Point / Counterpoint: Traits Are Powerful Predictors of Behavior

 

The argument: if the individual’s personality changes as a result of exposure to organizational settings, in what sense can that individual be said to have traits that persistently and consistently affect his or her reactions to those very settings?

 

Trait theorists are focused in the measurement of traits, which can be defined as habitual patterns of behavior, thought, and emotion in which are relatively stable over time, differ across individuals, and influence behavior (Saul Kassin, (2003). Psychology. USA: Prentice-Hall, Inc.). One of the common frameworks widely used is the Five-Factor Model (OCEAN) which includes Openness to experience/intellect, Conscientiousness, Extroversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism.

 

From the case, it is highlighted that there are two important problems with using traits to explain a large proportion of behavior in organizations. First, organization settings are strong situations that have a large impact on employee behavior. And last, individuals are highly adaptive and personality traits change in response to organizational situations.

 

It is true that traits are powerful predictors of behavior in organizations and the argument in the case is an extreme situation. Managers value and use the trait theory in hiring employees, the Five-Factor Models concept help managers in identifying and hiring the necessary employees needed in the organization structure. These models help managers in generalizing the employees and help the managers in grouping the common trait employees in order to achieve a harmonious and effective work environment. The formal and informal organization settings are placed as indicators and not as manipulators or constraints in order to inform managers of the reactions of employees and whereas, will be able to react and adjust to certain scenarios/reactions. The employees may adjust or change their personality in terms of organization’s formal and informal constraints in time due to pressure of change, but before these changes happen, there will be reactions from employees. These reactions from employees are predicted by trait theories, these reactions are the persistent and consistent traits of employees based on the models and these reactions are important feedbacks needed to be recognized by managers. These feedbacks can be used to change the said organizational constraints in order to keep the behavior of the employees be predictable. On the other hand, these organizational constraints can be retained in order to influence the employees to the needed and expected behavior.

 

In a situation where the effects of traits for some time to be likely strongest in relatively weak organizational situations can be interpreted by managers, from trait theory, to be the trigger points and markers that the organization’s formal and informal settings to be really weak and needed to be changed. The change in rules, regulations and culture will be effective by predicting the reactions of employees with the use of trait theory models. These predicted reactions will help the necessary and expected changes in the organization be effective and efficient in terms of time and resources of the organization.

 

disclaimer: this is a reaction paper as a requirement from an MBA course in Organizational Behavior

Ethical Dilemma: Is Organization Behavior Modification (OB Mod) a Form of Manipulation?

Manipulation is defined as a skillful or artful management by dictionary.com website. Another definition of manipulation, by the root word manipulate, is to manage or utilize skillfully by Meriam-Webster Dictionary. We can summarize that manipulation is closely related to management. In addition, Organization Behavior Modification (OB Mod) is a form of management in an organization level. Hence, we can say that OB Mod is a form of manipulation thru management. OB mod can be vied in a positive way by giving incentives to employees and by motivation, but in a negative way in a form of punishments and demoralization.

In terms of ethical issues of manipulation, using OB Mod for manipulating the behavior of employees is relative in terms of the point of view managers and employees. Managers are ethical in using OB Mod to employees in order to achieve the desired results needed by the company.  Whereas in hind sight, when achieving the desired results also affects the employees in assuring they will have their proper wage and benefits with the addition of incentives. Hence, in achieving the goal of the company, the saying “the end justifies the means” applies for managers.  In terms of the employees, OB Mod is unethical since it violates their rights of individual thinking freely or having limited choices. Hence, the saying “the means justifies the end” applies for the employees. The dilemma in the argument is in which ethical framework OB Mod becomes unethical; the holistic point of view or the individual point of view.

The Markkula framework, as a broad framework, will justify the use of OB Mod of managers in manipulating the behavior of employees.

• Utilitarian – whether the action maximizes the utility of the issue or to achieve “the greatest good for the most amounts of people”: using OB Mod will realize the goal of the company and will produce profit to the shareholders and wages for the employees.
• Justice and Fairness– whether the action has equal and fair effects on all involved: OB Mod is not equal and not fair on all involved especially for the employees since they are the only ones being manipulated.
• Rights and Duties – Whether the action violates any rights or imposed duties: OB Mod violates the individual rights of every employee to think for one self and by having only limited choices. However, OB Mod has not violated any duties of the employer when incentives are used but violates the duties when deductions of wages and benefits are used in the form of punishments.
• Ethics of Care – Whether the action has any adverse effects on the immediate stakeholders: OB mod has adverse effects since the employees are considered one of the immediate stakeholders positively or negatively depending on the method of use.
• Virtue – Whether the action violates any virtue: OB Mod deceives the employees by believing on limited choices.

In summary, OB Mod is unethical by four out of five views; only in terms of the Utilitarian view does OB Mod become ethical.

However, OB Mod can be also viewed as a reaction of managers to employee’s bad behaviors and bad results. Hence, OB Mod can be ethical in order to restore order and make the employees effective again.

Hence, OB Mod’s ethical position depends on the proactive and reactive state of the managers and company to the employees; proactively as unethical but reactively to bad employees as ethical. In addition, OB Mod is viewed as a solution to problems in a company for managers.

disclaimer: this is a reaction paper as a requirement from an MBA course in Organizational Behavior

Point / Counterpoint: In Search of the Quick Fix

 

 

Popular books related to organizational behavior are considered quick fix books. They are deceiving managers and top management executives that there exists a better and fast way in dealing organizational behavior problems and situations.

 

Organizational Behavior (OB) is a broad concept and these (quick fix) books are mostly and only focusing in a certain specific branch of study in organizational behavior. Like “Tribes” by Seth Godin in which the book describes on a way of bringing together like-minded people, and starting something big. In general perspective, the book only tackles the opportunity and success in utilizing the common thinking of employees and using this inputs in improving and building success. However, the book does not tackle on handling the minority of employees that are not thinking the same as of the majority of common employee thinkers. The book also tackles only on the group level of organizational behavior in terms of Leadership. In which, Organizational Behavior have three levels in terms of “Essential of Organizational Behavior” by Robbins; (1) Individual Level, (2) Group Level and (3) Organizational System Level.

 

These (quick fix) books are very specific in topics of Organizational Behavior that there exists different kind of Leadership books in which each book is only highlighting the importance of a specific trait of Leadership. However there exist many kinds and traits of Leadership in Organizational Behavior with different strengths and weakness in every situation.  These books only sells to managers that using only a specific trait in Leadership can lead to success in an organization. Brainwashing managers that there is only a better trait of Leadership and other traits are to be ignored. Examples of these books are; “Servant Leadership” by Robert K. Greenleaf in which the book is a collection of essays about serving others, and how you can lead by example. Another book is “The Versatile Leader” by Bob Kaplan and Rob Kaiser in which the book describes how to make the most of the manager’s strengths, and how to avoid burnout. Lastly, “Primal Leadership” by Daniel Goleman in which the book describes how to be an emotionally intelligent leader, and how that will benefit the manager in today’s world.

 

However, these (quick fix) books are still sources of knowledge and information. These books are mediums in order to share and inspire managers the success of other managers when doing right in applying proper Organizational Behavior concepts. These books also stand as warnings and proofs in sharing the failures of other managers when neglecting concepts in Organizational Behavior. These books are compilations of knowledge that gives assurance to managers that there are other managers out there having the same situation and problems they are encountering.

 

It is the job of managers and top management executives in realizing the purpose and use of these (quick fix) books and uses them properly in guiding them to a success in their organization.

 

disclaimer: this is a reaction paper as a requirement from an MBA course in Organizational Behavior