Organizational Behavior Final Project PDF

Preview

Summary

Break down of each milestone notes for final project. Has all 8 weeks of gathering information about how an organization should have structure, ethics....

Description

Final Project: Organizational Analysis

Joy Jordan Final Project: Organizational Analysis OL-342-H4234 Organizational Behavior 21EW4 Southern New Hampshire April 17, 2021

Final Project: Organizational Analysis

Introduction In this case study GM is a national company, who builds vehicles of all types from cars to SVU. The also run production for parts to service their motor vehicles. This company is described to have many lacking components in their organizational culture. They have been ridiculed for their ignition switch failures in the Chevy cobalt. Due to this malefaction 13 lives were lost (Kuppler, 2014). The culture in GM at the time of this issues was in shambles, employees were afraid to speak up with concerns on safety issues. Furthermore the management were more concerned about production numbers and profit, than the concerns of the employees were having and the safety of their product. GM was facing many problems in the culture of the company, which if not addressed and changed the company was due to failure. Moreover GM is characterized as very dysfunctional, and carless in the culture of GM in this study. I do not see many strength in the company during this case study. However the CEO Barra in the town meeting showed first signs of change by knowledge of the finding with the victims when sharing the report with them.

Organizational Model

In this study GM falls in the Autocratic model which means that the employees, are managed, and pushed by the management team by orders to do as they are told, and employees obey, with higher performance in fear of becoming insubordinate to the managers and the organization employed by ( Davis, 1968). GM culture falls under the custodial Model with GM needing the economic resources and driven by profit, and the employees are driven by security of the job and benefits receiving from GM.

Other Models Used

Final Project: Organizational Analysis

Other models used in the Motor vehicle industry, which already have strong organization culture could use Models such as the supportive model as ford motor company uses, in the decades of 1930 &1940 Mayo and Roethlisberger company did study’s and experiments one of them on Western Electric Company on how managers should act with employees, and their organizations. The conclusion was “that the employees work better when they are in a supportive environment” Keith Davis, 1968). For GM to use this model they would need to be more stable in approaching the culture with management knowledge not using their position as in a power role.

The Collegial Model is still shaping into a model that is based on the managers and the employees work together to get the task accomplished. In this model the managers make the employees of the company feel like their work the do is appreciated and needed, and they themselves are more of a contributor, not just one who holds a powerful position. GM would benefit much by getting their organizational culture to the point that they could implement this model, would be a great way to make the employees feel like equals, and give the managers more insight into their employees and what makes them be more productive.

Reason to Use Different Models In companies that use more of the team oriented models over the power driven model gives more insight from employee to managers and what makes, their employees feel valued as a part of the organization. Models such as the autocratic model it is all about the upper management barking orders to the employees. With this model you get resentment and pull back from your employees, higher turnover rate, less quality production, encounter safety issues with product, due to employees being in fear to bring it to management team.

Final Project: Organizational Analysis

Whereas, in the supportive model employees are motivated by being supportive in their position, not demanded in the job. This is intrinsic motivation. The employees feel like a part of the organization not just a number of the company (Davis, 1968). GM would need to change their outlook and how they view their employees and be willing to follow all step to implement a more employee/manager involving model.

Impact of Culture Companies back in the earlier generation sole depended on the more autocratic models, not much attention was put on culture and behavioral aspect of the organization. In time things have changed where more companies are investing more time into what makes their companies better than the competitors. In doing this they had to find what we’re making the other companies in the same industry more profitable, less turnover rate, happier employees which plays a huge part in their quality of production. Looking into the changes of the companies now compare to the companies models as before is knowing what makes your company stand out, reaching and striving to be a quality know organization.

We all know if you have happy employees, and managers who listen to the employee’s needs, and values the employees and want to learn what drives their employees to be a part of the organization you will have a great organizational culture and more competitive with the competitors.

Model used most in the Industry

Final Project: Organizational Analysis

The autocratic model that GM is using is compared to one of their biggest competitor ford. Ford stands on supportive measures, encouraging their employees learn and improve not threatening them to improve, using more of the supportive model. With this ford build integrity, and positive behaviors among its employees. Ford company culture focuses on safety, and quality in all their organization functions (Smithson, 2018).

Motivational Models Models have shifted from decades ago where more were in to using power to be more of the driving force where now the models have shifted to more of looking into what makes the organization as a whole complete, without taking away from employees moral, driven forces, their dignity, and making more organizations not just profitable but more of a challenge for the competitors in the same industry. There are still organization who use the power models to get production out at a fast pace, and do not care about the culture of the organization, or their employees. These companies will not persevere in the long run if they do not take a hard look at the organizational culture as a whole and do some major changes.

Leadership Style at GM

GM at the time of this crisis was falling under the Autocratic leadership style. With this leadership style the employees are managed out of losing their jobs. The autocratic style the managers and employees with authority do not take feedback from those who are providing it to them. This leadership is driven by power, money, not concerned much about safety of the product. Employees do as they are told and don’t give feedback about the issues out of fear of

Final Project: Organizational Analysis

losing their jobs (Davis, 1968). However where Barra took over as CEO in 2013 she did a great start in changing the culture and leadership style at GM. GM’ Shift in Leadership Style When Mary Barra Became the CEO she came in at a critical time for GM. She seen that the leadership style they were using, was a part in why they were in the crisis they were facing. She seen that many of the upper management knew about the concerns involving the ignition switch on the cobalt’s but it was ignored. She seen that the employees were too afraid to stand up to the management in fear of losing their positions. Barra seen that folks need to be accountable for their action and lack of action regarding the ignition switch tragedy. Barra decided that she need to change the culture within GM, in order to change the leadership style from Autocratic to more of a Coach style leadership/Democratic style, with coach type of leadership the management team encourage the employees to build skills work as a team and be more focused on the task at hand. However with the Democratic style Tis allows employees at a lower level position to have some authority when it is needed. This style help employees feel like they have a little more room to voice their concerns when it could be a life or death concern. This would have made a like changing outcome for GM if this would have been implemented before the cobalt ignition crisis. Internal and External Influences In this study I see that accountability, and culture are to huge internal reason why there was a shift in style. No one wanted to take accountability for the ignition switch issue. You had people working on the issue of the switch no one fixed it. (Kuppler, 2015). No one deemed this to be an urgent matter to resolve even up to the deaths of 13 civilians. You had engineers, investigators,

Final Project: Organizational Analysis

and even layers and no one brought this to the highest management and CEO, no one seen this as a huge critical issue that need to be addressed and fixed (Kuppler, 2015). The culture of GM was the part that made this company frail to the core of GM. With the lack of responsibility not taken, the fear form employees that they would get retaliation from the management team for speaking on their concerns with the issue. Having a good culture foundation of an organization, treating your employees with respect dignity, ensuring they are supported when the need to go to management, finding out what makes your employees want to work for your organization, treating them as an equal, not a less than person, could build a great foundation for a great Organization. GM lacked all that they were all about power, profit, and production. Not much of quality, safety, integrity of the organization, employees, or the consumers. The consumers and the competitors like Ford, Toyota were a couple reason for the shift in management. When you are a company based on sales, you will always have competitors like Ford. Ford focuses of safety, quality, of their product. They embraces their employees concerns, they encourage the employees to reach for new potions. Ford shows appreciation for the hard work their employees give. (Smithson, 2018).Barra knew that she had to make changes to the culture, and she started by address the victim’s family and the press at a town meeting (Kuppler, 2014). Relationship Style and Decision Making The style was unorganized, very focus driven on profit, production, not motivated by quality, safety of the product. The managers for focused on the power they held to push around the employees who were direct support of making, fixing, assembling the ignition switch for the cobalt’s (Kuppler, 2014). However the managers didn’t want to hear the concerns they just wanted the employees to produce, and keep their mouths closed, out of sight out of mind

Final Project: Organizational Analysis

approach. The upper management making the decision, did not want to deal with the issues of the ignition switch malfunctioning they wanted to produce, the parts, and install the parts? The pressures of competitors could push a company to ignore many quality, and safety based issues if it will put them behind a competitor production. Internal Culture of GM The culture with in GM was bare to nothing. This an Autocratic style of leadership. This was not a supportive managers to employee come to me if you have an issue, more of do as I say we have a deadline to meet, and money to make. The culture had no moral foundation with no understanding, encouragement, no respect and the list goes on. No one took responsibility for anything at GM Motor Company Examples This was not the first of the issue with the ignition switch this had been going on for 11 years. The switch was touched by very educated people with degrees such as engineers, investigators, lawyers and still no responsibility was addressed Kuppler, 2014).They were no sense that this was an urgent matter with the ignition switch. “One engineer wrote; this issue has been around since man first lumbered out of the sea and stood on two feet”. This was a culture problem for many years (Kuppler, 2014). The CEO before Barra did nothing to bring a firm diligent culture to GM and it went downhill until Mary Barra was named CEO and started the changing and structure of GM from within the heart of the company. She took responsibility for the crises by addressing the victim’s family, the press and focused on the changes she would make such as, firing of 15 employees putting Jeff Boyer as new vice president in safety. She made to where

Final Project: Organizational Analysis

everyone in the management positions had someone they had to report to. This started the chain of events that brought culture in the GM organization. Why the leadership Style Complement Each Other The leadership style that Mary Barra is implementing into the GM organization complements the culture in many ways. She is implementing compassion, respect, understanding to the employees and the consumers. If you have a company and the have a mission, and they have leaders who will uphold the organizations mission this will benefit the culture. Consumers, choose a company to buy from for reason of cost, safety of the product, efficiency of that product. Employees choose to work at a company that values them and their ability to complete the task with quality, dignity, and most importantly safety. Barra bring accountability to all who are employed at GM, empowering employees to speak up no matter how small they feel the concern is, show employees they are heard, and valued at the company. Whether Changes in Leadership style or culture influenced GM Before the new CEO Mary Barra there were no repercussions for any mistakes done by employees or management at GM. The culture at GM was no existent it was more of a flat production line with sergeant demanding production to move forward at any cost. They wanted no feedback from employees with concerns. You had employees afraid to speak up about the concerns, in fear of retaliation from upper management. The changes Barra brought gave GM new hope in moving forward from the crises it was facing. This was a great influence on the culture GM was moving toward by Mary Barra. How Leadership Style Influenced Employees at GM

Final Project: Organizational Analysis

The Autocratic leadership style influenced the employees by making sure threat they were aware of the repercussions if they were not to meet production. This style made them afraid to speak up about concerns. With this style no one took responsibility for the ignition switch crises not being addressed or brought to higher authority with in GM. There we degree educated people that were involved with the ignition switch and did nothing (Kuppler, 2014). Furthermore you had no one see that there was no leadership between employees and upper management. No one valued the lacking of the culture GM did not have. No one had respect for anyone but themselves and profit they were trying to accomplish. Conclusion Moreover this lead employees with not feeling respected, and a sense that it is okay to not care about safety, not to have any respect for the organizations missions or culture. Furthermore have the outlook that money and profit are above quality and safety. With no structure no harmony, no respect, or culture and an Autocratic leadership GM company would fall to the waste side, leaving employees without feeling respected, no feeling of belonging and jobless. Finally, if it we not for Barra facing the truth and stepping up taking responsibility for the crisis GM caused and moving toward making changes GM would be a failed company.

Final Project: Organizational Analysis

References Keith Davis. (1968). Evolving Models of Organizational Behavior. The Academy of Management Journal, 11(1), 27–38.

Kuppler, T. (2014, September 11). The GMN Culture Crisis: What leaders must learn from this culture case study. Retrieved March 20, 2021, from https://web.archive.org/web/20161013135112/http:/switchandshift.com/the-gm-culturecrisis Perkins S. J., & Arvinen-muondo R. (2013). Organizational Behavior. [MBS Direct]. Retrieved from https://mbsdirect.vitalsource.com/#/books/9780749463618/

Pratap, Abhijeet. An Analysis of the Organizational Culture at Ford Motors. 27 Jan. 2019, notesmatic.com/2017/11/analysis-organizational-culture-ford-motors/. Smithson, N. (2018, September 08). Ford motor company's organizational structure analysis. Retrieved March 20, 2021, from http://panmore.com/ford-motor-company-organizationalstructure-analysis...