E-ISSN: 2469-4339

Management and Economics Research Journal, Vol. 2, Pages 32–40, 2016

Review Article
Comparison of the
Models of Organizational
Behavior: A Review

Wibowo

HATASO, USA
32 Review Article

Comparison of the Models of Organizational Behavior: A Review

Galih Wibowo
Public Relation Officer and Organizational Practitioner in the Government of Central Java Province, Indonesia.

*Correspondence: [email protected]

Received: Dec 8, 2015; Accepted: Dec 30, 2016; Published: Jan 18, 2017

Abstract
An organization is composed of a variety of human behaviors to reach common goals. The unity of behaviors forms a behavior
model that determines the organization's performance. The organizational behavior model is helpful for knowing more clearly
what an organization does. There are five (5) models of organizational behavior: autocracy, custodial, supportive, collegial,
and system models. Every model has three impact elements, based on management orientation, employee side with three
sub-elements, and performance results. To understand the organizational behavior model, it is important to put the model
appropriate for an organization. The speech writing unit is an organizational line that often changes the leader. This study is an
attempt to look at the right behavior model for an organization. To determine which one is more suitable to implement, every
leader in the speech writing unit must consider all the basic elements of each model. The result is that a leader permanently
implements no model. Every leader always changes their organizational behavior model according to the situation they face.

Keywords: Behavior; Organizational behavior model; Impact elements.

1. INTRODUCTION

Organizational behavior is a rather general term that indicates the attitude and behavior of individuals and groups
within the organization, with respect to the systematic study of the attitudes and behaviors, both personal and
interpersonal concerns, in the context of the organization (Roberts, 1987). Organizational behavior is the study
and application of knowledge about how people act within organizations. Organizational behavior has the goal of
helping managers make new paradigm transitions. Some of the new paradigm characteristics include the
coverage of second-generation information technology and total quality management such as empowerment,
reengineering and benchmarking, and learning organization for managing the diversity of work (Praveen, 2011).
Based on both opinions, organizational behavior is an important aspect that influences the individual role in
an organization. Organizational behavior is a field of study that investigates the impact that individuals, groups,
and structures have on behavior within organizations for the purpose of applying such knowledge to improve
organizational effectiveness (Robbins and Judge, 2015). Human behavior is a function of the interaction between
the individual and his or her environment; the interaction means that an individual and his or her environment
affect each other and can determine the behavior of both. The intended environment can be either a group or an
organization.
The organization is an entity consisting of a group of people/individuals. The organization also consists of
various human behaviors in it. So the behavior of individuals in the organization impacts organizational
effectiveness. Organizational behavior becomes an important study to develop more effective organizational
knowledge. The behavior of organizations is formed by different characteristics in each individual in the
organization and on the character of the organization, also called models.
A model is a plan or representation that describes an object, a system, or a concept, which is often the
simplification or idealization. The model can be a physical object (mock-ups, prototypes), a model image
(drawings, computer images), or a mathematical formula. A model is a plan, representation, or description that
describes an object, system, or concept, often in the form of simplification or idealization, and this may be as a
physical model (mock-ups, prototypes), the model image (image, computer image), or mathematical formulas.

HATASO merj.scholasticahq.com
 Management and Economics Research Journal, Vol. 2, Pages 32–40, 2016 33

An organizational behavior model is a management mechanism of an organization that shows the skeleton
and the arrangement of the embodiment of a fixed pattern in the relationship between functions, parts, and
positions; and the behaviors of those who show the position and the assignment of authority and responsibility is
different in an organization. Several organizational models often adopted today are:
1) Autocratic model, 2) Custodial Model, 3) Supportive Model, 4) Collegial Model, and 5) System Model. The
models of organizational behavior help us see more clearly what an organization does (Falletta,
2005). These models are used to 1) improve our understanding of organizational behavior, 2) categorize/ manage
data about the organization, and 3) interpret data about the organization.
Different organizations depend on the quality of behaviors that develop within the organization. The model
used by leaders/managers is based on certain assumptions about people's organizational activities. Therefore, to
get the exact model for an organization, it is necessary to understand each model of organizational behavior that
exists today. It is important to examine each concept model of organizational behavior to understand its
advantages and disadvantages.
Local governments in the context of the Government of Central Java province in Indonesia have the concept
of reform of organizational structure every two years, even less than before, so leaders often change. Similarly,
the field of Organizational Unit Writing often welcomes a change of leadership. This study was conducted to
describe the model of the organizational behavior of every leader who had been a Pepin speech writing unit in the
Central Java government. From 2006 until 2015, there has been a change of leaders five times, while the staff
was permanent.
Most studies only determine the organizational or personal behavior in organizations, such as the behavior
of the procurement process not being transparent (Ahmad and Adnan, 2014), deviant behavior on the release of
morals (Ntayi et al., 2010), or the impact of organizational culture on organizational performance (Shahzad et al.,
2012). Everything never discusses the organizational behavior model that is implemented in an organization. An
organizational behavior model is created by the cooperation between the leader and staff, and this model is highly
supportive of the organization's success. The leadership's models of organizational behavior can have an impact,
so it can be understood through models of what is appropriate to be applied in the unit, which can be the answer
to the big question about the exact model of organizational behavior that must be implemented in local
government.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

Studying organizational behavior is to understand the theoretical models of organizational behavior. They are the
autocracy model, custodial model, supportive model, collegial model, and system model. They are different from
one another in their characteristics. However, by describing the five models, we can understand their differences
and determine the suitable model for an organization.
The autocracy model is based on the autocratic leadership style: The source of power is the manager, and
all interactions in the organization get through to the manager, and the employer controls the decision-making
process, defining policies and methods to achieve objectives, work activities, relationships and also decides
compensations or deserts (Nortilli and Wong, 2014). In the autocratic model, the leader/manager has the power to
govern his subordinates with specific tasks. The management believes that these leaders are very aware of what
is best for the organization; therefore, the workers must obey orders. Psychologically, such an attitude will
produce dependence between workers and supervisors.
In an autocratic environment, the management is a formal, nuanced orientation with high authority. The
leader is considered the boss, so the role of workers is determined based on their performance in a given task.
Management has the task of thinking, and workers must work by a command like Theory X, which was
popularized by McGregor (1967) as a conventional management theory. In this model, we can find a high role in
power. The autocratic model was adopted in the 18th century in many large projects, such as the construction of
railways in the United States and others.
Some important signs in the application of autocratic models are a) relying on power, b) managerial
orientation is authoritarian, c) employee orientation is obedience to commands, d) the psychological level of
employees depends on the boss, e) employees' life needs are unmet, and f) the result is minimal performance.

ID: 347338 https://doi.org/10.18639/MERJ.2016.02.347338

34 Review Article

The custodial model usually depends on economic resources (money). For example, managers can
stimulate employees by offering them facilities and benefits. However, in this model, employees will not work as a
team (less to share with others) because everyone will tend to focus on themselves to benefit more than others.
This model focuses on employee satisfaction and better security. With this model, the need for security and
employee benefits fullest. In this model, employees depend highly on the organization, not the boss. As there is
an increase in the economic impact in remuneration and wages, all the workers will happily put in more effort to
gain more powerful rewards.
The model is based on the psychology of custodial workers, industrial relations, and economic factors that
must be regulated/managed properly. Psychologically this model focuses on employee satisfaction because the
sense of satisfaction and pleasure in workers is a good motivation. The relationship between the worker and the
organization is also improved by establishing stability and assurance. In addition, this model also develops
programs for the welfare of subordinates, such as social welfare and economic factors. This model is like applying
paternalistic concepts. This model is a replication of the concept of Theory Y of McGregor (1967). Workers,
unions, and governments/organizations develop cooperation programs to meet together, as a tripartite concept in
employment in Indonesia.
The custodial model of success depends on the fulfillment of economic concepts to subordinates, such as
economic security, pensions, and other benefits, which thus cause this model to depend on the workers, although
not always to the fulfillment of welfare impact on employee performance, for example, in a
garments factory, because the climate there is based on the fulfillment of economic resources, those who work
hard will obtain guarantees and benefits. Additionally, the employees will get better benefits if an organization
goes well.
Typical characteristics of the custodial model: a) this model relies on economic resources, b) manage-rial
orientation is money, c) employees' orientation is a sense of security and benefits, d) the psychological
development of employees depends on the attitude of the organization, e) the needs of employees are fulfilled,
and more safety is ensured, and f) performance results in the form of passive cooperation.
The supportive model relies on leadership. For example, managers support their employees by encouraging
and supporting them to do a better job, get along with each other, and develop their skills. Performance results will
encourage increased productivity. The first experiment of the supportive approach model was conducted by Mayo
and Roethlisberger in Western Electric Company in 1930, as well as with Linkert's research on "employee-
oriented supervisors" during 1940–1950. The principle from this study is that "leaders and other processes in the
organization must be able to ensure the possibility of a maximum of all the interactions and relationships between
the organization and the wishes of its members, based on the background, values, expectations, and experience
as carrying capacity and the ability to build and maintain than the personal values" (Linkert, 1961).
Based on this principle, a supervisor is experienced as a supportive leader if he or she (a) guides the
employees in achieving objectives, (b) treats them fairly, and (c) appreciates and reviews their work performance
(House and Dessler, 1974). They study the performance of a supervisor of the company, who in this case could
be regarded as a leader/manager, which suggests that a supervisor said to be experienced in providing support
(supportive) must (a) guide employees to achieve their objectives, (b) treat employees fairly, and (c) respect
employee performance. In this case, the supportive stance is interpreted as an effort to guide, support, honor, and
respect the subordinates.
The supportive model depends on the power of the leader in managing economic resources. Through
leadership, the management provides climate behaviors that help employees grow and resolve important
organizational goals according to their ability, which assumes that employees do not naturally act passively and
can hamper the organization's needs, but what they do relies on a favorable climate (supportive climate) in work.
Management orientation supports their employees' performance, making them obey and maintain their
performance. However, employee motivation to do their jobs depends on the situation. The result is that the
model increases the participation and involvement of employees in the organization.
The difference between the custodial and supportive models is that moral judgment is put forward in the
latter to increase motivation. In contrast, the custodial model focuses on employees' satisfaction and
pleasure/delight. Several studies show that the supportive model is able to provide a very high motivation to
employees in an organization. The traits of supportive models are a) Depending on

HATASO merj.scholasticahq.com
 Management and Economics Research Journal, Vol. 2, Pages 32–40, 2016 35

leadership, b) managerial orientation is supporting, c) employee orientation to perform tasks and improve
performance, d) psychological outcomes of employees such as the level of participation, e) the employee needs
are met along with performance recognition status, and f) performance results are in the form of the establishment
of motivation.
The collegial model means that employees depend on each other as a team to perform tasks. Everyone has
enthusiasm, self-discipline, and responsible behavior toward their duties. This model adopts the flexible ability
and the intellectual environment of scientific and professional organizations. In an organization like this, not
programmed activities always require the effectiveness of team collaboration (teamwork) and need professional
labor or scientists so they can respond with a good job.
The collegial model is a function of collaboration and constructive cooperation, which can be seen in 5 (five)
values: altruism, consciousness, sense of sportsmanship, courtesy, and acceptance of audience/civic/community.
In his study about college performance, as an independent organization that determines the character of its own,
then the collegial role of the perpetrators, namely, the professors who need a co-worker (assistant), and
cooperation among professors, was instrumental in improving student achievement. Another example is volunteer
organizations, such as social organizations like the Red Cross or blood donors, because everyone works as a
team, and each member takes responsibility for organizational purposes. Each member works here just for self-
actualization.
The word "collegial" is correlated with individuals with a common goal in the sense that there is a team
concept. The management acts as a coach to build a better team. This model is about collaboration, a sense of
self-belief, and teamwork, as seen from the various methods of game outbound.
The collegial model depends on how the management builds a sense of contribution from all the
participants. Each member of the organization feels that their contribution is needed, and all of them are at the
same level of contribution, so they feel welcome and appreciated for their role in the organization.
Managers/leaders must see the members' contribution to this cooperation, not just bosses/ leaders.
Managerial orientation would divide tasks in an integrated form, and all contribute to each other as a team.
Managers have the power to unify/integrate the roles of the members of the organization rather than the just rule.
Leaders do not force members to pass the duties or threaten them if they are not working properly but give the
message in a respectful manner—each person has a deep desire to do the work better. The result will be a
growing sense of discipline and self-responsibility of each member to improve organizational performance. The
result of the psychological model is self-employed (Ivanko, 2013). An example of the model is a football team,
where each player shares the role for one purpose, to win. Such a common goal makes the members of an
organization have a high level of professional commitment to fulfilling their role.
The traits of collegial organization, namely: a) depending on the partnership, b) managerial orientation is
teamwork, c) employee orientation is responsible behavior, d) psychological outcomes such as self-disciplined
employees, e) the employee needs are met as an opportunity for self-actualization, and f) performance results are
enthusiasm and cooperation.
The system model is based on confidence and self-motivation. Performance results will be better than
expected because employees will be committed to performing their duties to achieve organizational goals. One of
the most important things to consider is that managers and leaders must clearly understand the nature of their
organization before making any decision. In addition, they should consider and look at changes in the
environment and, of course, the needs of employees so that they can have the best models used to obtain better
results. This example of an effort in some corporations, based on trust or community, where employees are
motivated and committed to achieving organizational goals.
The characteristics of the models of the system include a) depending on the level of trust, community, and
understanding, b) managerial orientation is a concern and compassion/mercy, c) employee orientation is a
psychological attitude of a sense of belonging, d) employees' psychological outcomes are self-motivated, e) the
unmet needs of employees who cover many things, and f) performance results are in the form of passion/spirit,
commitment, and organizational goals.
Based on the elaboration of the various models, elements that impact behavior models are managerial and
employee performance results. The managerial element is the managerial orientation that can be created with an
authoritarian attitude, money, supportive effort, and teamwork implemented among the

ID: 347338 https://doi.org/10.18639/MERJ.2016.02.347338

36 Review Article

Table 1. Essence elements of the Models of Organizational Behavior.

Autocracy Supportive
No Item Custodial Model Collegial Model System Model
Model Model

Economic Trust, community,

Basic of Model Power Leadership Partnership
resource understanding

Managerial
1 Authority Money Support Teamwork Caring compassion
orientation

Employee Psychological
2 Obedience Security benefit Performance Responsible
orientation ownership

Employee
Dependence Dependence on Depend on Dependence on
3 psychological Self-motivation
on boss organization partnership self-discipline
result

Employee Status
4 Subsistence Security Actualization Wide range
needs met recognition

Performance Passive Awakened Enthusiasm Passion,

5 Minimum
result cooperation drives moderate commitment to goals

leaders work together with subordinates and based on trust-community-understanding among all the members of
the organization. The employee element consists of three parts: employee orientation, employee psychological
results, and employee needs to be met. Employee orientation includes obedience, security benefit, performance,
responsibility, and a sense of ownership. Employees' psychological result is based on their feeling toward their
boss, the organization, the partnership, and the self. Employees' needs are met according to their performance,
subsistence, security, status recognition, actualization, and wide range.
In contrast, the performance result can be the minimum outcome, passive cooperation, awakened drive,
moderate enthusiasm, and commitment to goals. Each model has advantages and disadvantages. The essential
elements of these models as given in Table 1.

3. METHODS

This study used a qualitative approach with a single design case study (Yin, 2003) on the speech writing unit at
the Government of Central Java Province. The focus of the study was to determine the organizational behavior
models adopted by leaders in the unit and then assess the most comfortable model accepted by all the unit
members. This study will also have implications on the reference model of organizational behavior most
interested in a similar organization.
The assessment of the behavioral models of each leader is based on three elements: (1) management
orientation, (2) employee elements with three sub-elements, namely, employee Orientation, employee
psychological result, employee needs met, and (3) performance results. Each element and sub-element is
categorized in these five models of organizational behavior with different traits.
There are five leaders who have led this unit. To maintain their privacy, each leader's name will be
mentioned with initials. They are SS, who took the lead in 2006–2008, SBS in 2008–2010, WM in 2010– 2012, ES
in 2012–2015, and HS in 2015 until these studies were completed. Each member of the unit provided an
assessment of the leader who had led them over the years. The assessment is given by five permanent staff of
this unit, who has been working since 2006.
Round table discussions or collective interviews (Onwuegbuzie et al., 2008) were conducted with the entire
staff in the speech writing unit, and each staff member had the right to argue in determining each sub-element of
the behavior models applied by the leaders. Agreement in the discussion determining the outcome of any leader
is included in which category of each sub-element research.

HATASO merj.scholasticahq.com
 Management and Economics Research Journal, Vol. 2, Pages 32–40, 2016 37

The discussion also clarifies why these leaders are included in that category. The result of this collective
interview determines which models have been applied and which is the suitable model for the members of the
unit. Thus, we get the organizational behavior model suitable for units like this.

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Based on the collective interview with five staff on the speech writing unit, the application of each organizational
behavior model was categorized. To facilitate the placement of the categorization, each leader is included in
Table 2, which includes the impact of the various sections and model categories:
The confidence of the staff during the period 2006–2008 led by SS is less. The leaders consider every task
must be well handled, and they do so many tasks. These tasks also have implications in the additional income, so
they do much work, so the other staff does not get additional income. However, for senior staff, leaders provide
greater job opportunities, increasing their income. The feelings of the staff depend on the policies imposed by the
organization because no initiative emerges from the personnel or leaders in the unit. So they depend on the
organization's decision, and the unit is running flat. For two (2) years, there have been no new work program
initiatives that drive the performance of the unit, all just focus on writing a speech with the DOS program.
However, on the other side, the leader has a high sense of responsibility to authority entrusted by the rules,
against all the possible errors, all borne by the leaders, although the feeling of anger always gets to the staff. For
staff, this is very good, and the most important work is to be safe and comfortable.
During the period 2008–2010 led by SBS, the staff's confidence was high because the leaders were
supportive of any work performed by the staff based on their initiatives or motivation. Each task of writing a
speech is divided evenly among every staff writer so that work is done faster. Workload is divided

Table 2. Analysis of Element Behavior for each Leader Period.

Autocracy Supportive Collegial

No Item Custodial Model System Model
Model Model Model

Trust,
Basic of model Power Economic resource Leadership Partnership community,
understanding

Caring
Managerial Authority Money Support Teamwork
1 compassion
orientation ES SS SBS HS
WM

Psychological
Employee Obedience Security benefit Performance Responsible
2 ownership
orientation ES SS HS WM
SBS

Employee Dependence on Dependence on Dependence on Dependence on Self-motivation

3 psychological boss organization partnership self-discipline
SBS
result ES SS HS WM

Status
Employee needs Subsistence Security Actualization Wide range
4 recognition
met ES SBS WM HS
SS

Passion,
Enthusiasm
Performance Minimum Passive cooperation Awakened drives commitment to
5 moderate
result SS ES SBS goals
HS
WM

ID: 347338 https://doi.org/10.18639/MERJ.2016.02.347338

38 Review Article

proportionally among all the staff; the leaders only deliver and guide the task. The most important addition is that
the income of the workers is within a safe level and meets the elements of fairness in obtaining additional income.
The creation and innovation are handed over entirely by each staff, and leaders only serve and support. For
example, the proposed replacement of equipment that was originally based on DOS with that based on Windows
was approved and handed over to the staff to replace it, so the leaders know that the work would go well.
Performance, in general, is in the upgrading stage because everything depends on the motivation and dedication
of the employees. At the same time, pressure from the leaders is less because the leaders give only support and
guidance.
During the period 2010–2012 led by WM, the confidence level of the staff was not so bad, but the control is
still emerging. The task of writing speeches is distributed in accordance with the expertise of each staff; leaders
only supervise. Not infrequently, every staff gets more tasks than the other because every task requires different
skills. Because the tasks get the additional staff revenue, the staff can actualize themselves or develop more
talent than the others so that they get additional income. Thus, the workers show responsibility for their duties.
The leaders never get angry or impose anything on the staff; all depend on a disciplined attitude. The staff remain
committed to their organizational objectives and complete each job properly. Not infrequently, with their
commitment, each member works harder and goes home late, and the leaders also devote themselves to
monitoring and controlling the job.
During 2012–2015 led by ES, the shades of autocratic began to emerge, although ES is a female leader.
The staff is required to adhere to all the rules and not infrequently warning is issued to the staff who come late.
The staff's feelings also depend on the boss; the leaders are angry with the staff when they are not pleased with a
certain attitude. Staff needs are met based on the perception of the leaders, so there is additional setting revenue
as directed by the leaders. Organizational performance continuously improves, but internal collaboration is
passive because leaders adopt a more top-down model.
Since 2015, the unit has been headed by HS, and although it has only been a few months, there has
emerged a pattern of leadership. The leader is still very young, so he considers the other staff as a partner. He
does not hesitate to say thank you or accept input from the staff. He entrusts technical matters to the staff, and
manage-rial things are always determined, taking into account the input of the staff. Revitalizing and rearranging
the standard operating procedures of speech writing is continued under the leadership by involving the staff.
Making the visualization of a speech delivered entirely on technicians who handle and leader only in charge of
overseeing and assisting. Under such conditions, the staff also feel comfortable working in a team that is solid
and complements one another, and all of them work well together to improve organizational performance.
Psychologically, the staff's feelings are lifted by itself so that it appears self-motivated to improve performance.
When other units blame or destroy the credibility of the speech writing unit, the leader dares to resist and oppose
it. This leader is also quite bold in taking various job opportunities so that staff earns additional income. In order to
improve the performance and competence of the staff in writing speeches, the leader develops a more
comparative study of various areas to add to the experience of the staff, as a refreshment and as an additional
income. Because a comparative study gets travel money, it means an additional income.
From the pattern of each leader in the speech writing unit, it can be perceived that no leader is genuinely
implementing specific models of organizational behavior. Everyone had traits that were irregular. SS leaders in
the implementation turned out to apply custodial models when looking at management orientation, the orientation
of the workers, and the psychological result. However, he implements a supportive model when talking about the
fulfillment of revenue. The results of organizational performance precisely to be minimal because the pattern of
custodial implemented with a low level of confidence, not because of passive cooperation, since cooperation
between the staff and the boss is there, but in the context of a small or unbalanced, like all speech writing
executed by the leader, but to revision after correction and delivery or in print submitted to the staff. Hence,
cooperation appears on a small scale and not passive, although the organization's performance is minimal
because the main task depends on one person, a leader.
SBS leaders are very supportive of the staff, and the performance result also continues to increase, but
defining the staff's orientation and psychology rests entirely with the staff. The most important element to the
leaders is that the income of the staff is in a safe condition and is not inadequate. WM leaders also differ, which in
many cases do collegial patterns, but the performance results would indicate that it depends on the commitment
of each person in the organization.

HATASO merj.scholasticahq.com
 Management and Economics Research Journal, Vol. 2, Pages 32–40, 2016 39

ES as a leader, is almost very consistent in applying the behavioral patterns of the organization. However,
when the model of autocracy is more visible, the resulting performance cannot be said to be minimal because the
results are good and prove that ES gets a promotion to become a leader in larger units. This performance relies
on a passive cooperation pattern that has been happening, where the autocratic attitude will be unbalanced
because the main task is given to certain people, and others are not involved. Moreover, HS leaders are not only
young but also have great courage, so there are times when applying the collegial model affects the staff's
feelings to establish good relations. Finally, staff orientation is only focused on organizational performance.
However, the leaders applied collegial patterns that promoted cooperation among team members and were
enthusiastic about producing a good performance. Sometimes the pattern system is also applied in relation to
efforts to meet the needs of staff or increase the income of staff with various opportunities. The most dominant
factor in determining the organizational model is the leadership style or the attitude of a leader that is applied
within the organization.

5. CONCLUSION

Based on the reality of the study, none of the models have an absolute advantage in being implemented in an
organization. There is no absolute model, meaning no single model has a positive impact. Each model has
positive and negative impacts. It is wrong when one of the models has been considered very useful for a long
time. The condition of an organization would develop and become dynamic as well as organizational behavior
changes, so the model of organizational behavior also grows. No one model of organizational behavior can last
permanently because the best depends on how to understand the behavior of individuals in the environment. This
condition is similar to an assumption that there is increasing evidence that humans "rarely behave purposively,
consistently, and with the goal of maximizing their expected utility" (McDonald, 2003).
It can be concluded that the model of organizational behavior most suitable for an organization is combined,
the model that combines the five models. At this moment, there is no research that says what percentage of each
model should be combined to apply in an organization.

Acknowledgment
This article is dedicated to Prof. Y. Warella, who taught me a lot about organizational phenomena.

References

Ahmad J, Adnan A. 2014. The Behavior of Bureaucracy in application of transparency, participatory, and accountability
services procurement at Sidenreng Rappang Regency. Journal of Public Administration and Governance 4(1).
Falletta SV. 2005. Organizational Diagnostic Models: A Review & Synthesis. Sunnyvale, CA: Leaderspher Inc.
House RJ, Dessler G. 1974. The path-goal theory of leadership: some post hoc and a priori tests. In Hunt JG and
Larson LL (Eds.). Contingency Approaches to Leadership. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Ivanko S. 2013. Organizational Behavior. Ljubljana: Faculty of Public Administration University of Ljubljana.
Linkert R. 1961. New Patterns of Management. New York: McGraw-Hill; 102–103.
McDonald PK. 2003. Useful fiction or miracle maker: the competing epistemological foundations of rational choice
theory. The American Political Science Review 97(4): 551–565.
McGregor D. 1967. The Personal Management. McGregor C and Bennis W (Eds.). New York: McGraw Hill.
Nortilli A, Wong KC. 2014. A case analysis of the organisational behaviour of ryanair and its impact. Journal of Contemporary
Management 3: 73.
Ntayi JM, Eyaa S, Ngoma M. 2010. Moral disengagement and the social construction of procurement officers' deviant
behavior. Journal of Management Policy and Practice 11(4): 2010.
Onwuegbuzie AJ, Leech NL, Collins KMT. 2008. Interviewing the interpretive researcher: a method for addressing the
crises of representation, legitimation, and praxis. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 7(4): 1.
Praveen MV. 2011. "Organizational Behaviour". University of Calicut School of Distance Education. India: Calicut University
P.O., Malappuram Kerala.
Robbins SP, Judge TA. 2015. Organizational Behavior – Indonesian Vers. Jakarta: Salemba Empat.

ID: 347338 https://doi.org/10.18639/MERJ.2016.02.347338

40 Review Article

Roberts GO. 1987. Organizational Behavior in Education. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Schimmel T, Johnston PC, Stasio M. 2013. Can "collegiality" be measured?: Further validation of a faculty assessment
model of discretionary behaviors. Research in Higher Education Journal 21: 1–7.
Shahzad F, Luqman RA, Khan AR. 2012. Impact of organizational culture on organizational performance: an overview.
Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business 3(9): 975–985.
Yin RK. 2003. Case Study Research: Design and Methods (3rd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA; Sage.

Citation: Wibowo G. 2016. Comparison of the models of organizational behavior: A review. Management and Economics Research
Journal 2: 32–40.

HATASO merj.scholasticahq.com