Organizational Behavior and Management: Case Study Analysis | Desklib

This document provides a case study analysis of the cohesiveness, norms, and performance of a group of employees in a factory. It discusses the impact of leadership and motivation on organizational behavior and performance. The document type is an essay and the subject is Organizational Behavior and Management.

Running head: ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND MANAGEMENT
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND MANAGEMENT
Name of the student
Name of the university
Author note

1ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND MANAGEMENT
Part One
Answer to question 1
The case investigated the operations of the water removing section in a factory where five
male employees operated on their respective duties. The age group, on an average, of the
employees ranged between 18- 25 years. On the other hand, the cohesiveness of the five
employees in the unit were specifically based on the similarity of the demographics, payroll,
position and mentality of the same. The employees developed a rather reluctant attitude towards
the assigned job role while inducing an attitude of “mind your own business” towards the other
workers. On the other hand, the employees also developed a coherent understanding of fiddling
with their assigned time towards work.
On the other hand, the employees also portrayed a leisure stricken attitude towards their
work which affected the rate of operations. However, their collaboration and cohesion towards
the individuals in the team was portrayed through their induction of rotational shifts which
encouraged minimized the workload from a single employee in the section. The reluctance
towards work and the general habits of skipping their day- to -day targets also maximized their
bond. It has been noticed that the employees preferred to talk about girls, sex, pool and drinking
while operating in their respective job positions.
The similarity of mindset and their approach towards their work along with their
collaboration with each other acted as norms of the team where the workers operated. On the
other hand, the norm relating to one for all- all for one applies in the group which again reflects
cohesiveness and collaboration among the members of the group. However, it has also being
noticed through the case evaluation that the group also followed a norm relating to restricting

2ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND MANAGEMENT
their support among the members of the group in the trouble of a single member. The group felt
reluctant to support the other workers, who are senior to them, in their problems which again
isolated the group of five male employees in the unit. Therefore, the norms that are being
reflected through the assessment of the group’s culture is related to their reluctance to help the
other employees while restricting their cohesiveness among the group itself. On the other hand,
the group’s reluctance to work is again a noticeable norm which has affected the performance of
the employees.
Answer to question 2
The norms arose specifically because of three major reasons relating to the absence of
foreman, the absence of incentive schemes and the lack of performance audits in the
organization. The absence of the foeman affected the rate of operations while providing the team
of five male employees with abundance of time to chat and share their views on leisure. The
presence of foreman in the group would negated the reluctance of the group to meet their day- to
-day targets. On the other hands, the presence of the foreman would have enabled the group on
developing cohesiveness with the existing other employees from the different departments. The
absence of the foreman and reluctance of the group to work in the tight schedules while meeting
their daily targets led the group to chat on different topics subjecting to their leisure activities.
Again the lack of performance bonus or incentive schemes in the organization affected the rate
of motivation of the employees restricting the same to perform as per the expectations of the
organization.
On the other hand, the lack of performance audits in the organization also encouraged the
group members in developing a culture for cheating on their job targets and shift times to spend
more time on the leisure activities. The performance targets enables a group or a team of

3ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND MANAGEMENT
members aware of the needs of meeting the daily expectations of the organization for survival.
Therefore, the lack of performance audits affected the capability of the group in improving the
collaborative functioning of the same towards meeting their individual targets, over leisure
discussions. The lack of supervision on the work that was performed by the group encouraged
the same to handle only five vats of cheese while their daily target was to handle 7 vats of
cheese. The lack of careful supervision on the shift timings also permitted the group in
manipulating the shift timing through fiddling with their watch and cutting off their job targets,
minimizing the productivity of the organization.
Answer to question 3
The norms that are followed by the group enabled every member in the group to
minimize their work pressure while operating on their respective job roles. The rotational shifts
enabled the members in developing cohesiveness and the collaboration between the same.
Therefore, the norm relating to “One for all and all for one” remained a priced possession of the
group while empowering the activities that are undertaken by the five male employees in the
organization. The equality of treatment hat was met out to the group and the manner in which the
other four members supported the one person in the group enabled the group in developing a
sustainable culture through active collaborations among the members.
Apart from the members, the group itself will be benefitted through the activities as the
norms that are followed by the members would contribute to the sustenance of the same. It has
been noted that the sustenance of a group is specifically based on the interconnections and
collaboration among the members (Nwobia and Aljohani 2017). In this relation, the group
developed a culture of improved sustenance through collaboration and cohesiveness among the

4ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND MANAGEMENT
members. Therefore, it might be stated that the group itself will be benefitted through the norms
that are being followed by the members in the unit.
Again, the factory might be benefitted through the norms of the group as it specifically
aimed at developing social cohesion. Social cohesion and collaborations in the factory would
enable the same in developing the performance as per the collective goals of entertaining
sustenance. Strauss, Parker and O'Shea (2017) stated that the collaborative functioning of the
workforce enables an organization in upholding the proficiency of the operations. Therefore, the
norms elating to social cohesiveness within the members of the group might enable the
organization in maximizing the performance of the same through certain regulatory impositions.
Answer to question 4
The group in the water removing section of the factory is cohesive as the members
reflected certain levels of collaboration between the same. The level of collaboration between the
members of the group are evident from the attempts of making rotational shifts and supporting
the individuals in a group while facing trouble. The members in the group developed a strong
bond between the same which represented their collaboration.
On the other hand, it has been noticed that the group members shared the same age band
which again encouraged the bondage and collaboration. The collaborative mindset of the
members and the similarity of their values and demographics generated norms in the group
which protected the same from the exploitation of the organizational managers. However, the
cohesiveness of the group affected the performance of the organization as the employees felt
reluctant to meet their targets and would leave their workforce discussing on topics elating to
leisure like pool or drinking. On the other hand, the rotational shifts that were made by the

5ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND MANAGEMENT
employees in the group, without the knowledge of the factory’s operational head, affected the
performance.
The group was assigned with the task of handing 7 vats of cheese while they only
handled 5 vats, leaving a huge amount of work lagging. It affected the productivity that was
estimated by the factory managers. On the other hands, the cohesiveness of the group and their
norm relating to “one for all, all for one” affected the capability of the organization in enforcing
regulations for maximizing the performance. The unity among the members of the group thereby
affected the performance of the organization while working to fulfill the production targets.
Answer to question 5
 The development of performance assessment systems and frequent production based
audits would enable the organization in improving the production based performance.
Monitoring and surveillance over the day to day operation that are undertaken by the
group would enable the organization in keeping the workforce under pressure of
generating effective performance and meeting their daily targets.
 The organization might also appoint a foreman who would take up the responsibility of
personally looking into the progress in terms of productivity and report the same to the
operational managers, on a daily basis. The appointment of the foreman for reviewing the
status of operations in the water removal department would enable the factory owner in
getting a closer view of the operations and mentor the group members for optimizing
their operations to meet the daily pr0duction targets.
 The organization might take steps to introduce performance bonuses and incentive
schemes with the objective of encouraging and empowering the employees to fulfill their
daily targets while operating on the collective aims of the venture. The incentives and

6ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND MANAGEMENT
bonuses based on production performance would draw the attention of the employees and
thereby boost their motivation to optimize their operations with the objective of fulfilling
their daily targets as per the expectations of the enterprise
Part Two
Leadership and Motivation at work
Leadership is defined as an action for leading, empowering and encouraging progress
among a group of people. Deschamps et al. (2016) stated that effective leadership is based on the
aspects of influence that a person can create among a group of people with the objective of
fulfilling the common goals. In this relation, leadership holds a close relation with organizational
behavior as the different activities of a leader often influences and encourages the operations of a
workforce in the organizational setting (Schwarz et al. 2016). In this relation, the discussion
would take steps to develop a coherent understanding of the manner in which leadership and
motivation and workplace are linked to organizational behavior and performance. The
delineation of the different factors and the manner in which the same are interrelated would
assist in examining the strategic role of leadership and motivation at work.
Baškarada, Watson and Cromarty (2016) stated that organizational behavior is based on
the different elements of needs in the organizational setting. The different changes in the style
and approach of leadership greatly affects the rate of activities that are undertaken by the
workforce. Efficient leadership and control permits an organization in initiating superior process
planning while assessing the strategic capabilities of the same in the different markets. The
motivation to work and influential factors of leadership are specifically intertwined. Park, Song
and Lim (2016) state that the primary responsibility of a leader is to keep the workforce

7ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND MANAGEMENT
motivated with the objective of improving the performance of the organization. Factors like
transparency in communication, the inclusiveness of the leaders and encouraging the
involvement of the employees in the different work processes enables a leader in improving the
state of motivation among the employees (Puni, Agyemang and Asamoah 2016).
Moreover, Wang, Demerouti and Le Blanc (2017) noted that motivated workforce are
more likely to be satisfied in their respective job positions. In this relation, the different strategic
changes in the organizational operations are critically based on the change readiness of the
workforce. Hedlund et al. (2016) stated that the leaders hold an effective responsibility of
managing the conflicts in the workforce and mitigating the issues that are being confronted by
the same with the objective of motivating and empowering their operations towards the
achievement of the organizational goals. The leaders motivate he employees through a thorough
assessment of the behavior and expectations of the employees (Wang, Kim and Lee 2016).
On the other hand, leaders also assess the organizational culture and values with the
objective of empowering the sustenance of the venture. Fiaz, Su and Saqib (2017) stated that the
leaders truly justifies the needs of the organizations while operating in the different markets
through motivating and influencing the involvement of the employees on the developmental
processes. The active involvement of the employees in the organizational processes is a sign of
motivation and job satisfaction (Sparks and Repede 2016). In this relation, Joo, Lim and Kim
(2016) stated that job fit and the fulfillment of the employees’ expectations while operating
according to the needs of the organizational sustenance have a collective influence on their
satisfaction. Therefore, the leaders lay an important role in influencing the rate of job satisfaction
among the employees through screening and recruiting right employee for the right job position
apart from adhering to the individual needs of the employees relating to wellbeing.

8ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND MANAGEMENT
The different changes in the organizational operations are specifically based on the rate
of involvement of the employees in the different processes. Potipiroon and Ford (2017) stated
that leadership roles and approaches enables a leader in retaining the employees while
cooperating with the same to meet the organizational requirement of sustenance. Motivational
factors among the employees are the key aspect through which an organization enhances the rate
of performance. In this relation, the leaders play an effective role whole collaborating with the
workforce for improving the outcome. Transformational leadership and servant leadership
concepts generally empowered the workforce through motivating and empowering the activities
(Bottomley et al. 2016). On the other hand, authoritative control suppresses the needs of the
workforce and minimizes the rate of motivation and performance driven attitude among the
employees (Porter, Riesenmy and Fields 2016). The differences in the leadership approaches
and the manner in which the same affects the rate of motivation among the employees enables in
examining the types of organizational behavior.
Motivation factors among the workforce is primarily based on the expectations of the
same while operating as per the requirements of their job role. Ugaddan and Park (2017) stated
that the motivation of the employees encourages a leader in developing inter-trust relation of the
workforce with the management while retaining the loyalty of the same towards the work
process. It has been noted that more than 69% of the employees resign from their posts due to
lack of motivation (Im, Campbell and Jeong 2016). In this relation, Gözükara and Simsek
(2016) noted that the leaders play an important role in identifying the expectations of the
workforce and the organization and thereby balance the operations through the formulation of
effective policies. Therefore, it might be noted that the leadership approach holds a major
position in developing the organizational behavior apart from the motivation of the workforce.

9ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND MANAGEMENT
The major points of operations that are initiated by the organizations are based on the
efficiency of the workforce and the manner in which the same might contribute to the
organizational performance. Lee, Idris and Delfabbro (2017) noted in a study that
organizational performance is reliant on the environment of the organization, the cultural
frameworks, the leadership approach and contribution of motivated employees. In this relation,
the leadership approach and the motivation of the workforce are interdependent factors which
supports an organization in overcoming every barrier faced by the same during expansion and
sustenance.
Therefore, from the above study it might be concluded that the concepts of leadership and
motivation at work are interrelated. On the other hand, the research also enumerated the manner
in which leadership and workplace motivation influences the organizational behavior. The
leadership approach and the implications of the same on workplace motivation are important
factors that affects the rate of performance in an organization. Therefore, the study enumerated
the different factors through a thorough literature analysis with the objective of identifying the
different changes that are initiated by the organizations on the basis of leadership roles and
workplace motivation.

10ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND MANAGEMENT
References
Baškarada, S., Watson, J. and Cromarty, J., 2016. Leadership and organizational
ambidexterity. Journal of Management Development, 35(6), pp.778-788.
Bottomley, P., Mostafa, A.M.S., Gould‐Williams, J.S. and León‐Cázares, F., 2016. The impact
of transformational leadership on organizational citizenship behaviours: The contingent role of
public service motivation. British Journal of Management, 27(2), pp.390-405.
Deschamps, C., Rinfret, N., Lagacé, M.C. and Privé, C., 2016. Transformational leadership and
change: How leaders influence their followers’ motivation through organizational
justice. Journal of Healthcare Management, 61(3), pp.194-213.
Fiaz, M., Su, Q. and Saqib, A., 2017. Leadership styles and employees' motivation: Perspective
from an emerging economy. The Journal of Developing Areas, 51(4), pp.143-156.
Gözükara, İ. and Simsek, Ö.F., 2016. Role of leadership in employees' work engagement:
Organizational identification and job autonomy. International Journal of Business and
Management, 11(1), p.72.

11ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND MANAGEMENT
Hedlund, A., Gummesson, K., Rydell, A. and Andersson, M., 2016. Safety motivation at work:
Evaluation of changes from six interventions. Safety science, 82, pp.155-163.
Im, T., Campbell, J.W. and Jeong, J., 2016. Commitment intensity in public organizations:
Performance, innovation, leadership, and PSM. Review of Public Personnel
Administration, 36(3), pp.219-239.
Joo, B.K., Lim, D.H. and Kim, S., 2016. Enhancing work engagement: The roles of
psychological capital, authentic leadership, and work empowerment. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, 37(8), pp.1117-1134.
Lee, M.C.C., Idris, M.A. and Delfabbro, P.H., 2017. The linkages between hierarchical culture
and empowering leadership and their effects on employees’ work engagement: Work
meaningfulness as a mediator. International Journal of Stress Management, 24(4), p.392.
Nwobia, I.E. and Aljohani, M.S., 2017. The effect of job dissatisfaction and workplace bullying
on turnover intention: Organization climate and group cohesion as moderators. International
Journal of Marketing Studies, 9(3), pp.136-143.
Park, Y., Song, J.H. and Lim, D.H., 2016. Organizational justice and work engagement: the
mediating effect of self-leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 37(6),
pp.711-729.
Porter, T.H., Riesenmy, K.D. and Fields, D., 2016. Work environment and employee motivation
to lead: Moderating effects of personal characteristics. American Journal of Business, 31(2),
pp.66-84.

12ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND MANAGEMENT
Potipiroon, W. and Ford, M.T., 2017. Does public service motivation always lead to
organizational commitment? Examining the moderating roles of intrinsic motivation and ethical
leadership. Public Personnel Management, 46(3), pp.211-238.
Puni, A., Agyemang, C.B. and Asamoah, E.S., 2016. Leadership styles, employee turnover
intentions and counterproductive work behaviours. International Journal of innovative research
and development, 5(1), pp.1-7.
Schwarz, G., Newman, A., Cooper, B. and Eva, N., 2016. Servant leadership and follower job
performance: The mediating effect of public service motivation. Public Administration, 94(4),
pp.1025-1041.
Sparks, W.L. and Repede, J.F., 2016. Human motivation and leadership: Assessing the validity
and reliability of the actualized leader profile. Academy of Educational Leadership
Journal, 20(3), p.23.
Strauss, K., Parker, S.K. and O'Shea, D., 2017. When does proactivity have a cost? Motivation at
work moderates the effects of proactive work behavior on employee job strain. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 100, pp.15-26.
Ugaddan, R.G. and Park, S.M., 2017. Quality of leadership and public service motivation: A
social exchange perspective on employee engagement. International Journal of Public Sector
Management, 30(3), pp.270-285.
Wang, H.J., Demerouti, E. and Le Blanc, P., 2017. Transformational leadership, adaptability, and
job crafting: The moderating role of organizational identification. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 100, pp.185-195.

13ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND MANAGEMENT
Wang, X.H.F., Kim, T.Y. and Lee, D.R., 2016. Cognitive diversity and team creativity: Effects
of team intrinsic motivation and transformational leadership. Journal of Business
Research, 69(9), pp.3231-3239.