Organisational Behaviour Report 2022

Running head: ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
Organisational Behaviour
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
Contents
Introduction................................................................................................................................2
Task 1: Written Portfolio...........................................................................................................2
Analysis of the characteristics of different organisational structures....................................2
Characteristics of hierarchical structure.............................................................................3
Explanation of how the culture of an organisation can impact on the effectiveness of the
organisation............................................................................................................................5
Assessment of the impact of learning on the effectiveness of employees.............................7
Evaluation of how working in teams can improve employee effectiveness..........................9
Task 2:......................................................................................................................................10
Evaluating different leadership behaviour theories..................................................................10
Analyse theories relating to work relationships and interactions.............................................16
Task 3: Presentation with accompanying notes.......................................................................18
References................................................................................................................................19

2ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
Introduction
This research report provides an in-depth detail about business management in the
contemporary business context. Business management is relatively a broad area in
management which covers several internal and external business elements. Organisations in
today’s contemporary business environment are most likely to face constant market threats.
Thereby, businesses today face a broad set of market dynamics that often drive the business.
Business in today’s changing business environment, needs to understand suitable planning,
strategy, finance and marketing. Likewise, there have been several internal elements that
often drive the business. This research report consists of three different parts and to develop
a suitable understanding about business development, first part of the report is more of
portfolio explaining organisational structure, organisational culture, employee-learning and
team-working.
Task 1: Written Portfolio
Analysis of the characteristics of different organisational structures
Having aligned with contemporary market requirements, there have been a number of
organisational structures mostly used by the businesses include hierarchical, matrix,
horizontal/flat structure, network structure, and divisional structure, line organisational
structure, team-based organisational structure, when it comes to hierarchical structure, it is
noted that hierarchical framework under which employees are grouped with every employee
and each employee tends to hold a clear supervisor (Mizutani et al. 2015).

3ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
Characteristics of hierarchical structure
Functions: It is noted that individual in the organisation are grouped in relation to
functions they provide. This means that functions should be with regard to finance, technical,
HR and admin groups (Doz 2016). The functions have been further elaborated in the diagram.
Defined structure of communication: With the use of hierarchical organisation
structure, it can develop a clear line communication. This means employees in the entry-level
position is most likely to organisational tasks directly from the supervisors and this means the
supervisors take the responsibility of interpreting orders that come from the upper level of
supervisors (Teamah et al. 2012).
Multiple layers of authority within the organisation: Through a hierarchical
organisational structure, the business can communicate with both internal and external parties
about who exactly can hold the authority within the business (Schnetler et al. 2015). This
means this is actually a greater level of structure that allows reporting, allowing for consistent
movement of information and long chain of command.
Clear picture of authority: Under the hierarchical organisational structure, there is a clear
picture of who holds the authority and who does not hold the authority (Doz 2016). This
means that organisation would find it easier to identify which managers can have the power
to allocate resources and reward success.
Matrix structure characteristics
As put forward by Laein, Rashidi and Esfahani (2016) matrix organisational structure
develops a reporting relationship which is more of a grid or matrix unlike the conventional
hierarchy. This means this is kind of a structure in which people with similar skills and work
assignments led to one or more than one manager to report to. For example, all IT employees
may be in one IT department and report to one IT manager but same IT employees may be

4ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
assigned to different projects. They might have to report to respective project managers of the
projects being done. Thus, some IT employees might have to work with multiple IT managers
in the job role (Teamah, Dawood and Shehata 2016). The major characteristics of matrix
structure is significantly characterized by having dual authority relationship power balance
particularly between functional and project manager.
Horizontal/flat structure characteristics
Horizontal or flat structure usually adopted by small or medium size firms and start-
ups firms in their initial or early stage. Mäkimattila, Saunila and Salminen (2014) argued that
large organisation would find it challenging to follow a horizontal or flat structure. The major
characteristic of flat organisational structure is that multiple levels of middle management are
omitted. The major advantage of this flat organisational structure is that flat structure enable
employees to make decisions quickly and independently which helps to speed up the process.
This means trained workforce can be productive by being involved in decision-making.
Network structure characteristics
It is noted that network organisational structure helps to visualise both external and
internal relationship between managers as well as top-level management. This structure is
less hierarchical but more decentralised and more flexible compared to other structure. As put
forward by Cosh, Fu and Hughes (2012), network structure remains within a social networks
and it fundamentally remains within open and communication reliable structure. It is noted
that network structure seems to be little agiler than other structure because it only has few
tires with extensive control and bottom flow of decision-making.

5ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
Explanation of how the culture of an organisation can impact on the effectiveness
of the organisation
Generally, organisational culture has broad and intense impact on organisational
performance. Fowler (2013) mentioned that organisational culture determines the overall
performance of the organisation. When it comes to organisational culture, Competing Values
Framework is one of the most significant element to be considered. This means that
framework helps to determine a whether a particular organisation has a pre-dominant or
external focus or whether it seeks to have flexibility, individuality and control. In this
context, Green (2012) mentioned that there are four different type of culture like clan culture,
adhocracy culture, market culture and hierarchy culture and each type has its own role in
organisational effectiveness. As put forward by Caligiuri and Tarique (2012) effectiveness of
the organisation in achieving goals at the organisational level is often known as
organisational effectiveness. As put forward by Carlström and Ekman (2012), talked about
the measurement of effectiveness which is fundamentally the issue in organisational culture
theory. When it comes to organisational effectiveness through organisational culture, a
certain level or category of effectiveness dimensions. For instance, the effectiveness can be
found in human relation model because this model considers participation, discussion as well
as openness as the means of enhancing the morale and eventually achieve the commitment.
As put forward by Stensaker and Vabø (2013) Internal Process model is another
dimension in organisational effectiveness as this model considers internal process like
measurement, documentation and information management as the technique to accomplish
stability and control. Likewise, the Relation Goal Model dimension talks about the profit and
productivity through directions and goals. As put forward by Pinho, Rodrigues and Dibb
(2014), organisational effectiveness has a positive influence on overall organisational
effectiveness and thus, it can be mentioned that relationship between organisational culture

6ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
and effectiveness is always crucial. Huhtala et al. (2013.) also mentioned that organisational
culture represents an active and living phenomenon through which the potential or authorized
members of the organisation like executives can create shared meaning. This means that
chief executive officer or business founders can generate values often shape the
organisational culture. Chief Executive Officer or the Organisational founder values shape
the organisational culture as the most significant element affecting the manner of decision-
making, management style and behaviour models of the organisation.
Leaders always have a great role in shaping as well as controlling organisational
culture; it is also found that even though, founders tend to have an initial role in developing
an organisation’s culture. It is also noted that leadership is one of the significant driving
forces for enhancing organisational performance; this means leaders stand as the decision-
makers determine. Pinho, Rodrigues and Dibb (2014) mentioned the fact that organisational
culture goes a long way in establishing the brand image of the business and this means
culture generates an identity to the organisation. For example, Google’s open communication
approach in its culture is globally known across the Information Technology sector. Google’s
organisational culture allows its employees to take and implement managerial decisions
(Steiber and Alänge 2013).
Furthermore, it can be mentioned that culture shape the way individuals or employees
interact at the workplace. According to Stensaker and Vabø (2013), a healthy organisational
culture motivates its employees motivated and loyal towards the management. For example,
Emirates Airline provides its employees holiday trip packages on the basis of their yearly
performance and this trend is implemented across Emirates’ branch (Litz and Scott 2017).
Therefore, it can be mentioned that organisational culture positively affects employee
performance and this is further reflected on firm’s effectiveness. In this context, Caligiuri and
Tarique (2012) mentioned that every organisation tend to have a greater set of guidelines for

7ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
individuals to wok accordingly. Therefore, it is worth stating that culture of the organisation
must represent specific set of predefined policies that can guide employees and provide them
a sense of direction at the workplace. An effective organisational culture can help the
organisation to derive a greater level of employee productivity. Furthermore, Carlström and
Ekman (2012) mentioned that if people feel represented by organisational culture, they are
certainly capable of developing a strong and positive relationship with the workplace. This
means if the employees gain the ability of performing or doing a great work if they identify
the values. Likewise, the organization can build trust in the organisation and this results in
higher level of employee retention.
Assessment of the impact of learning on the effectiveness of employees
It can be mentioned that learning has broad impact on the effectiveness of employees,
as learning especially covers training and development programs. As put forward by Elçi,
Şener, Aksoy and Alpkan (2012), training programs may involve significant or enormous
level of investment in relation to time and money. Thus, measuring the ‘Return on
Investment’ of training can become critical. Evaluating the effectiveness of corporate training
programs via scientifically validated technique is often called learning effectiveness. As put
forward by Manzoor (2012), a new innovation in the market often takes place each day and
accordingly given the intensely competitive nature of the market. Thereby, a new innovation
can be a significant reason that catalyse the changes in organisational goals and objectives of
the organisation. Likewise, the need for re-calibrating the skills of employees with respect to
competencies aligned with the business objectives.
Continuous often focus on learning and development program helps employees to
learn levelling up with the company’s expectation and providing existing employees with
supreme opportunity of expanding existing knowledge base (Navimipour and Zareie 2015).
With the increasing focus on continual learning and development, organisations are keen on

8ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
identifying the reliable metrics and techniques to measure the effectiveness and Return on
Investment of such employee training initiatives.
Effective learning has a potential impact on employee effectiveness because it is most
likely to enhance and boost employee performance. Learning can also include training and
development program; hence, effective training and development programs is centred on
enhancing employee performance. As put forward by Shahzadi et al. (2014) training is
actually arranged by the management of the organization to significantly bridge the gap
between the current performance as well as the standard desired performance.
It is noted that training is offered in different or multiple forms which is mostly
decided by the management of the organization. However, in general training is provided in
the form of coaching, mentoring, peers, cooperation and participation by the subordinates. It
is noted that this such teamwork certainly enable employees to significantly tale in job and
products and better performance. Eventually, it improves the overall organisational
performance. Thus, it is worth mentioning that such learning programs not only contributes to
the development of employee performance but it significantly helps organizations to
significantly leverage the human resource in the interest for gaining competitive advantages.
On the basis of the potential outcome, it is highly necessary by the organization to
plan for such training programs for its employees to improve the abilities and even the
competencies that are required in the workplace. Furthermore, it is also seen that
effectiveness of learning is also seen in several internal and external areas of the organisation.
For example, it can be mentioned that effective learning programs also enhances the
efficiencies of employees and thereby, it helps employees to deal with consumers in the most
effective manner and eventually respond to customers’ queries in a timely manner. For
example, in order to enhance and present a great level of employee performance, the

9ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
organization Emirates provides respective learning programs for its customer service.
Employees are trained with contemporary social languages; so that the customer executive
can understand customers and their queries (Litz and Scott 2017). Consequently, none of
Emirates’ customers ever filled complaints about customer service. Thus, Navimipour and
Soltani (2016) mentioned that training is an essential element and imperative too for the
organization to revamp the performance of all individuals in organisational goals and success.
Thus, it can be mentioned that employee learning programs are important for both
organisation and employees of the organisation.
Evaluation of how working in teams can improve employee effectiveness
Identifying teamwork is significantly critical context for research, as there have been
a large number of businesses today are applying this teamwork methods to enhance the
overall performance of both employees and organisation. In this context, Agarwal and
Adjirackor (2016) commented that incentives or the benefits of the teamwork for the
organization are often tricky. Scholars state the fact that teamwork is a distinguishable or a
respective set of two or more individuals who dynamically and interdependently interact
toward a valued objective or goals of membership. In order to measure the effectiveness of
teamwork on employee effectiveness, there have been a set of theories and models but
Tuckman’s team development theory. Tuckman offered a four stage framework
transformed into a well-recognized for its stages called ‘forming, norming, storming and
performing in stages (Natvig and Stark 2016). Such stages today are referred as the most
idealised and these might have considerable face validity as the most general occurrence.
Tuckman claims that in order to reflect effectiveness on employees’ effectiveness
there have to be proper ways in which a team could tackle a task from initial information of
the team through to the accomplishment of the project. For example, the first stage of
Tuckman team development model talks about forming in which team is assembled and task

10ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
is allocated and here the team members tend to behave independently and even though
goodwill may exist they do not know each other effectively to unconditionally trust one
another (Sanyal and Hisam 2018). Likewise, in the second stage which is storming enables
the employees end up building the relationship with the team members or it can be broken
into different phases. Here, the team can be significantly focused on consensus, they can
make and decide on the plan and thereby the work is processed and implemented.
The significance of trust in team effectiveness is significant and the relation is
positive as well as added that behavioural basis of teamwork is warranted by trust and
outcome of synergy in the business or the organization. As put forward by Hanaysha (2016),
here trust ability is significantly originated from competencies and self-knowledge. Thus, it
must be developed through the members of the team whose competencies can be different
and accumulated. Most importantly, when the employees are working in a team, interpersonal
skulks are something that are highly needed. It is worth stating that interpersonal skills
significantly influence the performance of the employees and it also contributes to identifying
the determinants of a successful career of individual employee. It can be mentioned that such
skills help to increase productivity and minimise conflicts, a positive skills need be existing
among the employees. Thus, it can be mentioned that effectiveness of teamwork is found
both in individual success and overall organisational success (Hanaysha and Tahir 2016).
Task 2:
Evaluating different leadership behaviour theories
When it comes to leadership behaviour, behaviour is one such element that needs to
be analysed separately. According to Burnes and Cooke (2013), behaviour is a series of
actions and mannerism, system or artificial entities remains in conjunction with the
environment, which includes a set of system or organism in the physical environment. In

11ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
general, it can be mentioned that human behaviour significantly refers to a series of
behaviours demonstrated by humans and which are significantly influenced by culture,
attitude, emotions, values, authority and genetics. So when these two are amalgamated,
behaviour theory of leadership can consider some observable actions and reactions of leaders
in a particular situations (Tannenbaum, Weschler and Massarik 2013). It is noted that
behaviour theories fundamentally revolve around how leaders behave and so can be assumed
that how leaders should behave. In this context, Odumeru and Ogbonna (2013) mentioned
that leadership behaviour theories often help the managers to evaluate and understand how
the behavioural style as manager can affect their relationship with the team and promote the
commitment and contribution towards the organisational goals and objectives. Thus, theory
of leadership behaviour helps the managers to find out the appropriate balance between
different styles of leadership.
Nonetheless, it is observed that when it comes to leadership behavioural theories,
scholars usually focus on abstract concept of leadership instead of sticking to one particular
theory of behavioural leadership. It is observed that there are a number of behavioural
leadership theories that are often found in scholarly debates. Although there is a long list of
behavioural leadership but participative or democratic leadership often appears as the context
because there have been many global organizations that tend to implement democratic
leadership theories. As put forward by Ghasabeh, Soosay and Reaiche (2015), democratic
leadership theory suggests that democratic leaders are the one who consult their entire team
when taking managerial decisions or any methods for achieving team’s goals and objectives.
It has also been identified that the most relevant fact of behavioural leadership is that this
theory significantly enable the team to take advantages of everyone’s strengths. It is also
noted that individual voice of all team members are always considered. Creativity of each
individual member in the team is often considered and the approach provides an avenue for

12ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
new leaders to demonstrate their abilities for every individual to leverage the most of each
member’s strength.
Trait theory:
Amanchukwu, Stanley and Ololube (2015) stated the fact that born leaders were often
endowed with specific physical trait and personality characteristics which differentiated them
from non-leaders and the trait theories ignored the assumption regarding whether leadership
traits are genetic or acquired. De Silva et al. (2014) mentioned that there are two different set
of traits such emergent trait –such as the ones that enormously dependent on heredity. This
could include intelligence, charisma, and attractiveness, while other trait is completely
dependent upon the learning and personal experience. In the context of trait theory, Van Wart
(2014) mentioned that trait theory of leadership is kind of prior assumption that leaders are
born and due to their beliefs, they hold right synergies of quality and traits that are better
suited to leadership. Thus, it can be mentioned that trait theory can help to identify
behavioural characteristics that are general or common among the leaders across the globe.
However, as the use of behavioural leadership in business are relatively wide and there is a
long list of trait associated with leadership trait such as knowledge of the businesses,
initiative, tenacity, energy, flexibility and other emotional intelligence. Nonetheless, it is
argumentative that leadership characteristics state the fact that some people are considered to
be ‘born leaders’ because of their psychological makeup.
Contingency Theory
Unlike trait theory, theories of contingency suggests that no leadership style remains
precise as the stand-alone because the leadership style used significantly dependent upon
quality, situation as well as the number of other variables. Tannenbaum, Weschler and
Massarik (2013) mentioned that principles of contingency theories state the fact that there is

13ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
no single or right way of leading because both the internal and external dimensions of the
environment may require the managers or the leaders to incorporate particular situation. In
this context, Ghasabeh, Soosay and Reaiche (2015) argued that the fact that in most of the
cases, leaders not only change the dynamics and environment, but also the employees within
the organizational change; thereby, it can be mentioned that contingency theory is widely
similar to the behavioural theories and characteristics of this theory state that there cannot be
any specific or one finest way of leading the business or the organisation. Furthermore, it has
also been identified that contingency theories often end up making a belief that the leader is
the fundamental focus of leader-subordinate relationship and here situational theorists also
believe that subordinate also played a great role in defining the relationship. It is also found
that even though the theorist put emphasis mostly upon the leaders but it generates the
significance of focus into a set of group dynamics. Beside the contingency theory, situational
leadership theory also state the fact that theory of situational leadership proposes the style of
leadership should be in relation to the maturity of the subordinates.
Style and behaviour theory:
Style and behavioural theory acknowledge the significance of some particular
leadership skills that stand the enablers for an individual leader who performs an act but
simultaneously considers the existing abilities and capacities of the leader (Nixon,
Harrington, and Parker 2012). The principle of this style and behavioural leadership state the
fact that each individual must have or hold distinctive leadership styles. Hence,
Amanchukwu et al. (2015) argued that employees serving with democratic approach of
leadership often show a greater level of satisfaction and motivation. Such leadership create an
environment where each individual work with higher level of enthusiasm. There are three
different elements associated with this leadership such as a greater level of satisfaction,
creativity and motivation. Hence, Amanchukwu, Stanley and Ololube (2015) argued that

14ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
laissez faire leadership style can also be relevant while leading a team of highly skilled and
motivated people who have high track record prior to the present state of leadership.
However, it can be mentioned that when it comes to style and behaviour theory, autocratic,
democratic and laissez faire are top three leadership style that are often taken into
consideration.
Transactional Theory
Transactional leadership developed to diverge from some particular perspectives of
the leader, leadership context, followers the practice that pay attention to the exchange
between the followers and leaders. In this context, Amanchukwu, Stanley and Ololube (2015)
mentioned that transactional leadership has both active and positive exchange between
leaders and followers. It can be mentioned that transactional leadership stat the fact that
leaders mostly focus on flaws, avoid decisions and delay decision. It has also been identified
that such attitude remained ‘management by exception and can be categorised as passive or
active transaction. Nonetheless, here the difference lies in the timing of leaders’ involvement.
It is also noted that leader significantly monitors the performance and attempts to intervene
proactively. Ghasabeh, Soosay and Reaiche (2015) argued that transactional leadership is
often compared with transformational leadership but transactional leadership fundamentally
depends upon on self-motivated people who just work effectively in a structural manner.
It is also noted that transformational leadership tries to motivate and inspire the
individuals; hence, choosing the influence instead of directing others. It is also found that
transactional leaders just focus on the outcomes in relation to the existing structure of the
business and it helps to measure the success in relation to organisation’s reward and
penalties. It is also found that transactional leaders hold the formal authority and positions of
responsibility in an organization. Thus, it can be mentioned that such kind of leadership are

15ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
held accountable for maintaining a routine by managing individual performance and
facilitating group performance. In this context, Amanchukwu, Stanley and Ololube (2015)
mentioned that such kind of leadership develops the criteria for the workers to define and
state the requirements. Hence, leaders must have to pay a great role because leaders that work
best with the employees can best know their jobs and motivated by the reward-penalty
system.
Transformational theory of leadership:
As mentioned by Ghasabeh, Soosay and Reaiche (2015), transformational leadership
theory is little different from others or rest of the contemporary theories. It is noted that
transformational leaders tend to increase the motivation and morality of both the follower and
the leader and it is considered that transformational leaders involve in interaction with the
audiences based on the common beliefs and goals. So, it can be mentioned that the same can
significantly influence the performance of the leading to the attainment of the goal. It has also
been identified that transformational leaders make attempts of inducing the followers to
rearrange their needs by converting the self-interest and even strive for the higher needs.
Hence, Van Wart (2014) arguably mentioned the fact that transformational leaders is kin of a
course that change and approach the target on beliefs, values and attitude which significantly
enlighten the leaders’ practice and capacity of leading the change. It has also been identified
that under the transformational; leadership style, followers and leaders are set aside the
personal interest for the benefit of the group; hence the leader is often asked to supervise or
take care of the followers’ need to convert every individual into a leader by empowering and
motivating them. In most of the cases, a great level of emphasis has been put upon different
level of leadership theories, in which ethical element of leadership distinguishes the
transformational leadership theory. Thus, it can be mentioned that such leadership helps to
gain agreement and commitment of others by creating a particular vision which guides the

16ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
change. However, transformational leaders are always a step ahead in relation to treating its
subordinates individually and pursing to enhance their consciousness, morale and skills.
Moreover, transformational leaders are known for grading their relationship with the
followers very high in priority and it demonstrates individualised consideration in satisfying
their needs for empowerment, achievement and levels of self-efficacy.
Great-Man Theory
It is noted that efforts towards the exploration of similar traits of leadership is found all across
centuries because most cultures need a man who is skilled and talented to define and achieve
their success and eventually justify the failures. In this context, Odumeru and Ogbonna
(2013) mentioned that most effective leaders are born and these men are endowed with great
potential to become the leader. If the great leaders are not born great, rather they are most
influenced by their external activities, elements and the situation of other individuals. Earlier
leadership was particularly considered as the quality associated mostly with male leaders and
thereby theory was named after the great man theory. However, it can be mentioned that
Great Man theory is broadly criticised due to its biasness towards male executives or male
leaders.
Analyse theories relating to work relationships and interactions
Generally, it can be mentioned that leadership theories are highly effective in
organisational or business context because organisational activities are governed by the
leaders. This can be well understood with the real world work practices. Behavioural leaders
are seen to be the most preferred guide for employees. For example it is worth mentioning
that behavioural theory often considers behavioural and observable actions and reactions of
leaders which further influence the followers or the audiences in a particular workplace
situation. It can also be mentioned that leaders’ behaviour can significantly affect their

17ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
performance and thereby different leadership behaviour can be appropriate at different times
in a workplace. Thereby, it can be mentioned that best or effective leadership are those that
hold the adaptability to match their behavioural style. Thus, the most effective style
leadership can be chosen for the situation. It is noted that Style and Behavioural theory of
leadership talk about democratic leadership style and here democratic leadership style create
the scope for involving all employees and individuals in the group or team when taking or
implementing the managerial or organisational decisions. So, with the implementation of
such actions, it is noted that employees can feel motivated and encouraged and they remain
loyal to their organizations. On the contrary, autocratic leadership style is little different than
the democratic leadership style in which all employees are not involved in the decision-
making. Work decisions or all managerial decisions are taken and controlled directly from
supervisors, executives and directors. Hence, directors, senior executives and managers
mostly take the decisions and here employees’ involvement are hardly considered.
On the contrary, trait theory when considered with real-world working relationship, it
is found that leaders’ personality and characteristics can differentiate the individual from
others. For example, an individual can be highly motivated, skilled and has outstanding
communication skills and thereby, such individual can definitely influence others. An
individual with greater level of communication skills can effectively understand the problems
in the workplace. Likewise, some individuals in the workplaces are visionary in nature and
they can effectively foresee the issues that are coming. Such difference made the individuals
different from others and they end up becoming great leaders.
On the contrary, contingency theory when compared to real-world facts and findings,
it is noted that leaders or the individual hold a great level of skills and expertise that influence
or help them to become leaders. The quality, situation and followers can also make the
individual deserving as a leader. It is worth mentioning that such leadership style does not

18ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
have any proper or significant way of managing or leading the organisation. This means if the
followers or the other individuals working in the workplace demand or want an individual to
be their leader or if the selected individual is accepted by the audiences or the followers.
Conversely, transformational leaders are relatively different than other stated leadership when
it comes to bringing them in practice. Transformational leadership talk about a great deal of
communication and interaction between the followers and leaders. Hence, the leaders must
have to take care of the self-actualisation needs. Leaders’ involvement in organisational
practice, particularly in employees’ activities are relatively high. Moreover, transformational;
leaders, in practice show a level of individualised consideration in meeting their needs for
empowerment, achievement and enhanced level of self-efficacy. Odumeru and Ogbonna
(2013) argued that transformational leaders are innovative in nature and thereby, the leaders
do no embrace all of the factors that are significantly related to innovation.
However, it should be mentioned that leaders’ behaviour should be dynamic in nature when it
comes to handling people or the organisational environment as a whole. This means every
leader should understand the fact that external market environment has been dynamic. Market
needs and demands are changing rapidly; thereby, a rigid attitude of leaders can effectively
affect the whole operation. Moreover, a rigid behaviour can also be the reason for employees’
laidback attitude towards the organizational goals and responsibilities. Nixon, Harrington and
Parker (2012) mentioned the fact that apart from the defined principle of leadership, leaders
should be open to all sort of external and internal changes. Such dynamic or changing nature
should be there in the leaders because market environment in all sector has been tightly
intense.
Task 3: Presentation with accompanying notes
Refer to PPT

19ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR

20ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
References
Agarwal, S. and Adjirackor, T., 2016. Impact of teamwork on organizational productivity in
some selected basic schools in the Accra metropolitan assembly. European Journal of
Business, Economics and Accountancy, 4(6), pp.40-52.
Amanchukwu, R.N., Stanley, G.J. and Ololube, N.P., 2015. A review of leadership theories,
principles and styles and their relevance to educational management. Management, 5(1),
pp.6-14.
Amanchukwu, R.N., Stanley, G.J. and Ololube, N.P., 2015. A review of leadership theories,
principles and styles and their relevance to educational management. Management, 5(1),
pp.6-14.
Bano, M., Zowghi, D. and Sarkissian, N., 2016. Empirical study of communication structures
and barriers in geographically distributed teams. IET software, 10(5), pp.147-153.
Stverkova, H. and Pohludka, M., 2018. Business organisational structures of global
companies: Use of the territorial model to ensure long-term growth. Social Sciences, 7(6),
p.98.
Betts, S. and Healy, W., 2015. Having a ball catching on to teamwork: an experiential
learning approach to teaching the phases of group development. Academy of Educational
Leadership Journal, 19(2), p.1.
Burnes, B. and Cooke, B., 2013. K urt L ewin's Field Theory: A Review and Re‐
evaluation. International journal of management reviews, 15(4), pp.408-425.
Caligiuri, P. and Tarique, I., 2012. Dynamic cross-cultural competencies and global
leadership effectiveness. Journal of world Business, 47(4), pp.612-622.

21ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
Carlström, E.D. and Ekman, I., 2012. Organisational culture and change: implementing
person‐centred care. Journal of health organization and management.
Cosh, A., Fu, X. and Hughes, A., 2012. Organisation structure and innovation performance in
different environments. Small Business Economics, 39(2), pp.301-317.
De Silva, M.J., Breuer, E., Lee, L., Asher, L., Chowdhary, N., Lund, C. and Patel, V., 2014.
Theory of change: a theory-driven approach to enhance the Medical Research Council's
framework for complex interventions. Trials, 15(1), p.267.
Doz, Y., 2016. Managing multinational operations: from organisational structures to mental
structures and from operations to innovations. European Journal of International
Management, 10(1), pp.10-24.
Elçi, M., Şener, İ., Aksoy, S. and Alpkan, L., 2012. The impact of ethical leadership and
leadership effectiveness on employees’ turnover intention: The mediating role of work
related stress. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 58, pp.289-297.
Fowler, A., 2013. Striking a balance: A guide to enhancing the effectiveness of non-
governmental organisations in international development. Routledge.
Ghasabeh, M.S., Soosay, C. and Reaiche, C., 2015. The emerging role of transformational
leadership. The Journal of Developing Areas, 49(6), pp.459-467.
Green, T.J., 2012. TQM and organisational culture: how do they link?. Total Quality
Management & Business Excellence, 23(2), pp.141-157.
Hanaysha, J. and Tahir, P.R., 2016. Examining the effects of employee empowerment,
teamwork, and employee training on job satisfaction. Procedia-Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 219, pp.272-282.

22ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
Hanaysha, J., 2016. Examining the effects of employee empowerment, teamwork, and
employee training on organizational commitment. Procedia-Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 229(298-306), pp.298-306.
Huhtala, M., Feldt, T., Hyvönen, K. and Mauno, S., 2013. Ethical organisational culture as a
context for managers’ personal work goals. Journal of Business Ethics, 114(2), pp.265-282.
Laein, R.P., Rashidi, S. and Esfahani, J.A., 2016. Experimental investigation of nanofluid
free convection over the vertical and horizontal flat plates with uniform heat flux by
PIV. Advanced Powder Technology, 27(2), pp.312-322.
Lewis, M.A. and Brown, A.D., 2012. How different is professional service operations
management?. Journal of Operations Management, 30(1-2), pp.1-11.
Litz, D. and Scott, S., 2017. Transformational leadership in the educational system of the
United Arab Emirates. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 45(4),
pp.566-587.
Mäkimattila, M., Saunila, M. and Salminen, J., 2014. Interaction and innovation-reframing
innovation activities for a matrix organization. Interdisciplinary Journal of Information,
Knowledge, and Management, 9, pp.131-152.
Manzoor, Q.A., 2012. Impact of employees motivation on organizational
effectiveness. Business management and strategy, 3(1), pp.1-12.
Mizutani, F., Smith, A., Nash, C. and Uranishi, S., 2015. Comparing the costs of vertical
separation, integration, and intermediate organisational structures in European and East Asian
railways. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy (JTEP), 49(3), pp.496-515.
Natvig, D. and Stark, N.L., 2016. A project team analysis using Tuckman's model of small-
group development. Journal of Nursing Education, 55(12), pp.675-681.

23ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
Navimipour, N.J. and Soltani, Z., 2016. The impact of cost, technology acceptance and
employees' satisfaction on the effectiveness of the electronic customer relationship
management systems. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, pp.1052-1066.
Navimipour, N.J. and Zareie, B., 2015. A model for assessing the impact of e-learning
systems on employees’ satisfaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, pp.475-485.
Nixon, P., Harrington, M. and Parker, D., 2012. Leadership performance is significant to
project success or failure: a critical analysis. International Journal of productivity and
performance management.
Odumeru, J.A. and Ogbonna, I.G., 2013. Transformational vs. transactional leadership
theories: Evidence in literature. International Review of Management and Business
Research, 2(2), p.355.
Pinho, J.C., Rodrigues, A.P. and Dibb, S., 2014. The role of corporate culture, market
orientation and organisational commitment in organisational performance. Journal of
Management Development.
Sanyal, S. and Hisam, M.W., 2018. The impact of teamwork on work performance of
employees: A study of faculty members in Dhofar University. IOSR Journal of Business and
Management, 20(3), pp.15-22.
Schnetler, R., Steyn, H. and van Staden, P.J., 2015. Characteristics of matrix structures, and
their effects on project success. South African Journal of Industrial Engineering, 26(1),
pp.11-26.
Seck, M.M. and Helton, L., 2014. Faculty development of a joint MSW program utilizing
Tuckman's model of stages of group development. Social Work with Groups, 37(2), pp.158-
168.

24ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
Shahzadi, I., Javed, A., Pirzada, S.S., Nasreen, S. and Khanam, F., 2014. Impact of employee
motivation on employee performance. European Journal of Business and
Management, 6(23), pp.159-166.
Steiber, A. and Alänge, S., 2013. Do TQM principles need to change? Learning from a
comparison to Google Inc. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 24(1-2),
pp.48-61.
Stensaker, B. and Vabø, A., 2013. Re‐inventing shared governance: Implications for
organisational culture and institutional leadership. Higher Education Quarterly, 67(3),
pp.256-274.
Tannenbaum, R., Weschler, I. and Massarik, F., 2013. Leadership and organization (RLE:
organizations): A behavioural science approach. Routledge.
Teamah, M.A., Dawood, M.M.K. and Shehata, A., 2016. Numerical and experimental
investigation of flow structure and behavior of nanofluids flow impingement on horizontal
flat plate. Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science, 74, pp.235-246.
Teamah, M.A., Ibrahim, M.K., Khairat Dawood, M.M. and Aleem, E.A., 2012. Experimental
investigation for hydrodynamic flow due to obliquely free circular water jet impinging on
horizontal flat plate. European Journal of Scientific Research, 83(1), pp.60-75.
Van Wart, M., 2014. Dynamics of leadership in public service: Theory and practice.
Routledge.