Organisational Behaviour Report: LG Corporation Case Study Analysis

This report provides a comprehensive analysis of organisational behaviour within LG Corporation. It explores the influence of culture, politics, and power on employee behaviour and organisational performance. The report delves into Handy’s Model of culture, examining power, role, task, and person-based cultures within LG. It also analyses the various sources of power, including legitimate, reward, coercive, expert, information, and referent power, and how they impact the workplace. Furthermore, the report evaluates motivational theories, such as Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs and Vroom’s Expectancy Theory, to understand how individuals and teams are motivated to achieve goals within LG. Teamwork dynamics are examined through Tuckman’s Team Development Model, highlighting the stages of forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning. Finally, the report discusses the philosophy and concepts of organisational behaviour, providing a holistic view of the subject matter within the context of LG Corporation. The report aims to offer insights into how LG can manage operational and management issues related to individual employees, teams, and overall organizational behaviour.

Student Name:
Student ID:
Unit/Module: Organisational Behaviour
Programme:
_______________________________________________________

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3
LO 1.................................................................................................................................................3
Influence of politics, culture and power in LG............................................................................3
LO 2.................................................................................................................................................5
Motivational theories for attaining goals in LG..........................................................................5
LO 3.................................................................................................................................................7
Teamwork and development theories in LG...............................................................................7
LO 4.................................................................................................................................................8
Philosophy and concept of organisational behaviour..................................................................8
CONCLUSION..............................................................................................................................10
REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................11

INTRODUCTION
Organisational behaviour refers to the study of the way employees behave in the
organisational settings and the interface between where employees perform in the company roles
and affects various in relation to organisational structures, social systems and technology
(McShane and Glinow, 2017). LG electronics is a south Korean company that operates globally
and has its headquarters in Seoul. South Korea. The products offered by the multinational
company are business units such as Mobile and communications, Home entertainment,
Electronic appliances, vehicle components and air solutions. This report to the CEO will focus
upon the given case study of organisational management and behaviour related issues of LG
corporation. The report will consist of analysis of the influence of culture, politics and power on
the behaviour of others in LG and evaluation of ways of motivation for individuals and teams to
achieve goals. The report will also highlight team work theories and effectiveness of co-
operation along with concepts and philosophies that impact organisational behaviour.
LO 1
Influence of politics, culture and power in LG
Organization behavior primarily consists of culture, politics and power that directly and
indirect affect the working environment and organizational performance of LG corporation. In
order to understand how LG can manage its operational and management issues of individual
employees, teams and overall organizational behavior the three elements will be evaluated using
theories (McShane and Glinow, 2017).
Organizational Culture
As per Handy’s Model of culture, the culture of LG corporation can be divided into
various divisions of culture like power, role, task and person.
 Power: In a power culture, the power remains with just a handful of individuals that tend
to influence the entire company. The are limited rules, regulations and minimal
bureaucracy where swift decisions are possible. The concentration of power among few
individuals tends to control that radiates from the center. Employees are evaluated
according to their achievements rater than the way they do it (Kurniadinata, 2020).
 Role: Such organizations will role culture are established and operated on the basis of
strict rules which are highly rigid and controlled. In such companies all employees are
3

known by their responsibilities and roles where the person’s position tends to determine
the authority and power a person showcases. It portrays hierarchical bureaucracy, little
scope for expert power and the entire company has highly defined structure with all
employees having delegated authorities.
 Task: In a task-based culture, teams are formed on the basis of the particular needs,
requirements and progress made on projects or problems. In such cultures the power
keeps shifting on the status pf the problems. There is no single source of power and teams
tend to develop own objectives (Kurniadinata, 2020).
 Person: In a person-based culture, employees consider themselves superior and unique in
organizational context and company simply exists for working. Business is full of expert
power and individuals with experience and skills run the company.
Organizational Power:
In the organizations, the power used to influence people and processes that impacts
organizational behavior can be categorized into six sources or bases of power:
 Legitimate power: This power comes from the authority assigned to the person by the
company on the basis of the role and responsibility. Which is used for influencing people.
 Reward power: This power grants the ability of the power holder to give rewards to other
team members on the basis of a job assignment or excellent performance (Alapo, 2018).
 Coercive power: Such power allows the power holder to punish non-performing
employees and works through fear. It is based on punishments for non-compliance.
 Expert power: such power arises from knowledge, skill and experience and are possessed
by long-term employees that motivate the organization through their expertise and team
members follow them.
 Information power: Such power holders tend to have access to information and things
liked contacts and social networks that may help in the operations of the company.
 Referent power: this power comes from the attitude, personality and characteristics of the
person which tends to influence other team members to follow the lead by mere charisma
of the leader (Alapo, 2018).
Organizational Politics:
The presence of workplace politics is quite common in most corporations due to the
human nature and want for influence, power and progression in career. It consists of the
4

processes and behavior involved in human interactions with power and authority. It can also be
previewed as a tool to analyze the operational capacities and for balancing diverse views of
various parties. Employees tend to gain personal advantages by indulging in politics as it is a
self-serving behavior with the aim to obtain positive outcomes and include access to assets and
intangible benefits such as status, pseudo authority which affects other team manager or
subordinate behavior. The positive effects include portrayal of professional image, publicity of
accomplishments, volunteering for work etc., Major negative effects are rumors, malpractices to
persona gain, withholding information or miscommunication (Buchanan and Badham, 2020.).
LO 2
Motivational theories for attaining goals in LG
Content theories of motivation are based on the what of motivation and is established on
the basis of acquiring things they may need, while understanding wants and need can explain
how people are motivated. This includes Maslow’s need for hierarchy, Hertzberg’s two factor
theory, McClelland’s theory of needs etc.
Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs
This theory explains that all humans tend to share specific needs which has a hierarchy or
a level from the most basic necessities to searching the purpose of life. It showcases the human
perspective and acts as a ladder for needs from which the source of motivation can be evaluated.
 Physiological needs: It explains the most basic necessities of life which includes survival
elements such as physical needs of food, water, sleep and shelter which have to be
fulfilled before anything else motivates people.
 Safety needs: After a person has fulfilled his physiological needs, the person yearns for a
stable job that includes physical and emotional security, the housing needs, job security,
financial stability, health and well-being etc (Guo and et.al., 2019).
 Social belonging: After a person has achieved stability in life, the pursuit of socialisation
and other relationships and presence of certain emotional needs are focussed upon by the
individual. These include social belongingness, relationships of family, friendships and
overall acceptance and recognition as human beings are social animals.
5

 Self-esteem: Once the person ahs met all social acceptance, job stability and security
needs, the person yearns for self-esteem through status, respect and recognition in the
society and organisation.
 Self-actualisation: The final level of need as per the theory states that after achieving all
the four things in life, the person has satisfied the ego and start yearning for their ultimate
aim that is self-actualisation and transcendence through spirituality, altruism etc (Guo and
et.al., 2019).
Process theory of motivation concentrates on the how of motivation and focus on the
psychological and other behaviour-based process that employees may follow and involves the
understanding of contexts, actions and interactions. Examples include Skinner’s reinforcement
theory, Vroom’s expectancy model, Adam’s equity theory.
Vroom’s expectancy theory
This process theory states that the motivation in an individual is affected by the value
they place in rewards that are associated with actions or valence, the amount of efforts they put
to generate better outcomes or expectancy and what good they believe for generation of
outcomes that will result in rewards or instrumentality. In simple terms motivation = valence +
instrumentality + expectancy (Patil, 2020).
 Valence: The importance that employees might place upon the expected outcomes. For a
positive valence, the employee should prefer accomplishing results to not attaining it. Is
an employee is motivated by money, the he or she might not value any other incentives.
 Expectancy: This element explains that if higher efforts are put into work and tasks then
the productivity will be better. It gets impacted by the availability of resources, skills and
necessary support.
 Instrumentality: This is the belief that if employees will perform well, then the results
they receive will be valuable. The intensity of a positive result will even lead to another
positive result is the basic aim of this element. It is ruled by the rewards game (Patil,
2020).
6

LO 3
Teamwork and development theories in LG
As per the case study, I can observe that in organisations like LG corporation, people
work both individually and in teams. When it comes to team, they are the group of people that
share a common objective and are mutually committed regarding the attainment and working
through collaboration and coordination. Groups are the collection of individuals that tend to
coordinate their individual efforts to achieve personal goals (Gaikwad Santosh, 2020).
I can describe effective team as the one which tends to understand the objectives and
goals properly which is acceptable by all members. The decision making is democratic and
everyone participates in the discussion. All the members listen to each other and contribute
equally. Whenever there are any conflicts, the team aims to arrive at a resolution by hearing
both the sides and never avoids the conflicts. The leadership is not dominating, here is
opportunity for self-evaluation, proper division of labour according to strengths and weaknesses
and decision making is done through general consensus (Gaikwad Santosh, 2020). However, I
can say that in case of an ineffective team, the team members are unclear regarding their goals
and objectives, a few members try to dominate the entire discussion and contributions are
unequal and oof the point. The ideas are ignored and team members don’t listen to one another,
The disagreements are not deal with effectively and supressed which leads to open warfare. The
decision making of not effectives as premature decisions are taken without analysing everything.
The leadership is centralised wit any real leadership skills being portrayed by the leader and
there is no clarity on self-evaluation. The tasks are not assigned appropriately and improper
division of labour is noted (Jones, 2019).
Teamwork theory: Tuckman’s Team and group development model
I can describe the team behaviour and work conducted in the LG corporation on the basis of
Tuckman’s model. There are five stages to this model that is required for an effective team to
develop and grow:
 Formation: In this phase, the employees of LG corporation tend to know each other
through induction and orientation processes and understand each other formally by
knowing basic views, information and strengths and weaknesses. Employees tend to
7

avoid conflicts and play nice due to the want for acceptance in the group. Leaders have to
ensure proper orientation and introduction (Natvig and Stark, 2016).
 Storming: At this phase, employees start feeling safer and ted to push their boundaries
and certain conflicts might start erupting. Clashes because of differences in opinions,
personalities and lifestyle lead to irritation and resentments within teams. Leaders have to
ensure effective conflict resolution.
 Norming: In this phase, team members agree on the plans, timelines and role assignments
according to their expertise and skills. They start developing trust and socialising and
leader is advised to coach rather than direct.
 Performance: The objectives and goals become stable and clear and the team start
performing without any major conflicts and minimal supervision. The differences in
perspectives are deemed valuable and leader is advised to delegate, maintain vision and
celebrate achievements.
 Adjourning: This stage signifies the wrapping up of the task and breaking up of the team.
The good leader is observed to be quite helpful to team members in panning their future
and retain their learning s from the task (Jones, 2019).
LO 4
Philosophy and concept of organisational behaviour
I can describe that organisational behaviour is based on certain foundational concepts that
revolving around organisational and people’ nature. these are motivated behaviour, perception,
individual differences, mutuality of interest, human dignity, whole person, desire for
involvement, social system, holistic concept, value of the person.
Individuals tend to be unique in their own ways and different from one another as per
physiology and psychology. Perceptions of these different individuals are also variant as they
view or interpret things, opinions and ideas in different manner as per their past experience,
demographic factors, personalities and needs. All employees are whole persons and are not
detached from their personal lives while working (Chumg and et.al., 2016). Employees need
motivation on a regular basis that satisfies their needs in order to perform well which enrich the
quality of work. They also have desires to get involved in decision-making problems and giving
opinions and suggestions. The employees need to feel valued as a person rather than an
8

economic tool and need respect, recognition and dignity. Companies liked LG are social systems
and have social roles and status which are influenced by groups. They also have a human
purpose and employees view companies as a means for attaining their goals while companies
also do the same. When all the concepts are amalgamated together, it leads to a holistic concept
(Wood and et.al., 2016).
Path goal theory of leadership
This theory is based on the principle that particularities associated with leaders’ style and
behaviour will be effective to attain objectives whenever implemented in the organisation’s work
environment. There are four styles of leadership that can be implemented in LG corporation as
per the theory:
 Directive path goal: In this type of behaviour portrayed by the leader, the leaders lets the
workers and other employees for understanding the expectations that the leader have for
them and according conduct directing functions for instigating them to become
productive and perform their tasks. This type of leadership style can be adopted in LG
corporation wherever the roles, assignments, goals and tasks are unclear (Phillips and
Phillips, 2016).
 Participative leader: In this style of leadership, the leader behaves in democratic manner
and always consults with the employees before taking any major decisions that would
impact operations, staff and overall working environment through change of
organisational policies, cost reductions, new service or product initiation. In situations
where employees are highly involved with their work, employee participation can be
effective leadership behaviour.
 Achievement behaviour: This leadership behaviour is practices in those circumstances in
which the objectives and achieving goals are deemed challenging and the company
expects high level performance. The leader focusses and encourages achievement of
targets through rewards and recognition and people are highly achievement oriented.
 Supportive leader: This leadership style is set for the initiation of satisfaction of
employees in context of needs, requirements, demands and preferences. The leaders
understand and coordinate with employees towards their overall well-being and provide
9

support in case of any problems. This highly motivates employees as their leaders help
them in distressful times (Basrie and Jatmikof, 2020).
CONCLUSION
From the above report it can be concluded that organisational behaviour is highly
significant aspect that LG corporation needs to inculcate in its workplace through evaluation of
how employees behave in the organisational settings and the interface between where employees
perform in the company roles. The influences of power, politics and culture upon LG was studies
using various models of Handy’s model, Power models and critical evaluation of organisational
politics. Motivational theories were described such as content theory of Maslow’s Hierarchical
needs and process theory of Vroom’s expectancy model. A reflective statement on the
application of teamwork theory of Tuckman was elaborated on LG corporation along with
understanding the differences between effective an ineffective team. The concept of OB was
evaluated and the path goal theory of leadership was described.
10

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Alapo, R., 2018. Organizational power politics and leadership experiences on the view and use
of power in organizations. Management, 6(1), pp.30-36.
Basrie, H. and Jatmikof, B., 2020. Leadership Comparison Model at Higher University:
Contingency Friendler Method; Path-Goal Theory Method and Harsey and Blanchard
Method. Leadership, 14(7).
Buchanan, D. and Badham, R., 2020. Power, politics, and organizational change. SAGE
Publications Limited.
Chumg, H.F., and et.al., 2016. Factors affecting employees' knowledge-sharing behaviour in the
virtual organisation from the perspectives of well-being and organisational
behaviour. Computers in Human Behavior, 64, pp.432-448.
Gaikwad Santosh, K., 2020. Factor Responsible For Effective and Ineffective Team in
Construction Projects.
Guo, J., and et.al., 2019, March. Evaluation of Maslows Hierarchy of Needs on Long-Term Use
of HMDs-A Case Study of Office Environment. In 2019 IEEE Conference on Virtual
Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR) (pp. 948-949). IEEE.
Jones, D., 2019. The Tuckman’s Model Implementation, Effect, and Analysis & the New
Development of Jones LSI Model on a Small Group. Journal of Management, 6(4).
Kurniadinata, D., 2020. The Influence of Personal Characteristics on the Employees’
Performance-an observation based on Charles Handy’s model.
McShane, S. and Glinow, M.A.V., 2017. Organizational behavior. McGraw-Hill Education.
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.
Patil, M., 2020. Victor Vroom’s Expectancy Theory of Motivation.
Phillips, A.S. and Phillips, C.R., 2016. Behavioral styles of path-goal theory: An exercise for
developing leadership skills. Management Teaching Review, 1(3), pp.148-154.
Wood, J.M., and et.al., 2016. Organisational behaviour: Core concepts and applications. John
Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.
11