APPENDIX

A THE HISTORICAL EVOLUTION

OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

Why study history? Oliver Wendell Holmes you understand, for instance, how manage-
answered that question succinctly when he ment came to impose rules and regulations
said, “When I want to understand what is on employees, why many workers in orga-
happening today or try to decide what will nizations do standardized and repetitive
happen tomorrow, I look back.” By looking tasks on assembly lines, and why a number
back at the history of organizational behav- of organizations in recent years have
ior, you gain a great deal of insight into how replaced their assembly lines with team-
the field got to where it is today. It’ll help based work units. In this appendix, you’ll

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1435 ☛
find a brief description of how the theory nomic doctrine, but his discussion in The
and practice of organizational behavior Wealth of Nations,2 published in 1776,
have evolved. included a brilliant argument on the eco-
So where do we start? Human beings nomic advantages that organizations and
and organized activities have been around society would reap from the division of
for thousands of years, but we needn’t go labor (also called work specialization).
back beyond the eighteenth or nineteenth Smith used the pin-manufacturing industry
century to find OB’s roots. for his examples. He noted that ten individ-
uals, each doing a specialized task, could
produce about 48,000 pins a day among
Early Practices them. He proposed, however, that if each
There is no question that hundreds of peo- were working separately and independently,
ple helped to plant the “seeds” from which the ten workers together would be lucky to
the OB “garden” has grown.1 Three individ- make ten pins in one day. If each had to
uals, however, were particularly important draw the wire, straighten it, cut it, pound
in promoting ideas that would eventually heads for each pin, sharpen the point, and
have a major influence in shaping the direc- solder the head and pin shaft, it would be
tion and boundaries of OB: Adam Smith, quite a feat to produce ten pins a day!
Charles Babbage, and Robert Owen. Smith concluded that division of labor
raised productivity by increasing each
Adam Smith worker’s skill and dexterity, by saving time
that is commonly lost in changing tasks, and
Adam Smith is more typically cited by econ- by encouraging the creation of labor-saving
omists for his contributions to classical eco- inventions and machinery. The extensive

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1436 ☛
development of assembly-line production 4. It allows a more careful matching of
processes during this century has undoubt- people’s skills and physical abilities
edly been stimulated by the economic with specific tasks.
advantages of work specialization cited over Moreover, Babbage proposed that the
two centuries ago by Adam Smith. economies from specialization should be as
relevant to doing mental work as physical
Charles Babbage labor. Today, for example, we take special-
ization for granted among professionals.
Charles Babbage was a British mathematics
When we have a skin rash, we go to a der-
professor who expanded on the virtues of
matologist. When we buy a home, we con-
division of labor first articulated by Adam
sult a lawyer who specializes in real estate.
Smith. In his book On the Economy of
The professors you encounter in your busi-
Machinery and Manufactures,3 published in
ness school classes specialize in areas such
1832, Babbage added the following to
as tax accounting, entrepreneurship, mar-
Smith’s list of the advantages that accrue
keting research, and organizational behav-
from division of labor:
ior. These applications of division of labor
1. It reduces the time needed for learning were unheard of in eighteenth-century
a job. England. But contemporary organizations
2. It reduces the waste of material during around the world — in both manufacturing
the learning stage. and service industries — make wide use of
3. It allows for the attainment of high division of labor.
skill levels.

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1437 ☛
Robert Owen that would reduce the suffering of the work-
ing class. He was more than a hundred years
Robert Owen was a Welsh entrepreneur who
ahead of his time when he argued, in 1825,
bought his first factory in 1789, at the age of
for regulated hours of work for all, child
18. He is important in the history of OB
labor laws, public education, company-
because he was one of the first industrialists
furnished meals at work, and business
to recognize how the growing factory sys-
involvement in community projects.4
tem was demeaning to workers.
Repulsed by the harsh practices he saw
in factories — such as the employment of The Classical Era
young children (many under the age of ten),
13-hour workdays, and miserable working The classical era covered the period from
conditions — Owen became a reformer. He about 1900 to the mid-1930s. It was during
chided factory owners for treating their this period that the first general theories of
equipment better than their employees. He management began to evolve. The classical
criticized them for buying the best machines contributors — who include Frederick Taylor,
but then employing the cheapest labor to Henri Fayol, Max Weber, Mary Parker Follett,
run them. Owen argued that money spent and Chester Barnard — laid the foundation
on improving labor was one of the best for contemporary management practices.
investments that business executives could
make. He claimed that showing concern for Scientific Management
employees both was profitable for manage- The typical United Parcel Service (UPS) dri-
ment and would relieve human misery. ver today makes 120 stops during his or her
For his time, Owen was an idealist. work shift. Every step on that driver’s daily
What he proposed was a utopian workplace

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1438 ☛
route has been carefully studied by UPS vania, Taylor was consistently appalled at
industrial engineers to maximize efficiency. the inefficiency of workers. Employees used
Every second taken up by stoplights, traffic, vastly different techniques to do the same
detours, doorbells, walkways, stairways, and job. They were prone to “taking it easy” on
coffee breaks has been documented by UPS the job. Taylor believed that worker output
engineers so as to cut wasted time. It’s no was only about one-third of what was possi-
accident, for instance, that all UPS drivers ble. Therefore, he set out to correct the situ-
tap their horns when they approach a stop ation by applying the scientific method to
in hopes that the customer will hurry to the jobs on the shop floor. He spent more than
door seconds sooner. It’s also no accident two decades pursuing with a passion the
that all UPS drivers walk to a customer’s “one best way” for each job to be done.
door at the brisk pace of three feet per sec- It’s important to understand what
ond and knock first lest seconds be lost Taylor saw at Midvale Steel that aroused his
searching for the doorbell. determination to improve the way things
Today’s UPS drivers are following prin- were done in the plant. At the time, there
ciples that were laid down more than 85 were no clear concepts of worker and man-
years ago by Frederick W. Taylor in his agement responsibilities. Virtually no effec-
Principles of Scientific Management.5 In this tive work standards existed. Employees pur-
book, Taylor described how the scientific posely worked at a slow pace. Management
method could be used to define the “one decisions were of the “seat-of-the-pants”
best way” for a job to be done. In this sec- nature, based on hunch and intuition.
tion, we review his work. Workers were placed on jobs with little or
As a mechanical engineer at the Midvale no concern for matching their abilities and
and Bethlehem Steel companies in Pennsyl- aptitudes with the tasks they were required

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1439 ☛
to do. Most important, management and Taylor began his experiment by looking
workers considered themselves to be in con- for a physically strong subject who placed a
tinual conflict. Rather than cooperating to high value on the dollar. The individual
their mutual benefit, they perceived their Taylor chose was a big, strong Dutch immi-
relationship as a zero-sum game — any gain grant, whom he called Schmidt. Schmidt,
by one would be at the expense of the other. like the other loaders, earned $1.15 a day,
Taylor sought to create a mental revolu- which even at the turn of the century, was
tion among both the workers and manage- barely enough for a person to survive on. As
ment by defining clear guidelines for improv- the following quotation from Taylor’s book
ing production efficiency. He defined four demonstrates, Taylor used money — the
principles of management, listed in Exhibit opportunity to make $1.85 a day — as the
A-1; he argued that following these principles primary means to get workers like Schmidt
would result in the prosperity of both man- to do exactly as they were told:
agement and workers. Workers would earn
more pay, and management more profits. “Schmidt, are you a high-priced man?”
Probably the most widely cited example “Vell, I don’t know vat you mean.” “Oh,
of scientific management has been Taylor’s yes you do. What I want to know is
whether you are a high-priced man or not.”
pig iron experiment. The average daily out-
“Vell, I don’t know vat you mean.” “Oh,
put of 92-pound pigs loaded onto rail cars
come now, you answer my questions. What
was 12.5 tons per worker. Taylor was con- I want to find out is whether you are a
vinced that by scientifically analyzing the high-priced man or one of these cheap fel-
job to determine the one best way to load lows here. What I want to know is whether
pig iron, the output could be increased to you want to earn $1.85 a day or whether
between 47 and 48 tons per day. you are satisfied with $1.15, just the same

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1440 ☛
Exhibit A-1 Taylor ’s Four Principles of Management

1. Develop a science for each element of an individual’s work. (Pre-

viously, workers used the “rule-of-thumb” method.)
2. Scientifically select and then train, teach, and develop the
worker. (Previously, workers chose their own work and trained
themselves as best they could.)
3. Heartily cooperate with the workers so as to ensure that all work
is done in accordance with the principles of the science that has
been developed. (Previously, management and workers were in
continual conflict.)
4. Divide work and responsibility almost equally between manage-
ment and workers. Management takes over all work for which it is
better suited than the workers. (Previously, almost all the work and
the greater part of the responsibility were thrown upon the workers.)

as all those cheap fellows are getting.” “Did what impact the changes had on Schmidt’s
I vant $1.85 a day? Vas dot a high-priced daily output. For instance, on some days
man? Vell, yes. I vas a high-priced man.”6 Schmidt would lift the pig irons by bending
his knees, whereas on other days he would
Using money to motivate Schmidt, keep his legs straight and use his back. He
Taylor went about having him load the pig experimented with rest periods, walking
irons, alternating various job factors to see speed, carrying positions, and other vari-

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1441 ☛
ables. After a long period of scientifically heavy material like iron ore would be
trying various combinations of procedures, moved with a small-faced shovel and light
techniques, and tools, Taylor succeeded in material like coke with a large-faced shovel.
obtaining the level of productivity he Based on Taylor’s findings, supervisors
thought possible. By putting the right per- would no longer merely tell a worker to
son on the job with the correct tools and “shovel that pile over there.” Depending on
equipment, by having the worker follow his the material to be moved, the supervisor
instructions exactly, and by motivating the would now have to determine the appropri-
worker through the economic incentive of a ate shovel size and assign that size to the
significantly higher daily wage, Taylor was worker. The result, of course, was again sig-
able to reach his 48-ton objective. nificant increases in worker output.
Another Taylor experiment dealt with Using similar approaches in other jobs,
shovel sizes. Taylor noticed that every Taylor was able to define the one best way for
worker in the plant used the same-sized doing each job. He could then, after selecting
shovel, regardless of the material he was the right people for the job, train them to do
moving. This made no sense to Taylor. If it precisely in this one best way. To motivate
there was an optimum weight that would workers, he favored incentive wage plans.
maximize a worker’s shoveling output over Overall, Taylor achieved consistent improve-
an entire day, then Taylor thought the size ments in productivity in the range of 200 per-
of the shovel should vary depending on the cent or more. He reaffirmed the role of man-
weight of the material being moved. After agers to plan and control and that of workers
extensive experimentation, Taylor found to perform as they were instructed. The
that 21 pounds was the optimum shovel Principles of Scientific Management, as well as
capacity. To achieve this optimum weight, papers that Taylor wrote and presented,

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1442 ☛
spread his ideas not only in the United States, tributor to administrative theory was a
but also in France, Germany, Russia, and French industrialist named Henri Fayol.
Japan. One of the biggest boosts in interest in Writing at about the same time as Taylor,
scientific management in the United States Fayol proposed that all managers perform
came during a 1910 hearing on railroad rates five management functions: They plan, orga-
before the Interstate Commerce Commission. nize, command, coordinate, and control.7
Appearing before the commission, an effi- The importance of this simple insight is
ciency expert claimed that railroads could underlined when we acknowledge that
save a million dollars a day (equivalent to almost every introductory management text-
about $16 million a day in 1998 dollars) book today uses these same five functions, or
through the application of scientific manage- a very close variant of them, as a basic frame-
ment! The early acceptance of scientific man- work for describing what managers do.
agement techniques by U.S. manufacturing In addition, Fayol described the practice
companies, in fact, gave them a comparative of management as something distinct from
advantage over foreign firms that made U.S. accounting, finance, production, distribu-
manufacturing efficiency the envy of the tion, and other typical business functions.
world — at least for 50 years or so! He argued that management was an activity
common to all human undertakings in busi-
Administrative Theory ness, in government, and even in the home.
Administrative theory describes efforts to He then proceeded to state 14 principles of
define the universal functions that man- management that could be taught in
agers perform and principles that constitute schools and universities. These principles
good management practice. The major con- are shown in Exhibit A-2.

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1443 ☛
Exhibit A-2 Fayol’s 14 Prnciples of Management

1. Division of Work. This principle is the same as Adam Smith’s “division of labor.” Special-
ization increases output by making employees more efficient.
2. Authority. Managers must be able to give orders. Authority gives them this right. Along
with authority, however, goes responsibility. Whenever authority is exercised, responsibil-
ity arises.
3. Discipline. Employees must obey and respect the rules that govern the organization. Good
discipline is the result of effective leadership, a clear understanding between management
and workers regarding the organization’s rules, and the judicious use of penalties for in-
fractions of the rules.
4. Unity of Command. Every employee should receive orders from only one superior.
5. Unity of Direction. Each group of organizational activities that have the same objective
should be directed by one manager using one plan.
6. Subordination of Individual Interests to the General Interests. The interests of any one em-
ployee or group of employees should not take precedence over the interests of the organi-
zation as a whole.
7. Remuneration. Workers must be paid a fair wage for their services.
8. Centralization. Centralization refers to the degree to which subordinates are involved in
decision making. Whether decision making is centralized (to management) or decentral-
ized (to subordinates) is a question of proper proportion. The problem is to find the opti-
mum degree of centralization for each situation.

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1444 ☛
 9. Scalar Chain. The line of authority from top management to the lowest ranks represents
the scalar chain. Communications should follow this chain. However, if following the chain
creates delays, cross-communications can be allowed if agreed to by all parties and supe-
riors are kept informed.
10. Order. People and materials should be in the right place at the right time.
11. Equity. Managers should be kind and fair to their subordinates.
12. Stability of Tenure of Personnel. High employee turnover is inefficient. Management should
provide orderly personnel planning and ensure that replacements are available to fill va-
cancies.
13. Initiative. Employees who are allowed to originate and carry out plans will exert high lev-
els of effort.
14. Esprit de Corps. Promoting team spirit will build harmony and unity within the organization.

Structural Theory ing organizational activity as based on

authority relations.8 He was one of the first
While Taylor was concerned with manage-
to look at management and organizational
ment at the shop level (or what we today
behavior from a structural perspective.
would describe as the job of a supervisor)
Weber described an ideal type of organi-
and Fayol focused on general management
zation that he called a bureaucracy. Bureau-
functions, the German sociologist Max
cracy was a system characterized by division
Weber (pronounced Vay-ber) was developing
of labor, a clearly defined hierarchy, detailed
a theory of authority structures and describ-
rules and regulations, and impersonal rela-

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1445 ☛
tionships. Weber recognized that this “ideal MARY PARKER FOLLETT Mary Parker
bureaucracy” didn’t exist in reality but, Follett was one of the earliest writers to rec-
rather, represented a selective reconstruc- ognize that organizations could be viewed
tion of the real world. He meant it to be from the perspective of individual and group
taken as a basis for theorizing about work behavior.10 A transitionalist writing during
and how work could be done in large the time when scientific management domi-
groups. His theory became the design proto- nated, Follett was a social philosopher who
type for large organizations. The detailed proposed more people-oriented ideas. Her
features of Weber’s ideal bureaucratic struc- ideas had clear implications for organiza-
ture are outlined in Exhibit A-3. tional behavior. Follett thought that organi-
zations should be based on a group ethic
“Social Man” Theory rather than individualism. Individual poten-
tial, she argued, remained only potential
People like Taylor, Fayol, and Weber could until released through group association. The
be faulted for forgetting that human beings manager’s job was to harmonize and coordi-
are the central core of every organization nate group efforts. Managers and workers
and that human beings are social animals. should view themselves as partners — as part
Mary Parker Follett and Chester Barnard of a common group. Therefore, managers
were two theorists who saw the importance should rely more on their expertise and
of the social aspects of organizations. Their knowledge than on the formal authority of
ideas were born late in the scientific man- their position to lead subordinates.
agement period but didn’t achieve any large Follett’s humanistic ideas have influenced
degree of recognition until the 1930s.9 the way we look at motivation, leadership,

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1446 ☛
Exhibit A-3 Weber ’s Ideal Bureaucracy

1. Job Specialization. Jobs are broken down into simple, routine,

and well-defined tasks.
2. Authority Hierarchy. Offices or positions are organized in a hi-
erarchy, each lower one being controlled and supervised by a
higher one.
3. Formal Selection. All organizational members are to be selected
on the basis of technical qualifications demonstrated by train-
ing, education, or formal examination.
4. Formal Rules and Regulations. To ensure uniformity and to regu-
late the actions of employees, managers must depend heavily
on formal organizational rules.
5. Impersonality. Rules and controls are applied uniformly, avoid-
ing involvement with personalities and personal preferences of
employees.
6. Career Orientation. Managers are professional officials rather
than owners of the units they manage. They work for fixed
salaries and pursue their careers within the organization.

power, and authority today. In fact, Japanese Europe in the late 1970s, are indebted to
organization and management styles, which Follett. They place a heavy emphasis on group
came into vogue in North America and togetherness and team effort.

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1447 ☛
 CHESTER BARNARD Like Henri Fayol, nization’s dependence on investors, suppli-
Chester Barnard was a practitioner. He ers, customers, and other external con-
joined the American Telephone and stituencies, Barnard introduced the idea that
Telegraph system in 1909 and became pres- managers had to examine the environment
ident of New Jersey Bell in 1927. Barnard and then adjust the organization to main-
had read Weber and was influenced by his tain a state of equilibrium. So, for instance,
writings. But unlike Weber, who had a regardless of how efficient an organization’s
mechanistic and impersonal view of organi- production might be, if management failed
zations, Barnard saw organizations as social to ensure a continuous input of materials
systems that require human cooperation. and supplies or to find markets for its out-
He expressed his views in The Functions of puts, then the organization’s survival would
the Executive,11 published in 1938. be threatened. Much of the current interest
Barnard viewed organizations as made in how the environment affects organiza-
up of people who have interacting social tions and their employees can be traced to
relationships. Managers’ major roles were to ideas initially suggested by Barnard.
communicate and to stimulate subordinates
to high levels of effort. A major part of an
organization’s success, as Barnard saw it, The Behavioral Era
depended on obtaining cooperation from its The “people side” of organizations came
personnel. Barnard also argued that success into its own during the period we’ll call the
depended on maintaining good relations behavioral era. As we show, this era was
with people and institutions outside the marked by the human relations movement
organization with whom the organization and the widespread application in organiza-
regularly interacted. By recognizing the orga- tions of behavioral science research. While

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1448 ☛
this behavioral era really didn’t begin to roll personnel or human resource management
until the 1930s, two earlier events deserve directors, acted as a buffer between the
brief mention because they played an organization and its employees. The B. F.
important part in the application and devel- Goodrich Co. developed the first employ-
opment of organizational behavior. These ment department in 1900, but its responsi-
are the birth of the “personnel office” bilities consisted only of hiring. In 1902,
around the turn of the century and the cre- the National Cash Register Company estab-
ation of the field of industrial psychology lished the first comprehensive labor depart-
with the publication of Hugo Münsterberg’s ment responsible for wage administration,
textbook in 1913. grievances, employment and working con-
ditions, health conditions, recordkeeping,
The Birth of the “Personnel and worker improvement.
Office”
The Birth of Industrial Psychology
In response to the growth of trade union-
ism at the turn of the century, a few firms — Hugo Münsterberg created the field of
for example, H.J. Heinz, Colorado Fuel & industrial psychology with the publication
Iron, and International Harvester — created of his text Psychology and Industrial
the position of “welfare secretary.” Welfare Efficiency12 in 1913. In it, he argued for the
secretaries were supposed to assist workers scientific study of human behavior to iden-
by suggesting improvements in working tify general patterns and to explain individ-
conditions, housing, medical care, educa- ual differences. Interestingly, Münsterberg
tional facilities, and recreation. These peo- saw a link between scientific management
ple, who were the forerunners of today’s and industrial psychology. Both sought

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1449 ☛
increased efficiency through scientific work unions as the authorized representatives of
analyses and through better alignment of workers, able to bargain collectively with
individual skills and abilities with the employers in the interests of their members.
demands of various jobs. The Wagner Act would prove to be the
Münsterberg suggested the use of psy- Magna Carta of labor. It legitimized the role
chological tests to improve employee selec- of trade unions and encouraged rapid
tion, the value of learning theory in the growth in union membership. In response to
development of training methods, and the this legislation, managers in industry
study of human behavior in order to under- became much more open to finding new
stand what techniques are most effective ways to handle their employees. Having lost
for motivating workers. Much of our cur- the battle to keep unions out of their facto-
rent knowledge of selection techniques, ries, management began to try to improve
employee training, work design, and moti- working conditions and seek better relations
vation is built on Münsterberg’s work. with its work force. A set of studies done at
Western Electric’s Hawthorne plant would be
The Magna Carta of Labor the prime stimulus for the human relations
movement that swept American industry
Following the stock market crash of 1929, from the late 1930s through the 1950s.
the United States and much of the world’s
economy entered the Great Depression. To
help relieve the effects of the depression on Human Relations
the U.S. labor force, President Franklin The essence of the human relations move-
Roosevelt supported the Wagner Act, which ment was the belief that the key to higher
was passed in 1935. This act recognized productivity in organizations was increasing

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1450 ☛
employee satisfaction. In addition to the illumination intensities, while the control
Hawthorne studies, three people played group worked under a constant intensity.
important roles in conveying the message of The engineers had expected individual out-
human relations: Dale Carnegie, Abraham put to be directly related to the intensity of
Maslow, and Douglas McGregor. In this sec- light. However, they found that as the light
tion, we briefly review each man’s contribu- level was increased in the experimental
tion. But first, we’ll briefly describe the very group, output for both groups rose. To the
influential Hawthorne studies. surprise of the engineers, as the light level
was dropped in the experimental group,
THE HAWTHORNE STUDIES Without ques- productivity continued to increase in both
tion, the most important contribution to groups. In fact, a productivity decrease was
the human relations movement within observed in the experimental group only
organizational behavior came out of the when the light intensity had been reduced
Hawthorne studies undertaken at the to that of moonlight. The engineers con-
Western Electric Company’s Hawthorne cluded that illumination intensity was not
Works in Cicero, Illinois. These studies, orig- directly related to group productivity, but
inally begun in 1924 but eventually they could not explain the behavior they
expanded and carried on through the early had witnessed.
1930s, were initially devised by Western The Western Electric engineers asked
Electric industrial engineers to examine the Harvard professor Elton Mayo and his asso-
effect of various illumination levels on ciates in 1927 to join the study as consul-
worker productivity. Control and experi- tants. Thus began a relationship that would
mental groups were established. The experi- last through 1932 and encompass numer-
mental group was presented with varying ous experiments covering the redesign of

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1451 ☛
jobs, changes in the length of the workday and security. These conclusions led to a new
and workweek, introduction of rest periods, emphasis on the human factor in the func-
and individual versus group wage plans.13 tioning of organizations and the attainment
For example, one experiment was designed of their goals. They also led to increased
to evaluate the effect of a group piecework paternalism by management.
incentive pay system on group productiv- The Hawthorne studies have not been
ity. The results indicated that the incentive without critics. Attacks have been made on
plan had less effect on a worker’s output their procedures, analyses of findings, and
than did group pressure and acceptance the conclusions they drew.14 However, from
and the concomitant security. Social norms a historical standpoint, it’s of little impor-
or standards of the group, therefore, were tance whether the studies were academically
concluded to be the key determinants of sound or their conclusions justified. What is
individual work behavior. important is that they stimulated an interest
Scholars generally agree that the in human factors.
Hawthorne studies had a large and dramatic
impact on the direction of organizational DALE CARNEGIE Dale Carnegie’s book
behavior and management practice. Mayo’s How to Win Friends and Influence People15
conclusions were that behavior and senti- was read by millions during the 1930s,
ments were closely related, that group influ- 1940s, and 1950s. During this same period,
ences significantly affected individual tens of thousands of managers and aspiring
behavior, that group standards established managers attended his management
individual worker output, and that money speeches and seminars. So Carnegie’s ideas
was less a factor in determining output than deserve attention because of the wide audi-
were group standards, group sentiments, ence they commanded.

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1452 ☛
 Carnegie’s essential theme was that the he believed that self-actualization — that is,
way to success was through winning the achieving one’s full potential — was the
cooperation of others. He advised his audi- summit of a human being’s existence.
ence to: (1) make others feel important Managers who accepted Maslow’s hierarchy
through a sincere appreciation of their attempted to alter their organizations and
efforts; (2) strive to make a good first management practices to reduce barriers to
impression; (3) win people to their way of employees’ self-actualization.
thinking by letting others do the talking,
being sympathetic, and “never telling a man DOUGLAS MCGREGOR Douglas McGregor
he is wrong”; and (4) change people by is best known for his formulation of two sets
praising their good traits and giving the of assumptions — Theory X and Theory Y —
offender the opportunity to save face.16 about human nature.18 Briefly, Theory X
rests on an essentially negative view of peo-
ABRAHAM MASLOW Few students of col- ple. It assumes that they have little ambi-
lege age have not been exposed to the ideas tion, dislike work, want to avoid responsi-
of Abraham Maslow. A humanistic psychol- bility, and need to be closely directed to
ogist, Maslow proposed a theoretical hierar- work effectively. Theory Y, on the other
chy of five needs: physiological, safety, hand, rests on a positive view of people. It
social, esteem, and self-actualization.17 From assumes they can exercise self-direction,
a motivation standpoint, Maslow argued accept responsibility, and consider work to
that each step in the hierarchy must be sat- be as natural as rest or play. McGregor per-
isfied before the next can be activated, and sonally believed that Theory Y assumptions
that once a need was substantially satisfied, best captured the true nature of workers and
it no longer motivated behavior. Moreover, should guide management practice. As a

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1453 ☛
result, he argued that managers should free zational behavior. But to give you the flavor
up their employees to unleash their full cre- of their work, we’ll briefly summarize the
ative and productive potential. contributions of a few of the major theorists.

Behavioral Science Theorists JACOB MORENO Jacob Moreno created an

analytical technique called sociometry for
The final category within the behavioral era studying group interactions.19 Members of a
encompasses a group of researchers who, as group were asked whom they liked or dis-
Taylor did in scientific management, relied liked, and whom they wished to work with
on the scientific method for the study of or not work with. From these data, collected
organizational behavior. Unlike members of in interviews, Moreno was able to construct
the human relations movement, the behav- sociograms that identified attraction, repul-
ioral science theorists engaged in objective sion, and indifference patterns among group
research of human behavior in organiza- members. Moreno’s sociometric analysis has
tions. They carefully attempted to keep their been used in organizations to create cohesive
personal beliefs out of their work. They and high-performing work teams.
sought to develop rigorous research designs
that could be replicated by other behavioral B.F. SKINNER Few behavioral scientists’
scientists in the hope that a science of orga- names are more familiar to the general pub-
nizational behavior could be built. lic than that of B.F. Skinner. His research on
A full review of the contributions made operant conditioning and behavior modifi-
by behavioral science theorists would cover cation had a significant effect on the design
hundreds of pages, since their work makes up of organizational training programs and
a large part of today’s foundations of organi- reward systems.20

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1454 ☛
 Essentially, Skinner demonstrated that high achievers so as to maximize their moti-
behavior is a function of its consequences. vation potential. In addition, McClelland
He found that people will most likely and his associates have successfully trained
engage in desired behavior if they are individuals to increase their achievement
rewarded for doing so; these rewards are drive. For instance, in India, people who
most effective if they immediately follow underwent achievement training worked
the desired response; and behavior that is longer hours, initiated more new business
not rewarded, or is punished, is less likely to ventures, made greater investments in pro-
be repeated. ductive assets, employed a larger number of
employees, and saw a greater increase in
DAVID MCCLELLAND Psychologist David their gross incomes than did a similar group
McClelland tested the strength of individual who did not undergo achievement training.
achievement motivation by asking subjects
to look at a set of somewhat ambiguous pic- FRED FIEDLER Leadership is one of the
tures and to write their own story about most important and extensively researched
each picture. Based on these projective tests, topics in organizational behavior. The work
McClelland found he was able to differenti- of Fred Fiedler on the subject is significant
ate people with a high need to achieve — for its emphasis on the situational aspects of
individuals who had a strong desire to suc- leadership as well as for its attempt to
ceed or achieve in relation to a set of develop a comprehensive theory of leader-
standards — from people with a low need to ship behavior.22
achieve.21 His research has been instrumen- From the mid-1960s through the late
tal in helping organizations better match 1970s, Fiedler’s contingency model domi-
people with jobs and in redesigning jobs for nated leadership research. He developed a

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1455 ☛
questionnaire to measure an individual’s analyzed their responses. He concluded that
inherent leadership orientation and identi- people preferred jobs that offered opportuni-
fied three contingency variables that, he ties for recognition, achievement, responsi-
argued, determined what type of leader bility, and growth. Managers who concerned
behavior is most effective. In testing his themselves with things like company poli-
model, Fiedler and his associates studied cies, employee pay, creating narrow and
hundreds of groups. Dozens of researchers repetitive jobs, and developing favorable
have attempted to replicate his results. working conditions might placate their
Although some of the predictions from the workers, but they wouldn’t motivate them.
model have not stood up well under closer According to Herzberg, if managers want to
analysis, Fielder’s model has been a major motivate their people, they should redesign
influence on current thinking and research jobs to allow workers to perform more and
about leadership. varied tasks. Much of the current interest in
enriching jobs and improving the quality
FREDERICK HERZBERG With the possible of work life can be traced to Herzberg’s
exception of the Hawthorne studies, no sin- research.
gle stream of research has had a greater
impact on undermining the recommenda- J. RICHARD HACKMAN AND GREG OLDHAM
tions of scientific management than the While Herzberg’s conclusions were greeted
work of Frederick Herzberg.23 with enthusiasm, the methodology he used
Herzberg sought an answer to the ques- for arriving at those conclusions was far
tion: What do individuals want from their less enthusiastically embraced. It would be
jobs? He asked hundreds of people that ques- the work of J. Richard Hackman and Greg
tion in the late 1950s, and then carefully Oldham in the 1970s that would provide an

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1456 ☛
explanation of how job factors influence ideas. As United Parcel Service demonstrates,
employee motivation and satisfaction, and many of Taylor’s scientific management prin-
would offer a valid framework for analyzing ciples can be applied today with impressive
jobs.24 Hackman and Oldham’s research results. Of course, that doesn’t mean that
also uncovered the core job dimensions — those principles will work as well in other
skill variety, task identity, task significance, organizations. If there is anything we’ve
autonomy, and feedback — that have stood learned over the last quarter of a century, it’s
up well as guides in the design of jobs. More that few ideas — no matter how attractive —
specifically, Hackman and Oldham found are applicable to all organizations or to all
that among individuals with strong growth jobs or to all types of employees. Today, orga-
needs, jobs that score high on these five nizational behavior must be studied and
core dimensions lead to high employee per- applied in a contingency framework.
formance and satisfaction. Baseball fans know that a batter doesn’t
always try for a home run. It depends on the
score, the inning, whether runners are on
OB Today: A Contingency base, and similar contingency variables.
Perspective Similarly, you can’t say that students always
We’ve attempted to demonstrate in this learn more in small classes than in large
appendix that the present state of organiza- ones. An extensive body of educational
tional behavior encompasses ideas intro- research tells us that contingency factors
duced dozens, and sometimes hundreds, of such as course content and teaching style of
years ago. So don’t think of one era’s con- the instructor influence the relationship
cepts as replacing an earlier era’s; rather, view between class size and learning effectiveness.
them as extensions and modifications of earlier Applied to organizational behavior, contin-

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1457 ☛
gency theory recognizes that there is no variables and which ones are relevant for
“one best way” to manage people in organi- understanding various behavioral phenom-
zations and no single set of simple principles ena. This essentially reflects the maturing of
that can be applied universally.25 OB as a scientific discipline. The near-term
A contingency approach to the study of future of OB research is likely to continue to
OB is intuitively logical. Why? Because orga- focus on fine-tuning current theories so as
nizations obviously differ in size, objectives, to better help us understand those situa-
and environmental uncertainty. Similarly, tions where they’re most likely to be useful.
employees differ in values, attitudes, needs,
and experiences. So it would be surprising to
find that there are universally applicable Summary
principles that work in all situations. But, of While the seeds of organizational behavior
course, it’s one thing to say “it all depends” were planted more than 200 years ago, cur-
and another to say what it all depends upon. rent OB theory and practice are essentially
The most popular OB topics for research products of the twentieth century.
investigation in recent years have been the- Frederick Taylor’s principles of scientific
ories of motivation, leadership, work design, management were instrumental in engineer-
and job satisfaction.26 But while the 1960s ing precision and standardization into peo-
and 1970s saw the development of new the- ple’s jobs. Henri Fayol defined the universal
ories, the emphasis since has been on refin- functions that all managers perform and the
ing existing theories, clarifying previous principles that constitute good management
assumptions, and identifying relevant con- practice. Max Weber developed a theory of
tingency variables.27 That is, researchers authority structures and described organiza-
have been trying to identify the “what” tional activity based on authority relations.

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1458 ☛
 The “people side” of organizations came leadership theories offered by David
into its own in the 1930s, predominately as McClelland, Fred Fiedler, Frederick Herzberg,
a result of the Hawthorne studies. These and other behavioral scientists during the
studies led to a new emphasis on the human 1960s and 1970s provided managers with
factor in organizations and increased pater- still greater insights into employee behavior.
nalism by management. In the late 1950s, Almost all contemporary management
managers’ attention was caught by the ideas and organizational behavior concepts are
of people like Abraham Maslow and Douglas contingency based. That is, they provide
McGregor, who proposed that organization various recommendations dependent upon
structures and management practices had to situational factors. As a maturing discipline,
be altered so as to bring out the full produc- current OB research is emphasizing the
tive potential of employees. Motivation and refinement of existing theories.

Quit Chapter Start Contents Video Chapter End Web Site

☛ 1459 ☛