MBA (REVISED)

FIRST SEMESTER
ASSIGNMENTS
MB0022 Management Process and Organizational Behaviour
(3 credits)
Assignment 1
(4x10 = 40 marks)

Answer the following questions:

1. Compare and contrast Maslow, Alderfer and Hertzberg theory of motivation.
2. "Resistance to change is an irrational response". Do you agree or disagree?
Explain.

1. Explain the contribution of different disciplines for the development of organizational

behaviour.

Contributing Disciplines to the OB Field:

Organizational Behaviour is an applied behavioural science that is built upon

contributions from a number of behavioural disciplines.
The main areas are:
Psychology
Sociology
Social Psychology
Anthropology
Political Science

Psychology:
Psychology is the science that attempts to measure, explain and at times changethe
behaviour of humans and other animals. Early Industrial/organizational psychologists
were concerned with the problemsof fatigue, boredom and other factors relevant to
working conditions that could disrupt/ impede efficient work performance. More
recently, their contributions have been expanded to include learning, perception,
personality, emotions, training, leadership effectiveness, needs and motivational forces,
jobs satisfaction, decision making processes, performance appraisals, attitude
measurement, employee selection techniques, work design and job stress.

Sociology:
Sociologists study the social system in which the individuals fill their roles; that is,
sociology studies people in relation to their fellow human beings. Their significant
contribution to OB is through their study of group behaviour in Organizations,
particularly formal and complex organizations.

Social Psychology:
Socila Psychology blends the concept of Psychology and sociology. It focuses on the
influence of people on one another. The major challenge deals with the issue of how to
implement it and how to reduce barriers to its acceptance.

Anthropology:
Anthropology is the study of societies to learn about human beings and their activities.
Anthropologsts work on cultures and environments; for example, they have aided in
understanding differences in fundamental values, attituded, and behaviour among people
in different countries and within different organizations.

Political Science
Politicqal Science studies the behaviour of individuals and groups within a political
environment. It focuses on areas, such as, conflict, intra-organizational politics and
power.
2. Compare and contrast Maslow, Alderfer and Hertzberg theory of motivation.
Maslow’s Hierarchy Theory:

According to this theory, proposed by Maslow(1943), human beings have wants and
desires which influence their behaviour, only unsatisfied needs can influence behaviour,
satisfied needs can not. The needs are arranged in order of importance, from the basic to
the complex. The person advances to the next level of needs only after the lower level
need ia atleast minimally satisfied. The further they progress up the hierarchy, the more
individuality, humanness and psychological health a person will show.
The five needs are:
Physiological: Includes hunger, thirst, shelter, sex, and other bodily needs.
Safety: Includes security and protection from physical and emotional harm.
Social:Includes affection, belongingness, acceptance and friendship.
Esteem: Include internal esteem factors, such as, self respect, automony, and achievement
and external esteem factors sucha as status, recognition and attention.
Self-actualization: The drive to become what one is capable of becoming; includes
growth, achieving ones potential and self fulfillment.

Maslow seperated the five needs into higher and lower orders. Physiological and safety
needs are described as lower order. Social, esteem and self actualization are classsified as
higher-order needs. Higher-order needs are satisfied internally, where as Lower –order
needs are predominantly satisfied , externally.

Herzberg’s Two Factor theory:

Herzberg(1959)constructed a two-dimensional paradigm of factors affecting people’s
attitude about work. These two factors are motivators and hygiene factors and this theory
is also called motivation-hygiene Theory.

Motivators are intrinsic factors, such as advancement, recognition, responsibility and

achievement. Presence of these factors ensure job satisfaction. Extrinsic factors, such as ,
company policy, supervision, interpersonal relations, working conditions and salary are
hygiene factors. The absence of hygiene factors can create job dissatisfaction, but their
presence does not motivate or create satisfaction.

In summary, motivators describe a person’s relationship with what she or he does, many
related to the tasks being performed. Hygiene factors on the other hand, have to do with a
person’s relationship to the context or environment in which she or he performs the job.
The satisfiers relate to what a person does while the dissatisfiers relate to the situation in
which the person does what he or she does.

Removing dissatisfying characteristics from a job does not necessarily make the job
satisfying. Job satisfaction factors are separate and distinct from job dissatisfaction
factors. When hygiene factors are adequate, people will not de dissatisfied; neither will
they be satisfied. To motivate people, emphasize factors intrinsically rewarding that are
associated with the work itself or to outcomes directly derived from it.
ERG theory
Alderfer (1972) classifies needs into three categories into hierarchical order.
They are

The Existence category

Provides our basic material existence requirements.
They include Maslow’s psychological and safety needs.
Relatedness Category
The desire we have for maintaining important interpersonal relationships.
These social and status desires require interaction with others.
They align with Maslow’s social need and external component.
Growth Category
An intrinsic desire for personal development.
These include the intrinsic component from Maslow’s esteem category, and the
characteristics include under self-actualization.

This theory is very similar to Maslow’s theory. Existence need corrosponds with
Maslow’s physiological and safety needs, retardness need corrosponds with Maslow’s
esteem and self-actualization needs.
Alderfer’s ERG theory differs from Maslow’s theory in the following arguments:
1. More than one need may be operative at the same time.
2 If the gratification of a higher-level need is sifted, the desire to satisfy a lower-level
need increases.
3. ERG theory does not assume that there exists a rigid hierarchy. A person can be
working on growth even though existence or relatedness needs are unsatisfied, or all three
need categories could be operating at the same time.

ERG theory also contains a frustration-regression dimension. Maslow argued that an

individual would stay at a certain need level until the need was satisfied. ERG urgues that
multiple need s can be operating as motivators at the same time. ERG theory notes that
when a higher-order need level is frustrated, the individual’s desire to increase a lower-
level need takes place (Robbins 2003)
4. Four Approaches to Stress Management

Every person has experienced stress in some form or other and many writers have defined
stress in different ways. Some definitions have gained recognition while others are still
been passionately debated, avidly argued and aggressively defended. Stress, if not
managed effectively, can cause serious health problems, even death. Self-medication in
such situations is never advisable. Only qualified health professionals should treat stress-
related illnesses.

Walter Cannon (1932) conducted researches on stress and came up with his theory of
“fight-or-flight” response. He found out that when an organism comes in a situation that
it cannot comprehend, at that time either the organism fights or runs away. This is so
because the organism in the perception of threat, releases such hormones that enable it to
survive either by fighting or by fleeing.

In humans, these hormones enable the heart to pump faster, thereby delivering more
blood to the body and more oxygen to the body parts. The heart rate and blood pressure
increases as it flows much faster delivering sugar and oxygen to important muscles. The
sweat glands produce more sweat in an effort to cool down these muscles thereby
increasing their efficiency. The blood is diverted from the skin to the core of the body in
an effort to minimize blood loss if wounded. The hormones enable the mind to
concentrate only on the object of threat so that the individual can exclusively deal with it.
All these biochemical actions and reactions take place in direct proportion to the
perceived threat, some shock, something unexpected, or something that frustrates. If the
threat is small, the response is small, and likewise, if the threat is large the response is
large. These biochemical hormones enable the individual to survive stressful conditions.

The darker side of this critical mobilization of the body is that the body becomes more
highly-strung, more excitable, more jumpy, more irritable, and more anxious. This state
reduces the ability to interact successfully making it difficult to execute precise and
controlled skills. In addition, when the mind focuses exclusively on the subject of threat,
then it fails to draw from the other sources present and thus no fine judgment is possible.

Hans Selye (1956), one of the founding fathers of stress research, stated, that stress may
be good or bad depending on how the person takes it. Exhilarating, successful, and
creative work done under stress is beneficial, whereas stress caused by infection,
humiliation, or failure is detrimental. He was of the opinion that certain biochemical
effects take place irrespective of stress being helpful or harmful.

Modern research is of the view that stress has mainly negative effects, and starts a chain
reaction of biochemical actions, which has harmful long-term effects. In a positive
environment, such biochemical actions and reactions is not witnessed; hence, it
conclusively proves that stress is something ‘bad’ for human health.

Richard S. Lazarus, stated the most widely accepted definition of stress, as a condition or
feeling that is experienced by a person when the demands put on the person exceed the
social and personal resources that the person is able to garner.

Stress can be and should be managed to enable survival. Modern working life creates
tremendous personal and occupational pressures, which need immediate management and
successful resolution. Stress management techniques are many and all of them try to
control this fight-flight response. Stress has to be managed with a rational, calm,
controlled and socially sensitive approach.

To avoid burnout and debilitated health in the end, stress may be managed by the
following techniques:

* Action-oriented approach - In this kind of approach, the problem creating the stress is
identified and confronted directly. Appropriate changes are made to alter the situation or
the environment and thereby reduce or eliminate stress by resolution of the problem
creating the stress.

* Emotion-oriented approach - In this kind of approach, the individual does not have
the power to change the environment or the situation. The individual modifies personal
emotions to interpret the situation differently and thereby attempts to reduce to eliminate
stress.

* Acceptance-oriented approach - In this kind of approach, the individual has no direct

or indirect control over the factors causing the stress, along with no emotional control to
alter the interpretation of the situation. Total acceptance of the stress is undergone and the
focus is only on to somehow let the time pass and survive the stress. This shows results in
short term or long term health damages.

* Adaptation-oriented approach - In this kind of approach, the individual adapts to the

situation, and instead of trying to fight it, tries to go along with the flow, thereby
becoming one of the factors causing stress. This is done with a view that if the individual
also becomes one of the factors causing stress then stress shall be diverted to some other
individual and thereby the individual shall be free from stress. This approach is widely
practiced in office politics, where the officers transfer their stress to their subordinates
who again pass it on to their juniors. The negative side of this approach is that if the last
individual who finally receives the stress is unable to face it or fails in the resolution of
the stress, then additional stress is created, which goes on increasing, and if uncontrolled,
may result in a severe mental derangement of the individual, leading even to suicide or
death.

Conclusion
There are many other approaches identified by researchers, and any approach that suits
the individual should be applied. However, if stress is unbearable and seems to be beyond
control, then a qualified health professional should be immediately consulted. Even
minor changes in diet or exercise should be informed to the health professional, so that
with adequate professional help, stress can be controlled and if possible, eliminated.
Alternative therapies like meditation, yoga, deep breathing, etc., are also very popular in
the management of stress.

RESISTANCE TO CHANGE IS A IRRATIONAL RESPONSE:

We all know the relief people feel, even people who are being told the worst. It means people
can move on and go ahead and plan their life.
We all lose something in change, even the winners. Even those of use who are exhilarated
about the opportunity it represents, or who are choosing to participate in the new era that we
think is going to be better for our careers.
Change is never entirely negative; it is also a tremendous opportunity. But even in that
opportunity there is some small loss. It can be a loss of the past, a loss of routines, comforts,
and traditions that were important, maybe a loss of relationships that became very close over
time. Things will not, in fact be the same any more.
Thus, we all need a change to let go of the past and to “mourn it.”
Rituals of parting help us say goodbye to the people we have been close to, rather than just
letting those relationships slip away.
Things like goodbye parties, or tacking up the company’s history on bulletin boards are not
just frills or luxuries; they are rituals that make it easier for people to move into the future
because their loss is acknowledged and dealt with.
Resistance to change is not irrational, it stems from good and understandable concerns.
Managers who can analyse the sources of resistance are in the best position to invent the
solution to it – and to manage change smoothly and effectively.

1. Loss of control.
How people greet change has to do with whether they feel in control of it or not. Change is
exciting when it is done by us; threatening when it is done to us.
Most people need and want to feel in control of the events around them. The rise of
participative management is largely due to the notion that “ownership” counts in getting
commitment to actions and that if people have a chance to participate in decisions, they feel
better about them. The more choices are left to people, the better they feel about the changes.
If all actions are imposed upon them from outside, they are more likely to resist.
2. Excess uncertainty.
This is known as the “Walking Off a Cliff Blindfolded Problem” – too much uncertainty. If
people don’t know where the next step is going to take them, change seems dangerous. They
resist because they reason: “It’s safer to stay with the devil you know than to commit yourself
to the devil you don’t.”
Information is extremely important in building commitment to a change, especially step-by-
step scenarios with timetables and milestones. Dividing a big change into a number of small
steps can help make it seem less risky and threatening. People can focus on one step at a time,
but not a leap of a cliff.
Change also requires faith that the new way will be the right way. If the leaders themselves
do not appear convinced, then the rest of the people will not budge. Leaders should
demonstrate their commitment to the change. Leaders have to be the first over the cliff if they
 want the people they manage to follow suit. Information coupled with the leaders’ actions to
make the change seem safer, can convert resistance to commitment.
3. Surprise, surprise!
People are easily shocked by decisions or requests suddenly sprung on them without
groundwork or preparation. Their first response to something totally new and unexpected,
that they have not had time to prepare for mentally, is resistance.
Frequently companies make this mistake when introducing change. They wait until all
decisions are made, and then spring them on an unsuspecting population. Commitment to the
organisation suffers and often staff question; “Why didn’t they tell us earlier?”
It is important to provide employees with information to build commitment to change, but
also to arrange the timing of the information’s release. Give people advance notice, a warning
and a chance to adjust their thinking.
4. The “difference” effect
The difference effect is the fact that change required people to become conscious of and to
question familiar routines and habits.
A great deal of work in organisations is simply habitual. In fact, most of us could not function
very well in life if we were not engaged in a high proportion of “mindless” habitual activities
– like turning right when you walk down the corridor to work, or handling certain forms, or
attending certain meetings.
Imagine what it would be like if everyday you went to work and your office was in an
entirely different place, and the furniture was rearranged. You would stumble around, have
trouble finding things and feel very uncomfortable. This would be exhausting. Staff are likely
to resist the introduction of change because it makes them start feeling self-conscious. Staff
are required to question even the habitual things they do. They must think about behaviour
which they used to take for granted.
An important goal in managing change is to minimise or reduce the number of differences
required by the change, leaving as many habits and routines as possible in place.
Commitment to change is more likely to occur when the change is not presented as a wild
difference but rather as continuous with tradition.
5. Loss of face
If accepting a change means admitting that the way things were done in the past was wrong,
people are certain to resist. Nobody likes losing face or feeling embarrassed in front of their
peers. But sometimes making a commitment to a new procedure, product, or program carries
with it the implicit assumption that the “old ways” must have been wrong, thereby putting
adherents of the “old ways” in the uncomfortable position of either looking stupid for their
past actions or being forced to defend them – thereby arguing against any change.
Commitment to change is ensured when past actions are put in perspective – as the apparently
right thing to do then, but now times are different. This way people do not lose face for
changing, just the opposite – they look strong and flexible. They have been honored for what
they accomplished under the old conditions, even if it is now time to change.
6. Concerns about future competence
Sometimes people resist change because of personal concerns about their future ability to be
effective after the change: Can I do it? How will I do it? Will I make it under the new
conditions? Do I have the skills to operate in a new way? These concerns may not be
expressed out loud, but they can result in finding many reasons why change should be
avoided.
Nobody likes to look inadequate. And nobody, especially people who have been around for a
long time, wants to feel that he or she has to “start all over again” in order to feel competent
in the organisation.
It is essential when managing the change to make sure that people do feel competent, that
there is sufficient training and support available so that people understand what is happening
and know that they can master it – that they can indeed do what is needed. Positive
reinforcement is even more important in managing change than it is in managing routine
situations.
 In addition to training, people also need a chance to practice the new skills or actions without
feeling that they are being judged or that they are going to look foolish to their colleagues and
peers. They need a chance to get comfortable with the new routines or ways of operating
without feeling stupid because they have questions to ask.
Sensitivity is essential to make sure that nobody, including managers, feels stupid, that
everyone can ask questions, and that everybody has a chance to be a learner, to come to feel
competent in the new ways.
7. Ripple effects

People may resist change for reasons connected to their own activities. Change does sometimes
disrupt others kinds of plans or projects, or even personal and family activities that have
nothing to do with the job, and anticipation of those disruptions causes resistance to change.
Change inevitably sends ripples beyond the intended impact. The ripples may also negate
promises the organisation has made. Effective change masters are sensitive to the ripples
change causes. They look for the ripples and introduce the change with flexibility, so that, for
example, departments can go though a transition period rather than facing an abrupt change.
This sensitivity helps get people on board and makes them feel committed, rather than
resistant to the change.
8. More Work
Change is more work, and this may lead to resistance. The effort it takes to manage things
under routine circumstances needs to be multiplied when things are changing. Change
requires more energy, more time and greater mental preoccupation.
Change does require above and beyond effort. It cannot be done automatically, it cannot be
done without effort and it takes time. There is ample reason to resist change, if people do not
want to put in the effort. They need support and compensation for the extra work of change in
order to move from resistance to commitment.
Managers need to make sure that people are given credit for the effort they are putting in and
rewarded for the fact that they are working harder than ever before - rewards ranging from
bonuses, cinema tickets, or celebrations as simple as a morning tea.
Managers need to recognise that the extra effort is voluntary and not take it for granted, but
thank people by providing recognition, as well as the additional support or facilities or
comfort they need. While an employee is working harder, it certainly helps to know that your
boss is acknowledging that extra effort.
9. Past resentments
The cobwebs of the past always get in the way of the future. Anyone who has ever had a
gripe against the organisation is likely to resist the organisation telling them that they now
have to do something new.
 The conspiracy of silence, that uneasy truce possible as long as everything remains the same
and people can avoid confrontations, is broken when you ask for change. Unresolved
grievances from the past rise up to entangle and hamper the change effort.
Sweeping away the cobwebs of the past is a necessity for overcoming resistance to change.
As long as people remain aggrieved, people will not want to go along with something we
want. Going forward can thus mean first going back – listening to past resentments and
repairing past rifts.
10. Sometimes the threat is real
Sometimes the threat posed by the change is a real one. Sometimes change does create
winners and losers. Sometimes people do lose status, clout or comfort because of the change.
It would be naïve to imagine otherwise.
The important thing is to avoid pretense and false promises. If some people are going to lose
something, they should hear about it early, rather than worrying about it constantly and
infecting others with their anxiety or antagonism.