'Organizational Behavior Issues in Aussieco Essay\r'

'Aussieco, an Australian party established as a small humanityufacturing and service operation caller-out in 1962 is now a full expanded come with with 600 employees. The partnership reinforced its re entrustation on a undivided product livelihooding 90 per cent of the Australian market in the 1980. oer the years the market holding has foreg angiotensin converting enzyme down by 30 shargon in spite of the product being unique and play along facing humble competition in the market (Jones,Gal, n. d) The downswing in Aussieco’s proceeding is mainly due to introduces with the company’s trouble and governmental mien.\r\nOrganizational Behavior refers to ‘the understanding, fortune telling and anxiety of human behavior in organizations’ (Luthans,2010). It is the study of individual(a)s and their behavior in a bend place. A company’s mental process and outcome more often than non depends on its organizational behavior as it is an interdisciplinary field that includes sociology, psychology, communication and forethought. Aussieco’s organizational behavior issues can be explained through Henri Fayol’s 14 management principles.\r\nHenri Fayol’s theory of administration and organizational behavior focuses on the personal duties of management and autobusial effectiveness which aussieco lacked. (Fayol,1971). The company has inexperienced supply and no specialization as study elevated authority staff is friends and family without practised knowledge. The executive managing director is the owner’s nephew with no practical or industrial experience. The production supervisor is the production autobus’s outflank friend who has minor knowledge of the daily production tasks as he is a carpet healthier by qualification.\r\nEmployees at the operative assume ar unsettled labor generally lacking formal qualification. On diversification, management failed to understand the changing market unavoidably. Aussieco fol commencements the baron culture where control is centralized. The major motivational or driving force is vexation (Luthans,2011). Suggestions and personal preferences atomic number 18 not welcomed. The owner-chairman reacts in a strong negative trend if any manager’s judicial decision differentiates from his. This lack of consultation leads to staff spirit de motivated and undervalued.\r\nThough there has been piece of labor and departmentalization in the company entirely the managers lack authority and responsibility. On the illustration of owner accepting order from a bad debt customer without consulting the general manager shows lack of authority for the manager. Owner’s dictatorial berth and ignorance of modern trends hold posterior the dedicated managers to improve and fill changes in the company’s turning, as they are either fired from the personal line of credit or become his instant enemies. The company lacks discipline and employee loading.\r\n overleap of loyalty, no willingingness to put blue levels of effort, no belief in the company’s goals and vales and lack of trust in the management all together leads to all the issues of Aussieco. During lunch hours the fourth-year(a) management and gross sales staff strike addition to unlimited alcohol in the holdplace. manufacturing line workers underperform and hold back production with vague excuses. Subordination of individual interest over the company’s interest and goal is one of the major problems of Aussieco Employees overtime to get paid peculiar(a) and not for productive outcomes.\r\nAlso the senior programmer in spite of complemental his work order uses his work vacation for personal matters. there is lack of candour and justice among the employees. The rule being everyone mustiness vacate office during lunch flunk exclusively exceptions for the senior management and sales staff that eat in the work place, operatives and other staff are al unkepted no food or drinks in the workplace. The migrant staff is treated salubrious and breach than its own internal staff. There are little internal promotions. High employee turnover, no stability of tenure of force out is some other major issue with Aussieco.\r\nTo attain level best productivity of personnel it is es moveial to throw off a stable workforce, which Aussieco lacks. There are frequent mass resignations in the company. No production manager lasts for more than 3 years in the company. The post of personnel manager is vacant since 2 months. Employees have no job security and and so are not fully move to their work. This further increases the company’s be of recruitment,selection and fostering. There is lack of motivation and beginning(a) by the management for the welfare of the employees.\r\nThere is lack of rewards, appraisal and bonus. The workshop roofs are without insulation and leak during heavy rain, no doors and filthy windows point toward bad and morbid working conditions. This even gave a exhalation of $AUS 500,000 when water leakage blew a computerized robot. No parking area provided for the employees, who reach frustrate to the office,which in turn shows in their decompress performance. Lack of anatomical structured work, irregularity in work and no proper accounts and records kept up(p) by the managers is another organizational issue for Aussieco.\r\nThough the record showed a melodic phrase of 4700 resistors but none could be located. A welder forgotten by the company by and by fitting of new automat is idle and has no contribution in the company. Reasons why these problems occur. unitary of the major reason for the organizational issues of aussieco is the employee attitude. personal line of credit satisfaction focuses on employee attitude and organizational commitment focuses on their attitude towards the organization. mull satisfaction is determin ed by how well the expectations of employees are met in return of their turnout (Luthans,2011).\r\nThe aspects of job satisfication are not met by Aussieco. Employees of Aussieco are unsatisfied with the kind of work they get, the job provides less(prenominal) opportunities for learning and less responsibility. There is lack of remuneration and pay, less promotional opportunities, bad working conditions. This high level of job dissatisfaction of employees reflects in their low performance, company’s low profits, high employee turnover, high absenteeism and low level of commitment towards the company.\r\nThe attitude of employees in an organization is largely influenced by the kind of environment the organization posses and further the attitude of employees affects their ability and performance at the organizational level. The environment of aussieco is not employee friendly thus employees have a negative attitude. Employee traits can be best explained by the Five factor mod el. business enterprise performance is highly dependent on an individual’s conscientiousness (i. e dutifulness, persistence, industriousness) and emotional stability (i. anxiety, security, suspiciousness).\r\nIn Aussieco employees had low conscientiousness and low emotional stability which affected their overall task performance and contextual performance. Organizational commitment is an all important(predicate) attitude toward the employers and the company. It is the extent to which we identify with them. about of the employees, posses’ continuance organizational commitment, which is a conniving set out, where they chose to continue working in the company because they ‘have to’ rather than their want or obligation.\r\nThis attitude is influenced by perceived cost of leaving the company, lack of opportunities, age, peer pressure, rescript expectations etc. Employees of Aussieco developed this attitude because of the mechanical treatment they receive and lack of empathy from management. autarchy is the concentration of power and authority in hands of one person. The management of Aussieco has an overbearing structure with the owner having unlimited power and absolute authority. There is a harsh hierarchical structure; orders are sent from top level to bottom level.\r\nIdeas, personal opinions and suggestions are unwelcomed. In this management look managers believe workers must be controlled to jibe maximum productivity (Luthans,2011). Aussieco’s structure can be best explained by Douglas McGregor’s theory X. This theory represents an hypothesis of conflicting and negative working attitudes. The managers sham an average person dislikes work and will avoid it if possible, thus must be forced with threat of punishment to obtain organizational goals. An average person prefers to be directed and avoids responsibility.\r\nThis approach encourages deadline and ultimatums, arrogant and demanding managers, mechanist ic approach, no concern toward staff and one way communication (Jeremiah,2009). In Aussieco this approach resulted in a negative attitude by the employees, made them insecure and unhappy. Lack of Taylor’s scientific management. Frederik winslow taylor’s line idea was to improve industrial efficiency scientifically. He encouraged scientifically selecting and bringing up workers and regularly monitoring their work to improve efficiency which also improves work man happiness and positivity (Lynch,1984).\r\nAussieco lacked scientific selection, training and development of workmen and passively left them to train themselves. Managers did not supervise and provide book of instructions to the employees and there was no division of work between managers and workers. There was lack of specialization, standardised and systematic approach. The company continuously changed its suppliers for cheapest veridical available, a supplier providing 99. 5% tonicity level charging $20 per unit was replaced with a supplier charging $12per unit. The quality of the product suffered, change magnitude customer complaints and affecting the goodwill of the company negatively.\r\nThere is lack of communication between departments, department managers and workers and senior management and managers. The senior management is unapproachable and not provoke in the issues of the company and workers. Though Taylorism has confront criticism of exploitation, mechanistic approach etc but in relation to Aussieco, the company needs to adapt certain principles of Taylorism for a transgress organizational working. To conclude Ausseico’s major issue is organizational and management structure. The company should have a more humanistic and realistic approach with a castigate balance of authority and responsibility.\r\n'