Organizational Behaviour: Case Study Analysis and Recommendations

This presentation analyzes a case study on organizational behaviour issues and provides recommendations for improvement. It explores theories such as coordination, motivation, and productivity. Recommended actions include team building exercises, job rotation, and adopting total quality management.

ORGANISATIONSAL
BEHAVIOUR

TABLE OF CONTENTS
 Introduction
 Overview of case study
 Organizational Issues
 Organizational behavior issues
 Theories and models
 Application of the theory with the case study
 Recommendations
 Conclusion
 References

INTRODUCTION
 Organizational behavior means to study the group of
people and analysis their individual performance in an
organization (Organisational Behaviour, 2019). This
mainly focuses on examine the job structure,
communication and performance of employees in a
company. It helps to determine the impact of motivation
and leadership skills of an individual in an entity.
 The present report is based on Susan Taylor case study.
This will identify the current organizational issues which
she is facing in her new job. Then report will explain the
theories of organizational behavior. Lastly, the report will
suggest some recommendations and provide conclusion.

OVERVIEW OF CASE STUDY
As per the case study Susan Taylor had worked in
production department of large pharmaceutical firm. She
is assigned as production controller in previous firm. In
her previous position she is able to work smoothly. She
is able to control forty employees and three of women
supervisors. In the new job Susan is being promoted for
taking charges in product development department. This
unit mainly comprises of researchers’ pharmacists and
chemists. However, Susan is unable to perform her new
job at its optimal level due to issues among the
teammates. She is not feeling satisfied with her newly
assigned position in the company.

ORGANIZATIONAL ISSUES ARE
AS FOLLOWS –
 Lack of coordination - The team members keep questioning
about their tasks and they don’t want to perform in a way which
Susan is asking them to do so. They do not obey their manager
fully. There is lack of coordination among the teammates.
 Lack of Motivation – The employees are not feeling motivated
in the company. They are unable to perform with full
enthusiasm in the company. Employees are failing to
accomplish their targets on time. As their manger Susan is
unable to fulfill their health and safety needs.
 Poor productivity - There is lack of resources availability in
the company by which the production process gets delayed.
Teammates are unable to perform their tasks on timely basis as
there is no timely availability of the resources in the firm.

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR ISSUES
 Organizational behavior issues decreased overall
productivity of the firm. Here in this case study first
organizational behavior issue is that there is lack of
coordination among the employees (Aithal and Kumar,
2016). They do not show cooperative behavior among
themselves.
 The second issue is that there is lack of motivation
among the employees. The employee does not feel
satisfy with their job role and tasks which Susan assign
to them.

 The third issue is of poor productivity due to lack of
resources. As the resources is not timely delivered. The
Manager is unable to focus on product development. If
the resources are served on timely basis the employees
are able to perform optimal in the company (Rentschler,
2018).

POSDCORB THEORY OF COORDINATION
Theory for lack of coordination - This theory of
coordination was introduced in 1973 by Luther Gulick.
This theory is basically a set of five different process
which are, planning, organizing, staffing , directing ,
and coordinating, reporting, budgeting. An
organization can remove its problem of coordination
between different employees by performing these set
of functions to make the role of every employee clear.

SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT
THEORY
Theory for lack of
coordination - The theory
is being developed by
Frederick Taylor. This
theory is consisting of many
principles. This
management theory focuses
on the increasing the labor
productivity. One of the
principles of this theory is
cooperation which is not
only being done by the
individual but by the team
efforts. This is one of the
issues in the company that
there is lack of coordination.

EXPECTANCY THEORY
Theory for lack of motivation - This theory is being
discovered by V. Vroom. This theory explains that the end
result depends upon individual choices which are to
minimize the work burden and maximizing the pleasures.

CONTINUE…
 This theory claims that individual performance is
increased by maximizing the pleasure through
motivating them. By gaining the pain one can achieve
more (Barry and Wilkinson, 2016).
 If the efforts are more then outcomes were surely
satisfactory. The Main focus should be on the
performance not on the outcomes. The theory is based on
two factors, first one is that the expectancy should be
greater than performance and the probability standards
should always set higher than the outcomes.

HERZBERG’S TWO FACTOR
THEORY OF MOTIVATION
Theory for lack of motivation - According to
Herzberg at the work place there are certain
different factors that can cause job satisfaction
while a separate group of factors that can cause
dissatisfaction in which all the factors act as an
independent factor. So basically it states that on
the work place there are several set or group of
factor which either create satisfaction or can be a
cause of dissatisfaction, the fact is only that the
company has to choose wisely between these
groups for effective and efficient work.

TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT
Theory for poor productivity- Total quality
management strive continuous improvement and
helps in maintaining high standards in the company.
Quality of products gets improvement through
applying this. Employees collect data and statistics
process of production department which helps to
ensure that product meet customer expectation.

LEAN MANUFACTURING
Theory for poor productivity - It is a type of
methodology that helps to remove waste
while performing production function in
company. This simultaneously helps to
maximize the productivity. It is also cost
effective method by stopping unnecessary
waste company’s expenses get reduced.

APPLICATION OF THE THEORY WITH
THE CASE STUDY
 In the case of Susan Taylor the company is in an
emergent need for a systematic coordinated
management. The company needs to do the process
of planning, organizing, staffing, directing,
coordinating, reporting, and budgeting which can
make the work of her and his team mates effective
and efficient. So basically the company of Susan is
facing a problem of management.
 By adapting the Scientific Management theory in the company,
employees are able to perform better in the organization. One of the
issue is that employees are not showing cooperative behavior.
Hence, through taking this theory into the consideration Susan is
able build up its team spirit. By working together in coordinative
manner, they are able to achieve their tasks successfully.

 As per the expectancy theory if the employees do more
efforts in the company surely their performance is being
acceptable by the Susan. As they perform better in the
organization their manger will give them the desired reward
(Ranjan, 2017). Thus, the employee’s feels satisfy with the
reward and their morale also gets boosted through which
they are able to perform even better in the organization.
Therefore, overall productivity of the organization also gets
increased.
 In the case of Susan Taylor the company has to decide
between different group of factor and need to choose the
group with least dissatisfactory elements. The problem of
Susan is with his superiors because she did her best to
achieve the targets but was not rewarded or appreciated by
its superiors, this can only be removed if his company
chooses the right group of factors which can increase
motivation level.

 Lack of product availability in her company. Hence,
thorough applying the quality management she will be
able to manage the resources of the company efficiently.
Also the quality of products gets improved as this theory
encourages continuous improvement. It will also helps in
correcting defective material while doing production.
Through this productivity of the company gets increased
(Hanaysha, 2016).
 Lean Manufacturing helps to eliminate waste from the
company. It also helps to remove quality problems in the
products. The unutilized talent should also get removed.
Inventories get manage under this process. Hence through
applying lean Manufacturing Susa’s issue get resolved
and productivity of the company gets improved

RECOMMENDATIONS
 The company should organized team building
exercise in the campus so that employees get to
learn how to coordinate with each other.
 As the employees do not obey Susan orders and
they don’t want to perform as their manager
tells them. Hence job rotation would be great
idea. This will helps to boosts employees morale.
 Some benefits and reward should also be
provided so that employees started performing
in an optimistic way.
 Total quality management should be adopted in
the organization so that there will be timely
delivery of the resources which product
development department needed.

CONCLUSION
 It has been concluded from the above report that
organizational behavior directly impacts the individual
performance, Hence, if the individual performance get
effected it directly interlinked with the poor performance of
the company. It has been summarized that Susan Taylor was
working smoothly in the previous company but as she got
promoted she faced many challenges, There is lack of
motivation present in among the employees.
 Thus, it has been concluded that if the employees needs gets
fulfilled and timely reward is being served to employees the
performance level of the employees gets boosted. It had also
being concluded that through adapting Vroom expectancy
theory employees are able to perform more with their full
efficiency. Lastly, it has been summarized that overall
performance of company gets improved through adapting
scientific management theory.

REFERENCES
Books and Journal
 Aithal, P.S. and Kumar, P.M. 2016. Organizational behaviour in 21st
century–'Theory A'for managing people for performance. IOSR Journal of
Business and Management (IOSR-JBM). 18(7). pp.126-134.
 Barry, M. and Wilkinson, A., 2016. Pro‐social or pro‐management? A
critique of the conception of employee voice as a pro‐social behaviour
within organizational behaviour. British Journal of Industrial
Relations. 54(2), pp.261-284.
 Hanaysha, J. 2016. Testing the effects of employee engagement, work
environment, and organizational learning on organizational
commitment. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 229(8). pp.289-297.

 Ranjan, P., 2017. Human Resource Management and Organizational
Behaviour. Journal of HR, Organizational Behaviour &
Entrepreneurship Development, 1(1). pp.8-12.
 Rentschler, R. 2018. Managing Organizations in the Creative
Economy: Organizational Behaviour for the Cultural
Sector. International Journal of Arts Management. 20(3). pp.95-95.
Online
Organisational Behaviour, 2019. Available through;
<https://www.economicsdiscussion.net/management/o
rganisational-behaviour/31869>