Organisational Behavior for Job Satisfaction - myassignmenthelp

Question: Discuss about theOrganisational Behaviorfor Job Satisfaction and Emotions. Answer: Introduction In this report, an organizational behavior (OB) study is carried out for analyzing the behavior of individuals or groups or organizations. It assists in analyzing the employees motivational method, job satisfaction, emotions, psychology, attitude and personality displayed in his or her job life (Bauer and Jenny 2014). With reference to the case study, it has been noted that Big Energy being a market leader in the private sector, took over XYZ Energy, a key public sector energy company. Big energy has the opportunity of influencing their new employees by knowing their behavior, personality, attitude, etc. This specific study has an objective of comprehending the influence of the integration model used by Big Energy while procuring XYZ Energy on the basis of overall values, attitudes and behavior of the individuals as well as the groups existing in the XYZ organization. It has been used for assessing the behavior of both groups, along with the distinct performance in the organization. This distinct study has been carried out with the help of the following steps: Analysis of the influence of the integration model that has been followed by Big Energy while acquiring XYZ Energy on the basis of the overall, values, attitudes and behavior affected by individual personality. Provision of recommendations for helping in motivating employees and helping in the development of good teams. Prior to going into the detailed analysis of the case, there must be a clear idea about the scope of organizational behavior: Motivation of employees Influence of personality on performance Creation of effective teams (Pinder 2014) Discussion Impact on attitude, behavior and values After the procurement of XYZ Energy by Big Energy, the chief executive and other functional business members were considered unnecessary, which made the employees of the XYZ Company feel demoralized and apprehensive regarding allowing to scuffle for their job based on their importance. Therefore, the approach of the employees began changing and the companys attrition rate rising high. Behavior of the employees for their organization began changing due to their morale decreasing. Loyalty in the direction of the companys growth constituted XYZ organizations value that started decreasing because of the effect of the model of integration. The workers became irritated as no attention was paid by the management to the wellbeing of the personnel and concentrated just on the integration procedure instead of the work quality and long term profit. There are two theories based on which organization behavior can be defined: Micro organizational behavior theory:this theory is related to the behavior and conduct of an individual and group dynamics inside a workplace (Miner 2015). Macro organizational behavior theory: This theoryis related to the whole organization and even to industries, including their way of operating and their strategies, incidents and frameworks that direct them (Miner 2015). The values of the two organizations, Big Energy and XYZ organization did not orchestrate between the employees and their supervisors, which ultimately went on to have a bearing on the relational associations and on the efficiency of managerial leadership. The integration of the businesses had a serious influence on the staffs as their development and progress was at risk and the inspiration was at its lowest. Therefore, the minute Sally attempted to reason it had no outcome and employees began to dispense one after another. Administrative services of the management at Big Energy are doubtful. The management at the organization severely was short of in human relations skills, in which department they were deficient in the capacity of interacting effectively with the employees of the newly acquired organization. The study of this particular paper is based on the macro organizational theory. One more key point of organizational behaviour is culture. Organizational behaviour hugely depends on its culture. A companys corporate culture is difficult to recognize, but it is extremely important that how the organizations behave (Alvesson 2012). After XYZ Energy was bought by Big Energy, things took a turn for XYZ, but not in a good way. It has always been observed that at the time of mergers and acquisitions the behavior and culture of two organizations are added for creating a business ambience that has the capacity to strengthen or demoralize the success of an organization (Weber and Yedidia Tarba 2012). In the context of XYZ Energy and Big Energy, operative from inside the companys technique, both the management from Big Energy and the employees from XYZ Energy are facing trouble in recognizing the models of behaviour and the way the arrangements can deeply have an influence on the performance of the company. The most important component of any organization is its human resource or the employees as they build up the inner societal system of the organization. They are the ones who have built up the organization and exists for attainment of the organizational objectives. The organizations are existing for serving these peo ple. The employees of an organization are one vital resource that requires a lot of attention and needs to be managed carefully (Bratton and Gold 2012). The employees of XYZ were not provided with proper attention and importance, which in turn decreased their enthusiasm and morale for working under the name of Big Energy. The main cause of the problem in the merged organization is that Big Energy could not establish any association with the scope of the organizational behaviour. Recommendations It is to be noted that Big Energy failed in a lot of cases. Some of them are: Recognizing the feelings of the remaining workers Evaluating and assessing the consequences of the happening integration Inspecting the ideas by which the approach and behaviour of the workers can possibly be altered. The upper level of organization hugely needed intangible skills. Many theorists have offered models of organizational behaviour that were not put to use by the management of Big Energy. Therefore, it can be understood that there are numerous concerns in the newly integrated association that had a destructive influence on the public, which ultimately made them resign from the company. Big Energy had a wish of moving the remaining staffs just afterward the integration of the central operations were over. Big Energys integration model just concentrated on the competitive advantage of the company in terms of making long term profits. It concentrated on the speed of integration instead of quality, which ultimately could not lead them to success in the attainment of innovative procedure of system and operations and further demotivated the employees remaining in the organization (Bolman and Deal 2017). It is commended for Big Energy to turn back to the behavioral model of organizational proficiency that evaluates the presentation of the managerial skills and knowledge on the people for examining behaviour of teams of an individual. Meanwhile they must also conduct the study of OB so that comprehension of behavior and personality can be taken care of for supporting performance (Patel, Messersmith and Lepak 2013). An organization is made by its employees, their value system and their confidence and belief in leadership. It is important that Big Energy understand the nature of the organization and accordingly takes decision. Moreover, they must also investigate the atmosphere in the organization at the time of change and even the employee requirements so that they can make use of the model that best suits the organization for getting better results. Some of the most commended models that are best suitable for the integrated association are: Supportive Model: It hinge on extremely on leadership. Executives of Big Energy must have buttressed and backed the remaining staffs for performing fine in their job. It was important that they should have adjusted well with one another and assisted the workers in developing their skills. Performance would have been better stimulated and better outcomes acquired (Michel, Kavanagh and Tracey 2013). Collegial Model: In this model the management and employees must work together in a cooperative manner and complete their task. In this regard, everyone must labor in an organized manner as a team, having equivalent energy, responsibility and willpower for their errands. Big Energy must give an attempt in infusing the zeal in the remaining workers so that they do not get disheartened with the integration and nicely accomplish while contending with each other for acquiring the best results (Scott and Davis 2015). Autocratic Model: The base of this model is power, responsibilities and roles, relative with the employees working at Big Energy and the new employees who joined from XYZ Energy. It is the right of every employee to have some amount of power or authority by which they can work and contribute to the organization. If the authorities of an organization do not pay attention to both their old and new employees, then there are chances of adversity growing for the long run of organizational programs and jobs (Hurrell et al. 2013). Following McGregors Theory Y is also a recommendation for Big Energy in relation to the case study. Big Energy needs to work on improving the morale of their employees for motivating them to perform better. Big energy must also attempt at improving the value system, organizational culture for the employees to work comfortably and securely (Mohamed and Nor 2013). Conclusion The major test that Big Energy faces is choosing the best model and examining its efficiency that would be best suitable for the newly integrated organization. The recommended models would offer the contentment of the employee requirements. The management requires observing, interacting and considering with the employees for getting the best results from them. References Alvesson, M., 2012.Understanding organizational culture. Sage. Bauer, G.F. and Jenny, G.J., 2014.Salutogenic organizations and change. Springer. Bolman, L.G. and Deal, T.E., 2017.Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership. John Wiley Sons. Bratton, J. and Gold, J., 2012.Human resource management: theory and practice. Palgrave Macmillan. Hurrell, J.W., Holland, M.M., Gent, P.R., Ghan, S., Kay, J.E., Kushner, P.J., Lamarque, J.F., Large, W.G., Lawrence, D., Lindsay, K. and Lipscomb, W.H., 2013. The community earth system model: a framework for collaborative research.Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society,94(9), pp.1339-1360. Michel, J.W., Kavanagh, M.J. and Tracey, J.B., 2013. Got support? The impact of supportive work practices on the perceptions, motivation, and behavior of customer-contact employees.Cornell Hospitality Quarterly,54(2), pp.161-173. Miner, J.B., 2015.Organizational behavior 1: Essential theories of motivation and leadership. Routledge. Mohamed, R.K.M.H. and Nor, C.S.M., 2013. The relationship between McGregor's XY theory management style and fulfillment of psychological contract: A literature review.International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences,3(5), p.715. Patel, P.C., Messersmith, J.G. and Lepak, D.P., 2013. Walking the tightrope: An assessment of the relationship between high-performance work systems and organizational ambidexterity.Academy of Management Journal,56(5), pp.1420-1442. Pinder, C.C., 2014.Work motivation in organizational behavior. Psychology Press. Scott, W.R. and Davis, G.F., 2015.Organizations and organizing: Rational, natural and open systems perspectives. Routledge. Weber, Y. and Yedidia Tarba, S., 2012. Mergers and acquisitions process: The use of corporate culture analysis.Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal,19(3), pp.288-303.