Operational Efficiency Through Leadership at General Motors

This essay delves into the people and organizational management practices at General Motors (GM), examining the impact of leadership on employee behavior and performance. It critically discusses the significance of organizational structure and culture on operational efficiency, highlighting GM's agile structure and decentralized centralization strategy. The role of personality and values on work-life outcomes at GM is explored, alongside the importance of employee motivation. Leadership styles, such as those of Mary Barra and Dan Ammann, are analyzed using Fiedler's Contingency Model and the Leader-Member Exchange theory. The essay concludes by emphasizing the importance of charismatic leadership and a strong corporate culture in driving employee engagement and organizational success at General Motors. This document is available on Desklib, a platform offering study tools and resources for students.

Running head: PEOPLE AND ORGANIZATIONAL MANAGEMENT
People and Organizational Management
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author note:

1PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
Table of Contents
Introduction:....................................................................................................................................2
Assessing the impact of leadership on employee behavior and performance:................................3
Critical discussion on the significance of organizational structure and culture on the operational
efficiency: .......................................................................................................................................6
Discussing the role of personality and value on the work and life outcome of General Motors:. 13
Role of motivation on employee behavior and performance:.......................................................19
Conclusion:....................................................................................................................................25
References:....................................................................................................................................31

2PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
Introduction:
Extreme uncertainty in the market is acting as a driving force behind the companies to
rethink about their business process. This, in turn is putting extreme pressure on the companies
to restructure their business process in the attainment of their predetermined goals and
objectives. Kitchin (2017) commented that as the employees are solely responsible for improving
organizational process, it is imperative to assess their attitude and behavior towards the
workplace. There lies the significance of studying organizational behavior (OB). Organizational
behavior can be considered as the study of values and perception of the individual and group of
employees towards workplace. Effective organizational structure plays a significant role in
running an organization in a consistent manner.
According to Moerdyk et al. (2015) it is the prime responsibility of the managers of
corporate entities to study organizational behavior as it supports them to understand the attitude
of human resources in a better way. One of the greatest advantages of studying OB is that it
helps in generating motivation among the human resources. Clay-Williams and Braithwaite
(2015) highlighted that as believe and perception of the employees are different from each other,
studying OB can help them to apply appropriate motivational technique as per the nature of the
human resources.
Present paper will put forth the discussion of the management of people and organization
in the context of General Motors. This is one of the largest American multinational vehicle
manufacturers. This is currently operating their business in more than 30 countries across the
world. The total number of staffs of the company is 180,000 and as per the official report, the net
income of the company during 2017 is US$ -3.864 billion (Gm.com. 2018). Agile organizational

3PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
structure is being followed in General Motors, which is helping them to support the effort of the
staffs towards improving the organizational performance. Therefore, this organization has been
chosen in order to show how effective organizational behavior is supporting the company to be
the giant in the automobile industry.
Assessing the impact of leadership on employee behavior and performance:
Rapid development of globalization, technological advancement along with the inclusion
of free market process are playing a pivotal role in amplifying the competition in the global
level. This is also increasing the work stress on the companies. Renz (2016) stated that as they
the employees are the key factor in attaining success from business, effective leadership is
gaining extreme importance in terms of leading the employees towards proper direction.
Leadership can be defined as the process of guiding and leading individual as well as a certain
group of employees towards proper direction and thereby enable them to work with utmost
proficiency. As discussed by Bolden (2016) leadership is one of the most significant factors
towards amplifying the experience of the employees towards workplace.
Good leadership is highly imperative for introducing motivational factors for the
employees which is the key of strengthening work related commitment among them. There lies
the success factors of General Motor (GM) as the company is extremely committed to improve
motivation among the staffs by practicing proficient leadership. For instance, Mary T. Barra- the
CEO of GM is considered as one of the greatest leaders who has introduced zero crashes as well
as zero emission with the intention of making a healthier planet. Barra is highly focused on
improving the durability of the products. Under her democratic style of leadership, effective
training and development session has been introduced for the sake of enabling the staffs to adapt
high-end technology. In addition, Dan Ammann- the president of General Motors, is another

4PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
greatest leader of the organization. He is responsible for controlling the core business operation
of General Motor across the global level. Multiple strategies have been implemented by him in
order to strengthen the inner capability of the company and thereby improve its financial stability
(Gm.com. 2018).
Proactive leadership acts as a confidence boosting factor in an organization which is
highly significant of accelerating productivity of the company. Goetsch and Davis (2014)
observed that leaders such as Mary T. Barra and Dan Ammann play a major role in improving
the level of confidence among the employees of GM by providing them with multiple working
options and supporting them to run a self-directed team. Therefore, the leaders of General
Motors is holding a great style in order to create mission and vision among the staffs. As per the
Fiedler's Contingency Model of leadership, the style of leaders must be aligned with the
situation. This model has been developed during 1960 with the intention of showing the fact that
the trait of the leaders is the crucial factor in determining a group effectiveness. Fiedler has
developed a scale of least preferred coworker in order to indicate the behavior among the staffs
(Balon 2014).
Figure 1: Fiedler’s LPC Scale
(Source: Balon 2014)
As per this scale, the leaders with higher score are extremely interested towards
maintaining healthy relationship with the subordinates while the leaders with lower scale are
highly task oriented. There are several situational factor which according to Fiedler are major

5PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
factor in determining the durability of leadership. Buil et al. (2018) showed that Leader-
member relation is defined as the extent to which the group members of GM trust the leader
and follow his guidance. Position power is another vital factor, through which the leaders can
exercise their power in terms of guiding the staffs towards proper direction. One of the greatest
advantages of this framework is that it supports in exploring the best manager. As the
contemporary business environment is extremely volatile, flexibility in General Motors is very
much needed in adapting different situation. There lies the benefits of this model which highlight
leadership trait in accordance with different situation. However, Anitha (2014) argued by saying
that this model has been criticized due to the discussion of leaders with low LPC score. If any
company will find low LPC score within a leader, then it will immediate that leaders. Therefore,
there is no basis of discussion of the leaders. Contrarily, Buil et al. (2018) showed that this model
supports the managers along with the leaders to apply best tool, which can improve the group
performance.
According to the leader-member exchange theory, it is imperative to maintain healthy
relationship in between leaders and the members in order to lead them towards proper direction.
This theory focuses on maintaining vertical relationship in between the leaders and the group of
employees, which is the key of enabling the staffs to understand their roles and responsibilities.
In the context of General Motors, the staffs are being encouraged to run their self-directed team,
which acts as a greatest motivational factor for the staffs. This I the reason, for which the rate of
employee turnover is quite lower for the organization. In addition, the higher authority of GM is
highly committed towards providing reward among the employees based on the performance.
With the assistance of leader-member exchange theory, GM is becoming able to generate better

6PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
job attitude among the staffs. The way, through which the leaders of General Motors behave with
the staffs is one of the most significant factors in influencing the performance of the employees.
Trait, behavior and activity of a leader is a major factor in motivating a workforce. There
lies the importance of Charismatic Leadership which shades light on the fact that charming and
persuading characteristic of the leaders is highly significant factor in inspiring the subordinates.
As per the discussion of Herrmann and Felfe (2014) it can be said that this is the way, through
which emotional responses of the followers can also be triggered. Charismatic leadership is the
ability to boost motivation among the staffs and enable them to perform their assigned task with
utmost proficiency. Charismatic leaders demonstrate the level of willingness among the staffs to
take responsibility which is the key of achieving organizational goal and objectives.
Effective leadership style of GM is one greatest strength, with the assistance of which
they are getting immense success throughout the world. The enigmatic personality of Mary
Barra- the CEO and chairman of the company is playing a pivotal role in the way of amplifying
their inner functionality. She is extremely intended towards maintaining transparency with the
staffs and providing them with necessary information to the staffs for the sake of helping them to
understand their roles and responsibility. Mary Barra beliefs that allowing employees the
decision making process acts as a motivational factor by stimulating a sense of empowerment
among them (Forbes.com. 2018). At the same time, Barra also beliefs that the leaders hold the
responsibility of creating strong corporate culture which can generate positive behavior among
the staffs.

7PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
Critical discussion on the significance of organizational structure and culture
on the operational efficiency:
Organizational structure is one of the most important factors in running the internal
functionality of a company in a systematic manner. The structure of an organization is
responsible for setting the hierarchy of responsibility along with multiple communication level
within an organization. Therefore, organizational structure must be set up in such a manner
which can help in improving its productivity (Narman et al. 2016). The productivity of human
resources is largely dependent on the organizational structure. Therefore, incompetency within
the managerial structure can hamper the coordination between different departments which in
turn can affect the productivity. According to the observation of Horch (2018) effective
organizational structure can act as a significant tool, through which strong business related
decision can be initiated. In addition to that, proper organizational structure also results in
smooth flow of information throughout the organization. This is the way, through which an
effective channel of communication can be initiated which is very much needed to keep every
department informed about business process. Contrarily, negative organizational structure can
breakdown the level of communication in the organization (Alvesson 2016). Departmentalization
by product is one of the most significant strategy, followed by GM. This strategy supports the
individual department of the organization in accordance with their work, which is being
controlled by the senior management. Decentralized centralization strategy is being followed by
General Motors with the intention of buying a particular raw material from one particular
industry. This is the way, through which they are becoming able to handle their raw materials in
global level. Division of workers in accordance with their skill and ability is one of the greatest
strategies, followed in GM. The workers are being assembled in accordance with their

8PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
responsibility are any kind of pressure is not being put on them to work beyond their areas of
expertise. This acts as a motivational factor for the workers. A strict chain of command is being
followed throughout GM. However, as the contemporary business scenario is becoming highly
knowledge based, the notion of chain of command has become obsolete. Therefore, GM should
avoid following chain of command as it may create problem for them to generate positive
attitude among the staffs. With the assistance of this organizational structure, the functionality of
different departments can be synchronized appropriately in order to get desired outcome.
The ideas of employees are one of the most significant factors towards attaining success
from business. Thus healthy and effective organizational structure can have a firm impact on
supporting the staffs to generate innovative ideas. Promoting desired growth is also a crucial
outcome of strong and proactive organizational structure (Raman et al. 2014). Therefore, agile
structure of GM has been designed in such a manner which can help in aligning the growth along
with productivity of the company. This is the way, through which structural improvement can
also be carried out. There are multiple types of organizational structure which can influence as
well as affect the consistency of its inner functionality. This type of organizational culture helps
in addressing the issues in a timely manner. With the assistance of this organizational culture,
GM is becoming able to attain competitive advantage, through drastic innovation and healthy
relationship with the stakeholders. The senior management of GM is highly committed towards
aligning their goal and objective with that of the culture, in order to gain desired result. Through
this culture, freedom and opportunity are being offered among the staffs of General Motors for
the sake of promoting their career.
Simple organizational structure is defined as a default operating system which deals
with aligning the decision making process with that of the owners. This is a flat organizational

9PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
structure which serves the upper management with the ability to run the operational process
effectively. Su et al. (2018) showed that one of the greatest strength of this simple organizational
structure is that it makes it easy for the higher authority to have prompt control over the internal
process. This is the way, through which the employees of General Motors can interact directly
with the employers and thereby place their issues and grievances. Thus, the owners can take
decision accordingly to generate positive attitude among the staffs. With the assistance of this
simple organizational structure, the owners can take quick decision. However this structure has
been criticized on the ground that this structure increases work pressure on the owners as well as
the higher authority. Murray (2014) contended by saying that this structure creates restriction for
the other department to take any quick decision as it is extremely owner-oriented. This restricts
the staffs of General Motors to solve any critical issues without the approval of the owner.
In order to overcome the drawbacks of simple organizational structure, functional
organizational structure has been has been introduced in order to organize different activities of a
company around specific areas. This structure deals with process of standardization which is
very much needed in making necessary business related decision in a systematic manner.
According to Gupta (2017) this structure states the fact that the employees must be aligned
within a group in accordance with their skills and competencies which results in consistency in
different functional unit such as marketing department, HR department, and finance department.
One of the greatest advantages of this organizational structure is that it supports in high level of
specialization.
With the assistance of work specialization strategy, the employees of GM are becoming
able to work in accordance with their skills and competency level. This is also acting as a driving
for the employees take strong action to strengthen their inner skill and competency and thereby

10PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
promote sustainable growth in their career. This is the mode being followed in GM for
strengthening the productivity of the entire organization and so strengthen its position in the
market. Increasing skill is also acting as a motivational factor for the employees to work in a
dynamic workplace. Still, Dubey and Singhal (2016) argued by saying that poor coordination
and lack of communication across different functional units is the greatest disadvantage of this
type of organizational structure. This can hinder the speed of decision making process.
Additionally, this is a bureaucratic organizational structure which may lower the accountability
of functional units to each other.
Organizational structure is basically a framework which deals with different roles and
responsibilities of the individual department. Davies and Brown (2014) commented that as the
product is the core factor in attaining success from business, product-based organizational
structure is needed to be followed. This can be considered as the way of stressing individual
operational units for improving their efficiency. This is the way, through which the dedication
for improving the product line can also be generated among each of the functional unit. This
products-based organizational structure makes it easy for the companies to be flexible in the
highly volatile business environment. Thom and Wenger (2016) argued on the ground that lack
of consistency is the greatest disadvantage of this structure. As different functional unit works by
their own, this can prohibit the company to achieve predetermined goals and objectives.
Matrix organizational structure is the critical factor towards maintaining consistency in
between different department. Through this structure, the relationship in between different
department can be established as a matrix by avoiding merely the traditional hierarchy. This
structure helps in balancing between different functional units of an organization (Al Saifi 2015).
The strategy of two different chain of common is being followed in this type of organization.

11PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
One of the major positive aspects of this organizational structure is that it helps in sharing highly
skilled human resources in between different functional units which is extremely important for
the sake of acquiring long term success from business (Collins 2017). Open communication is
the major factor of this organizational structure which supports in ensuring smooth flow of skill
throughout the organization without any kind of obstruction. This results in extremely integrated
and dynamic organization (Zhu 2015).
The structure of an organization plays a significant role in making the human resource
skillful and knowledgeable. There lies the significance of matrix organizational structure, which
is being followed in General Motors. With the assistance of this structure, GM is becoming able
to n put the staffs of General Motors in such an environment, which facilitates in learning and
thereby provide the staffs with the opportunity to satisfy their career goal. In addition to that,
Willis (2017) opined that matrix organizational structure is also creating a strong pool of
resources for GM which is very much needed to promote sustainable growth of business.
Though, there are multiple managers in the matrix organizational structure which can hamper the
bottom line. This structure can also accelerate work related stress on the staffs which can
generate a negative vive among them (Shields et al. 2015).
As this structure is dynamic in both form and function, this can result in lack of stability
in the entire business process. This can also increase the psychological stress among the staffs.
Due to the rapid fluctuation of function, a conflict can be raised in the organization which can
affect its performance. Furthermore, matrix organizational structure does not deal with clear and
concise guideline related to the roles and responsibility of the employees. Thus can also raise
conflict inside the workplace which can hamper operational efficiency. Still, one of the major
advantages of this organizational structure is that it helps in designing the process in such a

12PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
manner which can align the objectives of project with that of functional goal. At the same time,
through this structure the organization, especially the small businesses can make use of limited
human resources which is very much needed for running business in a cost effective manner.
Additionally, Willis (2017) shows that clear and concise structure paves the way of improving
morale and work commitment among the staffs.
Organizing tasks in an appropriate manner is the key objective of organizational
structure. There lies the importance of mechanistic organizational structure which shows the
formal as well as strict organizational structure. Wheelen et al. (2017) observed that this structure
deals with division of job in accordance with the skills and competencies. This is the mode of
initiating high specialization of job which is very much needed in terms of coping up with the
intense competition in the market. The organization with this type of organizational structure is
highly dependent on the management to control their internal operation. However, Lasserre
(2017) contended on the ground that the inclusion of bureaucracy restricts the ability of
organizations to respond timely towards external market force. At the same time, rigid control as
well as job specialization over the employees also hampers creativity and thereby create firm
barrier for them to solve any impending issue through innovation. At the same time, making
group of employees in accordance with their function also results in interdepartmental isolation.
Still, this division among the employees on the basis of their functionality supports in cutting the
additional cost of supervision and thus run the business in a cost effective manner.
Unlike the formal organizational structure, organic organizational structure can be
defined as informal structure that with flexibility. The inclusion of flexibility is playing a major
role for General Motors to cope up with the volatile business environment. According to Aguinis
et al. (2017) decentralized decision making process, lower level of management and lower job

13PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
specialization are some of the major factors of organic organizational structure. Decentralization
of authority is the greatest aspect of organizational structure of GM, through which, the
company is initiating a strong decision making process. This also supports GM in ensuring
smooth flow of information across the organization which is the fundamental factor towards
keeping the staffs informed. This organizational structure of GM also serves the staffs with the
ability to interact directly with that of the management and thereby inform them about the issues
and achievement. This two way of communication can have a firm impact on solving any issue
in a timely manner (Wheelen et al. 2017).
Organic organizational structure puts ample stress on team work by dividing the tasks
into different group based on the nature of work. This is the way, through which organizational
goal is being attained. Adapting with dynamic business environment is one of the most
significant advantages of this organizational structure. Yet, this structure has also been
condemned on the ground that lack of coordination is the greatest disadvantage. Lasserre (2017)
contended by highlighting the fact that as the employees are being grouped according to their
functionality, it bestows more responsibility of the team members to work independently. This
maximizes workload among the staffs and generate reluctant attitude among them to maintain
coordination with the colleagues. The inclusion of participative decision making process also
leads the higher authority to integrate values and perception of the staffs. Such involvement
makes the entire decision making process too much complicated. Moreover, Aguinis et al. (2017)
also showed that it becomes also difficult for the management to control such huge number of
staffs within decision making process, which can hamper its consistency.

14PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
Discussing the role of personality and value on the work and life outcome of
General Motors:
The fundamental objectives of every organizations is to increase statistic of profit and
secure a prominent position in the market. In order to attain this objective, it is imperative for the
management of organizations to design working environment in such a manner, which can help
in strengthening productivity among the employees. Kim (2014) noted that the value and
personality of the employees also plays a very important role in determining their level of
commitment towards work. Therefore, it is the prime responsibility of management to initiate a
personality test at the time of recruiting staffs. As the HR department of General Motors holds
the responsibility of executing the process of recruitment and selection, it must plan to initiate a
personality test for the individual employees. This can help in assessing the IQ level of the staffs.
Sortheix et al. (2015) observed that the candidates with higher IQ are more likely to take work
pressure, gain knowledge from their flaws and deals with any conflicting situation with utmost
proficiency. With the assistance of personality test, the inner competencies as well as weaknesses
of individual employees of General Motors can also be assessed.
One of the greatest benefits of personality test is that it helps the HR department to get
more insight regarding the characteristic feature of the candidates. This is the way, through
which the process of selecting employees for the next interview process becomes very easy for
the HR department of General Motors. In addition to that, Alessandri et al. (2015) showed that
personality test also helps in detecting the interpersonal characteristic of the people that are
required for some of the specific jobs. Yet, personality assessment is quite lengthy process which
can create dissatisfaction among the potential candidates. At the same time, Armstrong et al.
(2014) opposed by saying that the experience and knowledge of the staffs may differ from the

15PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
result of personality test. Such confusion can make it difficult for the managers to explore the
way, through which the interview session can be carried out. Moreover, Bratton and Gold (2017)
figure out that personality assessment is a costly procedure which can hinder the cost
effectiveness of business.
The belief and perception of the employees is a highly important factor in accelerating
the level of commitment among them. Therefore, a session of personality test must be carried out
for understanding the characteristic feature of the candidates. Myers–Briggs Type Indicator
(MBTA) is one of the greatest tools for carrying out in-depth personality test. Brewster and
Hegewisch (2017) suggested that this can be referred as an indicators which helps General
Motors in assessing the psychological preferences of the candidates. With the assistance of this
test, any kind of negative characteristic among the candidates can also be explored. This is a very
simple tool which helps in understanding the characteristic of people from different aspect.
However, Bailey et al. (2018) opposed on the ground that this tool does not help in
understanding the characteristic of people with psychological shortcomings.
Different dimension of personality of the staffs is critical towards determining the level
of motivation among the staffs. Therefore, five-factor model (FFM) of personality test has been
introduced in order to show different personality test among the employees.

16PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
Figure 2: Big Five Model of Personality Trait
(Source: Bratton and Gold 2017)
The discussion related to these personality traits is as follows:
 Openness
This is one of the most significant traits of staffs which generate a down-to-earth like nature
among the people. This personality trait leads the people to gather challenging experience, which
is different from regular monotony. Bailey et al. (2018) suggested that people with this trait are
highly willing to generate unconventional belief.
 Conscientiousness
This is another major characteristic which generate self-discipline and planned attitude
among the people which is very much needed to be committed towards roles and responsibilities
at workplace. Kim (2014) perceived that Consciousness, in its simplest form is considered as the
inclination of being standardize and dutiful and thereby extremely focused towards attaining
predetermined goals and objectives. This personality trait of the staffs of General Motors
comprises of organized behavior that supports in running the internal functionality of a company
in a consistent manner.

17PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
 Extraversion
Brewster (2016) opined that positive emotion, positive energy and confidence are some of
the major features of this characteristic trait. Such person of General Motors holds the
responsibility to maintain a very healthy collaboration with that of others and complete any
impending task in a collaborative manner.
 Agreeableness
This is the tendency of being cooperative with others. This is a very helpful and trusting
nature which generates friendliness among people. At the same time, this characteristic feature
also plays a significant role for GM in stimulating the willingness among people to compromise
their own interest for that of others (Reiche et al. 2016).
 Neuroticism
This can be considered as emotional instability, which hampers the ability of people of
General Motors to show positive behavior at workplace.
Cultural background is also a significant factor in determining the attitude of the
employees. There lies the significance of Hofstedes Model. As per this model, culture of an
organization plays a pivotal role in generating positive behavior among the employees and thus
ensure their involvement in decision making processs (Kim 2014).

18PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
Figure 3: Hofstede's Model of Organizational Culture
(Source: Hofstede et al. 2015)
There are five different dimensions of culture. Power distance is the initial dimension of
culture which deals with mitigating the degree of inequality in between less powerful group of
society and more powerful group of people. This is the mode of equal distribution of power
without making any discrimination. With the assistance of this dimension, power can be
distributed equally in between developed and developing countries (Hofstede et al. 2015). The
score of USA in this dimension is 40 while the score of UK is 35. This means that, the notion of
inequality higher in US that that of UK. Such power distance is being followed in GM in terms
of treating the employees. Uncertainty Avoidance is another major dimension of culture which
highlights the extent to which the members of a society can feel uncomfortable and ambiguous.
This is one of the most significant issues, which the society must deal with. Such negative issue
can hamper the status quo of a society. Individualism vs. collectivism is the third significant
degree of cultural dimension which deals with the degrees to which the individual members of a
society can be integrated with rest of the group. In this dimension, US scores 91, while the score
of UK is 89. This shows that, the practice of accepting innovation and creativity is being

19PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
followed in the UK. Self-directed team is also being encouraged in every branches of GM in UK.
In the international level, this deals with collectivism which can have a firm impact on mitigating
any global issue in a collaborative manner (Reiche et al. 2016). Masculinity vs. femininity
(MAS) is one of most critical dimensions of culture, in which masculinity deals with the
perception of the society towards attaining heroism, assertiveness along with materialistic
reward. On the contrary, femininity shows the willingness for cooperation, caring for weak
people, modesty. This is basically a cross-cultural phenomenon which deals with the gap in
between male and female values. US scores 62 in this dimension while the score of UK is 66.
This means that there is high masculinity drive in the community. This shows that the activity of
gender discrimination is being followed in GM. Long-term orientation vs. short-term
orientation deals with the relationship in between past experience with that of the future actions
and challenges. The societies with long term view holds the ability to adapt effective problem
solving strategy in accordance with the situation. The countries with short term orientation
generally lack sustainable economic development.
Figure 4: Hofstede's cultural dimension

20PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
(Source: Hofstede et al. 2015)
This is the best model which can serve the organizations with the ability to run their
business in the international level without encountering any cultural hindrances. However, this
model has been criticized for being outdated in the contemporary context. At the same time, this
model also lacks accuracy as it does not put stress on the culture of community.
Role of motivation on employee behavior and performance:
Motivation is the process of generating enthusiasm among the employees to work with
utmost efficiency. Through motivation, the employees can behave sensibly which is very much
needed to improve their productivity. This is one of the most significant way, through which
positive behavior can be generated among the staffs and thereby strengthen the degree of
commitment among them towards the workplace (Sandhu et al. 2017). Motivating employees is
the core factor in generating loyalty among them. Therefore, it can be said that, motivation can
act as a driving forces behind attaining organizational success. As General Motors operates their
business at global level, they have a diverse team. In order to amplify the degree of commitment
among the employees, the company follows several strategies. Under Mary Barra’s strong
leadership, a healthy working environment is being followed in the entire company. At the same
time, agile organizational structure is also offering learning opportunity for the staffs, which is
also acting as a motivational factor for them. The more the employees will be motivated, the
more they will show willingness towards engaging with the core activity of an organization.
According to Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory of Motivation, there are certain factors which can
generate both satisfaction and dissatisfaction among the staffs (Shahzadi et al. 2014).

21PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
Figure 5: Herzberg’s factors of satisfaction and dissatisfaction
(Source: Shields et al. 2015)
There are two different categories of job factor which are as follows:
Hygiene factor
This can be considered as those factors, which are needed to be integrated at workplace in
order to generate motivation among the staffs. Shahzadi et al. (2014) observed that this can result
in long term satisfaction among the staffs. However, lack of these factors can generate
dissatisfaction among the staffs, which too can hamper their productivity. These factor are being
considered by GM to keep the staffs motivated. Such factors are also defined as dissatisfies or
maintenance factor which are as follows:
 Pay:
Lack of considerable salary structure generates dissatisfaction among the staffs. Thus,
reasonable pay structure is needed to be executed for generating positive vive among the
employees. Effective salary structure is being followed in the company. The salary of the staffs
ranges from $35,417 to $120,142 yearly.
 Rules and regulations:

22PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
Rigid policy can also create dissatisfaction among the staffs too much rigidity creates barrier
for them to show innovation. Therefore, the policies must be clear and it should include flexible
working environment, breaks, dress code along with effective leave policy (Jalloh and Jalloh
2016).
 Fringe benefit:
As health related issue is the crucial factor to ingrate negative vive among the human
resources, it is imperative to introduce healthcare plan and other benefits for family members.
This can drive motivation among them. Gifts on performances and bonus are being provided to
the staffs of GM to satisfy financial requirements of them.
 Interpersonal relationship:
Conflict in between the employees can also lead to dissatisfaction among the staffs.
Therefore, it is imperative to maintain healthy relationship between the employees and
subordinates which can supporting in mitigating any kind of conflicting situation at the
workplace (Bhuvanaiah and Raya 2015).
 Working condition:
Working condition also plays a significant role in motivating the employees. Therefore
working condition must be safe and hygienic and the equipment must be maintained properly.
Motivational factors
The hygiene factors cannot be considered as motivators. The motivational factors can be
considered as those factor, which can generate motivation among the human resources. With the

23PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
assistance of these factors superior performance among the staffs can be integrated. The
motivational factors are as follows:
 Recognition:
This is one of the most significant factors, which can raise a positive vive among the staffs.
Thus, it is the prime responsibility of the management to pay recognition to the staffs upon their
achievement. This can help in making them more productive.
 Relevance of work:
As monotony in the work generates negative behavior among the staffs, it is imperative to
assign challenging and interesting tasks. This is the key factor for producing motivation among
them and thus enable them to adapt with volatile working environment (Bradler et al. 2016).
 Growth opportunity:
Promotion plays a significant role in motivating the staffs and thereby keeping them
productive. Therefore, it is important to offer them with growth and promotional opportunity in
order to drag their interest towards workplace. This can also accelerate their performance level.
 Sense of empowerment and achievement:
Empowerment among the employees plays a significant role in stimulating a sense of
achievement among them. It is imperative to assign that type of job which can match their skill
and competency. This can serve them with a sense of empowerment and thereby enable them to
work efficiently (Van Iddekinge et al. 2018).
 Responsibility:

24PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
The staffs must be responsible for their own job. The managers of General Motors shows
special care towards providing an ownership of work among the staffs. This can support in
improving degree of accountability among them.
With the assistance of this theory, the management of General Motors are becoming able to
explore the factors that can generate cause work-related commitment among the staffs. At the
same time, they can also explore the factors that generate dissatisfaction among them.
Nonetheless, this theory is extremely unrealistic as it does not consider different situation, which
can arise at any point of time at workplace. Shields (2015) claimed that this theory is more
focused on satisfaction rather than productivity which is the crucial factor for determining
organizational success. Another major negativity of this theory is that it does not consider the
blue-collar employees, who are being acknowledged as one of the most significant assets of an
organization.
Intense motivation among the employees is very significant factor in improving their
performance. As Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs framework, there are certain need of the
employees which the management of an organization must satisfy in order to integrate
motivation among them.

25PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
Figure 6: Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs
(Source: Wheelen et al. 2017)
Psychological needs such as personal growth is the basic need of the employees. Training
plays a significant role in promoting skills and competency level of the staffs. In General Motors,
career growth opportunities are being provided to the staffs (Sandhu et al. 2017). Promotion is
also being provided to them as per their performance. This acts as a motivational factor for the
employees of General Motors. Safety need is also a vital need. The management of General
Motors is highly committed towards ensuring job security to the staffs and creating healthy
working environment, which acts as a motivational factors for the employees. Every employees
have some love and belongingness needs, which must be satisfied in a timely manner (Jalloh
and Jalloh 2016). Transparency is being maintained in GM, which acts as a great factor for
building trust among the employees towards the employees. This is the key if generating positive

26PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
perception of the human resources. As per the notion of esteem needs, it is imperative to provide
benefit to the staffs upon their performance. Both monetary and non-monetary reward is being
offered to the staffs of GM based on their performance level. Self-actualization is the final need
of Maslow’s framework. In order to satisfy this needs, training is being provided to the
employees of GM in order to enable them to face the professional difficulties (Van Iddekinge et
al. 2018).
Conclusion:
Based on the discussion, it can be concluded by saying that, appropriate management of
people is very much significant in order to get desired business outcome. Studying organizational
behavior actually supports in assessing the attitude and perception of the staffs towards
workplace. This is the mode of establishing a cordial relationship in between employers and
employees which is highly required to create healthy working environment. In-depth study of
OB also helps in exploring the factors, triggering negative human behavior and thereby apply the
strategies that can have a firm impact on controlling such behavior. Effective leadership is
extremely significant factor in leading the employees towards appropriate direction, which paves
the way of attaining organizational goals and objectives. It is imperative to explore the factors,
which raise motivation among the staffs and initiate those factors in order to keep them
extremely committed towards satisfying organizational goals and objectives. Accomplishment of
organizational goal plays a major role in sustaining in the intense competitive business
environment.

27PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
Reference List:
Aguinis, H., Edwards, J.R. and Bradley, K.J., 2017. Improving our understanding of moderation
and mediation in strategic management research. Organizational Research Methods, 20(4),
pp.665-685.
Al Saifi, S.A., 2015. Positioning organisational culture in knowledge management
research. Journal of Knowledge Management, 19(2), pp.164-189.
Alessandri, G., Borgogni, L., Schaufeli, W.B., Caprara, G.V. and Consiglio, C., 2015. From
positive orientation to job performance: The role of work engagement and self-efficacy
beliefs. Journal of Happiness Studies, 16(3), pp.767-788.
Alvesson, M. ed., 2016. Organizational culture. Sage.
Anitha, J., 2014. Determinants of employee engagement and their impact on employee
performance. International journal of productivity and performance management, 63(3), .308.
Armstrong, M. and Taylor, S., 2014. Armstrong's handbook of human resource management
practice. Kogan Page Publishers.
Bailey, C., Mankin, D., Kelliher, C. and Garavan, T., 2018. Strategic human resource
management. Oxford University Press.
Balon, R., 2014. Leadership versus management. Academic Psychiatry, 38(6), pp.720-722.
Bhuvanaiah, T. and Raya, R.P., 2015. Mechanism of improved performance: Intrinsic motivation
and employee engagement. SCMS Journal of Indian Management, 12(4), p.92.
Bolden, R., 2016. Leadership, management and organisational development. In Gower handbook
of leadership and management development. Routledge.

28PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
Bradler, C., Dur, R., Neckermann, S. and Non, A., 2016. Employee recognition and
performance: A field experiment. Management Science, 62(11), pp.3085-3099.
Bratton, J. and Gold, J., 2017. Human resource management: theory and practice. Palgrave.
Brewster, C. and Hegewisch, A. eds., 2017. Policy and practice in European human resource
management: The Price Waterhouse Cranfield survey. Taylor & Francis.
Brewster, C., Chung, C. and Sparrow, P., 2016. Globalizing human resource management.
Routledge.
Brewster, C., Mayrhofer, W. and Morley, M. eds., 2016. New challenges for European resource
management. Springer.
Buil, I., Martínez, E. and Matute, J., 2018. Transformational leadership and employee
performance: The role of identification, engagement and proactive personality. International
Journal of Hospitality Management, 9(6), 89-112
Clay-Williams, R. and Braithwaite, J., 2015. Reframing implementation as an organisational
behaviour problem: Inside a teamwork improvement intervention. Journal of health
organization and management, 29(6), pp.670-683.
Collins, H., 2017. Creative research: the theory and practice of research for the creative
industries. Bloomsbury Publishing
Davies, C.A. and Brown, G., 2014. Using design principles to deliver strategy in a new
organisational structure. Statistical Journal of the IAOS, 30(4), pp.1-12.
Dubey, A. and Singhal, A.K., 2016. Role of organisational structure in empolyee's
empowerment. International Journal of Education and Management Studies, 6(1), p.110.

29PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
Forbes.com. (2018). 5 Top Innovative Leaders (And What You Can Learn From Them). [online]
Available at: https://www.forbes.com/sites/christinecomaford/2018/08/25/5-top-innovative-
leaders-and-what-you-can-learn-from-them/ [Accessed 10 Sep. 2018].
Gm.com. (2018). About GM. [online] Available at: https://www.gm.com/our-company/about-
gm.html [Accessed 10 Sep. 2018].
Gm.com. (2018). Corporate Officers. [online] Available at:
https://www.gm.com/our-company/leadership/corporate-officers.html [Accessed 10 Sep. 2018].
Goetsch, D.L. and Davis, S.B., 2014. Quality management for organizational excellence. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: pearson.
Gupta, P., 2017. Organisational Structure and Management: In Reference of Banking
Sector. Journal of Management Science, Operations & Strategies (e ISSN 2456-9305), 1(2),
pp.29-35.
Herrmann, D. and Felfe, J., 2014. Effects of leadership style, creativity technique and personal
initiative on employee creativity. British Journal of Management, 25(2), pp.209-227.
Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G.J. and Minkov, M., 2015. Cultures and organizations: pyramids,
machines, markets, and families: organizing across nations. Classics of Organization Theory,
314(23), pp.701-704.
Holten, A.L. and Brenner, S.O., 2015. Leadership style and the process of organizational
change. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 36(1), pp.2-16.
Horch, H.D., 2018. The intermediary organisational structure of voluntary
associations. Voluntary Sector Review, 9(1), pp.55-72.

30PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
Jalloh, A. and Jalloh, A., 2016. The Effects of Motivation on Employee Performance: A Strategic
Human Resource Management Approach. CRC Press
Kim, H.K., 2014. Work-life balance and employees' performance: The mediating role of
affective commitment. Global Business and Management Research, 6(1), p.37.
Kitchin, D., 2017. An introduction to organisational behaviour for managers and engineers: A
group and multicultural approach. Routledge.
Lasserre, P., 2017. Global strategic management. Macmillan International Higher Education.
Moerdyk, A.P., Dodd, N., Donald, F., Kiley, J., Van Hoek, G. and Van Hoek, C.E.,
2015. Organisational Behaviour. Oxford University Press Southern Africa.
Murray, P.A., 2014. Organisational structure and strategic control. Routledge
Narman, P., Johnson, P. and Gingnell, L., 2016. Using enterprise architecture to analyse how
organisational structure impact motivation and learning. Enterprise Information Systems, 10(5),
pp.523-562.
Popli, S. and Rizvi, I.A., 2015. Exploring the relationship between service orientation, employee
engagement and perceived leadership style: a study of managers in the private service sector
organizations in India. Journal of Services Marketing, 29(1), pp.59-70.
Raman, K., Damaraju, N. and Joshi, G.K., 2014. The organisational structure of protein
networks: revisiting the centrality–lethality hypothesis. Systems and synthetic biology, 8(1),
pp.73-81.
Reiche, B.S., Stahl, G.K., Mendenhall, M.E. and Oddou, G.R. eds., 2016. Readings and cases in
international human resource management. Taylor & Francis.

31PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
Renko, M., El Tarabishy, A., Carsrud, A.L. and Brännback, M., 2015. Understanding and
measuring entrepreneurial leadership style. Journal of Small Business Management, 53(1),
pp.54-74.
Renz, D.O., 2016. The Jossey-Bass handbook of nonprofit leadership and management. John
Wiley & Sons.
Sandhu, M.A., Iqbal, J., Ali, W. and Tufail, M.S., 2017. Effect of Employee Motivation on
Employee Performance. Journal of Business and Social Review in Emerging Economies, 3(1),
pp.85-100.
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.
Shields, J., Brown, M., Kaine, S., Dolle-Samuel, C., North-Samardzic, A., McLean, P., Johns,
R., O'Leary, P., Robinson, J. and Plimmer, G., 2015. Managing employee performance &
reward: Concepts, practices, strategies. Cambridge University Press.
Sortheix, F.M., Chow, A. and Salmela-Aro, K., 2015. Work values and the transition to work
life: A longitudinal study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 89, pp.162-171.
Strom, D.L., Sears, K.L. and Kelly, K.M., 2014. Work engagement: The roles of organizational
justice and leadership style in predicting engagement among employees. Journal of Leadership
& Organizational Studies, 21(1), pp.71-82.
Su, Z., Chen, J. and Wang, D., 2018. Organisational structure and managerial innovation: the
mediating effect of cross-functional integration. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management,
pp.1-13.

32PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
Thom, N. and Wenger, A.P., 2016. Optimise How You Organise. Towards a Systematic
Evaluation of Organisational Alternatives. International Journal in Organizational Behavior and
Human Resource Management, 4(1), pp.68-91.
Van Iddekinge, C.H., Aguinis, H., Mackey, J.D. and DeOrtentiis, P.S., 2018. A meta-analysis of
the interactive, additive, and relative effects of cognitive ability and motivation on
performance. Journal of Management, 44(1), pp.249-279.
Wheelen, T.L., Hunger, J.D., Hoffman, A.N. and Bamford, C.E., 2017. Strategic management
and business policy. Pearson
Willis, P., 2017. Learning to labour: How working class kids get working class jobs. Routledge.
Zhu, C., 2015. Organisational culture and technology-enhanced innovation in higher
education. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 24(1), pp.65-79.

33PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT