1. INTRODUCTIONDefinition: 1) Organizational Behavior is the study of and application of knowledge about how people act with organizations. It is a human tool for human benefit. It applies broadly to the behavior of people in all type of organization such as business, government, schools and service organization. Whatever organization are, there is a need to understand organizational behavior - Keith Davis. 2) Organizational Behavior or OB for short is the study of individual and groups in organizations. It is a body of knowledge that has special implications for the ways in which managers deal with the people in any work setting Schermershon, John R What is meant by Organization Behavior? It is an attempt to replace all management with behavioral science concepts and techniques? How, if at all, does it differ from good old applied or industrial psychology? Fortunately, these questions have been largely been answered to the satisfaction of most management academicians, behavioral scientists and management practitioners.
OT Theoreti cal Figure: The Relationship Appli ed of Organization Theory OD Organizational Development
OB Organization Behavior P/HR Personal / Human Resource
organizational Behavior to other closely related disciplines
. Figure above shows in very general terms the relationship between and emphasis of Organizational Behavior (OB) and the related disciplines of Organization Theory (OT), Organization Development (OD) and Personal and Human Resource (P/HR). as shown OB tends to be more theoretically oriented and at the micro level of analysis. Specifically OB draws as many theoretical frameworks as the behavioral sciences that are focused at understanding and explaining individual and group behavior in organization. As with other sciences OB accumulates knowledge and test theories by accepted scientific methods of
research. In summary, Organizational Behavior can be defined as the Understanding, Prediction and Management of Human Behavior in Organizations. The Key elements in organizational Behavior are PEOPLE, STRUCTURE, TECHNOLOGY and the EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT in organization operates. When people join together in an organization to accomplish an objective some kind of structure is required. People also use technology to help get then job done. So there is an interaction of People, Structure and Technology as shown in figure below. In addition these elements are influenced by External environment and they influence it. PEOPLE EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT
PEOPLE: People make up the internal social system of the organization. They consist of individuals and groups and large groups as well as small ones. There are unofficial informal groups and more official and formal groups. Groups are dynamic. They form change and disband. The human organizations today is not the same as it was before. People are living, thinking, feeling beings who created the organization. It exists to achieve their objective. Organization exists to serve people. People do not exist to serve organizations. STRUCTURE: Structure defines the official relationship of people in organization. Different jobs are required to accomplish all of an organizations activities. There are managers and employees who have to be related in some structural way so that their work can be effective. The main structure is related to power and duties. For example, one person has authority to make decisions that affect the work of other people. TECHNOLOGY: Technology provides the physical and economic sources with which people work. They cannot accomplish much with their bare hands, so they build buildings, design machines, create work process and assemble resources. The technology that results has significant influence as working relationships. An assembly line is not the same as a research laboratory. The great benefit of technology is that it allows people to do more and better work, but it also restricts people in various ways, it has COSTS as well as benefits. ENVIRONMENT: All organizations operate within an external environment. A single organization does not exist alone. It is a part of a larger system that contains thousands of other elements. All these mutually influence each other in a complex system that becomes the life style of the people. The environment influences the attitudes of people, affects working conditions and provides competitions for resources and power. Hence, this assumes an important role in the study of Human Behavior in organization.
HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF OBThough human relationships are known to exist since the beginning of mankind its systematic study as art and science and trying to deal with them in complex organizations is relatively new. The industrial revolution brought about surplus of goods and wages, shorter hours and more satisfaction. Robert Owen, a young Welsh factory owner (about 1800) was one of the first to emphasis human needs of employees. Andrew Ure (1835) added the human dimension into his The Philosophy of Manufacturers, however the development of OB is reckoned with the Early Development during which the interest in people at work was awakened by Fredrick W Taylor in the United States in the early 1900s. he is often called as the Father of Scientific Management and the changes he brought about to management paved the way for later development of organizational behavior. His work eventually led to improved recognition and productivity for industrial workers. During this era the goal was technical efficiency, but management was awakened to the importance of one of its neglected resources. Whiting Williams (1920) published a significant interpretation of his experience with workers, in his work Whats in the Workers Mind. In 1920s and 1930s Elton Mayo and F.J.Rocthlisberger at Harward University gave academic stature to the study of Human Behavior at work. They applied keen insight, straight thinking and the sociological backgrounds to industrial experiments at western Electric Company, Hawthorne plant. The result was the concept that an organization is a social system and the workers indeed the most important element in it. Their experiments showed that the worker is not a simple tool but a complex personality interacting in a group situation the often is difficult to understand. To Taylor and his contemporaries, human problem stood in the way of production and so should be removed. To Mayo, human problems became a broad new field of study and an opportunity for progress Taylor increased production by rationalizing it while Mayo and his followers sought to increase production by humanizing it. The Mayo Rocthlisberger research was substantial about human behavior at work and its influence was widespread. The support of business and academic leaders led to a surge of interest in human relations. By the 1950 the subject had became so popular to the following reason: 1. There was a cultural lag in understanding the human side of organizations so that huge emphasis was needed to catch up with progress in engineering, production, sales and finance Management saw this imbalance and worked to improve the situation. 2. A large amount of research followed the work of Mayo and Rocthlisberger, giving managers new knowledge for building more effective organizations. 3. Social forces brought increasing pressures for improving human climate in organizations labour unions gained strength and pressed for better working environment. Minority groups insisted upon a better climate for their members. Workers were also better educated and expected an improved, more human quality of leadership in organizations. Generally there was a change in social attitudes of that required more social responsibility in organizations in dealing with all types of people including their employees.
4. The working environment itself became more complex, requiring more attention from management to make it operate effectively, increasing organization size added to the complexity of work. Increasing specialization contributed to the complexity of work. The employees became less able to understand and appreciable the whole product or service that they helped produce. A powerful for maturity in organizational behavior was Douglas Mc Gregors Theory X and Theory Y first published in 1957. These two theories clearly distinguished traditional automatic assumptions about people (Theory X) and more behaviorally based assumptions about people. The usefulness of Mc Gregor theories is his convincing argument that most management actions flow directly from whatever theory of human behavior managers hold. Mc Gregor pointed out Theory X was the set of assumptions held by most managers at that time. Even though they did not explicitly made their assumptions, they implicitly held them, because the kinds of actions they took came from Theory X.
THEORY Y o o o Work is as natural as play or rest. People are not inherently lazy. They have become that way as a result of experience. People will exercise self-direction and self control in the service of objectives to which they are committed. People have potential under proper conditions they learn to accept and seek responsibility. They have imagination, ingenuity and creativity that can be applied to work. With these assumptions the managerial role is to develop the potential in employees and help them release that potential towards common objectives.
The typical person dislikes work and will avoid it if possible. The typical person lacks responsibility, has little ambition and seeks security above all Most people must be coerced, controlled and threatened with punishment to get them to work.
With these assumptions the managerial role is to Coerce and Control Employees.
Theory X implies an autocratic approach to man