Introduction to Organizational Psychology
January 30, 2008 – 10:37 pmOrganizations, like people, are born, grow, mature, and eventually die or are transformed into new and different organizations.
What are we doing, our job has an important impact in our lives. The place and the people we are working with have also an important impact on our lives. Thus, it is extremely valuable to know about people at work and their interaction with each other in work organizations.
In this study we are focus on people and their performance in organizations.
We want to understand through this study how a manager can improve the quality of the organization product and improve the quality of his employee’s lives.
We want to understand how to lead, manage, and work in a wide variety of organizations; to learn strategies to guide our organizational actions, experiences, and aspirations; and learn to appreciate those organizational forces that shapes individual and organizational lives in the global marketplace.
Chapter I
Organizations and Methods of Research
Basically, organizations are social enterprises of people coming together to achieve some shared goals that they believe they can achieve more effectively and efficiently together than alone.
We stress the importance of a sound knowledge of theory, data, and applied strategies to work effectively with and in organizations. Therefor we will try to understand in this chapter the importance of methods of research in trying to find suitable strategies to improve the activity of the organization. Also, in this chapter we explore the features of human nature and the nature of organizations, the methods of collecting organizational data.
Five fundamentals
We identify in our study five fundamental features of human nature and nature of organizations that are related to enhance competitive advantage:
1. Individual and organizational actions and experiences arise from dispositional and situational forces.
2. Variation is a part of each person and all organizations.
3. All people and organizations have problems.
4. All people and organizations have the capacity to learn.
5. All people and organizations behave rationally and emotionally, and both type of behavior is essential for effective functioning.
Dispositional and Situational forces.
We define dispositional and situational forces that influence powerfully individual and organizational actions and experiences.
Organizational psychologists who have extensively studied the influence of the dispositional variable of personality on job performance have found that personality is the relatively stable pattern of individual traits or characteristics that an individual brings to a variety of situations (Lawson & Shen, 1998).
It is not easy to manage effectively in any organization. Effective management requires one to think logically, act compassionately, and appreciate those dispositional and situational variables alone or in combination influence significantly the behaviors and experiences of organizational members.
Variation
Variation is a part of each person and all organizations. Our primary interest here is behavioral systems and social systems and we want to understand the importance of the variation, flux or change in an organization.
We have “common variation” that reflect a lot of little flux or variation (trivial many) and “special variation” which is the large instance of variation. Almost every system exhibits this pattern, or what is known as the Pareto principle, of many small and few large instance of variation ( Lawson, 1998).
Variation arises everywhere in the organization, from the different functional business areas to the increasingly diversified workforce.
We should appreciate the values of variation in the organization because it affords the opportunity to change and do different things and to promote organizational stability by constructing, when appropriate, systems with low variability.
Problems
All people and organizations have problems. Most people are reluctant to the idea that they may have problems.
Organizations should be aware that they might have problems and be ready to get feedback from customers, clients, or members to anticipate unpleasant situations.
So the problems should be perceived as an opportunity to change something. The culture of an organization strongly influences whether a problem is perceived as an opportunity to improve.
As Lawson & Shen says that if an organizational culture dose not promotes learning, optimism and efficacy, then changing a chief executive or operating officer, manager, or individual employee will not fix the particular problem (Lawson & Shen, 1998).
In conclusion, people and organizations should be aware that they might have problems, which could be perceived as an opportunity to change, improve. Change must focus on systematic processes and the shared beliefs, values and actions of the members.
Learning
All people and organizations have the capacity to learn.
Lawson and Shen define “learning”as a relatively permanent change in the behavior and cognitive operations of an individual or organization as a result of experience (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
All organizations learn things, but some do it much better than others do. The term “learning organizations” has been used to describe organizations that learn rapidly and use the knowledge to become more effective (Yukl, 1998). In these organizations, decisions are affected as much by the desire for learning as by the desire to improve short-term performance.
Organization learning is based on individual learning and therefore the learning should be promoted to at all level through training programs, use of special assignments to promote learning, information systems to analyze processes and evaluate outcomes etc.
The values of learning, innovations, experimentation, flexibility, and initiative are firmly embedded in the cultural of the organization and reflected in the reward and appraisal systems. People at all levels are empowered to deal with problems and find better ways of doing the work.
Rationality and Emotionality
Organizations are formed by persons who have rational and emotional abilities. Feelings, fears, hopes, and prejudices influence actions and decisions and are a fact of individual and organizational life (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
Some people promote that a manager should focus only on the rational side of the individual, that he should use only rationality in leading an organization and to make appeal only to the rationality of theirs employees. Lawson and Shen present evidence that and arguments for the importance of both, rationality and emotionality of the organizational member. All people learn through emotions as well as through thoughts, so to ignore one fails to recognize the fundamental nature of humans and organizations (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
Every member of any organization experience the full range of adult emotions like: anger, anxiety, fear, serenity, belonging, identity, joy, satisfaction and sadness, and use these emotional experiences as a base for guiding their interaction, relation whit other members of the organization. In conclusion we should remain alert and appreciate the intersection of the powerful and pervasive rational and emotional forces of the organization.
The leaders and the managers in our global market place require an awareness and appreciation of some fundamental features of the nature of humans and organizations.
I believe that it is vital for the success of the organization the fact that the manager should know and consider the five features of the human and organization: dispositional and situational variables, variation, problems, learning and rationality-emotionality.
Methods of Study
I have presented the first set of tools tented to help us gain a better understanding about organizations and individuals and now see the second set of tools which include four specific methods of study commonly used in organizational psychology: the case study, field experiment, laboratory experiment and archival research.
Case Study
The case study method is excellent for rich or detailed descriptions of a given organization or subset of organizations and can be a great source of hypotheses. Lawson and Shen present this method as being a method focused on understanding the dynamics of a single organization or multiple organizations (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
Each method of inquiry has particular strengths and weaknesses. The weaknesses of the case study are little control of variables and makes determinants of actions and experience difficult to discern.
Field Experiment
This method involves systematic observations of events in real-life organizations and situations in which it is usually possible to manipulate some independent variables and measure some dependent variables (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
The weaknesses is that affords a limited degree of control of variables and dose not allow for subjects to be randomly selected.
Laboratory Experiment
This method allows for a high degree of control and precision and permit strong causal inferences. But, because everything is in a laboratory the results are often artificial and unrealistic and results have limited generalizability.
Archival Research
In this method the data that are collected are limited to whatever is available from the organization and yields correlation data. But it is unobtrusive and is relevant to the topic of interest. The findings of an archival study may also generate hypotheses that can be tested by one of the other methods of study.
As Lawson and Shen says, an important point is that each method has distinct advantages and disadvantage and a working knowledge of all four methods will definitely be of value to an organizational psychologist.
Measurement
In this chapter we have also the third set of tools which is a structural, systematic acquisition of information about organizational architecture, demography, geometry and politics, and networks. Data on organizational demography such as the age, gender, educational level and distribution by unit or function of organizational members, and similar info abut the customer or clients can provide useful information about some of the opportunities faced by the organization.
Here we have the four domains of organizational knowledge from Lawson and Shen:
Organizational architecture: structural patterns of the arrangement of people into units within the organization and with the external environment.
Organizational demography: defining features of organizational members and clusters of clients or customers.
Organizational geometry and politics: spatial and functional influence relationships in the internal and external organizational environments.
Organizational networks: communication patterns within the organization and with the external environment.
In conclusion the systematic use of all three tool sets can help any manager to understand better how to lead an organization, make them to sharp theirs skills of observation and help them to find appropriate solution to each situation from the organization. In order to do something great with my organization and my people I need to know the features of the individual and of the organization.
Chapter II
Organizational Culture
In this chapter I have the pleasure to discuss one of the favorite topics which I met in this course, and this is about the organizational culture.
In this chapter I’ll present what is the organizational culture, the function of the organizational culture and about the changing of the organizational culture.
Organizational culture has been defined as a system of shared backgrounds, norms, values, or beliefs among members of a group (Hughes, Ginnett and Curphy, 1996).
Organization culture is an important situational variable that influence all members of an organization to various degrees, so I consider that it is important to have a good understanding of this construct to manage and work effectively in an organization (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
In this chapter I will present levels of expression of culture in an organization, and provide specific strategies to modify organizational culture.
Individual and Organizational Culture
First, the culture of an organization is the shared and unifying thoughts, feelings, values, and actions of the organizational members. Organizational culture is the way all members think, feel, and act in an organization, rather than just one or a few members. It is a collective, not an individual organizational construct and forces (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
Therefor is essential that the managers have knowledge of the culture’s core components, origins, functions and processes for change and the effects of culture on individual and organizational level performance.
Here we have also the organizational climate, which concerns member’s subjective reaction to the organization. These two concepts are distinct, in the organizational climate is partly a function of reaction to organizational culture; one’s feelings or emotional reactions about an organization are probably affected by the degree to which a person shares the prevailing values, beliefs, and backgrounds of organizational members (Hughes, Ginnett and Curphy, 1996).
Thus, organizational climate is related to how well organizational members get along with each other. Just as there are many cultures across the world, there are a great number of different cultures across organizations. Members of many military organizations have different norms, background experiences, values, and beliefs, for example, from those of the faculty at many colleges.
One of the most fascinating aspects of organizational culture is that it often takes an outsider to recognize it; organizational culture becomes so second nature to many organizational members that they are unaware of how it affects their behaviors and perceptions.
Function of Organizational Culture
There is two main function of the organizational culture. The primary function is to enhance the organization’s responsiveness to the problems of external adaptation and internal integration.
In general, external adaptation requires an awareness of and sensity to the large societal culture; the global, regional, and domestic marketplaces; and issues for a particular type of business.
Problems of internal integration arise for every organization and in general require an awareness of and sensitivity to intra- and interpersonal processes. Knowledge about how people think, feels, act, and relate with others, is necessary for effective internal integration (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
Every organizational culture develops its own specialized language and the dictionary of meanings of organizational terms and the texts or organizational concepts, procedures, and stories vary from one organization to another.
In conclusion, organizational culture determines, in large measure, the responses of organizational members to problems of external adaptation and internal integration that confront all organizations around the globe.
Organizational Change
It is important for leaders to realize that they can play an active role in changing an organization’s culture, not just to be influenced by it. They can modify culture through their reaction to crises, by rewarding new or different kinds of behavior or by eliminating previous punishments.
Changing an organization’s culture takes time and effort, and sometimes it may be extremely difficult ( Hughes, Ginnett and Curphy, 1996). Sometimes people resist change when they do not understand its implications and perceive that it might cost them much more than they will gain. Such situation occurs when trust is lacking between the person initiating the change and the employees (Kotter, 1999).
Organizational learning and organizational culture are intimately linked to each other, and this linkage provides the bases for instituting organizational cultural change.
Organizational learning is based on individual learning, which is then shared with other members of the organization. Organizational learning serves as the mechanism for spreading and connecting members shared patterns of thoughts, feelings, values, and actions (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
So, it is clear that in order to do an organizational change we need to start with organizational learning. To change something the members of the organization need to be ready to learn because cultural change is made in partnership with people (Kouzes and Posner, 1988).
Also, Kouzes and Posner present the four principles, which should assist a cultural change: “To change, take risks, accept responsibility, and be accountable for our actions.
To respect all people, promoting unity, trust, pride, and dedication to our mission.
To achieve a high quality of work life through involvement of all our people in an environment of openness and fairness in which everyone is treated with dignity, honesty and respect.
To promote good communications among all employees by operating in an open atmosphere with freedom to share ideas and speak one’s mind without fear of reprisal” (Kouzes and Posner, 1988).
Cultural Change Strategies
Using different strategies can bring organizational cultural change. Lawson and Shen tell us that the most fully articulated change strategy is leader-centered (Lawson and Shen, 1998). The leader-centered strategy involves outside consultants working with cooperative organizational leaders to change the basic assumptions of the organization’s culture. Therefore, challenging and ultimately changing the leader’s basic assumptions is one way an I/O psychologist can work with an organization to change its culture.
Lawson and Shen also present us a cultural change strategy that combines features of different approaches involve changing norms, or unspoken rules of behavior, reward systems and organizational rites. Basically there are three phases to our cultural change strategy.
Assessment that involves three steps: identifying the client, increasing cultural awareness, and establishing baselines. Phase two is construction and implementation of cultural and learning change projects which means to have two or three projects, to have specific goals, deadlines and systematic feedback for each project and to have a rite of enhancement. And the third phase is that organizational outcomes measures and project modifications, which mean the synthesis and interpretation of changes in performance or identification of barriers to change and here we have also the sustained participation by the leadership (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
In conclusion to this chapter I would say that it helped me understand the importance of understanding the organizational culture to help me create plans, strategy and how to implementate them to create an efficient organization.
Also, it seems to me that the I/O psychologist role in modifying an organization’s culture is very valuable. I also believe that both factors- changing the basic assumption of leaders and focusing on the vision to bring about change in an organization’s culture are equally important. Additionally, an outside consultant seems much more appropriate to challenge basic assumption, help create vision, and promote optimistic actions.
Chapter III
Workforce Diversity and Human Resources
In this chapter I have studied about human diversity in an organization. Dose diversity affects the organization in a good way or in a bad way?
People are drawn to groups because they seek others who are like them in one or more dimension that they deem psychologically and physically important. The challenge for this chapter is that we need to understand that diversity is a bridge to finding deeper similarities and interests among all human beings (Lawson and Shen, 1998). Workforce diversity is an important concept and an area that is important in today’s organizations with the increased emphasis in interpersonal relations.
Diversity of attitudes, beliefs, and priorities is increasing as a result of the changing composition of the workforce in the
The most important thing is that all people need to respect and care for themselves and others in order to create a productive workplace where people can embrace their differences and similarities and achieve challenging and productive organizational goals.
“The walls that divide us from each other are within each one of us”
The Challenges of Diversity
The globalization and increasing diversity of the workforce are inevitable, and both are a source of challenge and hope for all humanity. Diversity was defined as any mixture of items characterized by differences and similarities (Lawson and Shen, 1998). Individuals, groups, and organization that want to promote diversity should focus on both the differences and the similarities between people. Organizational actions to address diversity in the workplace have evolved through three phases: affirmative action, valuing differences, and managing diversity (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
Affirmative action, the first phase, includes legally required plans and statistical procedures for recruiting, training, and promoting competent members of a target group.
Valuing diversity is driven by moral and ethical imperatives to promote pluralism, not assimilation and the guiding philosophy that difference is better.
Managing diversity focuses on developing managerial skills and policies to optimize every member’ contribution to the organization’s goals.
The challenge before each person is to continue to dismantle the interior psychological walls that can divide people from each other. These interior psychological walls are constructed from preconceived notions about other people, as well as by uncertainty, ambiguity and fear of the unknown (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
Now, we have two fundamental challenges of diversity that are imperatives for the success of organizations in the global marketplace in our days.
The first challenge is to adjust the availability of jobs and employment opportunities to obtain a better fit with the needs and expectations of a more diversified workforce.
The second challenge is for organizations to treat all employees and potential employees fairly and to be sensitive and responsive to employees.
Organizations that are inclined to favor certain personal orientations and shifle others and are not flexible to the diversity of gender, race, cultural and other legally protected attributes run the risk of low productivity as a consequence of employee’s dissatisfaction and lack of commitment (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
In general, the research suggests that diversity of background and perspective improves the quality of the strategic decisions made by a team facing turbulent, uncertain environment (Yukl, 1998). However, the potential benefits of diversity will not be realized unless the team is able to make decisions in a way that utilizes the relevant knowledge and skill of members. It is not enough to have workforce diversity if the manage dose not know how to make good strategies to encourage, be sensitive and treat the employees fairly to give them the opportunity to do a great job.
Strategies for Diversity
As we have seen above, workforce diversity is a challenge for all organizations in the world, and specific strategies can be applied in a variety of organizations to create harmony and productivity around the differences and similarities among the members.
In this chapter I found that if an organization have diverse members who do not understand, appreciate, respect, and harness theirs differences from and similarities to other members, the workforce will not be committed to the organization and the member will not find professional satisfaction.
Therefor it is important to plan and implement programs to harness diversity and to use diversity as an extraordinary source for the organizational success.
Lawson and Shen presented to us some strategies for diversity: Organizations must invest continuously in the education and development of the competencies of diverse high performance quality oriented teams.
Encourage awareness of diverse member’s strengths and educational strategies to address weaknesses and promote continuously interpersonal skills, self-management techniques and problem solving.
Implement organizational policies and practices that promote values, beliefs, and norms in support of diversity, teamwork, quality, and individual responsibility for the organization.
Implement realistic and encouraging career planning and advancement programs centered upon team or unit rewards, a variety of pay incentive shames and flexible benefits programs (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
Diversity varies along many dimensions, such as race; ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation but this potential source of conflict is also potential source of benefits and success for the organization.
I have understood how important is to know what workforce diversity is and what strategies a manager can use to improve the quality of the work and create a good atmosphere in the organization and in the organizational culture
Chapter IV
Group Dynamics
In this chapter we will discuss about the groups which are fundamental features of organizations around the world, and it is imperative that their dynamics and effectiveness are understood.
In the organizations the leaders needs to understand how followers as a group represent something that cannot be understood solely in terms of their collective characteristics.
We will define groups and indicate the similarities and differences between groups and teams examine the stages of group development of people in organizations and conclude with factors which influence groups and teams which influence the performance of groups and teams in the organization.
Groups at Work
Perhaps we should begin by defining a group. A group can be thought of as “two or more persons who are interacting with one another in such a manner that each person influences and is influenced by other person” (Hughes, Ginnett and Cuphy, 1996). Also we have definition found in Lawson and Shen: “two or more interdependent and interacting persons, sharing a common purpose or purposes who perceive themselves as having an unique relationship link between members as distinguished from interactions with nonmembers”(Lawson and Shen, 1998).
In one word, group members interact with and influence each other. Thus, people waiting at a bus stop would not constitute a group, as there generally is neither interaction nor influence between the various individuals. On the other hand, eight people meeting to plan a school bond election would constitute a group, as there probably would be a high level of mutual interaction among the attendees. Another aspect is that an individual can belong to a number of groups and could not be constrained to only one group; an individual could be a member of various service, production, sports, religion, parent, and volunteer groups simultaneously.
People often tend to identify more with the groups they belong to than with the organizations they belong to; they are more psychologically invested in theirs groups. Also, groups than better satisfy certain important psychological needs (e.g., social contact) by organizations (Hughes, Ginnett, and Curphy, 1996).
Types of the Groups
Lawson and Shen present us two types of groups, formal and informal.
A formal group is created by the organization and is designed to focus the resources of members on the attainment of some important organizational goal or goals. One type of formal group is the command group which is determined by organizational chart who report directly to a given manager or supervisor.
The other kind of formal group is the task group where the membership is determined by knowledge, experience, or interest that is relevant to the task group.
The second major type of group that is frequently found in organizations around the globe is the informal group, which arises naturally without any direction from the organization and reflects the fundamental need of people to belong to groups (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
One kind of informal group is the interest group, which may rise within an organization from a particular interest such as to request modifications in employee’s benefits. Generally, interest groups decide on some mission or goal, resources, and accountability features.
The other type of informal group is the friendship group, which arise outside an organization to bring people together around a common interest or activity such as an event or some type of entertainment or community action project.
Taken together, informal and formal groups are found in every organization and are designed to promote interaction among people and to achieve specific goals important to organizations and members alike.
Development Stages of Groups
Just as children go through different stages of development, so do groups.
Tuckman’s (1965) review of over 60 studies involving leaderless training, experimental, or therapeutic groups revealed that groups generally went through four distinct stages of development.
The first stage, forming was characterized by polite conversation, the gathering of superficial information about fellow members and low trust. Members seek information about the purpose or purposes of the group; begin to lean how the group will work or the rules of the road. Hughes, Ginnett and Curphy (1996) say that the group’s rejection of emerging potential leaders with negative characteristics also took place during the forming stage.
The second stage is storming, usually was marked by intragroup conflict, heightened emotional levels, and status differentiation as remaining contenders struggled to build alliances and fulfill the group’s leadership role. In this stage it is good to encourage members to remain actively involved in the group.
The clear emergence of a leader and the development of group norms and cohesiveness were the key indicators of the norming stage of group development. Now, the members are more upbeat and positive about the group, their membership, and their work in the group. Work starts to get done and project reports begin to take shape (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
Finally, groups reached the performing stage when group members played functional, interdependent roles that were focused on the performance of group tasks.
The members are fully focused on getting the work done.
In Lawson and Shen (1998) we have the fifth stage, which is adjuring, and this, means that the members prepare to dissolve the group. Some group members may be pleased that the group is breaking up, while others may be downhearted about the loss of camaraderie, friendship and the structuring of their organizational time.
I believe that it is very important to understand the stages of group development, which deals with the relationships between leadership behaviors and group cohesiveness and productivity. Some experts have maintained that leaders need to focus on consideration or group maintenance behaviors during the norming stage to improve group cohesiveness, and task behaviors during the performing stage in order to improve group productivity (Hughes, Ginnett, and Curphy, 1996).
Thus, being able to recognize stages of group development may enhance the likehood that one will emerge as a leader as well as increase the cohesiveness and productivity of the group. The role of the Organizational Psychologist is very important to advise the leader how to manage a group in an organization.
Roles and Norms
Another important topic in the study of groups within organization is the group roles and the group’s roles.
Group roles are the sets of expected behavior associated with particular jobs or positions or with other words the pattern of interrelationships among the members based on the positions they holds in the group (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
To have group cohesiveness and member’s appreciation I learn from this chapter that an organization needs to have different members play different roles, so each member can see for himself that there is a structure and a sense of predictability of management that works clearly for groups and teams.
Norms are the informal rules groups adopt to regulate and regularize group members’ behavior.
Most groups develop norms related to performance and associated processes, such as how hard, long and smart to work and how to go about doing your work, especially in relation to other members (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
Norms do not govern all behaviors, just dose groups feels are important. Hughes, Ginnett and Curphy (1996) says that norms are more likely to be seen as important and apt to be enforced if they facilitate group survival; simplify, or make more predictable, what behavior is expected of group members; help the group avoid embracing interpersonal problems; or express the central values of the group and clarify what is distinctive about the group’s identity (Hughes, Ginnett and Curphy, 1996).
In conclusion, I have understood the importance of roles and norms for promoting group stability and predictability and this because the members of the organization play different roles and respect each other. The behavior of a member may be due to the group norms and roles and the group’s stage of development or to the group’s level of cohesiveness. Moreover, this group characteristics just described can give leaders and follower ideas about factors that may be affecting their ability to influence other group members and what to do to improve their level of influence in the group.
Teams in Organizations
Teams are a valuable organizational resource that is being used increasingly in almost all organizations around the world. Teams are generally successful and have been an excellent response to downsizing.
Teams have been defined as “interdependent collections of individuals who share responsibility for specific outcomes for their organization” (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
Team members have cross-functional training and hence a variety of skills, so instead of doing the same thing over and over, they do many different things and can stand in for each other, which allows individuals to be more flexible but still to get the team’s work done.
There are some differences between teams and groups: first, teams generally have a stronger sense of identification among their members than do groups. Often, both team members and outsiders can readily identify who is and who is not on the team (athletic uniforms are one obvious example); identifying members of a group may be more difficult. Second, teams have common goals or tasks. Group members, on the other hand, may not have the same degree of consensus about goals as team members do. Group members may belong to a group for a variety of personal reasons, and these may clash with the group’s stated objectives (Hughes, Ginnett and Curphy, 1996). Last, teams are involved in organization-wide decision.
Types of Teams
The mission of the team determines the type of team; say Lawson and Shen (1998).
Quality circles, like task forces, are created for the primary purpose of solving specific problems. Quality circles usually consist of 6-12 members who focus on raising the quality or productivity of their part of the organization.
Quality circles appear to be the most effective early in the implementation phase of a new product or service.
Autonomous work group, self-managed teams, or empowered teams perform highly interdependent jobs, are identified as a social unit in the organization, are usually given significant authority and responsibility for many phases of their work and make decisions that have economic consequences (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
Not only do teams vary in the extent to which they have specialized roles or tasks interdependence; they also vary in effectiveness.
Team Building
How to make a team to be efficient in what they need to do?
The purpose of team building is to increase cohesiveness, mutual cooperation, and identification with the group (Yukl, 1998).
First, effective teams had a clear mission and high performance standard. Everyone on the team knew what the team was trying to achieve and how well had to perform in order to achieve the team’s mission (Hughes, Ginnett and Curphy, 1996).
Second, Lawson and Shen (1998) advise to construct a team on the basis of the technical, interpersonal and organizational skills that are needed for the task at hand. Also, it is important to promote clear definitions of the team’s rules of the road. Rules which may include issues of confidentiality; attendance; the use of only constructive criticism and guidelines for decision making. It is also important to meet regular for specified periods, and encourage and reward individual and team accomplishments. And based on the final rapport express gratitude to the team, and rapport the outcomes of the team’s work later.
Factors Influencing Groups and Teams
The factors that influence the performance of groups or teams are cohesiveness and familiarity, composition and context.
Group cohesion is the “glue” that keeps a group together. It is the sum of forces that attract members to a group, provide resistance to leaving it and motivate them to be active in it.
Cohesiveness is usually stronger when the group is small, membership is stable, members interact regularly, members have shared goals, members have similar values and background, membership is exclusive and limited and the group has high status in the organization (Yukl, 1998).
Cohesiveness facilitates high performance if the group values task achievement and sets high norms for member performance. Also it appears that teams that are composed of members who are familiar with each other are more effective than are teams composed of strangers (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
Composition
Composition is another factor, which influence the performance of groups.
Lawson and Shen (1998) sustain that the diversity is a fundamental feature of organizations, and the effect of diversity of membership on the performance of teams has been studied in the workforce diversity chapter. As long as the team is diversified it is assumed that the factor of diversity will yield enhanced performance of decision-making and problem-solving team.
The leader should encourage the members to increase mutual acceptance and respect among dives team members (Yukl, 1998).
Context
It is very clear that the effectiveness of the team is influenced substantially by the context, which includes such elements as organizational culture, mission, issues related to team autonomy, rewards and recognition and physical environment.
I agree with Lawson and Shen (1998) who says that an organizational culture that promotes innovations and shared expectations of success fosters effective teams. And also issues involving autonomy are important for the effectiveness of the team (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
In conclusion, a great influence on the effectiveness of a team is the organizational context that provides appropriate support for the team’s design and process, and also the cohesiveness and familiarity, and membership diversity of the groups and teams have a great influence on the performance of organizations and members.
Chapter V
Individual and Organizational Motivation
In this chapter we examine individual and organizational motivation, defined as a set of forces that initiates, directs and sustain action toward a goal.
Motivation is often one of the most asked about processes within organizations.
Therefore, we examine micromodels of motivation that focus exclusively on individual needs, beliefs, and expectations, such as Maslow’s need hierarchy, McClelland’s need achievement and equity and expectancy models in order to see how the organizational behavior can be predictable and manageable by an expectancy model of motivation.
In this chapter we want to see how motivational strategies and programs are conceptualized and implemented that involves an unequivocal movement from an individual to a group and a process-level focus for enhancing individual and organizational productivity.
The relationship between motivation and work and performance will be discussed and also we will see that absenteeism, lateness, safety, and quality are related to motivation.
Motivation
We have a definition of motivation in Lawson and Shen (1998): “we define motivation as forces within or outside the individual or group that initiate, direct, and sustain action toward a goal or set of goals”(Lawson and Shen, 1998).
Also, they believe that the situational and dispositional forces determine the level of motivation that organizational members relentlessly pursue individual and organizational goals, and the motivation operates as a system in which outcomes provide feedback that influences subsequent motivational levels.
Also, Kotter (1999), says that motivation and inspiration energize people, not by pushing them in the right direction as control mechanism do but by satisfying basic human needs for achievement, a sense of belonging, recognition, self-esteem, a feeling of control over one’s life, and the ability to live up to one’s ideals (Kotter, 1999).
I believe that such feelings touch us deeply and elicit a powerful response. In the same direction Sofia Chirica in “Psihologie Organizationala” (Chirica, 1996) says that if an individual has a good image about himself he is strongly motivated by the success satisfaction.
To conclude I’m convinced that motivation is a force, which can be used when a person has appropriate abilities and skills to produce high-quality and competitive services and products. In fact, performance is a function of ability combined multiplicatively with motivation.
A good and correct understanding of motivation, levers for action, models of motivation, and strategies to enhance motivational levels can help managers get to know their colleagues fully and harness these motivational forces to enhance the effectiveness of individual members and the organization (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
Models of Motivation
Lawson and Shen (1998) present us a number of micro- and macrodomes of motivation to work which have been developed and refined over the past 25 years.
Micromodels of motivation
These models assume that the highly motivated member alone can bring about enhanced productivity at the individual level and, perhaps, at the organizational level. These models are concern with what individual brings to the workplace.
We have here the Maslow’s need hierarchy which was developed by Maslow (1943, 1954), a clinical psychologist, he believed that the human needs could be divided into five levels and arranged in order of importance and that higher-lever needs (self-esteem) are not expressed until the basic, lower- lever needs (food, clothes, place to stay) are satisfied (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
Maslow says that if we want to motivate a person or to learn something we need to be sure that the basic needs are satisfied.
The second micromodel is McClelland’s nAch.
According to McClelland, Atkinson, Clark and Lowell (1953), human needs are learned, and the three most important ones for work motivation are the needs for achievement, affiliation and power. Persons who have high nAch assume personal responsibility for the solution of tasks or problems, set moderately difficult goals, take calculated risks and have a strong desire for feedback on their performance.
If in these two models we consider that the focus is on the individual need and these models are known as “push” models of motivation because they propel the individual into the organizational context, and in contrast we have equity and expectancy models of motivation known as the “pull” models. These are cognitive models of motivation that emphasize the cognitive process of motivation that people undergo in deciding to work or remain in particular organization (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
Linking rewards to performances and the motto for managers should be, don’t promise what you can’t deliver, and always deliver what you promise.
Macromodels of motivation
The fire macromodel of motivation presented in Lawson and Shen (1998) is Herzberg’s two-factor macromodel of motivation, which it focused on both the individual member and the organizational context. He found that the motivators (like opportunities for achievement, recognition, responsibility, advancement, and growth) were intrinsic to a particular job, and when they were strengthened, the level of motivation would increase. The hygiene factor was extrinsic to the job, yet including features of the organizational context, such as salaries, member’s relationships, and management style (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
I believe that this model is important because it include this extrinsic factor, include the role of the organizational context rather than just the individual as a variable for understanding the motivational levels in workplace.
The TQ macromodel of motivation focus on the importance of the context or system and its role in determining motivation in the workplace.
In TQ programs, the customer, or client is the primary focus for organizational motivation and in turn has an impact on all members of the organization.
Personally I believe that the best motivational model is that which understand and accept both intrinsic and extrinsic elements to motivate a person.
Motivational Levers
The following motivational levers or applied strategies are to enhance productivity.
Here we have the goal setting which is means to have a goal, a desired state or object that a person seeks at some point in the future. Goals are immediate regulators or, in other words, determine, in large measure the performance of tasks (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
Goal setting is an effective and sound motivational tool because it activates both cognitive and emotional processes in the person or group.
Also, just as goal setting by an individual directly influences the person’s goal-related performances, group goal setting improves group performances.
The research also says that when persons are assigned difficult goals, they produce more, experience a stronger sense of self-efficacy, and have a higher heart rate than when they are given simple goals.
We have here also other motivational levers like: self-fulfilling prophecies which is for interpersonal relationships and then perceived self-efficacy, which is probably the central psychological mechanism that mediates both goal setting and the self-fulfilling prophecy. Intrinsic motivation which is based on the need for self-determination and competence.
All this can be strategies which can be used to motivate the organizational member in improving his/ her performance at the workplace and I agree that it should be used a mixture of models, strategies that motivate the person using the context and also trying to satisfied the needs of the person in order to have performance at the workplace.
Chapter VI
Leadership
In this chapter we will focus on leadership, its historical roots, and the current thinking. We will try to understand the use of power in leadership and the transactional and transformational leadership. We try to see what types of leadership are useful in organizations and the impact of power used.
Leadership is a subject that has long excited interest among people. The term connotes images of powerful, dynamic individuals who command victorious armies, direct corporate empires from atop gleaming skyscrapers, or shape the course of nations.
The focus of much of research on leadership has been on the determinants of leadership effectiveness. Social scientists have attempted to discover what traits, abilities, behaviors, source of power, or aspects of a situation determine how well a leader is able to influence followers and accomplish group objectives (Yukl, 1998).
Definition of Leadership
Research usually defines leadership according to their individual perspectives and the aspects of the phenomenon of most interest to them. After a comprehensive review of the leadership literature, Yukl (1998) conclude that “ there are almost as many definition of leadership as there are person who have attempted to define the concept”, but we will present this topic as we have studied in the virtual class of this course evacuating the definition given by Lawson and Shen (1998).
So, leadership is presented by Lawson and Shen (1998) as being “a process that includes influencing the task objectives and strategies of a group or organization, influencing people in the organization to implement the strategies and achieve the objectives, influencing group maintenance and identification and influencing the culture of the organization” (Yukl & Van Fleet, 1992, p.149 in Lawson and Shen, 1998).
These writers believe it is more useful to study “leadership” as a process rather than to study “the leader” as an individual. According to this view, any member of the social system may exhibit leadership at any time, and there is no clear distinction between leaders and followers (Yukl, 1998).
We found in Lawson and Shen (1998) the same view saying that the effective leaders develop mature leadership relationships with their followers, reciprocal influence, mutual trust, respect, and internalization of shared goals (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
In conclusion to this discussion I believe too that an effective leader has the ability to use the interactive process that involves many different people who influence each other to make the best decision for a certain situation.
Power
Some researchers say that a person who uses control over rewards and punishments to manipulate or coerce followers is not really “leading” them. But, one can not lead unless one has power. Which makes power a necessary but not sufficient condition for leadership.
I agree that a leader must have some power in order to be an effective leader but it is important that this leader not to make abuse of his power.
An effective leader encourage his staff to use their own skills to devise original solutions to challenges rather than merely find out what he wanted them to do (Hughes, Ginnett, and Curphy, 1996).
Models of leadership
Just as there are many definitions of leadership, there are numerous models of leadership.
Lawson and Shen (1998) discuss the three leadership models as the trait model, the behavioral model and the situational model.
The direct approach is oriented toward a specific leadership behavior, which is clearly and objectively defined. The elements of leadership behavior are isolated as specific learning, which are systematically programmed into a long-term development process.
The direct approach ensures that appropriate and sufficient time is given the development of leadership skills, to bring about the desire change in behavior and to achieve leadership competence.
Trait Approach
The trait approach emphasizes the personal attributes of leaders. Underlying this approach as the assumption that some people are natural leaders who are endowed with certain traits not possessed by other people (Yukl, 1998). Lawson and Shen (1998) present some profiles of traits, motives, and skills which make a person be an effective leader.
Early leadership theories attributed managerial success to extraordinary abilities such as tireless energy, penetrating intuition, uncanny foresight, and irresistible persuasive powers.
I believe that the most important thing is that an efficient leader must have a balance between his emotional side, personal side and his professional side or his professional skills.
Behavior Approach
The focus of behavior models of leadership is on what the leader or manager dose with whatever personal traits, skills, or motivational capacities he or she has been endowed with as a result of organizational experience and education (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
Much of the behavior research is concerned with finding ways to classify behavior that will facilitate our understanding of leadership. The primary concern of behavioral models is actions and the impact of those actions on effectiveness.
Leaders operate in dynamic and turbulent environments in which conflict, people, productivity issues, outcome reports, and events converge on them daily.
Thus the descriptive behavioral profile of a leader includes maintaining a relentless pace; making multiple, minimal reflective decisions; building coalitions and networks; and searching for clarifying and meaning in ambiguous situations (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
The behavioral models, like the trait models, focus on the acquired behaviors and personal attributes that the person bring to the situation, and provide a framework for identifying and cultivating leaders in organizations.
Situational approach
In the situational model of leadership, the focus is on how the organizational situation shapes the leader’s thoughts, feelings and actions or how situational variables moderate the relationship between the leader’s attributes and behaviors and his effectiveness (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
This approach has two major subcategories. One line of research treats managerial behavior as a dependent variable, and searchers seek to discover how aspects of the situation such as the type of organization or managerial position influence this behavior. Effectiveness depends on how well a manager resolves role conflicts, copes with demands, recognize opportunities, and overcomes constraints (Yukl, 1998).
The other subcategory of situational research attempts to identify aspects of the situation that moderate the relationship of leader behavior to leadership effectiveness. The assumption is that different behavior patterns will be effective in different situations, and that the same behavior pattern is not optimal in all situations.
In either approach, what is important is that the leader must focus his or her energies on interpreting the situation to determine what can be done and how and then to implement an action or get out of the situation (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
Transformational Leadership
According to Yukl (1998), transformational leadership is defined in terms of the leader’s effect on followers: they feel trust, admiration, and loyalty, and respect toward the leader, and they are motivated to do more than they originally expected to do.
According to Lawson and Shen (1998), transformational leaders act to empower followers and pursue organizational changes that institutionalize new systems, processes and values.
The leader transforms and motivates the followers by: making them more aware of the importance of task outcomes; including them to transcend their own self-interest for the sake of the organization or team, and activating their higher-order needs (Yukl, 1998).
I believe that the major premise of the theory is that transformational leadership than by transactional leadership enhances follower motivation and performance more.
Here we have four transformational behaviors (idealized influence; individualized consideration; inspirational motivation and intellectual stimulation) which are highly interrelated and they interact to influence changes in followers (Yukl, 1998).
In conclusion to this chapter I learned that leadership has been defined in different ways, but most definitions share the assumption that it involves a social influence process whereby intentional influence is exerted by one person over other person in an attempt to structure the activities and relationships in a group or organization. In order to became an efficient leader one person can achieve through experience and education, and studding the organizational politics, influence tactics, how to use power and different models of leadership.
Leadership is about giving yourself to others. If you do it well, you grow as a person and as a leader earn the respect and support of your followers.
Chapter VII
Decision Making and Conflict Resolution
Decision making in organizations is a social process that is influenced by rational and nonrational forces and consists of process and outcome components. It involves choosing among alternatives, implementing the decision, and examining outcome data that shape later decisions associated with earlier decision.
We have organizations composed of multitudes of diverse individuals, there are almost a constant potential conflict possible, and therefore are important to understand correctly how to take good decision for the organization and how to resolve the conflicts.
Models of Decision Making
According to Lawson and Shen (1998) we have three models of how organizations make decisions: rationality, bounded-rationality, and political models which are briefly discussed in this chapter.
Rationality
This model is a cold, cognitive model in that it is based on the assumption that decision-makers are entirely rational and seeks the best or most effective alternative for a given problem.
Also I need to say that that the decision makers: have complete information about the opportunity or problem; have complete info about all alternatives and the consequence of selecting one alternative over any other; and make a decision solely on the basis of expectations about further outcomes, rather than on political considerations.
The person who uses the rational model will follow the steps of a process which will be: identification of an opportunity or problem; determination of the importance of the opportunity or problem; a search for and evaluation of alternatives; and the selection of an alternative or alternatives and implementation of the decision.
I believe that in general individuals and organizations tend to make decisions on the basis of rational consideration.
Bounded Rationality
In this case, the decision makers aspire to make optimal choices but are hampered by the following two boundaries to rationality: all possible information about the problem and alternatives cannot be known within a given period; a decision may be based on criteria other than the rational and logical evaluation of information, such as consideration of members preferences and coalitions in the organization.
Finally, according to the bounded-rationality mode of decision making, most decisions are made using relatively stable, routine organizational processes that operate incrementally in response to problems and serve to maintain the stability of an organization over time (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
Politics
The political model proposes that decisions result from bargaining by individuals or coalitions, rather than from the operation of routine organizational information gathering and processing processes. In this perspective, decision making is a matter of seeking a solution that is acceptable to all parties and following a strategy of incrementalism in search of what is possible rather than what is optimal or satisfying (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
Political decision making also includes: considering only alternatives that differ slightly, marginally or incrementally from existing policies or practices; considering a small number of alternatives and only those with limited consequences; continually massaging or redefining the problem and alternatives to make the decision acceptable to all parties and focusing on short-term problems.
Central to each of the three models is the fact that decision making is primarily a group or social process having the goal to find the best alternative and implementate it for the good of the organization.
In conclusion, decision making in organizations is a social process that is influenced by rational and nonrational forces and consists of process and outcome components. It involves choosing among alternatives, implementing the decision, and examining outcome data that shape later decisions associated with the earlier decision.
Conflict Resolution
Conflict resolution is another topic studied in this chapter and I’ll make a short presentation of the main ideas about conflict resolution.
Conflict is global, lifelong, and neither intrinsically good nor bad; is the key how it is managed. Conflict arise from many sources (intra- and interpersonal, as well as intra- and intergroup), but usually involves two or more parties in a situation in which resources are finite and there are perceived or real incompatibilities or disagreement between the parties (Lawson and Shen,
1998).
The first step in problem solving is to state the problem so that everyone involved in developing a solution has an informed, common appreciation and understanding of the task. But sometimes is difficult to find a solution in solving the problem and then we have the negotiation in order to resolve the conflict (Yukl, 1998).
Negotiations are formal systematic processes for resolving conflicts, and involve transaction costs, satisfaction with outcomes, effect on relationship and recurrence of disputes.
So, we need to use negations to solve the conflict between two or more persons.
A central feature of negations is the importance of knowing yourself, so you can recognize the strengths and weaknesses of others.
Also we have some guidelines for negotiating: be prepared; maximize with the right person; give yourself room to maneuver; don’t give away too much too soon; be prepared to say no; make your word your bond (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
I agree with the principled negotiations, which involve separating the people from the problem, focusing on interests rather than positions, generating options for mutual gain, and using objective standards to inform negations rather than relying on dogma, flimsy evidence, or hollow rhetoric.
Also, I found very helpful the idea that leaders should attempt to work out a resolution by looking at long-term rather than short-term goals and try to build a mutually trusting and beneficial working relationship that will endure beyond the present negotiation (Yukl, 1998).
The negotiation tactics can be very helpful to the manager to work with organizations to improve their effectiveness.
Chapter VIII
Individual Change and Organizational Change
Individual change involves the whole person, not just the enhancement of a skill, job, or career, and this development takes place in organizational context that change and challenges each person. Also, the world is changing and organizations have been and will continue to change and this to meet the global competition in today’s market.
Individual Change
Individual change can lead to the enhancement of a person’s intellectual, emotional, physical, and psychological capacities that promote a healthy, productive, loving, and enjoyable life (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
Every organization wants, at some level, to grow and nurture individual members, anticipating that there will be a value-added payback to the organization. We will look at a variety of timely work-life issues that influence individual change and identify specific guidelines for enhancing organizational citizenship behavior and for developing an increasingly diversified workforce.
Individual change dose not occur in static organizational contexts, and each person has to deal at different levels with a wide variety of work-life issues, such as aging, sexual harassment, and role juggling. Perhaps things are changing too fast. How to adapt is sure to be a large area of the I/O Psychologist not only for the individual, but also for the companies, businesses and organizations that they work for.
It is difficult to define conclusively the individual place in the community but most would agree that people are social creatures and display territorial behavior in many forms throughout all spheres of theirs lives. Everyone wants their place in the sun, and companies and positions that offer some autonomy and individual liberty will be in demand.
All organizations are concerned with power, leadership and politics and time management skill, leadership training, organizational developments are all areas in which the I/O individual can intervene within a corporate structure.
The job enrichment model identifies essential features of job that promote individual motivation, including the degree of autonomy and the timeliness of feedback on performance. Obviously, the higher both of these features are, the greater the enhancement of individual opportunities.
I believe that individual change involving a variety of work-life issues and coping strategies is advanced substantially by a discipline or a way to experience personal wholeness and uniqueness. But sometimes people have problems at work and at home and attempts in his or her own way to cope with these problems which could be a source of stress in theirs lives.
In most cases, stress is associated with problems and a high level of stress usually leads to deteriorating performance and may lead to dysfunction. An important part of individual change is to manage stress so that life can be enjoyable and fulfilling.
But factors such as environmental control program that provides assistance and counseling and change are to name a few steps, which can be done to help people cope with the stress.
Stress management and the promotion of individual change will help organizational members be more resourceful and increase the ability to apply interventions throughout a wide variety of organizations whether the stresses are objective or subjective (Lawson and Shen, 1998).
According to Lawson and Shen (1998) a discipline must contain five facets to help a person grow: an exercise that is done, for the most part, alone; an exercise that is easy to initiate and dose not require much mental effort; and exercise done daily for at least 30 minutes to 1 hour; an exercise that the exerciser must believe will improve her or his mental and physical state; an exercise that dose not require inordinate self-criticism or comparison of one’s progress to the progress of others. Also, Lawson and Shen (1998) advise that we should pursue our own coping strategy or discipline, so we can learn to adjust effectively to the wide variety of work-life issues that we may encounter at work and at home.
The goal of these individual changes is to enhance satisfaction in the work place and improve productivity.
Organizational Change
Organizational change is inevitable and essential for organizational growth. Organizational change focuses on changing the organization, rather than specific individuals, although individual change is essential for organizational change.
Two major expected outcomes of change according to Lawson and Shen (1998) are enhanced organizational performance and individual development. Both of these factors incorporate bottom-line-increasing characteristics in employees such as productivity, profitability, efficiency, quality, innovation, better job skill, new learning strategies, and adaptability. There are enormous demands on a global organization and organization-wide integration of structure, work force, and culture is imperative for productivity, customer satisfaction, and market growth. I feel that there are many organizations in current need of organizational change, there are many that are undergoing rapid change, and there will always be more to follow.
Lawson and Shen (1998) say also that each organization can add a new focus and can be the only eliminating aversion to organizational death.
Organizational development consists in changing the fundamental aspects of how an organization functions. The belief presented by Lawson and Shen (1998) is that if change is planned, then an organization is better equipped to handle existing or anticipated changes in environmental demands. The authors discuss a four phase model for planned change, which includes an intervention (a decision by someone that change is necessary); organizational targets (independent variables- vision and work setting); individual members (individual change); and organizational outcomes (a growth in organizational performance).
I learned in this study that employees are integral in bringing about organizational change.
Employers are transforming their relationship with employees by implementing alternative work arrangements; establishing up upward and downward communication lines; personalize the job to the worker; fostering an environment of continuous innovation and learning; and improving employee recognition programs.
In conclusion, I believe that the systematic application of competence, grace, and compassion in organizations can lead to more effective, efficient, and noble organizations.
Organizations, like individuals, must continue to learn, and continuous learning gives new lines and vitality to the organization, its members, and the larger community.
Conclusion
In conclusion to this study we have learn that organizations are crafted from people who come together because they believe and eventually test the belief that they can accomplish something more effectively and efficiently together than anyone could do alone.
We have learned that it is important for a manger to know the nature of the people and organization and strategies to improve organizational culture, to learn how to explore workforce diversity, how to motivate the individual and the organization to change, to improve theirs actions to be more effective, efficient and have a noble organization.
Finally, organizations, like people, are born, grow, mature, and eventually die or are transformed into new and different organizations.
REFERENCES
_____Lawson, R.B., Shen, Z. (1998). Organizational Psychology.
_____Hughes, R.L., Ginnett, R. C., Curphy, G. .J. (1996). Leadership.
_____Chirica, S. (1996). Psihologie Orgainzationala.
_____Kotter, P.J. (1999). What Leaders Really Do.
_____Yukl, G. (1998). Leadership in Organizations. (4th ed.).
______Kouzes, J.M. (1988). The Leadership Challenge.
copyright © Sorin Balogh
www.psihoteam.com