Importance of Organizational Behavior

Derek Denaro
(Graduate Student In A Masters Program) 

Org 502 / Managerial Communication

Professor Al Beck

April 5, 2003

It is no surprise that Organizational Behavior is being regarded as a valuable tool within the workplace. Great emphasis on personal interaction is an essential element within the workforce arena. The success of the workforce arena is contingent upon strong interdependent people skills.

As Robbins (2001) indicates, the typical employee is getting older; more and more women and nonwhites are in the workplace; corporate downsizing and the heavy use of temporary workers are severing the bonds of loyalty that historically tied many employees to their employers; and global competition is requiring employees to become more flexible and to learn to cope with rapid change. (p 15)

The hard-driving leaders who believe the technical competencies of individuals are far more important than the soft skills, should re-evaluate their thinking. Or look elsewhere for insight to expand their awareness of the world that is evolving.

In the passage 'The Limits of Specialization' Lao Tzu (2001) advises leaders to move toward simplicity and away from complexity - toward universality rather than differentiation. As always, he urges leaders to learn when to stop and practice noninterference. Leaders who insist on exacting systems and roles in their organizations cannot create a natural, effortless atmosphere for the completion of tasks, because the structure they conceive of is suited for machines, not humans.

When people are forced into roles and every aspect of their work defined, their possibilities become limited, no longer create, and they do not evolve. When leaders systematize every detail in their organization, they close it off from the possibility of evolution. Just as life forms that are highly specialized move in the direction of extinction, this path leads to the extinction, of Importance  the organization. On the other hand, with open-ended management the people have nothing to resist or resent. They become spontaneously cooperative because their attention shifts to the end rather than the means. (p 32)

In the words of Jorgensen (2002), Our universe is alive and flowing -always changing-not for the sake of change, but for the purpose of evolving, unfolding, and manifesting [itself] and all things within [it]. It is our purpose to 'join with' the universe so that we too will evolve, unfold, and manifest our self. We do this by making change, balance, and connectedness] practical realities in our everyday lives. (p 5)

It is not a problem within itself that today's leaders and managers believe that the technical competencies of individuals are important, but to believe they are more important and superior than soft skills does little service to evolve and bring about change, balance, and connectedness for the attainment of a practical reality.

The challenges leaders and managers alike are faced with is change. Thus how do we eliminate resistance to change, and how do we incorporate change that will bring about an efficient and productive workforce with healthy interactive relationships within the working environment?

Part of the thinking that goes with this thought process/ can be attributed to what Robbin's (2001) talks about related to resistance to change. He states that Organizations, by their very nature are conservative. They actively resist change. Government agencies want to continue doing what they have been doing for years, whether the need for their service changes or remains the same. Educational Institutions, which exist to open minds Importance and challenge established doctrine, are themselves extremely resistant to change. Most school systems are using essentially the same teaching technologies today as they were 50 years ago. Most business firms, too, appear highly resistant to change. (p375)

The cause for outward attitudes held by no-nonsense leaders who believe skills of good communication, listening and interacting are in the realm of "hocus-pocus," can stem from organizational patterns.

Robbins (2001) states that resistance to change because of organizational patterns is considered a threat to specialized expertise, a threat due to established power relationships, and a threat to established resource allocations. (376)

Based on the above fears, it is easy to understand the resistant attitudes that arise against Organizational behavior. There are many factors that can contribute to these fears.

As Robbins (2001) points out, habits, security, economic factors, fear of the unknown, and selective information processes are all contributing factors affecting change. These same factors are not inclusive to only employees, but to leaders and managers and all individuals.

Many factors such as the above are reason for the justification of demeaning Organizational Behavior by elite management, but is this reality or illusion?

As stated by Jorgensen (2001), the human experience contains many illusions that can cause us to be obsessed with the external world. (p.6)

As was profoundly brought up by Professor Beck (2003), 'People's behavior is based on their perception of reality, not reality itself.'

Professor Beck further points out (2003), people selectively interpret what they see on Importance  5  the basis of personal interests, background, experiences and attitudes. A self-serving bias is imposed when an individual attributes their own success to internal factors, but blames external factors for their failures.

A lot of the anxiety which management/leadership roles have that shed doubts as to whether or not individuals possess the capacity to change, and thereby fear the confrontations that may arise due to these doubts, would just assume resist change just to avoid conflicts.

As Jorgensen (2003) points out, In many relationships, we do not maintain [the] distinction between structural and emotional authority. When we do not keep structural and emotional authority separate, we have "authority conflicts". (p26)

Jorgensen, (2003) states, there are also setbacks that cannot always be attributed to tangible events. Our level of happiness and satisfaction often shifts even when things on our physical world remain "status-quo." These changes occur due to shifts in our perception, thinking, and attitude towards ourselves, our leaders, and the world around us. Our day to day lives consist of two dimensions - physical and emotional. We experience real and tangible setbacks in our personal, professional, and social lives.

We need to distinguish between the physical and emotional dimensions of our lives.  Our jobs and our roles within the team relationships consist of:

§         Our assigned tasks and responsibilities tied to a job or role.

§         Our emotional perceptions and attitudes towards authority

The physical world of our jobs and the roles within it are assigned as a result of the Importance overall objectives of the family, job, organization, or team we contribute to. This refers to structural authority, responsibility, and accountability. Our leaders have structural authority over when and how we complete our activities. This is the structural dimension of our participation. The emotional dimension of our tasks and role consists of our perception, thinking and attitudes regarding the family, job, leader, team etc. (p26)

The insights and the process that has been presented by Richard Jorgensen opens new doors and new horizons for not only those in leadership and management roles, but also for workers in today's workforce. Once the awareness of this obscure line between emotional authority and structural authority sets in, emotional self-control will be exercised. As a result, those in management/leadership roles will be better equipped to bring about necessary changes without the concern or the fear of being kicked out of his or hers proper position. This is because the workers are clear about their position and can easily learn to separate the elements of  emotional self-control with structural authoritative roles, whereby creating a win-win situation for all. 

In R.L Wings book (2001), Lao Tzu believed that the ideal way to direct events was to use methods that do not create resistance or elicit counter-reactions. In observing the laws of nature, he realized that excessive force in a particular direction tends to trigger the growth of an opposing force, and that therefore the use of force cannot be the basis for establishing a strong and lasting social foundation. (p.11)

As we surge onward through the twenty-first century, it would do us  a bit of good to open our horizons to the inevitable changes that surround us. It appears that resistance to change only prolongs progress and furthers conflict and is an obstacle to our ability to evolve.  

References:

Robbins, S.P (2001) Organizational Behavior, custom edition for UOP, Pearson Custom Publishing

Wing L.R (2001), The Tao of Power, Lao Tzu's Classic Guide to Leadership, Influence, and Excellence.

Jorgensen R D (2002), Practical Spirituality, [software]Stop 'n Start Learning Systems delivered by Life Skills U  Online Distance Learning      www.lifeskillsu.org

Jorgensen, R D (2003), Creating a Culture Responsive to Change, [software] Stop 'n Start Learning Systems, delivered by Life Skills U Online Distance Learning www.lifeskillsu.org or e-mail www.information@lifeskillsu.org