Big Energy

1.Organisational behavior may be defined as the specific branch of studies that helps in investigating how organizational structures affect different types of behavior within the organizations. It helps in the studying of an organization from a number of different viewpoints that not only includes different behaviors within the organization but also in relation to other different numbers of organizations (Pinder 2014). Some of the important facets of organizational behavior are the leadership, decision making, job satisfaction, team building and also motivation. However in case of the present scenario provided, it is seen that many of the facets of organizational behavior is not properly maintained in the pany named Big Energy. It is a private organization that had bought a flourishing pany called the XYZ pany but had not established a proper organizational behavior that would help the workers to adapt themselves in the new environment. In turn they had applied policies which had a v ery negative effect on the retained employees of the overtaken pany. This study would help to establish the different problems that the employees had to encounter in terms of a number of aspects like the behavior, values and also the attitudes that are portrayed by the new employers and the organization. Before one begin to describe the aspects of the case study provided, a brief overview about the concept of organization behaviour must be discussed.    Organisational behavior mainly pays importance on the topics like influence of personality on performance, motivation of employees and also creating effective teams and workplace groups that when work in harmonious situations will result in producing the best productivity for an organization (Miner 2015). There exists a specific attitude in a workplace that influences the workplace either in a positive way or in a negative way. In a workplace which shows a positive attitude, petition is taken by the workers as a motivation to show best capabilities. However a negative attitude in a workplace results in creation of an environment of distrust among the employees which results in different negative ou es like achieving success at each other expense, or results in increased attrition rate and also workers get emotionally depressed (Wagner and Hollenbeck 2014). From the beginning itself, a very negative attitude was portrayed by the Big Energy’s authorities when they made the chief executives and also the functional business members redundant. This came upon them as the warning signal which not only created a pressure on them of being sacked at any time but also showed another threat. It made them to think that they have to struggles in their pany and would always be judges in their merit which increased pressure on them and thereby became demotivated. This resulted in increase of the attrition rate of the organization. Another reason that can be noted here was that the behavior of the workers of XYZ developed very negative feelings about their new authority which had a very negative impact on their own work and thereby affected the organization’s productivity. The workers got depressed and also frustrated because the new authority was not paying heed to the workers’ welfare and betterment and only set their aim on the process of integration. They pletely neglected the quality of work that the workers were exhibiting and also did not take into account the pany’s long term profits. As a result the loyalty that the workers used to show their previous authority were gradually declining for their new authority and heir morale started to dwindle. Such kind of development of feelings should strictly been avoided by the new authority as it we es loss and increases turnover rates (Green berg 2013). Another important element of organizational behavior is values. Values are the attributes that an individual or an organization carries as as an integral part of existence and may vary from one to another. It is often defined as the main basis of attitude and motivation. In the case provided, the main reason for the arrival of different issues were that there was no similarity with the values shared by the Big Energy pany and that by the workers of the XYZ. As a result, feuds with the supervisors were in constancy and therefore it did not yield any positive result been when Sally tried to argue with them over the harmful effects of the integration model of the authority. The integration model implemented by the Big Energy affected the inter-personal relationships of the workers with that of the employers asking a big question on the effectiveness of managerial leaderships. The employees felt that their wishes and requirement were disrespected and these severe issues forced them to le ave the pany one by one. It also showed that the new authority could not implement proper human resource management skill and therefore could not establish a proper relationship with the employees which would have brought much more productivity (Champoux 2016). This case study portray the importance of knowledge about the macro organizational behavioral theory refereeing to entire organizations and also industries and their operations and not the Micro organizational behavior theory that pays heed to individual or group behavior as a whole. Organisational culture is the system of shared values, assumptions and beliefs that help a particular individual in an organization to properly evaluate what kind of behaviors are wanted by the organizations (DuBrin 2013). These have three important ponents like the artifacts mainly pondering over the tangible parts of the organization like office jokes, furniture, dress code, timings and others. A value which is already discussed earlier as qualities that an employee possesses is also found to e different from that of the employers. The workers of XYZ wanted to pete based on their merit but this was not prioritized by the Big Energy. Therefore, they b e demotivated. Assumptions are those behaviors which are not conscious but are integrated as the spirit of the corporate culture (Hogg and Terry 2014). If one wants to portray the bigger picture, it can be explained that both the employees and the new employer were not being able to harmonize. This is mainly because both of them were failing to catch hold of each other’s techniques and models of organizational behavior (Greenberh and Colquitt 2013). This resulted in huge negative impact on the performance of the workers and hence the productivity. In place Big Energy should have set up a proper and critically analyzed approach to integrate the acquired employees in such a way so that they could have developed proper relationship and also would make them fortable and thereby feel included in organizations’ mission and vision. Big Energy should have recognized that human resource make the foundation of the organization and therefore should have taken effective steps to manage them effectively and create an easy pathway to success rather than neglecting the voice of the workers and overpowering them. 2.The acquisition of XYZ Energy by Big Energy though seems to be a good fit, there lies more to it than the same vertical of business. The acquisition can be better explained with the help of the Corporate Parenting Matrix which shows a relation between the fit and misfit of parenting and strategic characteristics. The acquisition is in the quadrant of the Value Trap i.e. Big Energy was able to recognize the process values and technological importance of XYZ Energy, but it was unable to create an integration model which can sustain this acquisition in the long term. Big Energy which had been keen on only acquiring the technology, patents and innovations made the workforce of XYZ energy redundant to their own business model. It must be noted that long term petitive advantage can’t be sought after by myopic scenario planning (Greenberg and Coloquitt 2013). It is quite evident that with employee dissonance prevailing in an organization, it is bound to crumble sooner or later. The attitude and values of the XYZ employees have been hurt and no recognition has been paid to these employees. The senior management at XYZ had also faced the brunt once the acquisition was in full swing. With the redundancy of the senior management, the employees who were still surviving with XYZ very well knew that they were on the verge of colliding with the end of their careers at XYZ Energy. Big Energy in order to make the acquisition fall in the category of ‘Heartland’ needs to realize that the foundation of an organization is its human resource – it’s the people in the organization who form the culture have be liefs and possess values. Big Energy till now has miserably failed in prehending the organizational behavior scope of XYZ Energy. The downturn came about when Big Energy failed to understand the emotions of the employees who stayed back and were even little bothered to bring in the change management effectively in order to mold behavior and attitudes. Big Energy needs to put heed to the basics of prehending organizational behavior and form its strategy accordingly. Change management can only be successfully implanted when there is active participation from all realms of the organization especially within the employees and the management (Grant 2016). In order to get the integration to reach a new level of long term sustenance, Big Energy must take up the following actions: Delineate: It is the sole responsibility of the management of Big Energy to converse and delineate the responsibilities and behavioral patterns to the individual (employees of XYZ). Big Energy needs to start off by these so to make sure that dissonance and turnover is low (Nahavandi et al. 2013). Comprehend: Earlier during the acquisition process kicked off, the employees of XYZ had been reluctant, less enthusiastic and even flying on low morale. Big Energy should have taken this into consideration and tried to find out the root cause of such dissatisfaction among the existent employees (Lam et al. 2015). Instead it had turned a blind eye. Thus organizational behavior clearly outlines that it’s important to understand the reasons for an individual’s behavior. This prehension will help Big Energy to annihilate the causes of the dissatisfaction in the bud itself. Anticipate: In the study, it has been mentioned that the management as well as the employees of Big Energy were most reluctant to visit and interact with the remaining XYZ employees. This reluctance has proven to be instrumental in driving the private enterprise towards being clueless about the personalities and motivation factors of the XYZ employees. Thus interaction needs to be increased in order to better predict employee behavior for higher efficiency (Hui, Lee and Wang 2015). Control: Since the businesses are quite alike, Big Energy put all their efforts on the integration process but little on the incumbents post integration. Big Energy now has to implement separate Training and Development processes to ensurehigh employee morale, less employee turnover and higher orientation towards organizational goals. The T&D procedure must infuse enough job mitment in the employees so that they can again be a part of the activities and find their relevance in their respective job roles (Morris et al. 2015). With the above proceedings in action, Big Energy needs to be more transparent and promote inter dependence of employees to gain higher productivity. It is elementary to integrate the culture of both the organizations to create synergy, so as to provide the fit for the organizational resources and human resources (Lindebaum and Geddes 2016). Big Energy must pay close heed to the models of Organizational Behavior and implement the following to get the desired results. Supportive Model: The model thrives under effective leadership styles. Big Energy management should be on the lookout for the remaining XYZ employee needs so that organizational performance can be met. The respective leaders must support their fellow team mates to develop their skills and promote awakening motivational drives among them so as to orient them towards favorable results (Lee and Selart 2015). Collegial Model: This model encourages a sense of partnership in the organization. Working as a team is the right approach where team mates are self-disciplined and self-actualized. Big Energy must motivate XYZ employees to work closely Big Energy employees as teams so that there is diversity in teams and idea generation can be more frequent. Big Energy must also bring about an intra-organizational petitive environment which shall motivate XYZ employees to perform better, more enthusiastically, aligned towards desired organizational goals (Goestch and Davis 2014). System Model: The model is based upon the power of trust, munity and belongingness. The managerial orientation is passionate and caring which drives employees to being self-motivated, passionate towards achieving desired organizational results. Big Energy must ensure that employees are provided enough liberty to bring their thoughts on the table to initiateteam building and brain storming activities. Big Energy management needs to portray the right vibes of mutual trust with the remaining XYZ employees so that employees can recognize their own psychological ownership of the firm and work towards the betterment of the same. This would initiate a higher morale in the employees as they can feel their own relevance and authority in the organization (Grant 2016). It must be realized that all strategies are not the best fits for Big Energy management. A framework of the strategies has been provided with indicative approaches. Still further study is a requisite prior to implementing them. Champoux, J.E., 2016.  Organizational behavior: Integrating individuals, groups, and organizations. Routledge. DuBrin, A.J., 2013.  Fundamentals of organizational behavior: An applied perspective. Elsevier. Goetsch, D.L. and Davis, S.B., 2014.  Quality management for organizational excellence. Upper Saddle River, NJ: pearson. Grant, R.M., 2016.  Contemporary strategy analysis: Text and cases edition. John Wiley & Sons. Greenberg, J. and Colquitt, J.A. eds., 2013.  Handbook of organizational justice. Psychology Press. Greenberg, J. ed., 2013.  Organizational behavior: The state of the science. Routledge. Hogg, M.A. and Terry, D.J. eds., 2014.  Social identity processes in organizational contexts. Psychology Press. Hui, C., Lee, C. and Wang, H., 2015. Organizational inducements and employee citizenship behavior: The mediating role of perceived insider status and the moderating role of collectivism.  Human Resource Management,  54(3), pp.439-456. Lam, C.F., Liang, J., Ashford, S.J. and Lee, C., 2015. Job insecurity and organizational citizenship behavior: Exploring curvilinear and moderated relationships.  Journal of Applied Psychology,  100(2), p.499. Lee, W.S. and Selart, M., 2015. The influence of emotions on trust in ethical decision making. Lindebaum, D. and Geddes, D., 2016. The place and role of (moral) anger in organizational behavior studies.  Journal of organizational behavior,  37(5), pp.738-757. Miner, J.B., 2015.  Organizational behavior 1: Essential theories of motivation and leadership. Routledge. Morris, M.W., Hong, Y.Y., Chiu, C.Y. and Liu, Z., 2015. Normology: Integrating insights about social norms to understand cultural dynamics.  Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,  129, pp.1-13. Nahavandi, A., Denhardt, R.B., Denhardt, J.V. and Aristigueta, M.P., 2013.  Organizational behavior. SAGE Publications. Pinder, C.C., 2014.  Work motivation in organizational behavior. Psychology Press. Wagner III, J.A. and Hollenbeck, J.R., 2014.  Organizational behavior: Securing petitive advantage. Routledge.