Pluto Telecommunications
This text critically examines organizational behavior in Pluto Telecommunications through analysis of the relationship among the job design, motivation, structural form and the work culture. The Managing Director of Pluto Telecommunication came to understanding that the three departments within the organization: Sales, Marketing and Customer Service do not communicate with each other which have a direct negative impact on the company’s performance. Further investigations show that the three departments are different in term of what motivates the employees, the time span for achieving the goals, culture established within the departments and the structural forms within the departments. The organizational dilemma is how to balance out the individual or departmental aspirations with the organizational goals taking into consideration social, psychological and contextual aspects which affect the employee’s behavior.
The organizational behavior, as terminology and concept, was introduced by Fritz Roethlisberger in the second half of 1950 (Roethlisberger, 1977), which continue to be a field of interest to many researchers and academics until today. The behavior employee’s exhibit in the organization is result of how the work is designed, how the organization is structured, what is the work culture and the way the work culture is changed and managed.
The theoretical findings about work design can be grouped in two clusters. The first cluster captures the Frederick Taylor’s (Taylor, 1911) theory so called “scientific management” and Harry Ford’s view on work design. Both, Ford and Taylor are mainly focused on increasing efficiency through job specialization, task standardization, financial rewarding systems and rigid hierarchical organizational structures. Although, their understanding of job design varied, yet, the same shred similarities. The main difference between the two concepts is that Taylor believed that there is one best way of performing, whereas Ford
The organizational behavior, as terminology and concept, was introduced by Fritz Roethlisberger in the second half of 1950 (Roethlisberger, 1977), which continue to be a field of interest to many researchers and academics until today. The behavior employee’s exhibit in the organization is result of how the work is designed, how the organization is structured, what is the work culture and the way the work culture is changed and managed.
The theoretical findings about work design can be grouped in two clusters. The first cluster captures the Frederick Taylor’s (Taylor, 1911) theory so called “scientific management” and Harry Ford’s view on work design. Both, Ford and Taylor are mainly focused on increasing efficiency through job specialization, task standardization, financial rewarding systems and rigid hierarchical organizational structures. Although, their understanding of job design varied, yet, the same shred similarities. The main difference between the two concepts is that Taylor believed that there is one best way of performing, whereas Ford
References: Buchanan, D.A. and Huczynski, A.A. (2010). Organizational Behavior. Pearson: Prentice Hall, Burman, R Child, J. (2005). Organization: Contemporary Principles and Practice. Oxford: Blackwell Cunliffe, A.L Gilberth, F.B. and Gilberth, L (1916). Fatigue Study. New York: Sturgies and Walton Herzberg, F.(1987) Leavitt, H.J. (2007). Big Organizations and unhealthy environments for human beings. Academy of Management Learning and Education. pp. 253-63 Lewin, K Mayo, E. (1933). The Human Problems of Industrial Civilization. New York: Macmillan Martin, J Roethlisberger, F.J. (1977). The elusive phenomenon: An Autobiographical account of my work in the field of organizational behavior at Harvard Business School. Boston, Harvard University Press Pascale, R Stace, D. and Dunphy, D. (2001). Beyond the Boundaries: Leading and Re-creating the successful enterprise. Sydney: McGraw- Hill Taylor, F.W Weber, M. (1947). The theory of Social and Economic organization, Oxford: Oxford University Press