O slideshow foi denunciado.
Utilizamos seu perfil e dados de atividades no LinkedIn para personalizar e exibir anúncios mais relevantes. Altere suas preferências de anúncios quando desejar.

The Relationship Between Organizational Theory & Behavior Theory

12.721 visualizações

Publicada em

This reaction paper will exhibit when organizational theories and behavioral theories are not aligned properly, an organization will become unmotivated, chaotic, and misguided. Through selections of various authors, these theories will be explained more in depth and how they relate to each other.

Publicada em: Negócios

The Relationship Between Organizational Theory & Behavior Theory

  1. 1. The Relationship between Organizational Theory & Behavior Theory<br />Behavior Theory<br />Organizational Theory<br />Behavior Theory<br />Behavior Theory<br />Behavior Theory<br />Dr. Maurice Dawson, Dr. Darrell Burrell, & Dr. EmadRahim<br />
  2. 2. Abstract<br />This reaction paper will exhibit when organizational theories and behavioral theories are not aligned properly, an organization will become unmotivated, chaotic, and misguided. Through selections of various authors, these theories will be explained more in depth and how they relate to each other.<br />Keywords: Organizational Theory; Relationships; Generation<br />
  3. 3. Definition of Theory<br />Theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory" hypothesis: a tentative theory about the natural world; a concept that is not yet verified but that if true would explain certain facts or phenomena; "a scientific hypothesis that survives experimental testing becomes a scientific theory"; "he proposed a fresh theory of alkalis that later was accepted in chemical practices" (Princeton University , Unk). Theory is also a belief that can guide behavior; "the architect has a theory that more is less"; "they killed him the theory that dead men tell no tales" (Princeton University , Unk).<br />
  4. 4. Theory of Organization<br />Luther Gulick believed every large-scale or complicated enterprise requires many men to carry it forward (Gulick & Urwick, 1937). To do this he stated that first there needed to be a division of work, second the co-ordination of work, and last organizational patterns. Division of work was due to the differences in men i.e. nature, capacity, and skill. Through these divided the men in the type of work to be done. <br />
  5. 5. Example<br />An example would be a man with a good grasp of mathematics employed as a statistician. However, if that man would be employed as a laborer such as construction then it would be a waste of good talent because that talent has been incorrectly applied. Gulick’s reason for dividing work was that in a large setting it would be impossible to have an individual making complete items when each individual can work on a specific portion.<br />
  6. 6. Other Theorist’s View on What Theory is Not<br />Paul J. DiMaggio states that Sutton and Staw should include three additional issues that render the problem of theory. The first issue is there is more than one kind of good theory. Theory as covering laws, enlightenment, and narrative. The second issue is good theory splits the difference. Differences in theory allow readers to not see a list of ideas with troublesome choices. If the differences are left in, the readers will not differentiate between the ideas. Many times this occurs when readers look at theory. The last issue is that theory construction is social construction, often after the fact. This means that theories are not just constructed but also socially constructed after written. Good as stated by Paul J. DiMaggio items go in incomplete but later come out complete. Going in incomplete means to be partial but to be whole once everything has been completed.<br />
  7. 7. What Constitutes a Theoretical Contribution<br />David A. Whetton states in his paper that a theoretical contribution consists of three key questions; 1) What are the building blocks of theory development? 2) What is a legitimate value-added contribution to theory development? in addition, 3) What factors are considered in judging conceptual papers? (Whetton, 2001). Through these three items Whetton believes one can discuss the theory of developing process through simple concepts (Whetton, 2001). <br />In discussing the building blocks of theory development one must know and understand what the basis is. The basis sets the tone, setting, and provides a solid foundation for building upon. Without these building blocks the theory itself cannot stand. An example is of this is building a house upon sand. When the sand washes the houses will move but if built upon solid ground the house does not move during period of rain.<br />
  8. 8. Human Motivation and Participation<br />Motivation is generally meant by the individual’s drive to succeed. The question is what drives an individual to go beyond his or her normal duties. What drives an individual to go to work every day? Why do we as human beings accept our daily challenges and push forward while some of us do not? The suggestion is part of the answer can be found in understanding what the basic needs are then further exploring the process of participation. <br />
  9. 9. Sonnenfield (2007) stated that the Hawthrone Studies findings should be treated as that the influences of various physical and structural characteristics of the work setting cannot be properly understood as independent influences but rather must be considered components of a larger social system.<br />That larger social system could be viewed as the organizational culture consisting of subcultures within it. This subculture could be occupations, work group, hierarchal, previous affiliations, enhancing, orthogonal, or counter (Hatch, 1997). <br />If an individual simply took the Hawthorne Studies alone, with the theory, participation brings forth better workers then much is being lost. Participation itself does not increase the likelihood that employees will work for outcomes they value to include a direct correlation to independent influences (Mitchell, 1973).<br />A Deeper Look into the Hawthorne Studies<br />
  10. 10. Many young people entering the U.S. workforce lack critical skills essential for success (P21, 2004). The deficiencies were found in seventy percent of the individuals surveyed in the areas of applied skills, such as professionalism, and work ethic, defined as “demonstrating personal accountability, effective work habits, and e.g. punctuality, working productively with others, time and workload management” (P21, 2004).<br />The particular study was in reference to high school students entering the market place into entry-level positions. What this translates to is a lack of applied and social skills. Even in college, educated students at the associate and baccalaureate level nearly half had poor writing skills. Communication is key for the path moving forward.<br />Changes with a Younger Workforce and Changing Technology<br />
  11. 11. Conclusion<br />In conclusion, both organizational theory and organizational behavior is dependent on another in certain ways. Through studies such as the Hawthorne Studies, it is revealed that this is a complex matter and if it is to be done correctly to understand an individual’s motivators, we much fully understand what the basic needs are. From understanding, the basic needs we can then begin to derive what the motivators are<br />
  12. 12. References<br />Ashforth, B., & Mael, F. (1989).  Social identity and the organization.  Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 20-39.<br /> Gulick, & Urwick, (1937). Papers on the Science of Administration. New York: Institute of Public Administration. 3-13<br /> Hatch, M. (1997). Organizational Theory. Oxford University Press.<br />Mitchell, T. R.  (1973).  Motivation and participation:  An integration.  Academy of Management Journal, 16(4), 670-679.<br />Princeton University, (Unk). WordNet- Princeton University Cognitive Science Laboratory. Retrieved September 20, 2010, from WordNet Search 3.0 Web site: http://wordnet.princeton.edu/wordnet/tools/search/index.xml?search_type=site&submit=search&query=theory&submit=Search<br />Shafritz, J., Ott, J., & Jang, Y. (2005). Classics of Organizational Theory. <br /> 6th edition. Thomson/Wadsworth.<br /> Sonnenfeld, J., (2007).  Shedding light on the Hawthorne Studies.  Journal of Organizatoinal Behavior, 6(2), 111-130.<br /> P21, (2004). Events & News. Retrieved September 15, 2010, from The Partnership for 21st Century Skills Web site: http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=250&Itemid=64<br />
  13. 13. Further Questions<br />For further questions please contact Dr. Maurice Dawson at dr.mauricedawson@yahoo.com<br />