Organizational behavior: concepts, theory, and practice

¶ … organizations need an awareness of their environment?

In an increasingly globalized and competitive marketplace, organizational leaders must keep track of changes in consumer demand and tastes, what their competitors are doing, and the economic and political environment in which they compete (Zwell, 2000). By keeping track of these trends, leaders will be in a better position to align their available resources with their organizational goals. In this regard, Drucker emphasizes that, "It is only managers -- not nature or laws of economics or governments -- that make resources productive" (1993, p. 37). In order to achieve the optimal allocation of resources, leaders must be able to respond to constant change effectively. In this regard, Kramer (2007) emphasizes that, "Leaders face daily predicaments that, as a matter of course, cannot be defined with clarity, much less resolved, and yet require immediate action" (p. 39). Nimble responses to ever-changing problems, of course, require an acute awareness of the environment in which the organization competes. As Kramer points out, "In this environment, where the only constant is surprise, pain, and confusion -- leadership must be reframed as the capacity to learn continuously. Learning how to learn in this fluid environment is the key to leading others to perform effectively" (2007, p. 39). The need to "learn how to learn" might strike some organizational leaders as unnecessary in the Age of Information. After all, if information is needed, it is readily available. Making sense of the deluge of information that is available, though, is a challenging enterprise that does in fact require organizations to develop ways to interpret this flood of information in ways that can add value to their business processes. Unfortunately, many organizations have developed entrenched bureaucratic processes that defy the responsiveness needed during times of change. In this regard, Kramer adds that, "Too rigid to adjust to the transformation demanded by the pace of social change, market failures, and globalization, these organizations find it almost impossible to learn. Ownership for taking action is frequently impeded by the boxes on organization charts. Responsibility is easy to avoid in any hierarchical system" (p. 39). Despite these constraints, organizations must develop a corporate culture that places a high value on becoming responsive to changes in their business environment. According to Ellinger, Ellinger and Keller (2002), "Rapid change in the business environment, constant breakthroughs in information technology, and higher customer expectations mean that firms' successes will be increasingly dependent on learning" (p. 20). Indeed, organizations that are able to rapidly and effectively respond to changes in their competitive environment will likely enjoy a competitive advantage compared to those that do not. In this regard, Ellinger and his associates add that, "The notion of leveraging superior learning processes as a source of competitive advantage is well established. In fact, the rate at which individuals and organizations learn may be the only source of sustainable competitive advantage" (p. 20). Clearly, an awareness of the competitive environment is required in order to formulate timely marketing responses. For example, the increasing popularity of Facebook, MySpace and other social networks is being exploited by companies of all types and sizes, just as the use of quick response codes is becoming routine. Companies that ignore these types of changes in the marketplace do so at their peril.

2.

How does an understanding of motivation theory contribute to leader effectiveness?

Because all people are different, leaders who understand what individual factors tend to motivate people have a real advantage in the workplace because they can help improve employee performance and organizational profitability. For instance, according to Katsva and Condrey (2005), "Motivation is an inducement to action or effort expenditure. Employees exerting large amounts of effort are said to be highly motivated. High effort expenditure is generally associated with high performance levels" (p. 343). Effective leadership behavior that are capable of consistently motivating employees is defined by Pool as being "the ability of a leader to influence subordinates in performing at the highest level within an organizational framework" (1999, p. 273).

Although some leaders seem to have an intuitive knack for understanding what people want and need from their jobs (even if they are not sure themselves), others may require the additional insights that motivation theory can provide in order to motivate their subordinates to higher performance levels. For example, Arnold and Krapels report that, "Those who manage people are interested in motivation theories and studies because they provide insights into why people perform work as they do. As a result, motivation theory provides managers with methods that can be used to improve productivity" (1997, p. 8). This does not mean, of course, that managers who understand motivation theory can somehow "trick" their employees into working harder, faster and longer, but it does mean that most people share some common needs and desires in the workplace that can be used to motivate them in various ways. Despite the commonalities that are involved in motivating people, it is also important to understand that everyone is motivated differently, but motivation theory can help leaders pinpoint what will likely motivate specific individuals. For example, Arnold and Krapels report that in order to use motivation theory effectively, managers must "draw from the fields of economics, psychology, and sociology to develop a thorough understanding of what might motivate an individual employee" (p. 9).

Once managers have determined what individual employees want and need from their jobs, it is a matter of selecting the motivational techniques that are capable of satisfying those desires. In this regard, Katsva and Condrey add that, "The central question of motivation in the workplace is how to encourage people to accomplish more in less time and to be satisfied with this effort" (2005, p. 344). Despite the centrality of this question to motivation in the workplace, it is also clear that most people will require some type of incentive in order to "be satisfied with this effort." For this purpose, a wide range of incentives are available that can be used to motivate people into working harder, longer and faster, including: (a) material incentives (money, physical conditions), (b) personal inducements (distinction, prestige, personal power), and (c) associational rewards (stability) (Katsva & Condrey, 2005, p. 344). Therefore, by identifying the optimal mix of these incentives, leaders can draw on motivation theory to motivate their subordinates in ways that directly contribute to organizational productivity.

3.

In what ways can implementation of strategic diversity management improve organizational effectiveness? Illustrate your key arguments with organizationally-based examples.

As with other quality assurance initiatives, from a strategic diversity management perspective, it is vital to first measure something in order to know if it has been improved. In this regard, Davidson and Fielden (2003) report that, "Measuring organizational effectiveness in the context of diversity management is about creating a framework -- a strategy -- for ensuring a holistic approach to understanding the people factors and forces affecting organizational capability and performance" (p. 57). Just as it is important for organizations to measure something to see if it is working as intended in other fields of endeavor, strategic diversity management likewise seeks to identify opportunities for improvement and then measure the effectiveness of interventions to determine the need for fine-tuning or alternative approaches. In this regard, Davidson and Fielden (2003) suggest that there are four areas that are essential for developing a strategy and measuring diversity successfully for organizational effectiveness applications:

1. Creating diversity;

2. Management diversity;

3. Valuing diversity; and,

4. Leveraging diversity (p. 58).

All of the foregoing elements are required in order to implement and administer an effective strategic diversity management program, but they only represent a starting point (Davidson & Fielden, 2003). In addition, organizations of all types and sizes must implement some type of framework in which these elements can be administered efficiently. While Davidson and Fielden (2003) suggest that successful strategic diversity management is a fairly straightforward enterprise, other authorities are quick to caution that to be truly effective, strategic diversity management initiatives must take into account a number of organizational factors besides diversity for diversity's sake alone and there remains a dearth of timely studies in this area. For instance, Miller, Burke and Glick (1998) emphasize that, "Diversity among executives is widely assumed to influence a firm's strategic decision processes, but empirical research on this linkage has been virtually nonexistent" (p. 39). One study that touched on these issues by Knight, Pearce, Smith et al. (1999) analyzed how demographic diversity and group processes affected strategic consensus development among companies' top leadership team where strategic consensus was defined as "the degree to which individual mental models of strategy overlap" (p. 445). The results of this study of 76 high-technology U.S. And Irish companies showed that although demographic diversity had some influence on strategic consensus building, the influence was not especially strong; however, when these researchers incorporated two additional group process variables (i.e., interpersonal conflict and agreement-seeking), there was a high degree of congruence in the overall relationship with strategic consensus building processes (Knight et al., 1999). Generally speaking, the results of this study showed that increased levels of diversity within the top leadership team had a negative impact on their ability to reach strategic consensus because of both direct and indirect effects (Knight et al., 1999).

These findings are not that surprising, of course, given that it is intuitive that as diversity within a top leadership team increases, so too will the range of views that will be brought to the management table for consideration. Despite these constraints to consensus building, there are some highly desirable outcomes that can be achieved using the strategic diversity management approach that make it worthy of consideration by organizations that are "stuck in a diversity rut."

Strategic diversity management can improve organizational effectiveness by facilitating communication between superiors, peers and subordinates. Although many organizations have recognized the importance and value of a diversified workforce, some have failed to realize the benefits that can be achieved through a strategic alignment between these initiatives and the larger organizational goals they are designed to support. For instance, according to Thomas (2006), "Strategic diversity management can serve as the framework bridge that organizations, leaders, and rank-and-file employees can use to reach the next level of diversity management. Strategic diversity management possesses or fosters the attributes that companies and their diversity leaders need if they are to become unstuck" (p. 82). In order to move beyond their current diversity framework, organizations must adopt a new reference frame that includes the concepts set forth in Table 1 below.

Table 1

Conditions organizations must adopt to achieve full benefits from strategic diversity management

Condition

Description/Implications

Multiple perspectives

Individuals and corporations must learn to use at least two perspectives (this would presumably include empathetic responses to diversity critics and the diversity tension that can restrict implementation and administration).

An alternative decision-making framework

Organizations use these multiple perspectives to develop a refined decision-making framework.

Capability vs. solution

The alternative framework should help leaders formulate informed decisions based on the current environment rather than delivering "boilerplate" solutions.

Accommodation of diversity tension

Diversity champions will require decision making frameworks that accommodate the reality of diversity tension. Both organizations and individuals will have to remain effective for the duration of such tension states.

Multiple causation

This level of diversity management will acknowledge that while sexism, racism, and other forms of discrimination can adversely affect decision making, there are also factors involved that may account for such poor decisions including the complexity of the issues that are involved as well as cognitive limitations.

Ownership

Individuals (e.g., rank-and-file employees, managers, executives as well as diversity leaders) must all "own" the need for a diversified workplace as well as the larger society in which the organization competes.

Quality maps

These are needed to help establish benchmarks and assess the effectiveness of diversity management initiatives.

Source: Adapted from Thomas, 2006, p. 82

There are some other ways in which strategic diversity management can help improve organizational effectiveness as well. For example, the consultants at the Society for Human Resource Management report that, "A diverse workforce and an inclusive climate can, if managed well, help the organization to work better" (Leveraging employee diversity, 2011, para. 2). Notwithstanding the constraints to consensus building among an organization's top leadership team caused by increased diversity noted above, these consultants also cite other ways in which a strategic diversity management approach can help improve organizational effectiveness. In this regard, the Society for Human Resource Management adds that, "Diverse and inclusive workplaces have the potential to be more innovative, have more access to talent, and be better able to meet the needs of an increasingly diverse customer base. Organizations that can leverage employee diversity are not only better places to work, but places that work better" (Leveraging employee diversity, 2011, para. 3).