HOW DOES ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR RELATE TO ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, ORGANIZATIONAL THEORY, PERSONAL AND HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ? OVERVIEW Organizational Behavior studies encompasses the study of organizations from multiple viewpoints, methods, and levels of analysis. For instance, one textbook divides these multiple viewpoints into three perspectives: modern, symbolic, and postmodern. Another traditional distinction, present especially in American academia, is between the study of "micro" organizational behavior -- which refers to individual and group dynamics in an organizational setting -- and "macro" organizational theory which studies whole organizations, how they adapt, and the strategies and structures that guide them. To this distinction, some scholars have added an interest in "meso" -- primarily interested in power, culture, and the networks of individuals and units in organizations -- and "field" level analysis which study how whole populations of organizations interact. In Europe these distinctions do exist as well, but are more rarely reflected in departmental divisions. Whenever people interact in organizations, many factors come into play. Modern organizational studies attempt to understand and model these factors. Like all modernist social sciences, organizational studies seek to control, predict, and explain. There is some controversy over the ethics of controlling workers' behavior. As such, organizational behavior or OB (and its cousin, Industrial psychology) have at times been accused of being the scientific tool of the powerful. Those accusations notwithstanding, OB can play a major role in organizational development and success. One of the main goals of organizational theorists is, according to Simms (1994) "to revitalize organizational theory and develop a better conceptualization of organizational life." An organizational theorist should carefully consider levels assumptions being made in theory, and is concerned to help managers and administrators.

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR. The discipline of organizational behavior is concerned with identifying and managing the attitudes and actions of individuals and groups, looking particularly at how people can be motivated to join and remain in the organization, how to get people to practice effective teamwork, how people can accomplish their jobs more efficiently, and how employees can be encouraged to be more flexible and innovative. Attention is brought to these attitudes and actions in order to help managers identify problems, determine how to correct them, and change behavior so that individual performance and ultimately organization effectiveness increase. As a field of study, organizational behavior is built on a succession of approaches or ways of thinking about people. Since the early 1900s those who studied behavior in organizations have attempted to prescribe ways to effectively manage employees in order to achieve the organization's goals. The early approaches, referred to as the classical view, promoted increased management coordination of tasks, strict specialization and standardization of work tasks, a strict chain of command, and centralized decision making at the manager level. During the 1920s and 1930s the next new school of thought began to emerge, which was referred to as the human relations movement. By and large this movement began with the famous Hawthorne studies at the Western Electric plant that demonstrated how psychological and social processes could affect productivity and work behavior. This new way of thinking looked at organizational behavior by advocating a more people-oriented style of management that was more participative and oriented toward employee needs. Contemporary organizational thought has shifted to a more integrative systems approach, which includes the consideration of external influences; the relationship of the organization with managers and employees; and organizational processes, which are the activities through which work gets accomplished. In other words, the best solution for the situation depends on many factors. The organization is depicted as a number of interrelated, interdependent, and interacting subsystems that are continually changing. Those who managed by the classical approach emphasized the critical role of control and coordination in helping organizations to achieve goals. Those who managed by the human

relations approach considered the risks of high levels of control and coordination, focusing instead on the need for flexibility. So where do today's managers fit in? A contemporary approach to management recognizes that there is no one best way to manage; management approaches need to be tailored to fit the situation. The manager's role is to effectively predict, explain, and manage behavior that occurs in organizations. Particularly, managers are interested in determining why people are more or less motivated or satisfied. Managers must have a capacity to observe and understand the behavior patterns of individuals, groups, and organizations; to predict what responses will be drawn out by managerial actions; and ultimately to use this understanding and eventual predictions to effectively manage employees. Behavior can be examined on three levels—the individual, the group, and the organization as a whole. Managers seek to learn more about what causes people— individually or collectively—to behave as they do in organizational settings. What motivates people? What makes some employees leaders and others not? How do people communicate and make decisions? How do organizations respond to changes in their external environments? Although it may be said that the responsibility for studying organizational behavior rests with researchers, assessing and increasing organizational effectiveness is a primary responsibility of managers. They need to collect data about the environment in which people work and describe events, behaviors, and attitudes in order to develop plans for changing and improving behavior and attitudes. Managers can begin to understand organizational behavior by accurately describing events, behaviors, and attitudes. How can this be accomplished? Data can be gathered by observing situations, surveying and interviewing employees, and looking at written documents. These methods help to objectively describe events, behaviors, and attitudes—a first step in determining their causes and then acting on them. By direct observation, for example, managers can attend meetings and then describe what is happening, such as who talks most often, what topics are discussed, or how frequently those attending the meeting ask for the managers' viewpoint on the topic. In addition, survey

questionnaires could be sent to employees; these might provide concrete data about the situation, proving more useful than relying solely on personal perception of events. Sending the same questionnaire to employees each year could provide some insight into changes in behavior and attitude over time. Employees could also be interviewed in order to examine attitudes in greater depth. Some valuable information about attitudes and opinions may also be gathered by talking informally with employees. Finally, data could be gathered from organizational documents, including annual reports, department evaluations, memoranda, and other no confidential personnel files. An analysis of these documents might provide some insight into the attitudes of employees, the quality of management, group interactions, or other possible reasons behind the problems or situation.

HOW ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR RELATES ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT Organizational development (OD) is a planned, ongoing effort by organizations to change in order to become more effective. The need for organizational change becomes apparent when a gap exists between what an organization is trying to do and what is actually being accomplished. OD processes include using a knowledge of behavioral science to encourage an organizational culture of continual examination and readiness for change. In that culture, emphasis is placed on interpersonal and group processes. The fact that OD links human processes such as leadership, decision making, and communication with organizational outcomes such as productivity and efficiency distinguishes it from other change strategies that may rely solely on the principles of accounting or finance. The fact that OD is planned distinguishes it from the routine changes that occur in the organization, particularly through a more effective and collaborative management or organization culture with special emphasis on forming work teams. The focus on interpersonal and group processes to improve performance recognizes that organizational change affects all members and that their cooperation is necessary to implement change.

The forces compelling an organization to change can be found both inside and outside the organization. Internal forces toward change can affect changes in job technology, composition of the work force, organization structure, organizational culture, and goals of the organization. There are a variety of external forces that may require managerial action: changes in market conditions, changes in manufacturing technology, changes in laws governing current products or practices, and changes in resource availability. An organization can focus OD change efforts in several areas: changes to structure, technology, and people using a variety of strategies for development. Some of the more common techniques for changing an organization's structure include changes in work design to permit more specialization or enrichment, clarification of job descriptions and job expectations, increase or decrease of the span of control, modification of policies or procedures, and changes in the power or authority structure. Another general approach to planned change involves modifications in the technology used as tools to accomplish work. The assumption behind enhancing technology is that improved technology or work methods will lead to more efficient operations, increased productivity, or improved working conditions. Examples of technological approaches to change include changing processes for doing work, introducing or updating computers or software, and modifying production methods. The third general approach to change focuses on the people in the organization. This approach is intended to improve employee skills, attitudes, or motivation and can take many forms, such as introducing training programs to enhance work skills, increasing communication effectiveness, developing decision-making skills, or modifying attitudes to increase work motivation.


HOW ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR RELATES HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT To succeed in increasingly competitive domestic and global markets, organizations must create and motivate a workforce that is able to realize competitive advantage. What type of performance is necessary to attain such an advantage is heavily dependent on the market a firm is in and the strategic choices a firm makes. Firms that operate in markets where, for example, price is the dominant performance indicator likely will opt for producing large quantities of a limited set of products or services. Standardization and repetition of work processes will contribute to high levels of efficiency, and, thus add to competitive value. Facilitating outstanding routine performance requires an appropriate management of human resources by creating structures, rules and procedures so that work across individual employees and groups can be coordinated and controlled in effective and efficient ways. To give another example, if innovation and being innovative are prime performance indicators an organization may prefer a strategy to offer customer made products that fulfill the unique needs of individual clients. This will lead to work processes that are primarily nonroutine in nature and demand creative workers. Such a firm needs a HRM policy that stimulates employees to engage in creative and innovative courses of actions that may substantially deviate from fixed patterns of work behavior. Creating a high performing and innovative organization also requires cooperation among employees who differ in their knowledge, skills, and abilities. Cooperation implies knowledge sharing, finding solutions together, learning from one another and realizing synergy in creative and innovative processes. This implies that HRM policies should focus on interpersonal relations, interdependencies and processes such as trust, learning, communication, and information exchange between employees. In reality firms will often try to realize a complex mix of performance indicators where, for example, efficiency, innovation, quality and delivery performance may be part off. Moreover, such patterns of performance goals may vary for different departments or work units and also change over time within one and the same firm. This will result in highly diverse work settings and job designs. Consequently, organizations have to find the right balance between, for

example, using rules and procedures to optimize routine work and giving employees the freedom to be creative and proactive, and, human resource policies and interventions may help to realize this balance. Although all the staff members of our Department of Human Resource Management and Organizational Behavior have a background in social sciences, the foregoing makes clear that we operate in a Faculty of Management and Organization. Mainstream HRM research groups primarily focus on the design and effectiveness of all kinds of HRM instruments and policies and most OB oriented groups study behavior with little attention for work context. As the foregoing indicates, we much more relate these HRM policies and employee behavior to, for example, organizational strategy, work design, teamwork, task characteristics, goal setting, performance management and organizational change management. Our profile is also affected by the larger research group we are part of and in which also engineers and staff with an operations management background participate. In all of our research projects we focus on applied research questions that address the nature and consequences of human resource policies and interventions in an organizational context. By doing so, we are able to develop new methods or interventions that will further enhance employee motivation and competencies to contribute to the performance aimed at. Our research projects take account of characteristics of the individual employees (leadership, personality, competence, commitment, learning, leadership), but also on properties of higherlevel units such a dyads (dissimilarity between employees, interdependence, trust, conflict), teams (composition, coordination, performance, innovation), organizations (diversity, culture), or even groups of organizations (supply chain networks).


HOW ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR RELATES ORGANIZATIONAL THEORY Organizational theories are the backbone of the field of organizational studies, which has as its objective the investigation of organizations, particularly human organizations, in order to better understand their structures, functions and properties for the purpose of enhancing productivity and satisfaction. Classical theorists of the field put forth that there is a single, generally-applicable way in which to create and operate an organization. However, current theorists take a different approach, believing in the unique nature of each organization and, therefore, in the need to seek personalized solutions, taking into account elements such as its size, technological requirements, environment, nature of industry, etc.

Organizational theories are interdisciplinary, based on knowledge from the fields of psychology, political science, economics, anthropology and sociology. They seek to explain behavior and dynamics in both individual and group contexts. This has become increasingly significant, especially when one considers the cultural diversity in today’s typical workplace and the need for global interconnectedness and interaction. As with other social sciences, organizational studies employs the use of data and modeling. Its theories are many, some examples of which are the theory of faceted classification, the theory of terminology and the theory of concept. By the 1980s several new organizational system theories received significant attention. These included Theory Z, a blending of American and Japanese management practices. This theory was a highly visible one, in part because of Japan's well-documented productivity improvements—and the United States' manufacturing difficulties—during that decade. Other theories, or adaptations of existing theories, emerged as well, which most observers saw as indicative of the ever-changing environment within business and industry. The study of organizations and their management and production structures and philosophies continued to thrive throughout the 1990s. Indeed, an understanding of various organizational principles continues to be seen as vital to the success of all kinds of organizations—from

government agencies to business—of all shapes and sizes, from conglomerates to small businesses. "As we observe how different professionals working in different kinds of organizations and occupational communities make their case, we see we are still far from having a single 'theory' of organization development," wrote Jay R. Galbraith in Competing with Flexible Lateral Organizations. "Yet, a set of common assumptions is surfacing. We are beginning to see patterns in what works and what does not work, and we are becoming more articulate about these patterns. We are also seeing the field increasingly connected to other organizational sciences and disciplines," such as information technology and coordination theory.

HOW ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR RELATES ORGANIZATIONAL PERSONAL Basically, organizational personal is the culture of the organization. Personal is comprised of the assumptions, values, norms and tangible signs (artifacts) of organization members and their behaviors. Members of an organization soon come to sense the particular culture of an organization. Personal is one of those terms that's difficult to express distinctly, but everyone knows it when they sense it. For example, the personal of a large, for-profit corporation is quite different than that of a hospital which is quite different that of a university. You can tell the personal of an organization by looking at the arrangement of furniture, what they brag about, what members wear, etc. Similar to what you can use to get a feeling about someone's personality. Corporate personal can be looked at as a system. Inputs include feedback from, example; society, professions, laws, stories, heroes, values on competition or service, etc. The process is based on our assumptions, values and norms, example; our values on money, time, facilities, space and people. Outputs or effects of our culture are, example; organizational behaviors, technologies, strategies, image, products, services, appearance, etc.


The concept of personal is particularly important when attempting to manage organization-wide change. Practitioners are coming to realize that, despite the best-laid plans, organizational change must include not only changing structures and processes, but also changing the corporate culture as well. There's been a great deal of literature generated over the past decade about the concept of organizational personal -- particularly in regard to learning how to change organizational personal. Organizational change efforts are rumored to fail the vast majority of the time. Usually, this failure is credited to lack of understanding about the strong role of personal and the role it plays in organizations. That's one of the reasons that many strategic planners now place as much emphasis on identifying strategic values as they do mission and vision.


REFERENCE BOOKS : • Organizational behavior ; john middleton ;Capstone Publishing (a Wiley company), ISBN 1-84112-285-8.

Organizational V.G. Kondalkar, Published by New Age International (P) Ltd., Publishers; ISBN (13) : 978-81-224-2487-4.

John Bratton, human resource management; theory and practices 2nd edition, ISBN 08058-3862-7.

INTERNET; organizational behavior and development ;

• • Behavior and personal Wikipedia; Overview of Organizational.