproductive work behavior}}
Counterproductive work behavior consists of behavior by employees that harm or intended to harm organizations and people in organizations.<ref>Spector, P. E., & Fox, S. (2005). The Stressor-Emotion Model of Counterproductive Work Behavior. In S. Fox, P. E. Spector (Eds.) , ''Counterproductive work behavior: Investigations of actors and targets'' (pp. 151-174). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association. {{DOI|10.1037/10893-007}}</ref> Counterproductive work behavior is employee behavior that harms or intends to harm an organization.<ref>Spector, P. E., & Fox, S. (2005). The Stressor-Emotion Model of Counterproductive Work Behavior. In S. Fox, P. E. Spector (Eds.), ''Counterproductive work behavior: Investigations of actors and targets'' (pp. 151-174). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association. {{doi|10.1037/10893-007}}</ref>


===Decision-making=== ===Decision-making===
{{Main|Decision-making}} {{Main|Decision-making}}


Many Organizational behavior researchers embrace the ].{{citation needed|date=January 2017}} Decision-making research often focuses on how decisions are ordinarily made (normative decision-making), how thinkers arrive at a particular judgement (descriptive decision-making), and how to improve this decision-making (descriptive decision-making).{{citation needed|date=January 2017}}
* ]

*Normative decision-making (concerned with how decision is ordinarily made)
=== Effects of diversity and inclusion ===
*Descriptive decision-making (concerned with how a thinker arrives at a judgment)
Companies that focus on diversity and inclusion are able to benefit from advantages such as better retention and less intention by staff to quit, increased job satisfaction, lower levels of stress and job withdrawal, higher levels of creativity and innovation, as well as less on-the-job conflict. Diversity, or focusing on differences between individuals and groups is of course important, organizations that have a culture that values the unique perspectives and contributions of all employees, also known as inclusion, may be able to move the needle from not engaged to engaged.<ref>{{Cite journal |author-link=Gallup |date=2018 |title=Three Requirements of a Diverse and Inclusive Culture — and Why They Matter for Your Organization |url=https://my.gallup.com/direct/app/3?refTarget=document&rqp_itemId=313166&rqp_languageCode=en-US&rqp_mediaType=Document&rqp_spaceCodeName=GSSLEARN |journal=Gallup |pages=24}}</ref>
*Prescriptive decision-making (aims to improve decision-making)


===Employee mistreatment=== ===Employee mistreatment===


There are several types of mistreatments that employees endure in organizations, including: Abusive supervision, bullying, incivility, and sexual harassment. Employees in an organization being mistreated also can suffer work withdrawal. Withdrawing from an organization can be in the form of being late, not fully participating in work duties, or looking for a new job. Employees may file grievances in an organization with retrospect to a procedure or policy or mistreatment with human interactions.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Boswell |first1=W. R. |last2=Olson-Buchanan |first2=J. B. |title=Experiencing Mistreatment at Work: The Role of Grievance Filing, Nature of Mistreatment, and Employee Withdrawal |date=2004-02-01 |url=http://amj.aom.org/cgi/doi/10.2307/20159565 |journal=Academy of Management Journal |language=en |volume=47 |issue=1 |pages=129–139 |jstor=20159565 |issn=0001-4273}}</ref>
There are several types of mistreatment that employees endure in organizations including abusive supervision, bullying, incivility, and sexual harassment.


====Abusive supervision==== ====Abusive supervision====
{{Main|Abusive supervision}} {{Main|Abusive supervision}}


Abusive supervision is the extent to which a ] engages in a pattern of behavior that harms subordinates.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Tepper | first1 = B. J. | year = 2000 | title = Consequences of abusive supervision | url = | journal = Academy of Management Journal | volume = 43 | issue = 2| pages = 178–190 | doi = 10.2307/1556375 }}</ref> Abusive supervision is the extent to which a ] engages in a pattern of behavior that harms subordinates.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Tepper | first1 = B. J. | year = 2000 | title = Consequences of abusive supervision | journal = Academy of Management Journal | volume = 43 | issue = 2| pages = 178–190 | jstor = 1556375 }}</ref>


====Bullying==== ====Bullying====
{{Main|Workplace bullying}} {{Main|Workplace bullying}}
Although definitions of workplace bullying vary, it involves a repeated pattern of harmful behaviors directed towards an individual.<ref>Rayner, C., & Keashly, L. (2005). Bullying at Work: A Perspective From Britain and North America. In S. Fox & P. E. Spector (Eds.), Counterproductive work behavior: Investigations of actors and targets. (pp. 271-296). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.</ref> In order for a behavior to be termed bullying, the individual or individuals doing the harm have to have either singly or jointly more power than the victim. Although definitions of workplace bullying vary, it involves a repeated pattern of harmful behaviors directed towards an individual.<ref>Rayner, C., & Keashly, L. (2005). Bullying at Work: A Perspective From Britain and North America. In S. Fox & P. E. Spector (Eds.), Counterproductive work behavior: Investigations of actors and targets. (pp. 271-296). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.</ref> In order for a behavior to be termed bullying, the individual or individuals doing the harm have to possess (either singly or jointly) more power on any level than the victim.{{Citation needed|date=March 2019}}


====Incivility==== ====Incivility====
{{Main|Workplace incivility}} {{Main|Workplace incivility}}


Workplace incivility consists of low-intensity discourteous and ] behavior with ambiguous intent to harm that violates ] governing appropriate workplace behavior.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Andersson | first1 = L. M. | last2 = Pearson | first2 = C. M. | year = 1999 | title = Tit for tat? The spiraling effect of incivility in the workplace | url = | journal = Academy of Management Review | volume = 74 | issue = | pages = 452–471 }}</ref> Workplace incivility consists of low-intensity discourteous and ] behavior and is characterized by an ambiguous intent to harm, and the violation of ] governing appropriate workplace behavior.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Andersson | first1 = L. M. | last2 = Pearson | first2 = C. M. | year = 1999 | title = Tit for tat? The spiraling effect of incivility in the workplace | doi = 10.5465/amr.1999.2202131 | journal = Academy of Management Review | volume = 24 | issue = 3| pages = 452–471 }}</ref>


====Sexual harassment==== ====Sexual harassment====
{{Main|Sexual harassment}} {{Main|Sexual harassment}}
Sexual harassment is behavior that denigrates or mistreats an individual due to his or her gender, creates an offensive workplace, and interferes with an individual being able to do the job.<ref>Rospenda, K. M., & Richman, J. A. (2005). Harassment and discrimination. In J. Barling, E. K. Kelloway & M. R. Frone (Eds.), Handbook of work stress (pp. 149-188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.</ref> Sexual harassment is behavior that denigrates or mistreats an individual due to his or her gender, often creating an offensive workplace that interferes with job performance.<ref>Rospenda, K. M., & Richman, J. A. (2005). Harassment and discrimination. In J. Barling, E. K. Kelloway & M. R. Frone (Eds.), Handbook of work stress (pp. 149-188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.</ref>


===Teams=== ===Teams===
Line 136: Line 103:


===Job-related attitudes and emotions=== ===Job-related attitudes and emotions===
Organizational behavior deals with employee attitudes and feelings, including ], ], ] and ]. Job satisfaction reflects the feelings an employee has about his or her job or facets of the job, such as pay or supervision.<ref>Balzer, W. K. & Gillespie, J. Z. (2007). Job satisfaction. In Rogelberg, S. G. (Ed.). Encyclopedia of industrial and organizational psychology Vol. 1 (pp. 406-413). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.</ref> Organizational commitment represents the extent to which employees feel attached to their organization.<ref>Allen, N. J. Organizational commitment. In Rogelberg, S. G. (Ed.). Encyclopedia of industrial and organizational psychology Vol. 2 (pp. 548-551). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.</ref> Job involvement is the extent to which an individual identifies with their job and considers it a material component of their self-worth.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Rahati|first1=Alireza|last2=Sotudeh-Arani|first2=Hossein|last3=Adib-Hajbaghery|first3=Mohsen|last4=Rostami|first4=Majid|date=December 2015|title=Job Involvement and Organizational Commitment of Employees of Prehospital Emergency Medical System|journal=Nursing and Midwifery Studies|volume=4|issue=4|pages=e30646|doi=10.17795/nmsjournal30646|issn=2322-1488|pmc=4733505|pmid=26835470}}</ref> Emotional labor concerns the requirement that an employee display certain emotions, such smiling at customers, even when the employee does not feel the emotion he or she is required to display.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Ashkanasy | first1 = N. M. | last2 = Härtel | first2 = C. E. J. | last3 = Daus | first3 = C. S. | year = 2002 | title = Diversity and emotion: The new frontiers in organizational behavior research | url = http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:13564/Ashkanasy_Hartel_Daus_2002.pdf| journal = Journal of Management | volume = 28 | issue = 3| pages = 307–338 | doi=10.1177/014920630202800304| s2cid = 145258922 }}</ref>
Organizational behavior deals with employee attitudes and feelings.
* ] is the feelings one has about the job or facets of the job, such as pay or supervision<ref>Balzer, W. K. & Gillespie, J. Z. (2007). Job satisfaction. In Rogelberg, S. G. (Ed.). Encyclopedia of industrial and organizational psychology Vol. 1 (pp. 406-413). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.</ref>
* ] is the extent to which employees feel attachment to their organization.<ref>Allen, N. J. Organizational commitment. In Rogelberg, S. G. (Ed.). Encyclopedia of industrial and organizational psychology Vol. 2 (pp. 548-551). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.</ref>
* ] concerns the requirement that employees display certain emotions, like smiling at customers.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Ashkanasy | first1 = N. M. | last2 = Härtel | first2 = C. E. J. | last3 = Daus | first3 = C. S. | year = 2002 | title = Diversity and emotion: The new frontiers in organizational behavior research | url = | journal = Journal of Management | volume = 28 | issue = 3| pages = 307–338 | doi=10.1177/014920630202800304}}</ref>


===Leadership=== ===Leadership===
{{Main|Leadership}} {{Main|Leadership}}
There have been a number of approaches and theories that concern leadership. Early theories focused on characteristics of leaders, while later theories focused on leader behavior, and conditions under which individuals can be effective. Some leadership approaches and theories include: There have been a number of theories that concern leadership. Early theories focused on characteristics of leaders, while later theories focused on leader behavior, and conditions under which leaders can be effective. Among these approaches are ], the ] model, ], ], ] and ].


Contingency theory indicates that good leadership depends on characteristics of the leader and the situation.<ref name="Fielder1">Fiedler, F. E. (1978). The contingency model and the dynamics of the leadership process. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 59-112). New York: Academic Press.</ref> The Ohio State Leadership Studies identified dimensions of leadership known as consideration (showing concern and respect for subordinates) and initiating structure (assigning tasks and setting performance goals).<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Fleishman | first1 = E. A. | last2 = Harris | first2 = E. F. | year = 1962 | title = Patterns of leadership behavior related to employee grievances and turnover | journal = Personnel Psychology | volume = 15 | pages = 43–56 | doi=10.1111/j.1744-6570.1962.tb01845.x}}</ref><ref>Levy, P. E. (2006). Industrial/organizational psychology: Understanding the workplace. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.</ref> LMX theory focuses on exchange relationships between individual supervisor-subordinate pairs.<ref name="Novak1">{{cite journal | last1 = Graen | first1 = G. B. | last2 = Novak | first2 = M. A. | last3 = Sommerkamp | first3 = P. | year = 1982 | title = The effects of leader-member exchange and job design on productivity and satisfaction: Testing a dual attachment model | journal = Organizational Behavior and Human Performance | volume = 30 | issue = 1| pages = 109–131 | doi = 10.1016/0030-5073(82)90236-7 }}</ref> Path-goal theory is a contingency theory linking appropriate leader style to organizational conditions and subordinate personality.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = House | first1 = R. J. | last2 = Mitchell | first2 = T. R. | year = 1974 | title = Path-goal theory of leadership | journal = Contemporary Business | volume = 3 | pages = 81–98 }}</ref> Transformational leadership theory concerns the behaviors leaders engage in that inspire high levels of motivation and performance in followers. The idea of ] is part of transformational leadership theory.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Bass | first1 = B. M. | last2 = Avolio | first2 = B. J. | last3 = Atwater | first3 = L. E. | year = 1996 | title = The transformational and transactional leadership of men and women | journal = Applied Psychology: An International Review | volume = 45 | pages = 5–34 | doi=10.1111/j.1464-0597.1996.tb00847.x}}</ref> In behavioural modification, the leader's reward power (ability to give or withhold reward and punishment) is the focus and the importance of giving contingent (vs non-contingent) rewards is emphasized.
* ] says that good leadership depends on characteristics of the leader and the situation.<ref name="Fielder1">Fiedler, F. E. (1978). The contingency model and the dynamics of the leadership process. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 59-112). New York: Academic Press.</ref>
* ] or LMX focus on relationships between individual supervisor-subordinate pairs.<ref name="Novak1">{{cite journal | last1 = Graen | first1 = G. B. | last2 = Novak | first2 = M. A. | last3 = Sommerkamp | first3 = P. | year = 1982 | title = The effects of leader-member exchange and job design on productivity and satisfaction: Testing a dual attachment model | url = | journal = Organizational Behavior & Human Performance | volume = 30 | issue = 1| pages = 109–131 | doi = 10.1016/0030-5073(82)90236-7 }}</ref>
* Ohio State Leadership Studies identified the dimensions of consideration (showing concern and respect for subordinates) and initiating structure (assigning tasks and setting performance goals).<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Fleishman | first1 = E. A. | last2 = Harris | first2 = E. F. | year = 1962 | title = Patterns of leadership behavior related to employee grievances and turnover | url = | journal = Personnel Psychology | volume = 15 | issue = | pages = 43–56 | doi=10.1111/j.1744-6570.1962.tb01845.x}}</ref><ref>Levy, P. E. (2006). Industrial/organizational psychology: Understanding the workplace. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.</ref>
* ] is a contingency theory linking appropriate leader style to organizational conditions, and subordinate personality.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = House | first1 = R. J. | last2 = Mitchell | first2 = T. R. | year = 1974 | title = Path-goal theory of leadership | url = | journal = Contemporary business | volume = 3 | issue = | pages = 81–98 }}</ref>
* ] concerns the behaviors leaders do that inspire followers to high levels of motivation and performance. Related to ] that is part of transformational.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Bass | first1 = B. M. | last2 = Avolio | first2 = B. J. | last3 = Atwater | first3 = L. E. | year = 1996 | title = The transformational and transactional leadership of men and women | url = | journal = Applied Psychology: An International Review | volume = 45 | issue = | pages = 5–34 | doi=10.1111/j.1464-0597.1996.tb00847.x}}</ref>


===Managerial roles=== ===Managerial roles===


{{Main|Mintzberg's managerial roles}} {{Main|Mintzberg's managerial roles}}
In the late 1960s ], a graduate student at MIT, carefully studied the activities of five executives. On the basis of his observations, Mintzberg arrived at three categories that subsume managerial roles: interpersonal roles; decisional roles; and informational roles.<ref>Robbins, S. P. (2009). Organizational behaviour. Cape Town, Pearson.</ref> In the late 1960s ], a graduate student at MIT, carefully studied the activities of five executives. On the basis of his observations, Mintzberg arrived at three categories that subsume managerial roles: interpersonal roles, decisional roles, and informational roles.<ref>Robbins, S. P. (2009). Organizational behaviour. Cape Town, Pearson.</ref>


===Motivation=== ===Motivation===
Retaining talented and successful employees is a key factor for a company to maintain a competitive advantage. An environment where people can use their talent effectively can help motivate even the most smart, hard-working, difficult individuals. Building great people relies on engagement through motivation and behavioral practices (O'Reilly, C., and Pfeffer, J., 2000).<ref>O'Reilly, C., & Pfeffer, J. _2000_. The "right" people or the "right" organization? Hidden value: How great companies achieve extraordinary results with ordinary people.</ref> Baron and Greenberg (2008)<ref>Baron, Robert A., and Greenberg, Jerald. ''Behavior in organizations'' &ndash; 9th edition. Pearson Education Inc., New Jersey: 2008. p.248</ref> wrote that motivation involves "the set of processes that arouse, direct, and maintain human behavior toward attaining some goal." There are several different theories of motivation relevant to Organizational Behavior, including ],<ref name="Adams1965">Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 276-299). New York: Academic Press.</ref> ],<ref name="Vroom1964">Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: John Wiley.</ref> ],<ref name="Maslow1943">{{cite journal | last1 = Maslow | first1 = A. H. | year = 1943 | title = A theory of human motivation | journal = Psychological Review | volume = 50 | issue = 4| pages = 370–396 | doi=10.1037/h0054346| citeseerx = 10.1.1.334.7586 }}</ref> ], ] theory,<ref name="Greenberg1987">{{cite journal | last1 = Greenberg | first1 = J | year = 1987 | title = A taxonomy of organizational justice theories | journal = Academy of Management Review | volume = 12 | pages = 9–22 | doi=10.5465/amr.1987.4306437}}</ref> ]'s ],<ref name="Herzberg1968">Herzberg, F. (1968, January/February). One more time: How do you motivate employees? Harvard Business Review, 52-62.</ref> and ].<ref name="McGregor, D. M. 1960">McGregor, D. M. (1960). The human side of enterprise. New York: McGraw-Hill.</ref>
Baron and Greenberg (2008)<ref>Baron, Robert A., and Greenberg, Jerald. ''Behavior in organizations'' &ndash; 9th edition. Pearson Education Inc., New Jersey: 2008. p.248</ref> wrote that motivation involves "the set of processes that arouse, direct, and maintain human behavior toward attaining some goal."


There are several different theories of motivation relevant to OB. === Types of motivation ===
Intrinsic Motivation- This behavior happens out of the pure thought of an individual’s need. Not as compensation. This behavior is used out of the pure need of self-motivation. It is the need to prove one’s self worth. Extrinsic motivation is triggered by external rewards. Meaning, the need for a reward outside of themselves feeling accomplished. This can be brought to them by a pay raise, bonuses, rewards like gift cards and many other sorts.{{cn|date=May 2023}}
* ]<ref name="Adams1965">Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 276-299). New York: Academic Press.</ref>

* ]<ref name="Vroom1964">Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: John Wiley.</ref>
=== Public Relations ===
* ]<ref name="Maslow1943">{{cite journal | last1 = Maslow | first1 = A. H. | year = 1943 | title = A theory of human motivation | url = | journal = Psychological Review | volume = 50 | issue = | pages = 370–396 | doi=10.1037/h0054346}}</ref>
Public relations is the practice of managing the communication between the public and the organization, therefore public relations is also related to organizational behavior.
* ]
* ] theory<ref name="Greenberg1987">{{cite journal | last1 = Greenberg | first1 = J | year = 1987 | title = A taxonomy of organizational justice theories | url = | journal = Academy of Management Review | volume = 12 | issue = | pages = 9–22 | doi=10.5465/amr.1987.4306437}}</ref>
* ]'s ]<ref name="Herzberg1968">Herzberg, F. (1968, January/February). One more time: How do you motivate employees? Harvard Business Review, 52-62.</ref>
* ]<ref name="McGregor, D. M. 1960">McGregor, D. M. (1960). The human side of enterprise. New York: McGraw-Hill.</ref>


===National culture=== ===National culture===


National culture is thought to affect the behavior of individuals in organizations. This idea is exemplified by ]. Hofstede surveyed a large number of cultures and identified six dimensions of national cultures that influence the behavior of individuals in organizations.<ref>Hofstede, Geert, Gert Jan Hofstede and Michael Minkov.Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill. 2010</ref> National culture is thought to affect the behavior of individuals in organizations. This idea is exemplified by ]. Hofstede surveyed a large number of cultures and identified six dimensions of national cultures that influence the behavior of individuals in organizations.<ref>Hofstede, Geert, Gert Jan Hofstede and Michael Minkov.Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill. 2010</ref> These dimensions include power distance, individualism vs. collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity vs. femininity, long-term orientation vs. short term orientation, and indulgence vs. restraint.

* Power distance
=== Organizational behavior policies ===
* Individualism vs. collectivism
Organizational behavior policies inside organizations such as employee dating, are rules that can be applied to employees with fairness. Labor relations, leadership, diversity and inclusion policies, will have more satisfied employees with organizational behavior policies. Policy implications are underutilized in organizations. But the need for implications is important.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Aguinis |first1=Herman |last2=Jensen |first2=Søren Henning |last3=Kraus |first3=Sascha |date=August 2022 |title=Policy Implications of Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management Research |url=https://research.cbs.dk/en/publications/policy-implications-of-organizational-behavior-and-human-resource |journal=Academy of Management Perspectives |language=English |volume=36 |issue=3 |pages=857–878 |doi=10.5465/amp.2020.0093 |issn=1558-9080}}</ref>
* Uncertainty avoidance
* Masculinity vs. femininity
* Long-term orientation vs. short term orientation
* Indulgence vs. restraint


===Organizational citizenship behavior=== ===Organizational citizenship behavior===
Line 186: Line 140:
{{Main|Organizational culture}} {{Main|Organizational culture}}


Organizational culture emphasizes the culture of the organization itself. This approach presumes that organizations can be characterized by cultural dimensions such as beliefs, values, rituals, symbols, and so forth.<ref>Shein, Edgar (1992). Organizational Culture and Leadership: A Dynamic View. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.</ref> Within this approach, the approaches generally consist of either developing models for understanding organizational culture or developing typologies of organizational culture. ] developed a model for understanding organizational culture and identified three levels of organizational culture: Organizational culture reflects the values and behaviors that are commonly observed in an organization. Investigators who pursue this line of research assume that organizations can be characterized by cultural dimensions such as beliefs, values, rituals, symbols, and so forth.<ref>Shein, Edgar (1992). Organizational Culture and Leadership: A Dynamic View. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.</ref> Researchers have developed models for understanding an organization's culture or developed typologies of organizational culture. ] developed a model for understanding organizational culture. He identified three levels of organizational culture: (a) artifacts and behaviors, (b) espoused values, and (c) shared basic assumptions. Specific cultures have been related to organizational performance<ref>Kotter, John and Heskett, James L. (1992) Corporate Culture and Performance, Free Press; {{ISBN|0-02-918467-3}}</ref> and effectiveness.<ref>Denison, Daniel R. (1990) Corporate culture and organizational effectiveness, Wiley.</ref>
* Artifacts and Behaviors
* Espoused Values
* Shared Basic Assumptions

Schein argued that if any of these three levels were divergent tension would result: if, for example, espoused values or desired behaviors were not consistent with the basic assumptions of an organisation it is likely that these values or behaviors would be rejected.

Typologies of organizational culture identified specific organisational culture and related these cultures to performance<ref>Kotter, John and Heskett, James L. (1992) Corporate Culture and Performance, Free Press; ISBN 0-02-918467-3</ref> or effectiveness<ref>Denison, Daniel R. (1990) Corporate culture and organizational effectiveness, Wiley.</ref> of the organization.


===Personality=== ===Personality===
Line 202: Line 149:
{{Main|Occupational stress}} {{Main|Occupational stress}}


There are number of ways to characterize occupational stress. One way of characterizing it is to term it an imbalance between job demands (aspects of the job that require mental or physical effort) and resources that help manage the demands.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Demerouti | first1 = E. | last2 = Bakker | first2 = A. B. | last3 = Nachreiner | first3 = F. | last4 = Schaufeli | first4 = W. B. | year = 2001 | title = The job demands-resources model of burnout | url = | journal = Journal of Applied Psychology | volume = 86 | issue = 3| pages = 499–512 | doi = 10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.499 }}</ref> There are number of ways to characterize occupational stress. One way of characterizing it is to term it an imbalance between job demands (aspects of the job that require mental or physical effort) and resources that help manage the demands.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Demerouti | first1 = E. | last2 = Bakker | first2 = A. B. | last3 = Nachreiner | first3 = F. | last4 = Schaufeli | first4 = W. B. | year = 2001 | title = The job demands-resources model of burnout | journal = Journal of Applied Psychology | volume = 86 | issue = 3| pages = 499–512 | doi = 10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.499 | pmid = 11419809 }}</ref>


===Work-family=== ===Work–family conflict===
{{Main|Work-family conflict}} {{Main|Work–family conflict}}
] recognized that individuals behave differently when acting in their work role than when acting in roles outside their work role.<ref name=Barnard1938 /> Work-family conflict occurs when the demands of family and work roles are incompatible, and the demands of at least one role interfere with the discharge of the demands of the other.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Greenhaus | first1 = J. H. | last2 = Beutell | first2 = N. J. | year = 1985 | title = Sources and conflict between work and family roles | url = | journal = Academy of Management Review | volume = 10 | issue = 1| pages = 76–88 | doi=10.5465/amr.1985.4277352}}</ref> ] recognized that individuals behave differently when acting in their work role than when acting in roles outside their work role.<ref name=Barnard1938 /> Work–family conflict occurs when the demands of family and work roles are incompatible, and the demands of at least one role interfere with the discharge of the demands of the other.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Greenhaus | first1 = J. H. | last2 = Beutell | first2 = N. J. | year = 1985 | title = Sources and conflict between work and family roles | journal = Academy of Management Review | volume = 10 | issue = 1| pages = 76–88 | doi=10.5465/amr.1985.4277352}}</ref>


==Organization theory== ==Organization theory==
{{Main|Organization theory}} {{Main|Organizational theory}}
Organization theory is concerned with explaining the organization as a whole or populations of organizations. The focus of organizational theory is to understand the structure and processes of organizations and how organizations interact with industries and societies. Within business schools, organization theory or OT is considered a separate specialization in ] from OB.{{Citation needed|date=June 2014}} Organization theory is concerned with explaining the workings of an organization as a whole or of many organizations. The focus of organizational theory is to understand the structure and processes of organizations and how organizations interact with each other and the larger society.{{Citation needed|date=January 2017}}


===Bureaucracy=== ===Bureaucracy===
Line 216: Line 163:
{{Main|Bureaucracy}} {{Main|Bureaucracy}}


] argued that bureaucracy involved the application of ] authority to the organization of work, making bureaucracy the most technically efficient form of organization.<ref name="Weber1947"/> ] extended Weber's work, arguing that all organizations can be understood in terms of bureaucracy and that organizational failures are more often a result of insufficient application of bureaucratic principles.<ref>Perrow, C. (1986). ''Complex organizations: A critical essay'' (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.</ref> ] argued that bureaucracy involved the application of ] authority to the organization of work, making bureaucracy the most technically efficient form of organization.<ref name="Weber1947"/> Weber enumerated a number of principles of bureaucratic organization including: a formal organizational hierarchy, management by rules, organization by functional specialty, selecting people based on their skills and technical qualifications, an "up-focused" (to organization's board or shareholders) or "in-focused" (to the organization itself) mission, and a purposefully impersonal environment (e.g., applying the same rules and structures to all members of the organization). These rules reflect Weberian "ideal types," and how they are enacted in organizations varies according to local conditions. ] extended Weber's work, arguing that all organizations can be understood in terms of bureaucracy and that organizational failures are more often a result of insufficient application of bureaucratic principles.<ref>Perrow, C. (1986). ''Complex organizations: A critical essay'' (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.</ref>

Weber's principles of bureaucratic organization:
* A formal organizational hierarchy
* Management by rules
* Organization by functional specialty and selecting people based on their skills and technical qualifications
* An "up-focused" (to organization's board or shareholders) or "in-focused" (to the organization itself) mission
* Purposefully impersonal, applying the same rules and structures to all members of the organization


===Economic theories of organization=== ===Economic theories of organization===


At least three theories are relevant here, ], ], and ].
* ]

* ]
===Theories pertaining to organizational structures===
* ]

Theories pertaining to organizational structures and dynamics include ], ],<ref>French, J. R. P., Jr., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 150-167). Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.</ref> ], ], ], and ]'s ].


===Institutional theory=== ===Institutional theory===


{{Main|Institutional theory}} {{Main|Institutional theory}}

===Systems theory===

{{Main|Systems theory}}
The systems framework is also fundamental to organizational theory. ]s are complex, goal-oriented entities.<ref>Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1978). ''The social psychology of organizations'' (2 ed.). New York: Wiley.</ref> ], an early thinker in the field, developed his ], a theory widely considered a precursor of ]'s ]. One of the aims of general systems theory was to model human organizations. ], a social psychologist, was influential in developing a systems perspective with regard to organizations. He coined the term "systems of ideology," partly based on his frustration with behaviorist psychology, which he believed to be an obstacle to sustainable work in psychology.<ref>{{cite journal | last = Ash | first = M.G. | year = 1992 | title = Cultural contexts and scientific change in psychology: Kurt Lewin in Iowa | journal = American Psychologist | volume = 47 | issue = 2| pages = 198–207 | doi = 10.1037/0003-066x.47.2.198 }}</ref> ], a sociologist, developed a sociological systems theory.


===Organizational ecology=== ===Organizational ecology===


{{Main|Organizational ecology}} {{Main|Organizational ecology}}
Organizational ecology models apply concepts from ] to the study of populations of organisations, focusing on birth (founding), growth and change, and death (firm mortality). In this view, organizations are 'selected' based on their fit with their operating environment. Organizational ecology models apply concepts from ] to the study of populations of organizations, focusing on birth (founding), growth and change, and death (firm mortality). In this view, organizations are 'selected' based on their fit with their operating environment.

===Organization structures and dynamics===

* ]
* ]<ref>French, J. R. P., Jr., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 150-167). Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.</ref>
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]'s ]


===Scientific management=== ===Scientific management===
{{Main|Scientific management}} {{Main|Scientific management}}


Scientific management refers to an approach to management based on principles of ]. It focuses on incentives and other practices empirically shown to improve productivity. Scientific management refers to an approach to management based on principles of ]. It focuses on incentives and other practices empirically shown to improve productivity.


== Contributing disciplines ==
===Systems theory===
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]


== Models ==
{{Main|Systems theory}}
=== Inputs-Processes-Outputs (IPO) framework ===
The systems framework is also fundamental to organizational theory. ]s are complex, goal-oriented entities.<ref>Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1978). ''The social psychology of organizations'' (2 ed.). New York: Wiley.</ref> ], an early thinker in the field, developed his ], a theory widely considered a precursor of ]'s ]. One of the aims of general systems theory was to model human organizations. ], a social psychologist, was influential in developing a systems perspective with regard to organizations. He coined the term "systems of ideology," partly based on his frustration with behaviorist psychology, which he believed to be an obstacle to sustainable work in psychology (see Ash 1992: 198-207). ], a sociologist, developed a sociological systems theory.

==== Inputs ====
Inputs are the variables like personality, group structure, and organization culture that lead to processes. These variables set the stage for what will occur in an organization later.

==== Processes ====
Processes are actions that individuals, groups, and organisations engage in as a result of inputs and that lead to certain outcomes.

==== Outcomes ====
Outcomes are the key variables that you want to explain or predict, and that are affected by some other variables.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Organisational Behaviour : Key Elements , Levels Of Analysis , Contributing Disciplines , Models |url=http://www.jettystudy.com/topic/organisational-behaviour-key-elements-Levels-Of-Analysis-Contributing-Disciplines.30.html |access-date=2023-03-20 |website=www.jettystudy.com |language=en}}</ref>
=== Inputs-Mediators-Outputs-Inputs (IMOI) framework ===

Adding to the IPO model, the IMOI framework emphasizes that outputs can also become subsequent inputs, creating a cyclical process.


==Journals== ==Journals==


{{columns-list|2| {{columns-list|colwidth=30em|
*'']''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://amj.aom.org/|title=Academy of Management Journal|publisher=}}</ref> *'']''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://amj.aom.org/|title=Academy of Management Journal}}</ref>
*'']''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://amr.aom.org/|title=Academy of Management Review|publisher=}}</ref> *'']''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://amr.aom.org/|title=Academy of Management Review}}</ref>
*'']''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.johnson.cornell.edu/Administrative-Science-Quarterly.aspx|title=Johnson at Cornell - Administrative Science Quarterly|publisher=}}</ref> *'']''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.johnson.cornell.edu/Administrative-Science-Quarterly.aspx|title=Johnson at Cornell - Administrative Science Quarterly}}</ref>
*'']'' *'']''
*'']''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/%28ISSN%291099-050X|title=Human Resource Management - Wiley Online Library|publisher=}}</ref> *'']''<ref>{{cite journal|title=Human Resource Management - Wiley Online Library|journal = Human Resource Management|doi=10.1002/(ISSN)1099-050X|doi-access=}}</ref>
*''Human Resources Management Review''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.journals.elsevier.com/human-resource-management-review/|title=Human Resource Management Review|work=Elsevier}}</ref> *''Human Resources Management Review''<ref>{{cite book|url=http://www.journals.elsevier.com/human-resource-management-review/|title=Human Resource Management Review|publisher=Elsevier}}</ref>
*'']''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.springer.com/psychology/personality+%26+social+psychology/journal/10869|title=Journal of Business and Psychology|work=springer.com}}</ref> *'']''<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.springer.com/psychology/personality+%26+social+psychology/journal/10869|title=Journal of Business and Psychology|work=springer.com}}</ref>
*'']'' *'']''
*'']''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://jom.sagepub.com|title=Journal of Management|publisher=}}</ref> *'']''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://jom.sagepub.com|title=Journal of Management}}</ref>
*'']'' *'']''
*''Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes'' *''Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes''
Line 278: Line 234:
*'']'' *'']''
*'']'' *'']''
*'']''
}} }}


==See also== ==See also==
{{columns-list|2| {{columns-list|colwidth=30em|
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
Line 289: Line 244:
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
* ]
* ] * ]
* ]
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
Line 299: Line 254:
}} }}


==References== == References ==
{{Reflist|2}} {{Reflist}}


==Further reading== ==Further reading==
{{Wikiquote}} {{Wikiquote}}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Ash | first1 = M.G. | year = 1992 | title = Cultural Contexts and Scientific Change in Psychology: Kurt Lewin in Iowa | url = | journal = American Psychologist | volume = 47 | issue = 2| pages = 198–207 | doi=10.1037/0003-066x.47.2.198}} * {{cite journal | last1 = Ash | first1 = M.G. | year = 1992 | title = Cultural Contexts and Scientific Change in Psychology: Kurt Lewin in Iowa | journal = American Psychologist | volume = 47 | issue = 2| pages = 198–207 | doi=10.1037/0003-066x.47.2.198}}
* Hatch, M.J. (2006), "Organization Theory: Modern, symbolic, and postmodern perspectives." 2nd Ed. Oxford University Press ISBN 0-19-926021-4. * Hatch, M.J. (2006), "Organization Theory: Modern, symbolic, and postmodern perspectives." 2nd Ed. Oxford University Press {{ISBN|0-19-926021-4}}.
* Helge H, Sheehan MJ, Cooper CL, Einarsen S "Organisational Effects of Workplace Bullying" in Bullying and Harassment in the Workplace: Developments in Theory, Research, and Practice (2010) * Helge H, Sheehan MJ, Cooper CL, Einarsen S "Organisational Effects of Workplace Bullying" in Bullying and Harassment in the Workplace: Developments in Theory, Research, and Practice (2010)
* Jones, Ishmael (2008), ''The Human Factor: Inside the CIA's Dysfunctional Intelligence Culture.'' New York: Encounter Books ISBN 978-1-59403-382-7. * Jones, Ishmael (2008), ''The Human Factor: Inside the CIA's Dysfunctional Intelligence Culture.'' New York: Encounter Books {{ISBN|978-1-59403-382-7}}.
* Richmond, Lewis (2000), ''Work as a Spiritual Practice: A Practical Buddhist Approach to Inner Growth and Satisfaction on the Job'', Broadway * Richmond, Lewis (2000), ''Work as a Spiritual Practice: A Practical Buddhist Approach to Inner Growth and Satisfaction on the Job'', Broadway
* Robbins, Stephen P. (2004) ''Organizational Behavior - Concepts, Controversies, Applications.'' 4th Ed. Prentice Hall ISBN 0-13-170901-1. * Robbins, Stephen P. (2004) ''Organizational Behavior - Concepts, Controversies, Applications.'' 4th Ed. Prentice Hall {{ISBN|0-13-170901-1}}.
* Robbins, S. P. (2003). ''Organisational behaviour: global and Southern African perspectives''. Cape Town, Pearson Education South Africa. * Robbins, S. P. (2003). ''Organisational behaviour: global and Southern African perspectives''. Cape Town, Pearson Education South Africa.
* Salin D, Helge H "Organizational Causes of Workplace Bullying" in Bullying and Harassment in the Workplace: Developments in Theory, Research, and Practice (2010) * Salin D, Helge H "Organizational Causes of Workplace Bullying" in Bullying and Harassment in the Workplace: Developments in Theory, Research, and Practice (2010)
* Scott, W. Richard (2007). ''Organizations and Organizing: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems Perspectives.'' Pearson Prentice Hall ISBN 0-13-195893-3. * Scott, W. Richard (2007). ''Organizations and Organizing: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems Perspectives.'' Pearson Prentice Hall {{ISBN|0-13-195893-3}}.
* ] (1979). ''The Social Psychology of Organizing'' 2nd Ed. McGraw Hill ISBN 0-07-554808-9. * ] (1979). ''The Social Psychology of Organizing'' 2nd Ed. McGraw Hill {{ISBN|0-07-554808-9}}.
* ] (1997) ''Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organizations, 4th ed., The Free Press. * ] (1997) ''Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organizations'', 4th ed., The Free Press.
* Tompkins, Jonathan R. (2005) "Organization Theory and Public Management".Thompson Wadsworth ISBN 978-0-534-17468-2 * Tompkins, Jonathan R. (2005) "Organization Theory and Public Management".Thompson Wadsworth {{ISBN|978-0-534-17468-2}}
* Kanigel, R. (1997). ''The One Best Way, Frederick Winslow Taylor and the Enigma of Efficiency.'' London: Brown and Co. * Kanigel, R. (1997). ''The One Best Way, Frederick Winslow Taylor and the Enigma of Efficiency.'' London: Brown and Co.
* ] (1986) '']'' Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications * ] (1986) '']'' Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications


{{Aspects of organizations}} {{Aspects of organizations}}

Latest revision as of 02:56, 22 October 2024

Study of human behavior in organizational settings "Organization Studies" redirects here. For the academic journal, see Organization Studies (journal). For the academic field, see Organizational studies.

Business administration
Management of a business
Accounting
Business entity (list)
Corporate governance
Corporate law
Corporate title
Economics
Finance
Types of management
Organization
Trade

Organizational behavior or organisational behaviour (see spelling differences) is the "study of human behavior in organizational settings, the interface between human behavior and the organization, and the organization itself". Organizational behavioral research can be categorized in at least three ways:

  • individuals in organizations (micro-level)
  • work groups (meso-level)
  • how organizations behave (macro-level)

Chester Barnard recognized that individuals behave differently when acting in their organizational role than when acting separately from the organization. Organizational behavior researchers study the behavior of individuals primarily in their organizational roles. One of the main goals of organizational behavior research is "to revitalize organizational theory and develop a better conceptualization of organizational life".

Relation to industrial and organizational psychology

Miner (2006) mentioned that "there is a certain arbitrariness" in identifying a "point at which organizational behavior became established as a distinct discipline" (p. 56), suggesting that it could have emerged in the 1940s or 1950s. He also underlined the fact that the industrial psychology division of the American Psychological Association did not add "organizational" to its name until 1970, "long after organizational behavior had clearly come into existence" (p. 56), noting that a similar situation arose in sociology. Although there are similarities and differences between the two disciplines, there is still confusion around differentiating organizational behavior and organizational psychology.

History

As a multi-disciplinary science, organizational behavior has been influenced by developments in a number of related disciplines, including sociology, industrial/organizational psychology, and economics.

The Industrial Revolution is a period from the 1760s where new technologies resulted in the adoption of new manufacturing techniques and increased mechanization. In his famous iron cage metaphor, Max Weber raised concerns over the reduction in religious and vocational work experiences. Weber claimed that the Industrial Revolution's focus on efficiency constrained the worker to a kind of "prison" and "stripped a worker of their individuality". The significant social and cultural changes caused by the Industrial Revolution also gave rise to new forms of organization. Weber analyzed one of these organizations and came to the conclusion that bureaucracy was "an organization that rested on rational-legal principles and maximized technical efficiency."

A number of organizational behavioral practitioners documented their ideas about management and organization. The best known theories today originate from Henri Fayol, Chester Barnard, and Mary Parker Follet. All three of them drew from their experience to develop a model of effective organizational management, and each of their theories independently shared a focus on human behavior and motivation. One of the first management consultants, Frederick Taylor, was a 19th-century engineer who applied an approach known as the scientific management. Taylor advocated for maximizing task efficiency through the scientific method. The scientific method was further refined by Lillian and Frank Gilbreth, who utilized time and motion study to further improve worker efficiency. In the early 20th century the idea of Fordism emerged. Named after automobile mogul Henry Ford, the method relied on the standardization of production through the use of assembly lines. This allowed unskilled workers to produce complex products efficiently. Sorenson later clarified that Fordism developed independently of Taylor. Fordism can be explained as the application of bureaucratic and scientific management principles to whole manufacturing process. The success of the scientific method and Fordism resulted in the widespread adoption of these methods.

In the 1920s, the Hawthorne Works Western Electric factory commissioned the first of what was to become known as the Hawthorne Studies. These studies initially adhered to the traditional scientific method, but also investigated whether workers would be more productive with higher or lower lighting levels. The results showed that regardless of lighting levels, when workers were being studied, productivity increased, but when the studies ended, worker productivity would return to normal. In following experiments, Elton Mayo concluded that job performance and the so-called Hawthorne Effect was strongly correlated to social relationships and job content. Following the Hawthorne Studies motivation became a focal point in the Organizational behavioral community. A range of theories emerged in the 1950s and 1960s and include theories from notable Organizational behavioral researchers such as: Frederick Herzberg, Abraham Maslow, David McClelland, Victor Vroom, and Douglas McGregor. These theories underline employee motivation, work performance, and job satisfaction.

Herbert Simon's Administrative Behavior introduced a number of important Organizational behavior concepts, most notably decision-making. Simon, along with Chester Barnard, argued that people make decisions differently inside an organization when compared to their decisions outside of an organization. While classical economic theories assume that people are rational decision-makers, Simon argued a contrary point. He argued that cognition is limited because of bounded rationality For example, decision-makers often employ satisficing, the process of utilizing the first marginally acceptable solution rather than the most optimal solution. Simon was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics for his work on organizational decision-making. In the 1960s and 1970s, the field started to become more quantitative and resource dependent. This gave rise to contingency theory, institutional theory, and organizational ecology. Starting in the 1980s, cultural explanations of organizations and organizational change became areas of study, in concert with fields such as anthropology, psychology and sociology.

Current state of the field

Research in and the teaching of Organizational behavior primarily takes place in university management departments in colleges of business. Sometimes Organizational Behavioral topics are taught in industrial and organizational psychology graduate programs.

There have been additional developments in Organizational behavior research and practice. Anthropology has become increasingly influential, and led to the idea that one can understand firms as communities, by introducing concepts such as organizational culture, organizational rituals, and symbolic acts. Leadership studies have also become part of Organizational behavior, although a single unifying theory remains elusive. Organizational behavioral researchers have shown increased interest in ethics and its importance in an organization. Some Organizational behavioral researchers have become interested in the aesthetic sphere of organizations.

Research methods used

A variety of methods are used in organizational behavior, many of which are found in other social sciences.

Quantitative methods

Main article: Quantitative research

Quantitative research allows organizational behavior to be studied/compared through numerical data. A key advantage of quantitative studies is that their efficient examinations of large groups can be studied at lower costs and in less time. This form of research studies more of the broad study.

Statistical methods used in OB research commonly include correlation, analysis of variance, meta-analysis, multilevel modeling, multiple regression, structural equation modeling, and time series analysis

Computer simulation

Main article: Computer simulation and organization studies

Computer simulation is a prominent method in organizational behavior. While there are many uses for computer simulation, most Organizational behavioral researchers have used computer simulation to understand how organizations or firms operate. More recently, however, researchers have also started to apply computer simulation to understand individual behavior at a micro-level, focusing on individual and interpersonal cognition and behavior such as the thought processes and behaviors that make up teamwork.

Qualitative methods

Main article: Qualitative research

Qualitative research consists of several methods of inquiry that generally do not involve the quantification of variables.This procedure builds and structure patterns of individual behavior. An advantage of qualitative research is that it provides a clearer picture of an organization. Qualitative methods can range from the content analysis of interviews or written material to written narratives of observations. Meaning that qualitative research goes more in depth of their studies as opposed to the entirety. Common methods include ethnography, case studies, historical methods, and interviews.

Topics

Consulting

Consultants use principles developed in organizational behavior research to assess clients' organizational problems and provide high quality services. A robust framework to analyze the consultant-client relationship is key in the success of any consulting engagement.

Counterproductive work behavior

Main article: Counterproductive work behavior

Counterproductive work behavior is employee behavior that harms or intends to harm an organization.

Decision-making

Main article: Decision-making

Many Organizational behavior researchers embrace the rational planning model. Decision-making research often focuses on how decisions are ordinarily made (normative decision-making), how thinkers arrive at a particular judgement (descriptive decision-making), and how to improve this decision-making (descriptive decision-making).

Effects of diversity and inclusion

Companies that focus on diversity and inclusion are able to benefit from advantages such as better retention and less intention by staff to quit, increased job satisfaction, lower levels of stress and job withdrawal, higher levels of creativity and innovation, as well as less on-the-job conflict. Diversity, or focusing on differences between individuals and groups is of course important, organizations that have a culture that values the unique perspectives and contributions of all employees, also known as inclusion, may be able to move the needle from not engaged to engaged.

Employee mistreatment

There are several types of mistreatments that employees endure in organizations, including: Abusive supervision, bullying, incivility, and sexual harassment. Employees in an organization being mistreated also can suffer work withdrawal. Withdrawing from an organization can be in the form of being late, not fully participating in work duties, or looking for a new job. Employees may file grievances in an organization with retrospect to a procedure or policy or mistreatment with human interactions.

Abusive supervision

Main article: Abusive supervision

Abusive supervision is the extent to which a supervisor engages in a pattern of behavior that harms subordinates.

Bullying

Main article: Workplace bullying

Although definitions of workplace bullying vary, it involves a repeated pattern of harmful behaviors directed towards an individual. In order for a behavior to be termed bullying, the individual or individuals doing the harm have to possess (either singly or jointly) more power on any level than the victim.

Incivility

Main article: Workplace incivility

Workplace incivility consists of low-intensity discourteous and rude behavior and is characterized by an ambiguous intent to harm, and the violation of social norms governing appropriate workplace behavior.

Sexual harassment

Main article: Sexual harassment

Sexual harassment is behavior that denigrates or mistreats an individual due to his or her gender, often creating an offensive workplace that interferes with job performance.

Teams

Main article: Team

Job-related attitudes and emotions

Organizational behavior deals with employee attitudes and feelings, including job satisfaction, organizational commitment, job involvement and emotional labor. Job satisfaction reflects the feelings an employee has about his or her job or facets of the job, such as pay or supervision. Organizational commitment represents the extent to which employees feel attached to their organization. Job involvement is the extent to which an individual identifies with their job and considers it a material component of their self-worth. Emotional labor concerns the requirement that an employee display certain emotions, such smiling at customers, even when the employee does not feel the emotion he or she is required to display.

Leadership

Main article: Leadership

There have been a number of theories that concern leadership. Early theories focused on characteristics of leaders, while later theories focused on leader behavior, and conditions under which leaders can be effective. Among these approaches are contingency theory, the consideration and initiating structure model, leader-member exchange or LMX theory, path-goal theory, behavioural modification and transformational leadership theory.

Contingency theory indicates that good leadership depends on characteristics of the leader and the situation. The Ohio State Leadership Studies identified dimensions of leadership known as consideration (showing concern and respect for subordinates) and initiating structure (assigning tasks and setting performance goals). LMX theory focuses on exchange relationships between individual supervisor-subordinate pairs. Path-goal theory is a contingency theory linking appropriate leader style to organizational conditions and subordinate personality. Transformational leadership theory concerns the behaviors leaders engage in that inspire high levels of motivation and performance in followers. The idea of charismatic leadership is part of transformational leadership theory. In behavioural modification, the leader's reward power (ability to give or withhold reward and punishment) is the focus and the importance of giving contingent (vs non-contingent) rewards is emphasized.

Managerial roles

Main article: Mintzberg's managerial roles

In the late 1960s Henry Mintzberg, a graduate student at MIT, carefully studied the activities of five executives. On the basis of his observations, Mintzberg arrived at three categories that subsume managerial roles: interpersonal roles, decisional roles, and informational roles.

Motivation

Retaining talented and successful employees is a key factor for a company to maintain a competitive advantage. An environment where people can use their talent effectively can help motivate even the most smart, hard-working, difficult individuals. Building great people relies on engagement through motivation and behavioral practices (O'Reilly, C., and Pfeffer, J., 2000). Baron and Greenberg (2008) wrote that motivation involves "the set of processes that arouse, direct, and maintain human behavior toward attaining some goal." There are several different theories of motivation relevant to Organizational Behavior, including equity theory, expectancy theory, Maslow's hierarchy of needs, incentive theory, organizational justice theory, Herzberg's two-factor theory, and Theory X and Theory Y.

Types of motivation

Intrinsic Motivation- This behavior happens out of the pure thought of an individual’s need. Not as compensation. This behavior is used out of the pure need of self-motivation. It is the need to prove one’s self worth. Extrinsic motivation is triggered by external rewards. Meaning, the need for a reward outside of themselves feeling accomplished. This can be brought to them by a pay raise, bonuses, rewards like gift cards and many other sorts.

Public Relations

Public relations is the practice of managing the communication between the public and the organization, therefore public relations is also related to organizational behavior.

National culture

National culture is thought to affect the behavior of individuals in organizations. This idea is exemplified by Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory. Hofstede surveyed a large number of cultures and identified six dimensions of national cultures that influence the behavior of individuals in organizations. These dimensions include power distance, individualism vs. collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity vs. femininity, long-term orientation vs. short term orientation, and indulgence vs. restraint.

Organizational behavior policies

Organizational behavior policies inside organizations such as employee dating, are rules that can be applied to employees with fairness. Labor relations, leadership, diversity and inclusion policies, will have more satisfied employees with organizational behavior policies. Policy implications are underutilized in organizations. But the need for implications is important.

Organizational citizenship behavior

Main article: Organizational citizenship behavior

Organizational citizenship behavior is behavior that goes beyond assigned tasks and contributes to the well-being of organizations.

Organizational culture

Main article: Organizational culture

Organizational culture reflects the values and behaviors that are commonly observed in an organization. Investigators who pursue this line of research assume that organizations can be characterized by cultural dimensions such as beliefs, values, rituals, symbols, and so forth. Researchers have developed models for understanding an organization's culture or developed typologies of organizational culture. Edgar Schein developed a model for understanding organizational culture. He identified three levels of organizational culture: (a) artifacts and behaviors, (b) espoused values, and (c) shared basic assumptions. Specific cultures have been related to organizational performance and effectiveness.

Personality

Main article: Personality

Personality concerns consistent patterns of behavior, cognition, and emotion in individuals. The study of personality in organizations has generally focused on the relation of specific traits to employee performance. There has been a particular focus on the Big Five personality traits, which refers to five overarching personality traits.

Occupational stress

Main article: Occupational stress

There are number of ways to characterize occupational stress. One way of characterizing it is to term it an imbalance between job demands (aspects of the job that require mental or physical effort) and resources that help manage the demands.

Work–family conflict

Main article: Work–family conflict

Chester Barnard recognized that individuals behave differently when acting in their work role than when acting in roles outside their work role. Work–family conflict occurs when the demands of family and work roles are incompatible, and the demands of at least one role interfere with the discharge of the demands of the other.

Organization theory

Main article: Organizational theory

Organization theory is concerned with explaining the workings of an organization as a whole or of many organizations. The focus of organizational theory is to understand the structure and processes of organizations and how organizations interact with each other and the larger society.

Bureaucracy

Main article: Bureaucracy

Max Weber argued that bureaucracy involved the application of rational-legal authority to the organization of work, making bureaucracy the most technically efficient form of organization. Weber enumerated a number of principles of bureaucratic organization including: a formal organizational hierarchy, management by rules, organization by functional specialty, selecting people based on their skills and technical qualifications, an "up-focused" (to organization's board or shareholders) or "in-focused" (to the organization itself) mission, and a purposefully impersonal environment (e.g., applying the same rules and structures to all members of the organization). These rules reflect Weberian "ideal types," and how they are enacted in organizations varies according to local conditions. Charles Perrow extended Weber's work, arguing that all organizations can be understood in terms of bureaucracy and that organizational failures are more often a result of insufficient application of bureaucratic principles.

Economic theories of organization

At least three theories are relevant here, theory of the firm, transaction cost economics, and agency theory.

Theories pertaining to organizational structures

Theories pertaining to organizational structures and dynamics include complexity theory, French and Raven's five bases of power, hybrid organization theory, informal organizational theory, resource dependence theory, and Mintzberg's organigraph.

Institutional theory

Main article: Institutional theory

Systems theory

Main article: Systems theory

The systems framework is also fundamental to organizational theory. Organizations are complex, goal-oriented entities. Alexander Bogdanov, an early thinker in the field, developed his tectology, a theory widely considered a precursor of Bertalanffy's general systems theory. One of the aims of general systems theory was to model human organizations. Kurt Lewin, a social psychologist, was influential in developing a systems perspective with regard to organizations. He coined the term "systems of ideology," partly based on his frustration with behaviorist psychology, which he believed to be an obstacle to sustainable work in psychology. Niklas Luhmann, a sociologist, developed a sociological systems theory.

Organizational ecology

Main article: Organizational ecology

Organizational ecology models apply concepts from evolutionary theory to the study of populations of organizations, focusing on birth (founding), growth and change, and death (firm mortality). In this view, organizations are 'selected' based on their fit with their operating environment.

Scientific management

Main article: Scientific management

Scientific management refers to an approach to management based on principles of engineering. It focuses on incentives and other practices empirically shown to improve productivity.

Contributing disciplines

Models

Inputs-Processes-Outputs (IPO) framework

Inputs

Inputs are the variables like personality, group structure, and organization culture that lead to processes. These variables set the stage for what will occur in an organization later.

Processes

Processes are actions that individuals, groups, and organisations engage in as a result of inputs and that lead to certain outcomes.

Outcomes

Outcomes are the key variables that you want to explain or predict, and that are affected by some other variables.

Inputs-Mediators-Outputs-Inputs (IMOI) framework

Adding to the IPO model, the IMOI framework emphasizes that outputs can also become subsequent inputs, creating a cyclical process.

Journals

See also

References

  1. ^ Moorhead, G., & Griffin, R. W. (1995). Organizational behavior: Managing people and organizations (5th edition). Boston. Houghton Mifflin, (p.4)
  2. Management which is the process of stated Objectives, Planning, Organizing, Directing, Controlling, and Staffing to achieve stated (formalized) objectives. Wagner, J. A., & Hollenbeck, J. R. (2010). Organizational behavior: Securing competitive advantage. New York: Routledge.
  3. ^ Barnard, Chester I. (1938). The Functions of the Executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. OCLC 555075.
  4. Simms, L.M., Price, S.A., & Ervin, N.E. (1994). The professional practice of nursing administration. Albany, NY: Delmar Publishers. (p. 121)
  5. ^ Miner, J.B. (2006). Organizational behavior, Vol. 3: Historical origins, theoretical foundations, and the future. Armonk, NY and London: M.E. Sharpe.
  6. Baden Eunson: Behaving – Managing Yourself and Others. McGraw-Hill, Sidney 1987, ISBN 978-0-0745-2022-2.
  7. Jex, S. & Britt, T. (2008). Organizational psychology: A scientist-practitioner approach. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley.
  8. Weber, M. (1993). The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism (T. Parsons, Trans.). London, England: Routledge. (Original work published 1904–1905)
  9. ^ Weber, Max. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. Translated by A.M. Henderson and Talcott Parsons. London: Collier Macmillan Publishers, 1947.
  10. Fayol, Henri (1917), Administration industrielle et générale; prévoyance, organisation, commandement, coordination, controle (in French), Paris, H. Dunod et E. Pinat, OCLC 40224931
  11. Follett, Henry C. (2003). Dynamic Administration: The Collected Papers of Mary Parker Follett. Routledge. ISBN 978-0415279857.
  12. Taylor, Frederick Winslow (1911), The Principles of Scientific Management, New York, NY, USA and London, UK: Harper & Brothers, LCCN 11010339, OCLC 233134. Also available from Project Gutenberg. {{citation}}: External link in |postscript= (help)CS1 maint: postscript (link)
  13. Price, B 1989, ‘Frank and Lillian Gilbreth and the Manufacture and Marketing of Motion Study, 1908-1924’, Business and Economic History, vol. 18, no. 2
  14. Sorensen, C. E. (1956). My forty years with Ford. New York, NY: Collier Books.
  15. Cullen, David O'Donald. A new way of statecraft: The career of Elton Mayo and the development of the social sciences in America, 1920–1940. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses; 1992; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text.
  16. Simon, Herbert A. (1997) Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organizations, 4th ed., The Free Press.
  17. "Press Release: Studies of decision-making lead to prize in economics". Nobelprize.org. 16 October 1978. Retrieved 11 May 2014.
  18. Covaleski, Mark A.; Dirsmith, Mark W.; Samuel, Sajay (1996). "Managerial Accounting Research: The Contributions of Organizational and Sociological Theories". Journal of Management Accounting Research. 8: 1–35.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  19. Banks, George C. (2023). "Eight puzzles of leadership science". The Leadership Quarterly. 101710 (4): 101710. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2023.101710. Retrieved 6 July 2023.
  20. Kilburg, Richard R.; Donohue, Marc D. (2011). "Toward a "grand unifying theory" of leadership: Implications for consulting psychology". Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research. 63: 6–25. doi:10.1037/a0023053. Retrieved 13 December 2018.
  21. Taylor, S.; Hansen, H. (2005). "Finding form: Looking at the field of organizational aesthetics drawing on theories and methods from the humanities, including theater, literature, music, and art". Journal of Management Studies. 42 (6): 1211–1231. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2005.00539.x. S2CID 143896605.
  22. ^ Schmiedel, Theresa; Müller, Oliver; vom Brocke, Jan (October 2019). "Topic Modeling as a Strategy of Inquiry in Organizational Research: A Tutorial With an Application Example on Organizational Culture". Organizational Research Methods. 22 (4): 941–968. doi:10.1177/1094428118773858. ISSN 1094-4281.
  23. ^ Brewerton, P.M., & Millward, L.J. (2010). Organizational research methods: A guide for students and researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  24. Organizational Research Methods (journal)
  25. Harrison, Lin, Carroll, & Carley, 2007
  26. Hughes, H. P. N.; Clegg, C. W.; Robinson, M. A.; Crowder, R. M. (2012). "Agent-based modelling and simulation: The potential contribution to organizational psychology". Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 85 (3): 487–502. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8325.2012.02053.x.
  27. Crowder, R. M.; Robinson, M. A.; Hughes, H. P. N.; Sim, Y. W. (2012). "The development of an agent-based modeling framework for simulating engineering team work". IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans. 42 (6): 1425–1439. doi:10.1109/TSMCA.2012.2199304. S2CID 7985332.
  28. "How to work with a demanding client – Organizational Behavior Guide for Consultants". Organizational Behavior Guide for Consultants. 6 February 2018. Retrieved 9 February 2018.
  29. H. Chalutz Ben-Gal, Tzafrir, S. S., (2011). "Consultant-Client Relationship: One of the Secrets to Effective Organizational Change?" (PDF). Journal of Organizational Change Management, vol. 24(5), p. 662-679.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  30. Spector, P. E., & Fox, S. (2005). The Stressor-Emotion Model of Counterproductive Work Behavior. In S. Fox, P. E. Spector (Eds.), Counterproductive work behavior: Investigations of actors and targets (pp. 151-174). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/10893-007
  31. "Three Requirements of a Diverse and Inclusive Culture — and Why They Matter for Your Organization". Gallup: 24. 2018.
  32. Boswell, W. R.; Olson-Buchanan, J. B. (1 February 2004). "Experiencing Mistreatment at Work: The Role of Grievance Filing, Nature of Mistreatment, and Employee Withdrawal". Academy of Management Journal. 47 (1): 129–139. ISSN 0001-4273. JSTOR 20159565.
  33. Tepper, B. J. (2000). "Consequences of abusive supervision". Academy of Management Journal. 43 (2): 178–190. JSTOR 1556375.
  34. Rayner, C., & Keashly, L. (2005). Bullying at Work: A Perspective From Britain and North America. In S. Fox & P. E. Spector (Eds.), Counterproductive work behavior: Investigations of actors and targets. (pp. 271-296). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.
  35. Andersson, L. M.; Pearson, C. M. (1999). "Tit for tat? The spiraling effect of incivility in the workplace". Academy of Management Review. 24 (3): 452–471. doi:10.5465/amr.1999.2202131.
  36. Rospenda, K. M., & Richman, J. A. (2005). Harassment and discrimination. In J. Barling, E. K. Kelloway & M. R. Frone (Eds.), Handbook of work stress (pp. 149-188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  37. Balzer, W. K. & Gillespie, J. Z. (2007). Job satisfaction. In Rogelberg, S. G. (Ed.). Encyclopedia of industrial and organizational psychology Vol. 1 (pp. 406-413). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  38. Allen, N. J. Organizational commitment. In Rogelberg, S. G. (Ed.). Encyclopedia of industrial and organizational psychology Vol. 2 (pp. 548-551). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  39. Rahati, Alireza; Sotudeh-Arani, Hossein; Adib-Hajbaghery, Mohsen; Rostami, Majid (December 2015). "Job Involvement and Organizational Commitment of Employees of Prehospital Emergency Medical System". Nursing and Midwifery Studies. 4 (4): e30646. doi:10.17795/nmsjournal30646. ISSN 2322-1488. PMC 4733505. PMID 26835470.
  40. Ashkanasy, N. M.; Härtel, C. E. J.; Daus, C. S. (2002). "Diversity and emotion: The new frontiers in organizational behavior research" (PDF). Journal of Management. 28 (3): 307–338. doi:10.1177/014920630202800304. S2CID 145258922.
  41. Fiedler, F. E. (1978). The contingency model and the dynamics of the leadership process. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 59-112). New York: Academic Press.
  42. Fleishman, E. A.; Harris, E. F. (1962). "Patterns of leadership behavior related to employee grievances and turnover". Personnel Psychology. 15: 43–56. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1962.tb01845.x.
  43. Levy, P. E. (2006). Industrial/organizational psychology: Understanding the workplace. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
  44. Graen, G. B.; Novak, M. A.; Sommerkamp, P. (1982). "The effects of leader-member exchange and job design on productivity and satisfaction: Testing a dual attachment model". Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 30 (1): 109–131. doi:10.1016/0030-5073(82)90236-7.
  45. House, R. J.; Mitchell, T. R. (1974). "Path-goal theory of leadership". Contemporary Business. 3: 81–98.
  46. Bass, B. M.; Avolio, B. J.; Atwater, L. E. (1996). "The transformational and transactional leadership of men and women". Applied Psychology: An International Review. 45: 5–34. doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.1996.tb00847.x.
  47. Robbins, S. P. (2009). Organizational behaviour. Cape Town, Pearson.
  48. O'Reilly, C., & Pfeffer, J. _2000_. The "right" people or the "right" organization? Hidden value: How great companies achieve extraordinary results with ordinary people.
  49. Baron, Robert A., and Greenberg, Jerald. Behavior in organizations – 9th edition. Pearson Education Inc., New Jersey: 2008. p.248
  50. Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 276-299). New York: Academic Press.
  51. Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: John Wiley.
  52. Maslow, A. H. (1943). "A theory of human motivation". Psychological Review. 50 (4): 370–396. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.334.7586. doi:10.1037/h0054346.
  53. Greenberg, J (1987). "A taxonomy of organizational justice theories". Academy of Management Review. 12: 9–22. doi:10.5465/amr.1987.4306437.
  54. Herzberg, F. (1968, January/February). One more time: How do you motivate employees? Harvard Business Review, 52-62.
  55. McGregor, D. M. (1960). The human side of enterprise. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  56. Hofstede, Geert, Gert Jan Hofstede and Michael Minkov.Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill. 2010
  57. Aguinis, Herman; Jensen, Søren Henning; Kraus, Sascha (August 2022). "Policy Implications of Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management Research". Academy of Management Perspectives. 36 (3): 857–878. doi:10.5465/amp.2020.0093. ISSN 1558-9080.
  58. Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA, England: Lexington Books/D C Heath and Com.f
  59. Shein, Edgar (1992). Organizational Culture and Leadership: A Dynamic View. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  60. Kotter, John and Heskett, James L. (1992) Corporate Culture and Performance, Free Press; ISBN 0-02-918467-3
  61. Denison, Daniel R. (1990) Corporate culture and organizational effectiveness, Wiley.
  62. Michel, W., Shoda, Y., & Smith, R. E. (2004). Introduction to personality: Toward an integration. New York: Wiley
  63. Demerouti, E.; Bakker, A. B.; Nachreiner, F.; Schaufeli, W. B. (2001). "The job demands-resources model of burnout". Journal of Applied Psychology. 86 (3): 499–512. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.499. PMID 11419809.
  64. Greenhaus, J. H.; Beutell, N. J. (1985). "Sources and conflict between work and family roles". Academy of Management Review. 10 (1): 76–88. doi:10.5465/amr.1985.4277352.
  65. Perrow, C. (1986). Complex organizations: A critical essay (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
  66. French, J. R. P., Jr., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 150-167). Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.
  67. Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1978). The social psychology of organizations (2 ed.). New York: Wiley.
  68. Ash, M.G. (1992). "Cultural contexts and scientific change in psychology: Kurt Lewin in Iowa". American Psychologist. 47 (2): 198–207. doi:10.1037/0003-066x.47.2.198.
  69. "Organisational Behaviour : Key Elements , Levels Of Analysis , Contributing Disciplines , Models". www.jettystudy.com. Retrieved 20 March 2023.
  70. "Academy of Management Journal".
  71. "Academy of Management Review".
  72. "Johnson at Cornell - Administrative Science Quarterly".
  73. "Human Resource Management - Wiley Online Library". Human Resource Management. doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1099-050X.
  74. Human Resource Management Review. Elsevier.
  75. "Journal of Business and Psychology". springer.com.
  76. "Journal of Management".

Further reading

  • Ash, M.G. (1992). "Cultural Contexts and Scientific Change in Psychology: Kurt Lewin in Iowa". American Psychologist. 47 (2): 198–207. doi:10.1037/0003-066x.47.2.198.
  • Hatch, M.J. (2006), "Organization Theory: Modern, symbolic, and postmodern perspectives." 2nd Ed. Oxford University Press ISBN 0-19-926021-4.
  • Helge H, Sheehan MJ, Cooper CL, Einarsen S "Organisational Effects of Workplace Bullying" in Bullying and Harassment in the Workplace: Developments in Theory, Research, and Practice (2010)
  • Jones, Ishmael (2008), The Human Factor: Inside the CIA's Dysfunctional Intelligence Culture. New York: Encounter Books ISBN 978-1-59403-382-7.
  • Richmond, Lewis (2000), Work as a Spiritual Practice: A Practical Buddhist Approach to Inner Growth and Satisfaction on the Job, Broadway
  • Robbins, Stephen P. (2004) Organizational Behavior - Concepts, Controversies, Applications. 4th Ed. Prentice Hall ISBN 0-13-170901-1.
  • Robbins, S. P. (2003). Organisational behaviour: global and Southern African perspectives. Cape Town, Pearson Education South Africa.
  • Salin D, Helge H "Organizational Causes of Workplace Bullying" in Bullying and Harassment in the Workplace: Developments in Theory, Research, and Practice (2010)
  • Scott, W. Richard (2007). Organizations and Organizing: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems Perspectives. Pearson Prentice Hall ISBN 0-13-195893-3.
  • Weick, Karl E. (1979). The Social Psychology of Organizing 2nd Ed. McGraw Hill ISBN 0-07-554808-9.
  • Simon, Herbert A. (1997) Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organizations, 4th ed., The Free Press.
  • Tompkins, Jonathan R. (2005) "Organization Theory and Public Management".Thompson Wadsworth ISBN 978-0-534-17468-2
  • Kanigel, R. (1997). The One Best Way, Frederick Winslow Taylor and the Enigma of Efficiency. London: Brown and Co.
  • Morgan, Gareth (1986) Images of Organization Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications
Aspects of organizations
Topics
See also
See also templates
Aspects of corporations
Aspects of jobs
Aspects of occupations
Aspects of workplaces
Categories: