Organizational Behavior: Perceptions Analysis Of Micro And .
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR: PERCEPTIONS ANALYSIS OF MICRO AND MACROORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR IN AN ORGANIZATIONAL SETTINGJoshua T. Delich, B.A., ME.D.Dissertation Prepared for the Degree ofDOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHYUNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXASDecember 2015APPROVED:Jane B. Huffman, Major ProfessorDon Powell, Minor ProfessorDouglas Otto, Committee MemberMiriam Ezzani, Committee MemberJames D. Laney, Chair of the Departmentof Teacher Education andAdministrationJerry Thomas, Dean of the College ofEducationCostas Tsatsoulis, Dean of the ToulouseGraduate School
Delich, Joshua T. Organizational Behavior: Perceptions Analysis of Micro and MacroOrganizational Behavior in an Organizational Setting. Doctor of Philosophy (Educational Leadership),December 2015, 214 pp., 35 tables, 6 figures, references, 528 titles.Understanding organizational behavior (OB) has profoundly influenced organizationalperformance and how people behave in organizations. Researchers have suggested variousmicro and macro organizational behaviors to be the impetus for high-performing organizations.Through a policy capturing approach this study builds on these findings by specificallyexamining the perceptions of micro and macro organizational behaviors in an organizationalsetting. The participants (n 181) completed a Micro and Macro Organizational BehaviorPerceptions Questionnaire. Results showed perception differences exist between subordinatesand supervisors. Additionally, participants perceived job satisfaction to be the most importantmicro organizational behavior, whereas organizational design was perceived to be the mostimportant macro organizational behavior. However when comparing hierarchal positions in theorganization, supervisors weighted leadership as the most important and subordinates weightedjob satisfaction as the most important organizational behavior. While these findings only scratchthe surface as to how organizational behavior is perceived, the implications challenge leaders toclose the OB perception gap. Correspondingly, organizational behavior thinking may result inimproving individual and organizational performance.
Copyright 2015byJoshua T. Delichii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSDr. Huffman, I want to gratefully thank you for the remarkable support, guidance, andsincerity you showed me during this process. You will always hold a special place in my futurecareer endeavors. It is my privilege to have worked under your guidance.To my dissertation committee, thank you for the thought-provoking insight you providedme along the way. Thank you for what you taught me during the doctoral program.To my brother Caleb, thank you for the many conversations we had over the years duringmy research, you unknowingly ignited the fire inside me to keep persevering. Brotherly loveforever. Rachel, Jennifer, Eve, and Charity, “Little Josh” is done. Thanks for checking in on myprogress throughout this journey.John and Trudy, your enduring and unconditional love and support laid the foundationthat made this all possible. When you turn the pages of this body of research, know that eachpage was because of you. Dad and Mom, you are as deserving of this degree as I am. Love you.Daddy’s beautiful little girls, Rae’ven-Hope and Nylah-Rae, you were, and will alwaysbe, an inspiration for me to keep going. While you probably will never remember Daddy’sresearch days, I will always remember your little voices asking me: “Are you doing research?When will you be done?” My precious daughters, your dad is finished. I love you.Finally, and most importantly, I would like to thank my wife, Desirae, for the unwaveringlove, incredible support, selfless acts, and compassionate understanding you gave me during thislong journey. I will never forget the sacrifices you made. I am so blessed, and honored, to callyou my wife. And despite this landmark in our lives coming to an end, it is only the beginningof many more amazing milestones we will achieve together. My soul mate for life, I love you.We did it!iii
TABLE OF CONTENTSPageACKNOWLEDGEMENTSiiiLIST OF TABLESixLIST OF FIGURESxiCHAPTERS12INTRODUCTION1Background1What is Organizational Behavior3Historical Origin of Organizational Behavior4Statement of the Problem5Statement of Purpose6Research Questions6Significance of tual Framework9Definition of Terms11Organization of Study14REVIEW OF LITERATURE16Organizational Behavior16Micro and Macro Dichotomy18Micro Organizational Behaviors21iv
Stress21Job Satisfaction25Creativity28Leadership32Macro Organizational Behavior38Organizational Structure39Organizational Design48Organizational Change54Organizational Development64Contingency Theory72Policy Capturing ApproachSocial Judgment Theory76Lens Model78Single System Research Questions83Research Design83Policy Capturing Approach83Defining Judgment Policy86Population87Pilot Study89v
4Data Collection Procedures90Instrument Design90Instrument Questions90Instrument Considerations92Instrument Validity and Reliability92Limitations96Policy Capturing Approach Limitations97Data Analysis98Summary99RESULTS102Overview of Data Collection102Materials102Questionnaire Instrument103Descriptive Statistics104Questionnaire Response Rate104Demographical Data104Statistical Analysis106Characteristics of Data106Least-Squared106Cue Usage107Data Results109Conclusion116vi
5DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS119Introduction119Review of Organizational Behavior119Overview of the Study120Summary of the Results121Perceptions Theorization123Discussion126Concluding the Eight Studied Organizational Behaviors126Insight on Findings of the g, Understanding, and Managing OrganizationalBehavior135Interlocking Organizational Behavior Thinking with HighPerforming Attributes137Future Exploration into the Field of Organizational Behavior139Concluding Thoughts143A.DIFFERENTIATING ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR SUBFIELDS146B.DEFINING ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR150C.STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS/CHANGE MANAGEMENTAPPENDIXD.MODELS152LENS MODEL SINGLE SYSTEM DESIGN155vii
E.MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION OF BRUNSWIK’S LENS MODELF.QUESTIONNAIRE FOR DETERMING THE RELATIONSHIP157BETWEEN ADMINISTRATOR AND TEACHER PERCEPTIONSOF MICRO AND MACRO ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR IN ANORGANIZATIONAL SETTINGG.159HIGH-PERFORMING ORGANIZATIONS, HIGH-PERFORMINGPEOPLE, AND HIGH PERFORMING LEADERSREFERENCES174178viii
LIST OF TABLESPage1. Definitions of Organizational Behavior . 172. Differentiating Organizational Behavior Subfields . 193. Micro vs. Macro Organizational Behavior: Issues, Research, and Applications. 204. Creativity. 315. Leadership Effects . 346. Leadership Styles . 357. Organizational Structure – 3 Key Components . 418. Organizational Structure Types . 429. Organization Structure – Tall vs. Flat Organizations . 4410. Organizational Structure – Dimensions Impacted. 4511. Mechanistic vs. Organic . 4912. Montzberg’s Five Organizational Design Configurations . 5113. Classical and Neoclassical Organization Design . 5214. Organizational Change . 5515. Receptivity to Change . 5616. Organizational Change Types . 5717. Strategic Planning Process/Change Management Models . 6318. Organizational Development Goals . 6719. Organizational Development Types . 7120. Transparency, Communicability, Coherence, and Transferability Defined . 9421. Demographical Characteristics of the Research Sample . 10522. Normalized Usefulness Index Across All Participants . 108ix
23. Logistical Regression Coefficients for Demographics Assessing Micro and MacroOrganizational Behavior Preference . 11024. Logistical Regression Coefficients for Weighted Cues Assessing Micro and MacroOrganizational Behavior Preference . 11125. Cue Means and Standard Deviation for T-Test Analysis . 11226. Mean Differences in the Weighted Cues for Teachers and Administrators . 11327. Perception Importance: Micro or Macro Organizational Behavior . 11428. Perception Importance within the Organizational Behavior . 11529. Perception Importance with the Organizational Behavior - Macro . 11530. Perception Importance of the Eight Organizational Behaviors . 11631. Attributes of High-Performing Organizations, People, and Leaders . 138A.1. Differentiating Organizational Behavior Subfields . 147B.1. Organizational Behavior – Definitions and References . 151C.1. Strategic Planning Process/Change Management Models . 153G.1. High-performing Organizations, High-performing People, and High-performingLeaders . 175x
LIST OF FIGURESPage1. Organizational structure types . 422. Flat organization and tall organization . 433. Mechanistic and organic characteritistics . 504. Determing organization development interventions . 69D.1. Lens model – single system design . 156E.1.Mathematical formulation of Brunswik’s lens model. . 158xi
CHAPTER 1INTRODUCTIONOrganizational behavior is important to leaders, managers, employees, and consumers; andunderstanding it can make us more effective leaders, managers, employees and consumers.- Richard Sims, 2002In Chapter 1, the background and historical roots of organizational behavior arediscussed. The theoretical framework that supports this research study is disclosed to betterexplain the vacillating behaviors observed in an organizational setting. Furthermore, thefollowing sections in Chapter 1 are: problem statement, purpose of the study, significance of thestudy, delimitations, limitations, and assumptions of the study. Lastly, Chapter 1 concludes withdefinition of key terms and organization of the study.BackgroundThrough decades of research, the study of organizational behavior (OB) has yielded amultitude of attributes that lead to high-performing organizations. Researchers in psychology,sociology, political science, economics, and other social sciences have systematically attemptedto explain and develop a comprehensive body of organizational research that explain theattributes that lead to organizational performance (Greenberg, 2011; Miner, 2007; Owens &Valesky, 2011; Wagner & Hollenbeck, 2005). If leaders are better able to answer the questionsof how to design organizations to become superior performers by identifying what specificactions need to be taken, then leaders can implement systems to drive organizational success(Epstein & Manzoni, 2004). In an attempt to discover the fundamental attributes that lead tohigh-performing organizations, scholars have turned to the study of organizational behavior forthe answer (Colquitt, Lepine, & Wesson, 2009; Greenberg, 2003, 2011; E. M. Hanson, 2003;Miner, 2007; Owens, 2001; Sims, 2002; Wagner & Hollenbeck, 2005).1
Leaders need to know how to manage behavior effectively in the organization and toidentify the connection between organizational behavior and performance to become a highperforming organization (Hitt, Miller, & Colella, 2006). Furthermore, Hitt et al. (2006) goes onto purport that improved performance in an organization requires taking a strategic approach toorganizational behavior by organizing and managing people’s knowledge and skills.Understanding organizational behavior has influenced organizational performance and howpeople behave in organizations (Clegg, Barling, & Cooper, 2008). As Sims (2002)acknowledges, recognition of organizational behavior has empowered leaders to betterunderstand the myriad workforce issues, therefore, altering leadership behavior to increase anorganization’s performance and effectiveness. By recognizing and understanding the impactorganizational behavior has on performance, leaders can better ascertain what attributes lead tohigh-performing organizations. Subsequently, leading researchers in the field turn toorganizational behavior when identifying the organizational attributes that are responsible for thedifference in performance levels among organizations (Colquitt et al., 2009; Greenberg, 2011;Miner, 2007; Owens, 2001; Wagner & Hollenbeck, 2005).Researchers have spent decades studying organizations, people, individuals, and thereasons why some organizations perform at unprecedented high levels, and other organizationsmake a descending plunge to dismal performance. How does this happen? Connellan (1978)posited the majority of an organization’s problems are derived from human performanceproblems; thus, a change in human behavior means a change in the performance results of theorganization. Organizational behavior has been identified as the crucial variable for achievingsuccess, and is considered the fundamental underpinning that helps leaders identify problems,ascertain how to address the problems, recognize the complexities within the organization, and2
establish whether change needs to occur to make things better (Miner, 2006b; Sims, 2002).Organizational behavior is used as a means for enhancing organizational effectiveness andindividual welfare (Greenberg, 2011; Robbins & Judge, 2007). Research shows thatorganizational behavior affects performance levels within an organization.What is Organizational Behavior?The field of organizational behavior has evolved from the various disciplines ofpsychology, sociology, political science, and economics; therefore, notably being defined as thestudy of behavior of individuals and groups within an organization (Cummings, 1978;Greenberg, 2011; Schneider, 1985; Wagner & Hollenbeck, 2005). Greenberg (2011) definesorganizational behavior to be a multidisciplinary field that seeks knowledge of behavior in anorganizational setting by systematically studying individual, group, and organizational processes.Organizational behavior is the study of individual behavior and group dynamics in anorganization, primarily focusing on the psychosocial, interpersonal, and behavioral dynamics inorganizations; thus, morphing into an applied discipline that is an interplay of practice andapplication (Miner, 2006b; Nelson & Quick, 2009; Wilson, 2001). Organizational behaviorresearchers seek to describe, understand, and predict behavior in the environment of formalorganizations by focusing on individual, group, and organizational dynamics (Miner, 2005;Sims, 2002; Wagner & Hollenbeck, 2005).Researchers have also identified organizational behavior as the actions and attitudes ofpeople in an organization that attempt to understand, explain, and ultimately improve theattitudes and behaviors of individuals and groups in organizations (Colquitt et al., 2009; Sims,2002). Organizational behavior differs from related fields (psychology, sociology, politicalscience, and anthropology) in the fact it specifically focuses on individual and group behavior in3
an organization (Northcraft & Neale, 1990). As Owens and Valesky (2011) purport, “. . .organizational behavior is an area in which social scientists and school administrations can seekto collaborate, however imperfectly, to bridge the gulf between arcane academic inquiry and theeveryday challenges of improving the performance of schools” (p. 65). Organizational behaviorhas evolved into a growing field of study that provides a plethora of information for 21st centuryleaders who are interested in improving organizational performance and identifying the attributesthat lead to high-performing organizations.Historical Origin of Organizational BehaviorThe study of organizational performance, organizational theory, and the origin oforganizational behavior dates back to the era of the Industrial Revolution and ScientificManagement era in the United States (Sims, 2002), the epoch in which classical thinkers such asMax Weber (a German sociologist), Henri Fayol (a French industrialist), and Fredrick Taylor (anAmerican industrial engineer) began to examine the various attributes of organizationalperformance and efficiency (E. M. Hanson, 2003). By the 1930s, organizations were examinedthrough a social system theory lens, and by the 1960s, organizations, specifically educationalorganizations, were viewed through the open system theory (Owens & Valesky, 2011). The firstreview of organizational behavior was done in 1979 by Terence R. Mitchell which covered fourtopics: personality and individual differences, job attitudes, motivation, and leadership(Cummings, 1982). Preceding Mitchell’s work on organizational behavior came Cummings in1982, Staw in 1984, and Schneider in 1985 (Schneider, 1985). By the 1980s, organizationalbehavior was codified into two separate and identifiable fields: micro organizational behavior[individual action] and macro organizational behavior [organization action] (Cummings, 1982;Nystrom & Starbuck, 1981; Schneider, 1985; Staw, 1991).4
Micro organizational behavior includes individual behaviors that influence organizationalaction (Cummings, 1978), while macro organizational behavior is the social structure and theeffects of the structure on the organization and the people within the organization (Pfeffer, 1991).Decades later, organizational behavior has been divided into three distinct subfields: microorganizational behavior, meso organizational behavior, and macro organizational behavior(Miner, 2006b; Wagner & Hollenbeck, 2005). Micro organizational behavior focuses primarilyon the behaviors of an individual, meso organizational behavior hones in on the behaviors ofpeople
organization. Organizational behavior has been identified as the crucial variable for achieving success, and is considered the fundamental underpinning that helps leaders identify problems, ascertain how to address the problems, recognize the complexities within the organization, and . 3 establish whether change needs to occur to make things better (Miner, 2006b; Sims, 2002). Organizational .
Organizational behavior is an interdisciplinary field that examines the behavior of individuals within organizational settings as well as the structure and behavior of organizations themselves. Macro organizational behavior (some times called organization theory) has roots in sociology, political science, and
Verbal Behavior Verbal Behavior (V) is a class of behavior that is reinforced through the mediation of other persons (Skinner, 1957, p.2). Verbal Behavior is the application of behavior principles to language. Verbal Behavior categorizes language responses into different categories based on the function of the response Verbal Behavior is a subset of the science of Behavior Analysis
behavior as a group have two perspectives - internal and external. Behavior Analysis at Different Levels Behavior as an individual or in a group is always analyzed by everyone in the organization. It is analyzed at three different levels: Individual level of analysis Group level of analysis Organizational level of analysis Individual Level of Analysis Organizational behavior, at this level of .
towards the organization. The POB towards the organization (β .70) is strongly affected by perceived organizational support that is one of the organizational factors and is exchange based. Keywords: organizational prosocial behavior, organizational support, supervisor support, interpersonal helping behavior, self enhancement, psychological well-being 1. Literature Review POB is performed by .
Organization 67 SECTION 2: ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR IN GROUP LEVEL Chapter 6 Organizational Communication in Islamic Management 91 Chapter 7 Organizational Conflict Management in Islamic Management 111. SECTION 3: ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR IN ORGANIZATION LEVEL Chapter 8 Influence and Leader–Follower Relations in Hereafter-oriented Organizations 137 Chapter 9 Leadership Styles in Islamic .
Organizational Climate Tagiuri and Litwin mention organizational climate as a stable quantity of organizational environment experienced by employees that influences their behavior (Alizadeh et al., 2013). According to Suarez et al. (2013), organizational climate is a set of perceptions shared by workers who occupy the same workplace.
organizational citizenship behavior /helping has been positioned by Dyne et al (1995) as a larger framework of extra role behavior that enhances the effective bonds among organizational members arises from, generates positive emotional states of members and promotes consensus rather than conflict. Dimensions of Organizational citizenship behavior
The behavior of individuals and groups within the organizational context is presented and analyzed. Different forms of organizational behavior are considered, providing students with exposure to various models. Topics covered include the context of organizational behavior, organizational culture, understanding individual behavior,
