Module 1- Lesson 1- INTRODUCTION
What Is Organizational Behavior?
Organizational behavior (OB) is defined as the systematic study and application of knowledge about
how individuals and groups act within the organizations where they work.
Organizational behavior (OB) is the academic study of how people act within groups. Its principles are
applied primarily in attempts to make businesses operate more effectively.
The field of study that draws on theory, methods, and principles from various disciplines to learn about
individuals’ perceptions, values, learning capacities, and actions while working in groups and within the
organization and to analyze the external environment’s effect on the organization and its human
resources, missions, objectives, and strategies.
Organizational behavior is the study of both group and individual performance and activity within
an organization. This area of study examines human behavior in a work environment and determines its
impact on job structure, performance, communication, motivation, leadership, etc.
Elements of Organizational Behavior

Individuals


Structure
Technology

Environment
People form the inner social structure of the organisation. They consists of
people and groups. Groups can be formal or informal.
This describes the formal association between individuals in an organization.
Technology accommodates physical objects, activities and method,
knowledge, etc. through which individuals accomplish their tasks to realize
organizational objectives.
All organisations within an external setting. It is a part of a broader system that
contains various components. This includes the suppliers, customers,
competitors, etc.
Significance of Organisational Behaviour
Fred Luthans (2011) states that organisational behaviour is concerned with understanding,
applying and control of activity and structural data of an organisation for organisation's
effectiveness.”
His evidence-based
vidence-based
forever
essentially
Taylor’s
realities.
However,
role
management
There
as compared
were
principles
has
they
new
various
functions
essential
approach
did
management
with
of
not
approach
scientific
and
highlight
the
oflessons
isorganising
roles
that
complex
ismanagement
history
basically
that
the
of
tohierarchical
human
history
show.
and
reasons
the
control.
dimension.
It’s
forever
recognised
readapting
data
an exciting
structure,
has
They
the
ofessential
existing
activity
let
development
specialisation,
it play
or
aspect
lessons
previous
solely
ofthat
to
aand
management.
not
management
show.
therefore
ismost
praised
It’s
vitalthe
anasexciting
development that is praised as essentially new management is basically the readapting of existing or
previous management realities.
Taylor’s principles of scientific management recognised the activity aspect of management. However,
they did not highlight the human dimension. They let it play solely a not most vital role as compared
with the roles of hierarchical data structure, specialisation, and therefore the management functions of
organising and control. There were various and complex reasons
This is in line with management functions which incorporates planning, organising, leading and
controlling individual’s work duties or group’s specific roles (individual, informational, and decisional
roles) and totally different skills. Consequently, for an organisation to thrive, it is important for it to
recognise and appreciate its culture, its individuals by way of understanding perception,
attitudes, motivation, personality, vital temperament traits that are relevant to the nature of the
organisation, learning, job satisfaction, etc. This can be done using some theories of motivation,
learning, and strengthening and shaping the worker’s discontentedness to satisfaction, motivating them
to realise desired results. The Other significance of OB is that it helps offer staff with relevant
work culture, development opportunities, penalise their wrong doing, and inculcating learning
techniques and leadership skills.
The Hawthorne Studies
The term “Hawthorne” is used within several behavioural management theories and is originally
derived from the western electrical company’s massive factory named Hawthorne works.
Francis (2010) “The Hawthorne Experiment brought out that the productivity of the workers is not to
operate of solely physical conditions of labour and cash wages paid to them.” It so will be deduced that
productivity of staff depends heavily upon their satisfaction in their work state of affairs.
There were various and complex reasons for the emergence of the importance of an
organisation as a social entity, however it is the known Hawthorne studies that offer historical roots for
the construct of a social system made up of individuals
The Illumination Studies: A surprising Discovery
The initial illumination studies tried to look at the link between intensity on the work of manual
work sites and worker productivity. A look at groups and an impression cluster were used. The
experiment at groups in an early part showed no increase or decrease in output in proportion to the rise
or decrease of illumination. The management cluster with unchanged illumination multiplied output by
an equivalent quantity overall. Resulting phases brought the amount of illumination right
down to moonlight intensity; the employees may barely see what they were doing,
however productivity multiplied. The results were shocking to the researchers (Robbins,
Decenzo,Coulter, 2008).
Environmental and Organizational Context
It is fortunate that the light experiments didn't find itself within the analysis material waste bin. The
team that was responsible for the Hawthorne studies had enough foresight and spirit of scientific
inquiry to simply accept the challenge of wanting below the surface of the deceptive failure of
the experiments. In a way, the results of the illumination experiments were associate sudden
discovery, which, in research analysis, is unexpected accidental discovery. The definitive example
of coincidence is that the discovery of an antibiotic that occurred when Sir Alexander Fleming
accidentally discovered raw mould in a laboratory test tube. Thus the green mould wasn't washed
down the drain which the results of the illumination experiments weren’t thrown into the
wastebasket are often attributable to the researchers’ not being unsighted by the bizarre or seemingly
negligible results of their experimentation. The sudden results of the illumination experiments provided
the impetus for the additional study of human behaviour within the company.
Turan (2015) points out that the illumination studies were followed by a study in the relay room, where
operators assembled relay switches. This phase of the study tried to test specific variables, such as
length of workday, rest breaks, and method of payment. The results were basically the same as those
of the illumination studies: each test period yielded higher productivity than the previous one.
Still another phase was the bank wiring room study. As in the forgoing relay room
experiments, the bank wirers are said to have been placed in a separate test room. Further the
researchers showed reluctance to segregate the bank wiring group because they recognized that it
would modify the realistic factory environment they were attempting to simulate. However, for
practical reasons, the research team decided to use a separate room. Unlike the relay room
experiments, the bank wiring room study involved no experimental changes once the study had
started. Instead, an observer and an interviewer gathered objective data for study. Of particular
interest was the fact that the department’s regular supervisors were used in the bank wiring room.
Just as in the department out on the factory floor, these supervisors’ main function was to maintain
order and control (Sharma, 2011)The results of the bank wiring room study were essentially
opposite to those of the relay room experiments. In the bank wiring room there were not the
continual increases in productivity that occurred in the relay room. Rather, output was actually
restricted by the bank wirers. The incentive system dictated that the more a worker produced, the
more money the worker would earn. Also, the best producers would be laid off last, and thus they
could be more secure by producing more. Nonetheless, in the face of this management rationale,
almost all the workers restricted output (Elton Mayo: Hawthorne Experiments).
Relevancy of the Hawthorne Experiment to Modern Organisations.
Other than being a techno-economic system, a business organisation is basically a social system in
which the employer can be motivated by psychological and social wants because his/her behaviour is
likewise influenced by feelings, emotions and attitudes. Thus economic incentives are not the only
method to motivate people (Francis 2010). From Francis’ explanation, we learn that management in
organisations must study and be able to develop accommodating attitudes and not depend solely on
directives. This is so because participation becomes an important instrument in human relations
movement.
In order to achieve participation, effective two-way communication network is essential. Based on the
Hawthorne studies and their findings, it is clear that productivity is linked with employee satisfaction in
any business organisation. The findings despite being undertaken many years ago are still relevant to
modern and global organisations. Just like the illumination experiment, the current power outages have
affected productivity across the country, though in a negative way as levels have reduced. This is so
because most organisations depend on power to produce goods and services which without,
productivity goes down. At first the reduction in supply hours of power did not really affect productivity
that much, but after the hours were increased to 15 across the board, we heard there has been a
decline in production of various products on the market. The power cut have further affected employee
performance in most institution as others are even uncertain of what to do whilst at work not knowing
when power will be restored. Man is said to be a living machine and he is far more important than the
inanimate machine. Therefore, the key to higher productivity lies in employee morale and high morale
results in higher output, but the absence of incentives and resources takes away the morale and work
suffers. It is therefore, worth stating that, regardless of the structure an organisation is to adopt,
consistent evaluations are to be conducted in order to keep a stable output and good standard in
quality. Such a strategy has potential to result in continuous progression of the
organisational management and a prosperous organisation producing maximum efficacy in its produce.
Vroom’s Expectancy Theory of Motivation
Motivation is derived from the word ‘motive’ which reflects to desire, needs, wants or drives within the
individual. Motivation of the employee by his supervisor will determine the behaviour of the
employee into the organisation. Motivating the worker is a very important role in all the
organisation. Each and every employee should be motivated by his superior or manager so that he/she
will perform better in the organisation to accomplish the company’s targeted goals. Employees get
gratified and motivated in different aspects. There are some theories which have been introduced by
the famous authors which help to determine what all factors required to motivate the employees.
The main motivation theories are








Maslow Hierarchy of Needs Theory
Two Factor theory (Herzberg)
Alderfer’s ERG Theory
Acquired Need Theory (McClellan)
Cognitive Evaluation Theory
Equity Theory,
Reinforcement Theory and
Expectancy Theory (Vroom).
In this part, we will focus on the expectancy theory (George & Jones, 2008). The expectancy theory was
proposed by Victor Vroom of Yale School of Management in1964. Vroom emphasised and focused
on outcomes, and not on needs unlike Maslow and Herzberg. The theory states that the intensity of
a tendency to perform in a particular manner is dependent on the intensity of an expectation that the
performance will be followed by a definite outcome and on the appeal of the outcome to the individual.
Velmurugan (2017), the Expectancy theory states that employee’s motivation is an outcome of how
much an individual wants a reward (Valence), the assessment that the likelihood that the effort will lead
to expected performance (Expectancy) and the belief that the performance will lead to reward
(Instrumentality). In short, Valence is the significance related to a personal regarding the expected
outcome. It is expected and not the particular satisfaction that a worker expects to get after
successfully achieving the goals. Expectancy is the belief that greater efforts can lead to
higher performance. Expectancy is influenced by factors like possession of applicable skills for
executing the duty, handiness of the proper resources, availability of crucial data and obtaining
the desired support for finishing the duty. Instrumentality is that belief that if an individual performs
well, then a sound outcome are going to be there. The faith in managers who decide who receives
what outcome, the simplicity of the method deciding which employee gets what outcome, and clarity
of the link between performance and outcomes. Thus, the expectation theory concentrates on
the subsequent 3 relationships:
The first relationship is effort-performance relationship which focuses on possibility that the individual’s
strength can be recognized in his performance appraisal.
Secondly, the performance-reward, this relationship talks about the extent to which a worker believes
that receiving a top notch performance appraisal leads to organisational rewards.
And finally rewards-personal goals this relationship is all about the attractiveness or appeal of
the potential reward to the individual (Griffin & Moorhead, 2007).Vroom theory created an opinion that
employees intentionally choose whether to perform or not at the job. This decision solely depended on
the employee’s motivation level which in turn depends on three factors of expectancy, valence and
instrumentality.
Merits of the Expectancy Theory
It is based on self-interest individual who want to achieve maximum satisfaction and who wants to
minimize discontent. The theory emphasises upon the expectations and perception; what is real
and actual is immaterial. It stresses on rewards or pay-offs. It focuses on psychological extravagance
where final objective of individual is to attain maximum pleasure and least pain.
Limitations of the Expectancy Theory
The expectancy theory seems to be idealistic because quite a few individuals perceive high degree
correlation between performance and rewards. The application of the theory is restricted as
reward is not directly associated with performance in many organisations. It is related to other factors
also such as position, effort, responsibility, education, etc.
Implications of the Expectancy Theory






The managers can relate the desired outcomes to the aimed performance levels.
The managers must guarantee that the employees can achieve the aimed performance levels.
The deserving employees must be rewarded for their exceptional performance.
The reward system must be fair and just in an organisation.
Organisations must design interesting, dynamic and challenging jobs.
The employee’s motivation level should be continually assessed through various
techniques such as questionnaire, personal interviews, etc.