PROFESSOR: RAMA IYER

SUBMITTED BY: Hardik Savla

ORGANIZATIONA
L BEHAVIOUR

SHAH & ANCHOR KUTCHHI

ENGEENIRG COLLEGE - MMS

FY MMS roll number: 42

 CULTURE
Henry Mintzberg on Culture
• “Culture is the soul of the organization — the beliefs and values, and how
they are manifested. I think of the structure as the skeleton, and as the flesh
and blood. And culture is the soul that holds the thing together and gives it life
force.”

 A culture is defined as Excellence of taste in the fine arts and humanities, also

known as high culture
 An integrated pattern of human knowledge, belief, and behavior that depends
upon the capacity for symbolic thought and social learning
 The set of shared attitudes, values, goals, and practices that characterizes an
institution, organization or group

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 2

 ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE
• The pattern of shared values, beliefs and assumptions considered to be the
appropriate way to think and act within an organization.
  – Culture is shared
  – Culture helps members solve problems
  – Culture is taught to newcomers
  – Culture strongly influences behavior

Exhibit 10-1 Layers of Culture Levels of Culture

• Artifacts
  – Aspects of an organization’s culture that you see, hear, and feel
• Beliefs
  – The understandings of how objects and ideas relate to each other
• Values
  – The stable, long-lasting beliefs about what is important
• Assumptions
  – The taken-for-granted notions of how something should be in an organization

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 3

Characteristics of Organizational Culture

• Innovation and risk-taking

  – The degree to which employees are encouraged to be innovative and take risks.
• Attention to detail
  – The degree to which employees are expected to exhibit precision, analysis, and
attention to detail.
• Outcome orientation
  – The degree to which management focuses on results or outcomes rather than on
technique and process.
• People orientation
  – The degree to which management decisions take into consideration the effect of
outcomes on people within the organization.
• Team orientation
  – The degree to which work activities are organized around teams rather than
individuals.
• Aggressiveness
  – The degree to which people are aggressive and competitive rather than easygoing.
• Stability
  – The degree to which organizational activities emphasize maintaining the status quo
in contrast to growth.

At strong culture Johnson & Johnson, for example, widely-shared, intensely-held core
values
were pervasive across the organization, however individual operating units were given
the autonomy to
determine how to operate on a daily basis. While the company’s credo emphasized
customer and
employee satisfaction, the operating culture in a new medical products division was
distinctly less
conservative and more innovative than a more mature product division. In this way,
subunits were able to
act on the values that were important to them but peripheral to the functioning of the
organization, leaving
the core pivotal values of the organization intact (Tus

hman & O’Reilly, 1997: 26-27).

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 4

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 5
 ORGANIZATIONAL SUBCULTUTRES
Whether it is a charitable organization, a company or a club there are always
subdivisions. For example, a charitable organization may have administrators, office
workers, fund raisers, field workers and etc. Each of these divisions will have a separate
subculture even though they all participate in the organizational culture and purpose of
the charitable organization.
The fund raisers, for example, may meet together on their own to plan strategies or
share successes with each other. The field workers may meet together or with others to
report on how the distributed charitable funds are being used.
Each of these groups share a commonality that is individual to that group even though
they also share the organizational culture of the whole. Each of these groups can have
more or less structure. They may have leaders or act as a cooperative. Some may be
innovative and some may adhere strictly to the perceived values and rules of the parent
organization.
Some groups may have a similar enough culture within to allow for social interaction
outside the workplace.
Organizational cultures represents a common perception held by the organization’s
members. This was made explicit when we defined culture as a system of shared
meaning. A dominant culture express the core values that are shared by a majority of
the organization members. Subculture tend to develop in large organization to reflect
common problem, situation, or experience that members face.

For example there is difference in subculture of Reliance industry and Tata industry and
subculture of Semler & Company is completely different

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 6

 VALUES
Values are an integral part of every culture. with worldview and personality, they
generate behavior. Being part of a culture that shares a common core set of values
creates expectations and predictability without which a culture would disintegrate and its
members would lose their personal identity and sense of worth. Values tell people what
is good, beneficial, important, useful, beautiful, desirable, constructive...etc. They
answer the question of why people do what they do. Values help people solve common
human problems for survival. Over time, they become the roots of traditions that groups
of people find important in their day-to-day lives .

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 7

 TYPE OF
TYPE OF VALUES
VALUES

ROKEACH VALUE SURVEY

INSTRUMENTAL TERMINAL
 A COMFORTABLE LIFE
 AN EXCITING LIFE  AMBITIOUS
 A SENCE OF ACCOMPLISHMENT  BROAD-MINDED
 A WORLD AT PEACE
 A WORLD OF BEAUTY  CAPABLE
 EQAULITIY
 CHEERFUL
 FAMILY SECURITIY
 FREEDOM  CLEAN
 HAPPINESS
 COURAGEOUS
 INNER HARMONY
 MATURE LOVE  HELPFUL
 NATIONAL SECURITY
 PLEASURE  HONEST
 SALVATION  LOVING
 SEL RESPECT
 SOCIAL RECOGNITION  POLITE
 TRUE FRIENDSHIP
 SELF RESPECT
 WISDOM
 SELF CONTOL

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 8

 CLASSIFICATIONA OF VALUES
Theoretical values
Sometimes referred to as a fair or hypothetical value, a theoreticalvalue is the estimated
price of an option. The options pricing may have to do with buying, selling, or a
combination of the two. In most cases, the theoretical value is calculated using some
specific type of mathematical equation. There are several such models in use today.

One of the most popular models for estimating the price of options is know as the Black-
Scholes Option Pricing Model. First introduced in 1973, this formula was the brainchild
of Fischer Black and Myron Scholes. Considered to be highly accurate, the concept
quickly gained attention and remains one of the most workable of all formulas in
common use today. Calculating the theoretical value is helpful to investors in a couple
of ways. First, the determination of a hypothetical value for the option or options, given
specific market conditions, can provide insight into whether the purchase or sale of the
security is a good idea. The theoretical value, of course, relies on the quality of the
assumptions made regarding market performance in general and the performance of
the option in particular.

Economics values
An economic value is the worth of a goods or service as determined by the market.[1]

The economic value of a good or service has puzzled economists since the beginning of
the discipline. First, economists tried to estimate the value of a good to an individual
alone, and extend that definition to goods which can be exchanged. From this analysis
came the concepts value in use and value in exchange.

Wealth maximization predicts that a person will choose to obtain the good or service in
the place where it is cheapest, where the amount given up is the least.

Value is linked to price through the mechanism of exchange. When an economist

observes an exchange, two important value functions are revealed: those of the buyer
and seller. Just as the buyer reveals what he is willing to pay for a certain amount of a
good, so too does the seller reveal what it costs him to give up the good.

Additional information about value is obtained by the rate at which transactions occur,
telling observers the extent to which the purchase of the good has value over time.

Said another way, value is how much a desired object or condition is worth relative to
other objects or conditions. Economic values are expressed as "how much" of one

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 9

desirable condition or commodity will, or would be given up in exchange for some other
desired condition or commodity. Among the competing schools of economic theory
there are differing metrics for value assessment and the metrics are the subject of a
"Theory of Value." Value theories are a large part of the differences and disagreements
between the various schools of economic theory.

Social value
Social value orientations (also referred to as social motives, social values, or value
orientations) is a social psychology motivational theory of choice behavior
in game situations advanced by David M. Messick and Charles G. McClintock in 1968.
[1]
 Unlike the traditional rational choice theory in mainstream economics, which assumes
that all individuals make choices that maximize their own payoffs in social
dilemmasituations, social value orientations consider personality differences across
individuals which leads to a range of preferences for one’s own well-being and the well-
being of others.
Social Value Orientations Categories

Social value orientations are based on the assumption that individuals pursue different
goals when making decisions for which the outcomes affect others. Social psychologists
generally distinguish between five types of social value orientations. The main
difference between each category is the extent to which one cares about his or her own
payoffs and that of the other in social dilemma situations.

 Altruistic: Desire to maximize the welfare of the other

 Cooperative: Desire to maximize joint outcomes
 Individualistic: Desire to maximize own welfare with no concern of that of the
other
 Competitive: Desire to maximize own welfare relative to that of the other
 Aggressive: Desire to minimize the welfare of the other
Most individuals are either cooperative or individualistic.

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 10

Political values
The attitudes, beliefs, and values which underpin the operation of a particular political
system. These were seen as including knowledge and skills about the operation of the
political system, positive and negative emotional feelings towards it, and evaluative
judgements about the system. Particular regional, ethnic, or other groups within a
political system with their own distinctive sets of values, attitudes, and beliefs were
referred to as subcultures. A greater awareness developed over time in the literature of
the importance of studying elite political cultures, given that the influence of individuals
in the political process varies significantly. One of the principal objections to political
culture is that it can be used as a ‘garbage can variable’ to explain anything which
cannot be accounted for in any other way. Hence, whilst appearing to explain
everything, it actually explains very little. Cultural explanations can, nevertheless, assist
the understanding of how reactions to political events and developments may vary in
different societies, while the analysis of subcultures remains important in understanding
tensions and cleavages within particular societies.

Definitions

 Dennis Kavanagh defines political culture as "A shorthand expression to denote

the set of values within which the political system operates".
 Lucian Pye describes it as "the sum of the fundamental values, sentiments and
knowledge that give form and substance to political process".
Political culture is how we think government should be carried out. It is different
from ideology because people can disagree on ideology, but still have a common
political culture.

Political scientist Sidney Verba, describes political culture as a "system of empirical

beliefs, expressive symbols, and values, which defines the situation in which political
action takes place."

Religious values
Religious values are ethical principles founded in religious traditions, texts and beliefs.
In contrast to personal values, religious-based valuesare based on scriptures and a
religion's established norms.

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 11

Various aspects of the significance of religious values have been considered with repect
to novels, their relevance to a particular religious group (the Jains for instance or Latin
Americans) and in relation to human society.

Values and behavior of Tso communication for example

Openness and We will be as open as we can be with both clients

Honesty and associates, consistent with keeping the
business on a sound footing.  We will nor attempt
to undertake any assignment unless we believe we
can do an excellent job.

 
Integrity We will not undertake any assignment unless we
feel that it will have a positive impact on the client. 
We want to feel that   "We make a difference".

 
Learning and Consistent with our intention to provide innovative
Sharing and imaginative solutions to our clients we will
share our knowledge and experience with them
and or associates. As well as providing competitive
benefits this gives us an imperative for continually
updating our skills and knowledge.

 
Valuing people We value the contribution that everyone in our
client organisations makes to our and their own
organisation's success.

We will never allow our associates and partners to

feel exploited - we are delighted to be able to credit
their thinking and experience.  We value the
diversity of backgrounds, experience, knowledge,
approach etc. that our associates and partners can
bring to our business.

 
Doing the right In any situation where any ethical question arises
thing we expect each of us (directors and associates) to
"do the right thing".  The well-being of our clients'
business is our first concern.

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 12

 TSO Communication operates under the premise of:

 
Imagination.... TSO Communication treats each assignment
uniquely, recognising that each client’s business
environment is different, with unique challenges
requiring tailored solutions. Where appropriate,
we take advantage of the latest tools and
techniques and use our links with the academic
world to inform our thinking.

We work in a number of industry and service

fields, across both the private and public sectors,
and can cross-fertilise our ideas from apparently
disparate fields to bring fresh insights to bear.

 
Innovation.... TSO Communication uses no predetermined
methodologies. Each solution demands to be
developed afresh to meet a particular business
situation. We will assemble a team of experienced
consultants with an appropriate set of skills and
consider each situation from a fresh perspective.

By carefully managing and monitoring all projects

we can help to identify and control the risks
associated with any change. Our clients can,
when necessary, work at the leading edge,
without the fear of falling off.

 
Action.... When TSO Communication undertakes an
assignment, we are always keen to carry any
recommendations through to implementation. And
we don’t stop there... sometimes forgotten is the
opportunity to exploit changes beyond the original
ideas that spurred them - it is often at this stage
that the most valuable benefits accrue. We
believe that our ideas are only as valuable as the
results they produce and we are not afraid to put
them to the test. Our experience in
implementation provides powerful support to our
advice to clients. We are keenly aware that no
experience is better than the wisdom that comes
from making things happen in the real world.

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 13

INDIVIDUALISM AND COLLECTIVISM
 Individualism is “the opposite of collectivism; together they form on of the dimensions of
national cultures. Individualism stands for a society in which the ties between individuals
are loose: everyone is expected to look after himself or herself and his or her immediate
family only.”
Collectivism “stands for a society in which people from birth onwards are integrated into
strong cohesive ingroups, which throughout people’s lifetime continue to protect them in
exchange for unquestioning loyalty.”
Individualistic cultures like USA (highest score = 1st rank) and France (10th rank) are
more self-centred and emphasize mostly on their individual goals. People from
individualistic cultures tend to think only of themselves as individuals and as “I”
distinctive from other people.They make just a little different between ingroup and
outgroup communication (USA). They prefer clarity in their conversations to
communicate more effectively and come in general directly to the point like the Finns
(17th rank) and Americans are doing. An exception here are Germans (15th rank) who
indeed are an individualistic culture but their communication style is different. First
details will be named and discussed and after that they will come to the point.
Americans and Finns might feel annoyed because they say first what it is about and
explain afterwards
People in individualistic cultures emphasize their success/achievements in job or private
wealth and aiming up to reach more and/or a better job position. Especially in the USA
the fight about jobs and trying to climb up in the hierarchy ladder is something very
common there. It just counts to get there less caring who will left behind one. In
business they try to improve their connections and to gain more value out of them, not
for establishing a good relationship but just to be involved in a calculative way.
Employees are expected to defend their interests and to promote themselves when ever
possible.

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 14

Asian – collectivist cultures like China (Hong Kong 37th rank), view other companies
with less collectivistic philosophy as cold and not supportive. Collectivistic cultures have
a great emphasize on groups and think more in terms of “we”. Harmony and loyalty
within a company is very important and should always be maintained and confrontation
should be avoided. In China it is out of question to disagree with someone’s opinion in
public. You will do that in a more private and personal atmosphere to protect a person
from the “loss of face”. In collectivistic cultures a direct confrontation will be always
avoided. Expressions or phrases are used which describe a disagreement or negative
statement instead of saying no. Saying no would mean to destroy the harmony in the
group. The relationship between employer and employee or business partners is based
on trust and harmony and a deep understanding of moral values. The wealth of the
company and the groups inside are more important than the individual one’s. David
Yaou-Fai Ho, a Hong Kong social scientist defines “Loosing face as follows: “Face is
lost when the individual, either through his action or that people closely related to him,
fails to meet essential requirements placed upon him by virtue of the social position he
occupies.” (Hofstede, 1976, page 867) This can be compared with “self-respect” in
individualistic cultures. There is understanding and help for employees who have poor
performance.
“Christopher Earley, an American management researcher, gave 48 management
trainees from southern China and a matched group of 48 management trainees from
the USA an ‘in-basket-task’ consisting of 40 separate items requiring between two and
five minutes each (Earley, 1989). The task involved such activities as writing memos
evaluating plans and rating job candidates’ application forms. Half of the participants
from each country were given an individual goal of 20 items; the other half were given a
group goal of 200 items to be completed in one hour by 10 people. In addition, half of
the participants from either country, both from the group and from the individual goal
subsets, were asked to mark each item with their name; the other half turned them in
anonymously. The Chinese, collectivist, participants performed best when operating

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 15

with a group goal and anonymously. They performed worst when operating with
individually and with their name marked on their work. The individualist American
participants performed best when operating individually and with their work attributed to
them personally, and performed very poorly when operating as a group and
anonymously.”

"A social system is a code of laws which men observe in order to live together. Such a
code must have a basic principle, a starting point, or it cannot be devised. The starting
point is the question: Is the power of society limited or unlimited? 
    "Individualism answers: The power of society is limited by the inalienable, individual
rights of man. Society may make only such laws as do not violate these rights. 
    "Collectivism answers: The power of society is unlimited. Society may make any laws
it wishes, and force them upon anyone in any manner it wishes." -- Ayn Rand, Textbook
of Americanism, HERE

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are
endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life,
Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are
instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,
--That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the
Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its
foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall
seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." -- Jefferson et al, The
Declaration of Independence. discussing individualism and collectivism it needs to be
clear that this represents overall philosophical perspectives that aren't confined to
simple economic or political interpretations.  Rather these ideas permeate human
society, its interactions, and the subgroups within it.

It is interesting to note that many people want to advocate one philosophical position
over another rather than recognizing that regardless of our personal preferences, these
viewpoints are a part of human society and are responsible for the social circumstances
we find ourselves in.  It makes little difference which you prefer, but rather which are a
part of your existence and which you must respond to.

In general, it seems that the concept of individualism is more positively viewed among
people despite the fact that there is little evidence to suggest that it is a viable strategy
with which to maintain a cooperative society.  Similarly, collectivism is generally frowned

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 16

upon as a means by which an individual is lost to the "collective" mass and therefore to
be distrusted or avoided.

In truth, collectivism tends to dominate the social scenery ranging from the attitude
among family and friends up to the national levels.  Each group represents a collective
to which concessions are made and some degree of reciprocity is expected.  People
often vehemently defend or support family and friends, simply because they are
recognized as being a special social group and, in many cases, people will risk
everything to sacrifice for such a group.  Similarly, depending on the relative importance
of the social group to the individual, all manner of sacrifice and/or risk may be
undertaken to advance such a group.

We have all heard the phrases about being a "team player", or even Kennedy's "ask not
what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country"  as strong
indicators of the collectivist mindset.  Institutions such as the military, police, and fire
departments are based on being a member of a team (or collective) to which you
maintain loyalty and a willingness to sacrifice for the group. National sports teams are
similar examples of team behavior that extend beyond the abilities of individual players. 
Team sports often emphasize the need for being a team player as being significantly
more important than simply being skillful.  In fact, individual skills may often have to be
suppressed or tempered to engage the team rather than being maximized for individual
gain.

Team sports naturally are all about the team, but it is critical to focus initially on
individual players. Businesses have adopted concepts from team sports for years, and
now coaches are applying business concepts to team sports to gain a competitive
edge.
Even in the workplace there is a sense of being loyal to one's employer and
participating with the group to achieve objectives.  While such an identity can be more
difficult to maintain as the group becomes larger and more diverse, there is
nevertheless a strong impetus to ensure that the success of the group is considered

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 17

above that of the individual. This can be seen from the definition of "corporate culture"
shown below:

CORPORATE CULTURE
The set of important assumptions that members of the company share. It is a system of
shared values about what is important and beliefs about how the company works.
These common assumptions influence the ways the company operates.

Arguably our most individualistic activities such as Olympic sports are based on
belonging to a team rather than consideration as individual competitors.  While
individuals are certainly recognized for their achievements as competitors, it is within
the context of the larger group (i.e. the team or even the country) gaining the benefit of
their accomplishments.

There is no question that the individuals are often recognized, even heroically, for their
actions, but there can be little doubt that such recognition occurs against the backdrop
of the group, collective, or team.  The entire basis of leadership presumes the existence
of a collective over which such a trait can be exhibited.

Heroism is a much higher attainment than anything that occurs in sports. To be a hero
requires taking risks and exposing yourself to jeopardy. Heroism requires nobility of
purpose, some goal that is outside your own self-interest. And heroism may require
sacrifice.

So what causes so many people to resist the notion of collectivism in favor of

individualism?

I suspect that this occurs because while we recognize our role in the "collective" we also
want to be recognized as individuals for our contributions to such a group. It is precisely
such motivation that provides the "glue" which causes such groups to be strong.  Fame
and fortune are sought after because they provide a greater recognition within the social
group (perhaps even all human beings), which is what holds the appeal. 

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 18

In addition, most people are strongly opposed to the idea of being coerced into group
participations.  So it would seem that our urge to consider ourselves as individualists
hinges more on having the freedom to determine which groups we associate with, than
any issue of true individaulism. However, even coercion is tolerated to a fair degree if it
doesn't conflict to radically with our basic desires.  A military draft may be considered
too coercive, while the idea of getting a job or obeying the law are generally considered
reasonably acceptable.

True individualism is not common and in our society is typically marked as being
a sociopath.  This is an individual for whom no social connections matter, and there is
little ability to empathize with fellow humans. 

Even the strongest advocates of individualism rarely argue in its favor as much as they
argue that individuals need to be recognized and acknowledged within the larger social
group.  The typical argument focuses on the desire to freely choose which collective
one participates in rather than arguing against collectivism. An individualist requires no
such acknowledgement nor recognition, since they have no need of the social group's
approval. However, the majority of people enjoy the groups they belong to and will
strongly identify with many of them that share similar values and ideals.  This doesn't
deny our individual identities, nor does it deprive us of the choices we make regarding
such group participations.  In fact, it is precisely our ability to curtail our individualist
tendencies that has given rise to the society and achievements we can claim as human
beings. 

If humans evolved as individualists, I suspect they would still be sitting in the trees or

hunkered down in a savannah someplace.

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 19

 POWER DISTANCE
Power distance is the extent to which less powerful members of institutions and
organizations within a country expect and accept that power is distributed unequally.”
(Hofstede page 262). Power distance describes also the extent to which employees
accept that superiors have more power than they have. Furthermore that opinions and
decisions are right because of the higher position some has. In countries with high
power distance employees are too afraid to express their doubts and disagreements
with their autocratic and paternalistic bosses. The index for power distance describes
the dependence of relationships in a country.
It is small in countries where bosses and subordinates work close together and consult
each other. Subordinates and superiors consider each other as or less equal even there
is a difference in education level. The hierarchical system can always change
depending on the circumstances. The hierarchies are flat with a decentralized
organization and a small number of supervisors who are expected to be accessible for
their subordinates. Within a company the degree for unequal treatment is reduced to a
low level. There is a interdependence between employer and employee. The salary
range is narrow between the top and bottom in companies. Subordinates expect to be
consulted within the decision-making process.

In contrast in large power distance countries the relation between boss and
subordinate is strictly ruled and dependent on the decisions of the boss. In
companies with larger power distance which have a very centralized
organization, subordinates expect to be told what to do from their superiors
because they consider each other as unequal. Inequalities are normally
expected and privileges are seen as desirable by superiors. There is a
large extend to centralization and the salary range is wide. People in high
power distance cultures positive emotions are expressed to superiors and
negative emotions to subordinates.

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 20

 Jitender Dabas
Last week, the first part of this column posited that the consumer should not be king.
Today, consumers’ scorn for brands seems to keep growing even as brands try harder
and harder to keep them pleased. This disdain, postulates the writer in this concluding
piece, is due to a mindset in Indian society where people believe they are superior or
subordinate relative to their place in the social structure. To uphold their image, brands
should put a certain distance between themselves and the consumer.

What has changed in the last few years is that the consumer has become more
powerful because of the choices that he has today as a result of the service sector
opening up to private players. But why has this led to the change in the value system of
t he consumers?

The answer lies in the understanding of Indian social structure and the abilities of its
sub-parts to handle power. Indian society is a pyramidal construction with the power
gradient being steep between levels/classes. An age-old structure that Indians are very
comfortable with. And the truth about a pyramidal structure is that in such a structure
you either look up or look down at other people. There cannot be a third way, a
relationship of equality. In such a structure either you rule or you are being ruled.
Therefore the only relationships that the Indians have existed comfortably in are of
either superior or subordinate.

Added to it is the historical experience of society handling power. There haven’t been
too many instances in history of the middle class holding power in India. Whenever a
part of the middle class has acquired power, suddenly those parts have generally
displayed a change in behaviour which has been towards becoming rude. (The neo-rich
class has at times tried to aggressively assert its dominance in an ugly way.)

By and large, mainstream Indians (or the middle class) are bad masters – they don’t
know how to handle authority. We’ve never been good to people below us. We’ve never
been too courteous to sections that perform menial tasks and in this regard we find that
people in some of the Western societies are far more courteous to the bartender or the
guy at the gate or the valet at the car park.

The Power Distance Theory

A more scientific understanding of this behaviour comes from the study of different
cultures by Geert Hofstede on various dimensions. The Hofstede model of five
dimensions of national cultures has analysed and differentiated societies from 50
countries on the basis of Power Distance, Uncertainty Avoidance, Individualism,

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 21

Masculinity and Long-Term Orientation. One of the dimensions on which the 50
countries were plotted and differentiated was the Power Distance Index (PDI)

Power Distance was defined as the extent to which the less powerful members of
organisations and institutions (like the family) accept and expect that power is
distributed unequally. This represents inequality (more versus less), but defined from
below, not from above. The most important bit is that it suggests that in a lot of societies
the level of inequality is endorsed by the followers as much as by the leaders. All
societies are unequal, but some are more unequal than others. On the basis of how
people in different cultures willingly accept or reject these inequalities the societies in 50
different countries have been classified as small and large power distance societies.

Some of the characteristics of a large power distance society are:

Power is a basic fact of society ante-dating good or evil: its legitimacy is irrelevant

Parents teach children obedience

Older people both respected and feared

Teacher-centered education

Hierarchy means existential inequality

Subordinates expect to be told what to do

Corruption frequent; scandals are covered up

Income distribution very uneven

Religions with a hierarchy of priests

India has Power Distance as the highest Hofstede Dimension for the culture, with a
ranking of 77 as compared to the world average of 56.5. This score indicates a high
level of inequality of power and wealth within the society. What is important to
understand is that this condition is not subverted upon the population, but rather
accepted by the population as a cultural norm.

This is where India completely differs from some of the Western cultures such as
Sweden, Austria, the UK, the US and Australia who have very low PDI scores less than
40 and hence are classified as low power distance societies. Hence the relationships
between entities there are more equal and less hierarchical.

Power distance between brands and consumers

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 22

What this means is that in the low power distance societies it is possible for brands to
have the relationship of equality with the consumer. The brands can ascribe the status
of ‘King’ to the consumer and yet retain the status of equal in the hierarchy. But not in a
high power distance society such as India and the others. And therein, perhaps, lies the
reason for the problems the service brands are facing in controlling their relationship
with the consumers.

In the Western markets the consumercentric nature of brand management slowly

evolved to putting the consumer at the centre of everything and started treating them as
kings. But since these were all small power distance societies, even while treating the
consumer as the ‘king’ the brands themselves didn’t have to compromise their own
position.

Not so in a high PDI (Power Distance Index). In such cultures there can only be a
hierarchical relationship between the consumer and the brand. The servile nature of the
business puts the service brands at a disadvantage in consumer relationships, and over
and above this when their ‘let the consumer be king’ model comes into force they
completely become subservient to the consumer, leading them to start treating them
with the same disdain they treat any subservient entity in their culture.

This explains why, as the service brands are falling over each other to please the
consumer he is treating them with more and more contempt. Not that he dislikes being
given importance but because that’s the only way he knows to treat his subject.

This also explains why the consumer was more respectful 10 years ago when he wasn’t
treated too well by the State-owned brands. It is very simple. Intentionally or otherwise,
the service providers then kept the power with themselves and the consumer,
comfortable with being at the lower rung of the power equation, gave the brands the
status of the ruler and was happy to be ruled.

But in today’s scenario, the brands have a serious challenge in front of them to retain
their premiumness.

Can’t Be King: What does it mean?

It simply means the brands need to be always at a higher level of hierarchy than the
consumer if they need to protect the premium-ness. If the choice has to be made then
the brand should be the king.

So are there examples of brands that seem to be doing it right? Are there service
brands that behave like kings and have people following them? Well, there are many
such as Gymkhana Club and India Habitat Centre which enjoy high premium simply
because of their exclusionist positioning. The most interesting case in point is Kingfisher
Airlines which seems to be climbing fast on brand preference among fliers in India. The
whole experience is built almost as an invite from the king to his private kingdom to
enjoy the luxury. It offers you great service but keeps itself on a higher pedestal and

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 23

doesn’t compromise its position in the whole equation. Therefore it is very much
possible to keep the consumer at the centre without having to make him King.

What it does not mean

What needs to be understood is that this is not about treating the consumer disdainfully.
The brands will need to provide the best of service but what they need to avoid is
becoming too eager to please the customer. Across all consumer touch points we need
to be careful about our status in the relationship.

The greater the number of humble telephone calls I receive from the customer service
asking if I’m happy the more I will start asserting my ruler status on the brand.

The service brands need to be careful when they’re training their staff in the softer skills.
They need to be told the difference between being polite and being servile. The CEOs
of top companies should not appear in a servile avataar in TVCs even if they’re handling
some delicate PR issue. I would always recommend the way Vijay Mallya invites you
aboard his flight. That looks like a ‘King’ inviting you to his kingdom. The equation with
the consumer is therefore stated clearly in the very beginning.

It is also not about being niche and mass. The argument that by increasing the power
distance from your consumers you will become niche is also not correct. In fact, the
brands with more power distance from their consumers will always be the bigger and
more desired brands than others. Sonia Gandhi and Shah Rukh Khan are examples of
two celebrities in India whose popularity has increased in direct proportion to their
power distance from their consumers. And in market share terms they are bigger brands
than any other in India.

After the telecom and financial services the next wave of service brands to hit Indian
consumers will be from retail, entertainment and food services. Before they make plans
to rule the market they need to decide who will rule the relationship.

Not just India

Indian has a PDI of 77. But then there are countries such as Russia, Romania, Mexico,
Bangladesh and others from the Arab world with PDI scores higher than 80. The service
brands will have to make similar choices in those cultures as well. Other cultural
dimensions will affect the overall consumer behaviour in each country but brands will
have to decide which side of the power equation they want to be on.

Therefore, let the brand always be the King. Or at least the consumer should never be.

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 24

 CROSS CULTURE VALUES
All communication is cultural -- it draws on ways we have learned to speak
and give nonverbal messages. We do not always communicate the same
way from day to day, since factors like context, individual personality, and
mood interact with the variety of cultural influences we have internalized
that influence our choices. Communication is interactive, so an important
influence on its effectiveness is our relationship with others. Do they hear
and understand what we are trying to say? Are they listening well? Are we
listening well in response? Do their responses show that they understand
the words and the meanings behind the words we have chosen? Is the
mood positive and receptive? Is there trust between them and us? Are
there differences that relate to ineffective communication, divergent goals
or interests, or fundamentally different ways of seeing the world? The
answers to these questions will give us some clues about the effectiveness
of our communication and the ease with which we may be able to move
through conflict.

The challenge is that even with all the good will in the world,
miscommunication is likely to happen, especially when there are significant
cultural differences between communicators. Miscommunication may lead
to conflict, or aggravate conflict that already exists. We make -- whether it
is clear to us or not -- quite different meaning of the world, our places in it,
and our relationships with others. In this module, cross-cultural
communication will be outlined and demonstrated by examples of ideas,
attitudes, and behaviors involving four variables:

 Time and Space

 Fate and Personal Responsibility
 Face and Face-Saving
 Nonverbal Communication

As our familiarity with these different starting points increases, we are

cultivating cultural fluency -- awareness of the ways cultures operate

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 25

 in communication and conflict, and the ability to respond effectively to
these differences.

JOB SATISFACTION
Due to the rapid changes in the global marketplace, new and changing technologies,
and significant competition in all industries, paternalistic organizations are quickly going
the way of the dinosaur. Today’s employers expect their workers to be self-directed and
responsible for their own career development. A critical component in establishing a
“win-win” relationship between employers and their employees is having a mutual
understanding of the importance of job satisfaction.

Job satisfaction - organization’s view. Organizations hire people to perform specific

tasks that help them achieve their business goals. They want to hire the talent
necessary to achieve organizational goals that are consistent with their mission and
profitability. The process of selecting employees is dependent on accurate job
descriptions, reasonable expectations and realistic, self-aware applicants. When an
organization successfully finds people who “fit” the job requirements, who enjoy and are
skilled in the tasks assigned to meet the organization’s goals, and appreciate the
organization’s salary/benefit strategy, a win-win situation is created for the employer
and employee.

Historically, the focus of organizations has been to establish a generally acceptable

organizational culture. Organization-provided satisfiers (org-ps) are offered to
employees in exchange for outcomes the organization considers valuable, such as high
levels of performance and loyalty. Organizations benchmark their compensation and
benefit strategies to remain competitive in hiring and retaining talent. They also face
increasing expenses in benefits such as healthcare, retirement investments and tuition
reimbursement.

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 26

Employers that understand another critical aspect of job satisfaction will gain an
advantage in recruiting, retaining and developing talent. This second aspect is referred
to as job-related satisfiers (job-rs), the satisfiers and enjoyment that an individual
employee experiences from performing the actual work or tasks of his or her job

Job Satisfaction - employee’s view. Starting with the end in mind, reflect for a
moment on what people might be looking for when they take a job. Perhaps they are
working mainly for a paycheck? Maybe their health benefits are most important, or a
good retirement plan? Some people may be interested in tuition reimbursement,
opportunities for advancement, or to learn new skills. All of these types of critical
rewards are determined by the organization based on their strategy to be profitable and
competitive in recruiting and retaining people.This is the heart of how employees and
organizations negotiate the value of the labor exchange.

Job-related satisfiers have to do with the employee’s desire to use his/her abilities to
make a contribution, to do meaningful work, and to be valued. These satisfiers are more
directly related to how much we enjoy our day-to-day tasks and our role in the
organization. How we perform on daily tasks is related to our productivity, and we
expect to discuss the assignment and performance of our work with an immediate
supervisor or manager.

The annual performance review is typically the main conversation to explore productivity
and satisfaction. Since these conversations focus more on evaluation of performance,
goal attainment and salary adjustments (org-ps), they seldom get to meaningful
conversations about satisfaction with tasks or the “fit” of the current or future work itself
(job-rs). Also, managers juggle multiple demands to achieve organizational goals, so
they can easily under-appreciate the powerful influence that job-related satisfiers have
on employees’ overall satisfaction. By taking the initiative to communicate with their
managers, employees can help ensure that managers are better able to provide the
necessary guidance or coaching support.

In summary, it is challenging for an organization and manager to identify and promote

employee satisfaction at an individual level. This is surprising because these job-related
satisfiers are highly motivating when met, (de-motivating when not met), and are at the
heart of productivity and performance. 

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 27

 Job Satisfaction Model

Employees are in a better position for achieving success and satisfying work once they
understand and can communicate how their own unique work profiles
(aptitudes/abilities, interests, personality style & values) can meet an organization’s
work–related requirements and opportunities.

A simple job satisfaction model shown of the following page demonstrates the
organizing relationship of these different concepts.

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 28

 The model is divided so the concepts on the left side identify what the
employer wants and what it offers as rewards and benefits - the
organization-provided satisfiers (org-ps, circles 1 and 5). The right side of
the model shows what the employee contributes to accomplish specific
tasks (circle 2) and ultimately the organization's goals (job-rs). The more
self-aware an individual is about their aptitudes, personal style, and
values, the greater the potential to identify and select jobs that fit. The
more accurate the job description, the better the odds of attracting the

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 29

 right pool of applicants (circle 3). When there is a clear fit between the
person and the job, there is a greater chance of successfully
accomplishing goals (circle 4). This in turn leads to an increase in
personal satisfaction (circles 6 and 7). In today's complex work
environment, job descriptions are evolving as we take on special projects
or are assigned to teams. This expanded complexity increases the need
to be proactive in determining fit.

Performance & fit - the core of satisfaction

Job performance and fit are at the center of the diagram because they
comprise the core of a win-win relationship between employer and
employee, (circles 3 & 4). When we are relatively satisfied with our salary,
vacation time and other organization-related rewards and we find a fit and
enjoy our work, feel appreciated and understand that our contributions are
needed (our job-related satisfiers), we develop a personal, higher level of
commitment to the achievement of goals and thereby the success of the
organization. Collectively, when individuals achieve higher levels of job
satisfaction and performance, an organization is better positioned to meet
its goals with improved productivity and profitability.

What happens when the job no longer fits?

We might select a position that is an excellent fit at any point in our

working years. We perform well and enjoy the work, the benefits and
rewards are in the right range - but over time the things begin to change.
This can be the result of new and different goals that no longer use our
full range of aptitudes/abilities, the introduction of technology that alters
the work, the need for new knowledge or skills to accomplish the tasks, or
perhaps the lack of anything new. These types of changes and others
impact our level of satisfaction. The key is to take a step back, conduct an
evaluation of what has changed and identify what specifically is impacting
our current level of satisfaction.

First, it is important to determine whether any of the actual work

requirements and expectations, (job-rs), or organization-provided

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 30

 satisfiers have changed. You may discover that the job is still satisfying,
but the organization may be facing increased competition or costs that
have impacted their profitability and capability to maintain its current
salary and/or benefit strategy. This change may impact our satisfaction
with the way the organization rewards us. In today's changing economy, a
situational analysis should include industry trends to determine if the
changes are specific to your organization or are industry-wide.

Second, since there are many aspects of job satisfaction, it may be time
to re-evaluate what is most important for you. Our needs change over
time. We may have experienced changes in our personal life or entered a
new stage of life.

Finally, if the job itself has become unsatisfactory, determining what has
changed is critical to planning effective next steps in your career decision
making process. Unfortunately, without an analysis of what is contributing
to our personal level of satisfaction, many of us make uninformed choices
that don't actually improve our circumstances or satisfaction.

Tips to manage your career and job satisfaction

1. Become more self-aware. Learn about your aptitudes/abilities,

preferences, values, and interests and be prepared to articulate where
you can best contribute and what is important to you.

2. Practice using both personal and organizational information to analyze

and evaluate different work requirements to help you evaluate what offers
a good fit. Since most professional jobs today are a composite of projects,
some will be more inviting to you than others. By understanding what you
want and taking the opportunity to influence your manager, you are more
likely to gain access to projects that are attractive to you.

3. Benchmark the type of work you perform in your organization with

comparable work in similar organizations. This broader context will let you

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 31

 see trends and help you to evaluate the organization-provided rewards
more objectively.

4. Identify specifically what is contributing to your satisfaction or

dissatisfaction. Make a list. What items relate to the organization,
department, or your job? Is there something you need to learn or change
to improve the situation? Have the job responsibilities altered over time?
Take the time to get at the root of what isn't working.

5. Learn how to talk with your manager about what types of projects you
enjoy or specifically identify roles that are appealing. Also, share your
thoughts about what you don't enjoy and why. Remember, at times we all
have assignments find work tasks that are not satisfying.

6. Find a mentor in the organization to give you feedback and help you
find developmental opportunities to contribute that more closely fit your
work profile.

7. Build a professional support network to keep current on your field and

understand the changes that may be coming.

8. Develop a relationship with a career professional. 

9. Be proactive, conduct an annual career checkup

Keeping call center workers satisfied with their jobs is just as important as finding
new employees.  If a company is willing to go through the trouble of finding
qualified candidates to handle their call center work, it should also make sure
that its current agents are happy.  If not, the situation depicted in the cartoon
below can easily turn into a reality.  

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 32

 New job opportunities, including many in the call center business, continue to
open up all around.  As workers get tired of being under-appreciated, under-paid
and overworked, they are likely to move on to other jobs.

The void that is left by departing employees is difficult to fill because new
workers may not be available, or may only be attainable at much higher salaries. 
In addition, the negative effects of loosing employees are not only felt by workers
who are left to pick up the slack, but also by customers who must deal with
higher queues and burned out reps. 

Whether the call center is a virtual one or a mortar and brick one, call center
work is challenging and certainly not for people who do not being on the phone. 
However, for the employees that choose customer service as a means of making
a living, it is imperative to give them the treatment they deserve.

After all, without a customer service call center, how will companies know deal
with their customer's concerns?  Sure, there are other means of communication,
but for must people, there is nothing like a friendly voice on the other side of the
phone.

EVLN MODEL

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 33

organizational behavior, the Exit-Voice-Loyalty-Neglect (EVLN)
Model is a template that identifies ways that employees respond
to dissatisfaction.
Exit

Exit refers to leaving the organization, transferring to another work unit, or at least trying
to exit the dissatisfying situation. Exit usually follows specific "shock events," such as
when your boss treats you unfairly. These shock events generate strong emotions that
energize employees to think about and search for an alternative employment.
Voice

Voice refers to any attempt to change, rather than escape from, the dissatisfying
situation. Voice can be constructive response, such as recommending ways for
management to improve the situation, or it can be more confrontational, such as by

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 34

filing formal grievances. In the extreme, some employees might engage in
counterproductive behaviors to get attention and force changes in the organization.
Loyalty

Loyalty has been described in different ways, but the most widely held view is that
"loyalists" are employees who respond to dissatisfaction by patiently waiting - some say
they "suffer in silence" - for the problem to work itself out or get resolved by others.
Neglect

Neglect includes reducing work efforts, paying less attention to quality, and increasing
absenteeism and lateness. It is generally considered a passive activity that has negative
consequences for the organization.

For example : suffering from a dismal customer satisfaction rating in

the 17th percentile and an employee turnover rate 25 percent ,
Sarasota memorial hospital formed teams to improve employee
working condition and customer service. Sarasota’s new focus on
pleasing customer begins with the valet parking for patients against
the complain about scare parking around the hospital. By refocusing
on satisfying employees and customer. Sarasota reduced employee
turnover to 16 percent and boosted customer satisfaction to 90
percentile.

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 35

 BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. www.globalbehavior.com/sports/

2. www.nwlink.com/~Donclark/leader/leaddef.html

3. www.zone37.com/

4. Michelle LeBaron article of cross culture

5. 11th edition of Stephen p. robbins & Seema Sanghi

6. Goggle Wikipedia

7. TSO Communication 

8. Jitender Dabas reference of case

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. Page 36