Organizational Behavior Analysis

This assignment requires students to analyze key concepts in organizational behavior. Students are asked to examine various theories of motivation and leadership, assess factors influencing team effectiveness, and discuss the impact of organizational culture. The provided reading list offers a foundation for understanding these complex topics.

Organization Behaviour
1

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................................3
TASK 1.................................................................................................................................................3
1.1 Compare and contrast different organizational structures and culture......................................3
1.2 Impact of relationship between organization structure and culture on performance of
Syngenta ..........................................................................................................................................4
1.3 Factors that influence individual behaviour at work.................................................................5
TASK 2 ................................................................................................................................................5
2.1 Effectiveness of different leadership style ................................................................................5
2.2 Role of organizational theories in practice of management at Syngenta...................................6
2.3 Different approaches to management used by Syngenta and its competitor.............................7
TASK 3 ................................................................................................................................................8
3.1 Impact of different leadership styles on motivation in Syngenta during the period of change. 8
3.2 Compare between motivational theories and their application in Syngenta..............................9
3.3 Evaluate usefulness of motivation theory in Syngenta............................................................10
TASK 4...............................................................................................................................................10
4.1 Explain the nature of groups and group behaviour within Syngenta.......................................10
4.2 Factors that promote or inhibit the development of effective teamwork at Syngenta ............11
4.3 Evaluate the impact of technology in Syngenta ......................................................................12
CONCLUSION..................................................................................................................................13
REFERENCES...................................................................................................................................14
2

INTRODUCTION
Organization Behaviour (OB) is a field of study that assess how a company
structure affect behaviour of the individual employee within the firm. In the organization, it
helps the management to improve their understanding about the expectations of
employees as well as their actions on a particular situation (Pinder, 2014). Basically, OB is
relating to the area of management and it focus on different problems face by the top and
middle level management on regular basis. It is an important part of every company
because in a firm, different people work in various manner in contrary situations as well as
with attitudes (Naylor, Pritchard and Ilgen, 2013). Therefore, it is needed to understand
individual reactions in different situations. The present research is focusing on organization
behaviour and its role in Syngenta. It is a world leading plan science business and it
promotes sustainable agriculture products through innovation, technology and research
(Miner, 2015). Different approacher of management and leadership, use of motivational
theories in the company and role of team working will be the objectives that will cover
under the present study.
TASK 1
1.1 Compare and contrast different organizational structures and culture
Monsanto Company is a US based organization which deals in agriculture business
and produce herbicides, crop seeds and pesticides. It is a major competitor of Syngenta in
the sector of agriculture (Shafritz, Ott and Jang, 2015). Organizational structure of
company is product based. Every product division is having its own specific marketing
department. The functional departments of organization are dedicated to particular product
line. On the other side, in the present time, the followed culture of Monsanto Company is
role culture in which firm has distributed right amount of role and responsibilities to each
and every employee (Greenberg and Colquitt, 2013). The reason of adopting this type of
culture within the workplace is minimize the probabilities of duplication of work and roles
during the allocation period. It has promoted the optimum utilization of the resources and
save the extra expenses of the firm.
Another side, BASF is a world largest chemical producer across the glob and
situated in Germany. Company is manufacturing different types of products such as crop
technology, crude oil, catalysts etc. At present, the organization structure of the firm is
geographical (Wagner III and Hollenbeck, 2014). The reason of following it firm is
3

operating its different branches at various locations. Every office has separate department
and it has responsible for that region. Beside this, BASF has followed power culture
because it has hard for the organization to take all the decisions of various branches by a
single person (DuBrin, 2013). It has assisted the management team of geographically
based office in taking decision by small consult.
Company Organizational structure Culture
Monsanto Product based Role culture
BASF Geographically based Power culture
On the basis of the above discussion, Syngenta has to adopt its competitors
organizational structure and type of culture for taking the advantage of high level of
competition. It helps in increase the market share in the comparative of its rivals.
1.2 Impact of relationship between organization structure and culture on
performance of Syngenta
Line of authority is an most essential element for the success of an organization.
Both organizational structure and culture has put the combined impact on performance of
Syngenta (Scott and Davis, 2015). At present time, the current organizational structure is
matrix and culture is role. With the help of structure of company, the management has
easily defined the position of the different employees at the workplace. Similarly, the role
culture has developed the new opportunities for the staff members to achieve the success
and growth. The combine impact of both organizational culture and structure on Syngenta
is it has reduced the communication gap situation between the workers at different level
(Mowday, Porter and Steers, 2013). In addition to this, it has improved the productivity of
the firm by promoting the creativity and innovation. The result of this is the quality of
agriculture goods are increasing.
Rather than this, the impact of both existing organizational culture and structure on
Syngenta is it has improved decision making process as well as performance level of the
company (Robbins, Judge Millett and Boyle, 2013). Along with this, organization has set
some process to doing the work so that chances of mistakes or errors can be reduced. In
addition to this, the present organizational structure and culture of Syngenta has
developed a positive environment at the workplace which promoted team working between
the employee's (Haslam and et.al., 2014). Firm has effectively allocated the resources and
optimum utilized its resources and that reduce its expenses.
4

1.3 Factors that influence individual behaviour at work
There are different factors which influence individual behaviour at workplace of
Syngenta. The description of these elements are as follows:
Personality: It shows the relationship between response of worker and its characteristics
in a particular situation. Syngenta has required to focused on those personality
components which affect individual work such as relatives, society, genetics etc
(Nahavandi and et.al., 2013). Along with this, company needs to considered those unlikely
conditions which affect the productivity of individual. By maintaining good personality,
organization can promote the creativity, innovation and meet the business objectives in
appropriate manner.
Perception: Mental capacity to understand the situation of every person is different.
Syngenta has required to interpret the perception of individual employee because it helps
in analyse those factors which demotivate the staff members (Borkowski, 2015). With the
help of this, a positive environment at the workplace had created which change the
perception of workers towards the work.
Attitude: It is define as a pre set method of thinking of the person. Syngenta has tried to
understand the reasons of negative attitude of employees on individual basis. By doing
this, it becomes easy to minimize those factors which raise the negative attitude in the
workers. The result of this is it has increased the team working within the organization
(Shoss and et.al., 2013).
Conflict, Stress and Change: The ability of resolving the conflicts, manage the stress
level and accept the change is varying person to person. Syngenta has to try to resovle
the various issues between the staff members so that its impact on productivity and
performance of organization can be minimized.
TASK 2
2.1 Effectiveness of different leadership style
Syngenta has various competitors in the market such as Monsanto Company,
BASF, Dow Agro Sciences, Bayer Crop Science and DuPont Pioneer. The major rival of
company is BASF and both the organizations are using different leadership styles (Chiang
and Hsieh, 2012). The effectiveness of their leadership methods are showing in below
table.
Parameters Syngenta BASF
5

Type of leadership Autocratic leadership style. Democratic leadership style.
Reason of selection For strong control over group to
maintain leadership.
For increase the interaction
between the employees and
management (Overview of
Participative Leadership Style,
2016).
Decision making Done only by leaders where
employees are not involving in
decision making process
(Barrick, Mount and Li, 2013).
Employees and staff both are
taking part in decision making
process.
Motivation Less motivated Highly motivated
Interference Complete interference of leader Employees and leaders are
interfere in all the work.
Productivity High Low
Benefits Help in taking quick decisions,
strong chain of command etc
(Cherry, 2015).
Increase participation of
employees, effective use of
capabilities, easy to solve
complex problem etc
(Schneider, Ehrhart and Macey,
2013).
Shortcomings Low morale, increase conflicts,
decrease creativity of the
employees etc.
Create delay in taking decision,
taking more time, organization
become less competitive etc.
2.2 Role of organizational theories in practice of management at Syngenta
Organizational theories are playing an important role in practices of management of
Syngenta. According to the case stud, the suitable organization hypothesis are as follows.
Scientific Management theory: With the use of it, organization easily assess the
workflow. In the case of Syngenta, management can analyse the working style of the
employees and monitor the progress of agriculture project (Alavosius, Newsome,
Houmanfar and Biglan, 2016). The role of scientific management theory within the
company is enhance workers productivity, strength of economic condition of the firm,
6

promote creative within the employee's etc. Along with this, the new process to complete
the work can be determined (Zellweger, Nason, Nordqvist and Brush, 2013). It helps in
allocation of the role and responsibilities to different team members as per their abilities
and core competencies.
Bureaucracy theory: With the use of it, a company can set the line of authority within the
workplace (Anderson, Potočnik and Zhou, 2014). In the case of Syngenta, the employees
needs to follow the chain of command. It presents a crystal clear picture in front of the staff
members. Along with this, it develops a impersonal and formal relationship between the
workers and management. Procedures for doing the works can be set for the employees
so that the proper outcomes can be deliver to the clients. Beside this, bureaucracy theory
minimizes the pressure over Syngenta in case of any skilled employee left the company
(Ankli and Palliam, 2012). It helps the management to manage the work between the
group members without raise the pressure on them.
2.3 Different approaches to management used by Syngenta and its
competitor
Syngenta and its competitor BASF, both are using different approaches of
management. The evaluation of management framework of both the companies are as
follows.
Parameters Syngenta BASF
Type of management
theory
Scientific theory Bureaucracy theory
Reason of selecting To train the employees and
guide them in appropriate
direction to meet the objectives.
Along with this, it effectively
divide the role and
responsibilities among the
different level of management
(De Jong and Den Hartog,
2010). Beside, scientific theory
sets a process of doing the
work to reduce the chances of
To establish the chain of
command which is needed to be
followed by employees. It has
increased the impersonal and
formal relationship between the
two job position which promote
professional behaviour within the
workplace.
7

errors.
Benefits Minimize the cost of production,
maintain the quality of end
products, reduce chances of
conflicts between the workers
and management team and
optimum utilization of
resources.
Properly define role and
responsibilities, create an
appropriate working process and
right allocation of limited
resources (DeChurch and
Mesmer-Magnus, 2010).
Shortcomings Hinder core competencies of
workers, increase resistance of
the employee towards
accepting the changes and
minimize productivity of the firm
(Harackiewicz and et.al., 2014).
Unable to develop a good
relationship between the team
members and affect the team
working environment.
TASK 3
3.1 Impact of different leadership styles on motivation in Syngenta during the
period of change
In a fast moving environment, to remain in the competition, Syngenta needs to bring
the changes. Without alteration, the chances of losing the competitive edge by a company
has increased. Along with this, organization has unable to meet the needs of the target
customers (Pinder, 2014). At the time of brining the changes within the workplace, it is
necessary for Syngenta to adopt different leadership styles with the aim of motivate of the
employees. The impact of various leadership methods on motivation of the staff members
are as follows.
Impact of autocratic leadership style: Here, the leader take all the decisions by just
taking the little inputs from the team members. It is appropriate in that situation when
organization has needed to take the decisions in quick manner without consulting all
employees (Naylor, Pritchard and Ilgen, 2013). It promotes effective and fast judgement
about the business activities. If Syngenta adopt autocratic leadership style within the
company at the time of change than it will increase involvement of the staff in discussion
process. It will motivate them and they will able to set the clear vision about their roles and
responsibilities (Shafritz, Ott and Jang, 2015). Along with this, the employees will able to
8

apply their skills on various projects. It will leads to improve the productivity of Syngenta.
Impact of participative leadership style: Under this, the leader involves all team
members by the management in different process such as developing goals and
objectives, prepare strategies etc (Greenberg and Colquitt, 2013). If Syngenta follow
participative leadership style at the period of changes then it will motivate the staff
members in more effectively. It will increase the participation of each and every employee
that will describe the creativity, talents and abilities. With the help of participative
leadership method, company will also discover hidden skills that will use in future for
growth purpose (Wagner III and Hollenbeck, 2014). Every team members will get the
opportunity to show his capabilities and give the contribution in taking the right business
decisions.
3.2 Compare between motivational theories and their application in Syngenta
Motivation is a very essential for every organization because it increases the level of
efficiency of workers, achieve the organization goals, develop positive and good working
environment and maintain a stable work force (Scott and Davis, 2015). As per Maslow's
hierarchy of needs theory, all the people have a pyramid of series of needs that help in
satisfy them from top to bottom. Basically, this framework defines that need of the person
is ever changing. As one demand is met, the next one generate. On the other hand,
Herzberg's motivation theory helps in understand those factors which motivate individual
employee at the workplace (Mowday, Porter and Steers, 2013). Under this, the motivating
elements are dividing into two sections: one is hygiene and second is motivational factor.
The comparison between Maslow's and Herzberg's motivation theory is describing below.
Parameters Maslow's Herzberg's
Meaning Human needs and their satisfaction Use of motivators to motivate the
employees.
Level of
needs
Can be classified into five levels:
physiological, security,
belongingness, esteem and self-
actualisation (Robbins, Judge Millett
and Boyle, 2013).
Can be classified into two factors:
hygiene and motivational .
Focus Talking about the needs that are
needed to be completed to motivate
Talking about causes of
dissatisfaction and satisfaction
9

the person factors
Nature of
theory
Simple and descriptive and based on
long experience of human being.
Prescriptive (Haslam and et.al.,
2014)
In the case of Syngenta, company has imposed Maslow's and Herzberg's
motivational theories at the workplace with different purpose. With the help of this,
management of the organization has able to understand the needs of the staff members
which will more require for further motivating to individual one in near future (Nahavandi
and et.al., 2013). Along with this, the needs have easily categorised into different levels. In
addition to this, it helps Syngenta to determine those elements which demotivate the
employees. By doing this, company will easily provide basic needs to the staff members so
that they can be motivated in positive direction.
3.3 Evaluate usefulness of motivation theory in Syngenta
Motivation is a group of external and internal elements that impact on the desire and
wants of the employees in an organization. It is playing an important role within the firm
because it delivers the several benefits to the management. It increases the workers
performance and productivity at the workplace (Barrick, Mount and Li, 2013). Syngenta
has imposed Maslow's motivational theory with the intention of motivating the staff
members in positive directions. The evaluation process of following motivation theory
shows that it encourages workers to achieve the success in the job and develop the new
skills. It also promotes to enhance knowledge and abilities so that work can be complete
within the given limitations (Schneider, Ehrhart and Macey, 2013). It brings the changes in
the attitude of the employees and they starts to work for accomplish the business
objectives.
On the other hand, at the lower level staff, Maslow theory increases their turnover.
With the help of this, Syngenta easily meet the basic needs of workers such as air, water,
food, shelter and clothing (Alavosius, Newsome, Houmanfar and Biglan, 2016). These all
things motivate the lower level employees to stay long with the organization. Beside this,
the level of staff efficiency also increases with the use of Maslow's theory in terms of raise
in productivity. The improve capabilities, capacities, skills, knowledge and core
competencies of employees helps Syngenta to achieve the organizational goals and
objectives in appropriate manner (Zellweger, Nason, Nordqvist and Brush, 2013). On the
other hand, company effectively allocates the resources and utilize it in right way. It will
10

reduce the chances of wastage of resources and save the operational cost. Similarly, the
application of motivational theory within the workplace of Syngenta developes a positive
working environment and morale of the staff members in positive directions.
TASK 4
4.1 Explain the nature of groups and group behaviour within Syngenta
As per the given case study, it been identified that there are two kinds of groups in
Syngenta : formal and informal groups. Formal groups are generally creating by the
organization itself with the intension of meeting specific objectives (Anderson, Potočnik
and Zhou, 2014). In Syngenta, formal group has divided into team, task and technology
groups. The behaviour of these are varying with the type of work as well as allocated
responsibilities. Formal groups have dissolved after completing the task because they
have developed for temporary purpose (Ankli and Palliam, 2012). Such type of batch has
performed their work by considering the rules and regulations of Syngenta. Here, the
formal groups are showing professional behaviour with each other at the workplace. There
discussions are based on different objectives that a company wants to achieve in near
future.
On the other hand, informal groups are those who are not creating by the
organization itself. These are form when people are working together and interact with
each other over a certain time duration (De Jong and Den Hartog, 2010). Such type of
species develops by employees for their own satisfaction. The relationship between them
are based on person which is more than their roles and position. In the case of Syngenta,
the staff members have formulated informal groups to satisfy their social and psychological
needs and wants (DeChurch and Mesmer-Magnus, 2010). The behaviour of such type of
batch is informal with each other because their relation are not based on position or roles
within the firm. Therefore, the above discussion shows that the behaviour of both formal
and informal groups within the Syngenta has varied according to the workplace situation
(Harackiewicz and et.al., 2014).
4.2 Factors that promote or inhibit the development of effective teamwork at
Syngenta
To achieve the objectives of business, for a company, effective team working is
playing an important role. Some times, there are some factors which may promote or
inhibit the development of effective team work. In the case of Syngenta, these elements
11

that affect team working are as follows:
Group size: For Syngenta, the group size of employees has to be small because it is
more effective as compare to large one. It leads to take high quality decisions at the right
time and reduce the chances of conflicts between less number of people (Chand, 2016).
The result of this is it has promoted effective team-working within Syngenta.
Group norms: It is informal guidelines and various code of conducts that helps the
employees to perform organization activities. Syngentas has defined the dress codes,
performance judgement criteria, skills, attendance etc for all staff members. The individual
or group of people who are not following set guidelines in appropriate manner then
company has took actions against them (Miner, 2015). So, the define group norms helps in
development of effective team working at Syngenta.
Group synergy: Here group synergy means the interaction or cooperation between more
than two groups of a company to produce a combines effects that is higher or greater as
compare to sum of individual effect (DuBrin, 2013). The different formal groups of
Syngenta has to work together on a single project. Their combines efforts will help in
develop more effective sustainable agriculture products. The collective performance of all
the batches have produced productive outcomes (Haslam and et.al., 2014). So, the joining
of right and skilled person in a group and the interaction between different formal groups
brings special advantage to Syngenta in the terms of market power, skills, technology, cost
as well as develop effective team working.
4.3 Evaluate the impact of technology in Syngenta
In the ear of changing in technology, it is require for Syngenta team members to
update their knowledge level so that their work can not affected. There are numerous
technologies that can improve team functioning such as email, computers, digital
technologies, internet etc (Borkowski, 2015). If Syngenta has adopt various technologies
with the aim of improve the working process and quality then it will affect team functioning.
In this respect, an evaluation procedure can be conduct which shows that it has enhanced
the working process of develop sustainable agriculture products. The new ways to
complete the tasks have determined (Shoss and et.al., 2013).
On the other hand, with the help of Power Point Presentation technique, it has
become easy to train the staff (Chiang and Hsieh, 2012). Along with this, the newly appoint
staff members have easily trained. It leads to develop a continuous learning habit in the
employees. Similarly, by using different types of technologies such as email, text
12

massages, internet, video conferencing etc, communication between the team members of
Syngenta has increased (Barrick, Mount and Li, 2013). It has reduced the
miscommunication situations among all the employees. Different kinds of information
related to business can be easily shared and use for various purpose.
By taking the help of advance information and other technologies, Syngenta has
developed a network with its clients where the employees of the company can resolve the
queries of the service users. In addition to this, it has helped in developed virtual teams in
different branch offices of company where the staff members easily connected with other
teams on a same time to complete the work within given limitations (Schneider, Ehrhart
and Macey, 2013). Therefore, the above evaluation shows that the impact of various
technologies positivity influenced team functioning of Syngenta.
CONCLUSION
From the above research, it can be summarized that organization behaviour has
helped the company to analysed the individual behaviour in a particular situation.
Syngenta has different competitors and to became a leader in agriculture business,
organization has needed to adopt different organizational structure and culture. The rivals
of the firm has used different management frameworks for taking the better decisions. The
motivation theories have motivated the employees of Syngenta in positive direction. It has
helped out the management to motivate the staff members and improve their productivity.
Beside this, there are two groups in the organization: formal and informal. The behaviour
of these groups have changed as per the situation. Along with this, there are many factors
which promote development of effective team working within Syngenta. The impact of
increase the use of technology at the workplace has positive for the organization.
13

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Alavosius, M., Newsome, D., Houmanfar, R. and Biglan, A., 2016. A functional
contextualist analysis of the behavior and organizational practices relevant to
climate change. The Wiley Handbook of Contextual Behavioral Science. pp.513-
530.
Anderson, N., Potočnik, K. and Zhou, J., 2014. Innovation and creativity in organizations a
state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework.
Journal of Management. 40(5). pp.1297-1333.
Ankli. E. R. and Palliam. R., 2012. "Enabling a motivated workforce: exploring the sources
of motivation". Development and Learning in Organizations: An International Journal.
26(2). pp. 7 – 10.
Barrick, M.R., Mount, M.K. and Li, N., 2013. The theory of purposeful work behavior: The
role of personality, higher-order goals, and job characteristics. Academy of
Management Review. 38(1). pp.132-153.
Borkowski, N., 2015. Organizational behavior in health care. Jones & Bartlett Publishers.
Chiang, C.F. and Hsieh, T.S., 2012. The impacts of perceived organizational support and
psychological empowerment on job performance: The mediating effects of
organizational citizenship behavior. International Journal of Hospitality
Management, 31(1). pp.180-190.
De Jong, J. and Den Hartog, D., 2010. Measuring innovative work behaviour. Creativity
and Innovation Management. 19(1). pp.23-36.
DeChurch. L. A. and Mesmer-Magnus. J. R., 2010. The cognitive underpinnings of
effective teamwork: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology. 95(1). pp. 31 –
32.
DuBrin, A.J., 2013. Fundamentals of organizational behavior: An applied perspective.
Elsevier.
Greenberg, J. and Colquitt, J.A. eds., 2013. Handbook of organizational justice.
Psychology Press.
Harackiewicz. M. J. and et.al. 2014. Harnessing Values to Promote Motivation in
Education, in Stuart A. Karabenick , Timothy C. Urdan (ed.) Motivational Interventions
. Advances in Motivation and Achievement. 18. pp. 71 – 105.
Haslam, S.A. and et.al., 2014. Social identity at work: Developing theory for organizational
14

practice. Psychology Press.
Hogg, M.A. and Terry, D.J. eds., 2014. Social identity processes in organizational contexts.
Psychology Press.
Miner, J.B., 2015. Organizational behavior 1: Essential theories of motivation and
leadership. Routledge.
Mowday, R.T., Porter, L.W. and Steers, R.M., 2013. Employee—organization linkages: The
psychology of commitment, absenteeism, and turnover. Academic Press.
Nahavandi, A. et.al., 2013. Organizational behavior. SAGE Publications.
Naylor, J.C., Pritchard, R.D. and Ilgen, D.R., 2013. A theory of behavior in organizations.
Academic Press.
Pinder, C.C., 2014. Work motivation in organizational behavior. Psychology Press.
Robbins, S., Judge, T.A., Millett, B. and Boyle, M., 2013. Organisational behaviour.
Pearson Higher Education AU.
Schneider, B., Ehrhart, M.G. and Macey, W.H., 2013. Organizational climate and culture.
Annual review of psychology. 64. pp.361-388.
Scott, W.R. and Davis, G.F., 2015. Organizations and organizing: Rational, natural and
open systems perspectives. Routledge.
Shafritz, J., Ott, J. and Jang, Y., 2015. Classics of organization theory. Cengage Learning.
Shoss, M.K. and et.al., 2013. Blaming the organization for abusive supervision: The roles
of perceived organizational support and supervisor's organizational embodiment.
Journal of Applied Psychology. 98(1). p.158.
Wagner III, J.A. and Hollenbeck, J.R., 2014. Organizational behavior: Securing competitive
advantage. Routledge.
Zellweger, T.M., Nason, R.S., Nordqvist, M. and Brush, C.G., 2013. Why do family firms
strive for nonfinancial goals? An organizational identity perspective.
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. 37(2). pp.229-248.
Online
Chand, S., 2016. 5 Factors Affecting Team Effectiveness In An Organisation. [Online].
Available through: <http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/management/5-factors-
affecting-team-effectiveness-in-an-organisation/3490/>. [Accessed on: 8th March,
2016].
Cherry, K., 2015. What Is Autocratic Leadership?. [Online]. Available through:
<http://psychology.about.com/od/leadership/f/autocratic-leadership.htm>. [Accessed
15

on: 8th March, 2016].
Overview of Participative Leadership Style, 2016. [Online]. Available through:
<http://www.leadership-central.com/participative-leadership.html#axzz42IZfnUc5>.
[Accessed on: 8th March, 2016].
16