Human Relations Management Theory

Case Analysis Proposal By Nizar Al-Jamal (100900012) Gaby St-Louis (101022176) Zeinab Tabaja (101103497) Tamirat Taffesse (101164406) Michael Bassi (101163254) The Organizational behaviour we are going to discuss is a situation that happened to myself when I was an employee in a chain industry called Kerr Norton in St-Eugene Ontario. This company assembled old cassettes for the use of typewriters. I was totally bored from doing the repetitive work so decided to see how many cassettes I could assemble say in a short period of time compared to my co-worker. As soon as my co- worker would put down her first piece to assemble the cassette, I would start the race and would hurry to make as many as I could with in a short period of time to see how many more I could make. No words were shared during this period as I was totally focused on the number. Even though this was done in secrecy, my co-worker caught on to what was going on and got very frustrated. She stood up and started to speak very loud asking me to stop competing as it was very stressful, and she did not like this competition. It was obvious that she had caught on to what I was doing, and she really did not approve. Embarrassed, I tried to calm her as I did not want a scene and told her that I was not competing, but she knew what I was doing and just wanted me to stop. Of course, I stopped but I totally got bored again. I totally felt embarrassed as my intention was not to upset anyone, but I was just so totally bored I needed something to keep me motivated. When she started to raise her voice, I just wanted her to calm down and speak to me in a lower voice since I was not doing anything to hurt or annoy as I had not even spoken to her. I tried being respectful, but I guess she felt my competitive character and got annoyed with me. I think what annoyed her most is that I was much faster than her and she did not like that. The other staff did not seem to care but some were laughing and giggling making the situation worse. Since this job was so boring, I needed something to motivate me. The intrinsic motivators here were that I would get satisfaction in knowing that I could do more cassettes than my colleague could in a very short period. And every time she would start another, I would try to do even more than I had done the time before. This would be considered an intrinsic motivator since I would get great satisfaction in simply making more and each time, we would start I would push to achieve still more. I believe we could also apply McClellands theory of needs for achievement as I had a very strong drive to always succeed and make more. My perspective at the time was that my co-worker did not like my competitive nature. She seemed to get irritated at the first sight of a competitive co-worker. My focus was on my work not her. My motives were to cure my boredom. The fact that I did not initiate any dialogue, but somehow found myself at the heart of a scene came as a huge surprise to me. Her perspective seemed that I was trying to make her look bad in front of her peers. She saw that I was indeed racing against her and put her under the spotlight. She found that to be very stressful. She saw me as an agonizing figure. She decided to confront me because of the way it made her feel and look. During her confrontation, giggles from the other co-workers might have confirmed what she assumed I was doing. By then, the only option I had seemed to be to deescalate the situation and clam her down. It seemed neither of us wanted the spotlight. My urge to find out the number of cassettes I would assemble in a short period compared to my co-worker made me hurry to create as many cassettes as possible. The urge resulted from boredom at the workplace due to the repetitive nature of our work. My co-worker was frustrated after noticing that I always tried to outdo her by assembling more cassettes than her at any given point. The frustration compelled her to make me aware of her stressful situation. Despite my efforts to convince her that I wasn't in competition with her, she disapproved of my behavior, forcing me to stop my hurried working, and I had to resort back to the boredom. According to Taylor's Scientific Management Theory, compelling to work extra- hard was not efficient as optimizing how a worker performs. The case mentioned proves Taylor's Scientific Management Theory. I worked as hard as I could to assemble as many cassettes as possible compared to my co-worker. In so doing, I frustrated my co- worker, which forced me to get back to my old ways hence boredom. I would simplify the work and optimize my co-worker, and I had instead of working so hard to produce the many cassettes. Simplifying the assembling process would undoubtedly increase the productivity of cassettes. The case shows that workers can improve efficiency by optimizing how they carry out their work, agreeing with Taylor's Scientific Management Theory. The Human Relations Management Theory argues that management can improve employees' productivity through positive social bonds, especially in the workplace. The case also proves this theory where the workers get motivated by the administration. My co-worker's motivation at work diminishes after she discovers that I compete with her. She gets frustrated and even confronts me over the matter. Her performance at work was certainly no longer good due to the frustration that resulted from the competition compelling her to voice her concern. Acknowledgment of a worker as unique depending on their skills and capabilities is therefore significant for workers' success. Failure to acknowledge the effect my hurriedness to assemble the cassettes would have on my co-worker led to her frustration and ineffectiveness at work. The management can improve the worker's quality and productivity, therefore, through positive relationships between workers. The case agrees with the Human Relations Management Theory. Throughout Edwin Lockes Goal-Setting Theory it is argued that specific difficult goals with feedback ultimately lead to higher performance. The goal in which I was trying to accomplish was to see how many more cassettes I could stack in the time being than my co-worker. The case proves how I utilized the SMART goals as I knew what needed to be done, which was stacking the cassettes. It was measurable as my progress was trackable. Attainable as my goal to out stack my co-worker was achieved. However, result-oriented was not achieved as the ultimate outcome ended up in a dimensioning vision of the organization, with the an altercation sparking between my co- worker and myself. The goal of stacking more than my co-worker through a specific time was achieved, although it was cut short. All in all, with my contributions I believe that Edwins Lockes theory does support the case as the end objective is to receive feedback leading to a higher performance. With a competitive edge the cassettes were stacked in a very productive time frame dispite the altercation in which occurred not long after achieving my own person goals. References. Miner, J. B. (2002). Organizational behavior: Foundations, theories, and analyses. Oxford University Press. Miner, J. B. (2005). Organizational Behavior: Essential theories of motivation and leadership. one (Vol. 1). ME Sharpe. Pinder, C. C., & Moore, L. F. (1980). The resurrection of taxonomy to aid the development of middle range theories of organizational behavior. In Middle range theory and the study of organizations (pp. 187-211). Springer, Dordrecht. Shakeshaft, C., & Nowell, I. (1984). Research on theories, concepts, and models of organizational behavior: The influence of gender. Issues in Education, 2(3), 186- 203.