Download Managing Misbehaviour - Organizational Behavior - Study Notes and more Study notes Organization Behaviour in PDF only on Docsity!
Chapter Eleven
Managing misbehaviour
Objectives:
To develop an understanding of:
The emergence in Management of the study of misbehaviour
Selected misbehaviours
Defining misbehaviour
In the academic discipline of OB Misbehaviour is said to involve: …any intentional action by member/s of organisation/s that defies and violates (a) shared organisational norms and expectations, and/or (b) core societal values, mores and standards of proper conduct (Vardi and Wiener, 1996: 153).
Vardi and Wiener subdivide misbehaviour into three categorise – to benefit the self, to benefit the member's employing organisation as a whole, and, inflict damage. Subsequent work by Vardi and Weitz (2004) reiterates the same definition and categorisation. Other OB theorists with a specific interest in misbehaviour, such as Sagie et al (2003: 153), believe it to be equated with ‘dysfunctional attitudes’, or, ‘the kind of organisational behaviour that can be expected when normative work values are not a deciding factor'. Acts not considered to be misbehaviour include accidental damage, human error, accidents and slip-ups. Broadly, OB theorists take a functional approach to misbehaviour and see consciously breaking and violating formal company rules and regulations to be management practitioners. Misbehaviour in this sense is also said to be about breaching broader societal norms or moral order.
In industrial sociology, however, Ackroyd and Thompson (1999: 2) borrow Sprouse's (1992:3) definition of sabotage – anything you do at work you are not supposed to do – to define misbehaviour, although questions remain about how useful this definition is. Further comments by Ackroyd and Thompson leads to a portrayal of misbehaviour as a range of conflicts between employer and employee concerning time, product, work and identity. The conflicts, in turn, are defined by levels of intensity that range from commitment to hostility. Such conflicts usually involve employees seeking to carve out of autonomy in the face of confining or working practices. Excluded acts include whistleblowing and serious organisational fraud. More recently, Thompson and Newsome (2004) likened misbehaviour to anything other than organised and conscious collective action by labour as a wider class agent. A further definition is presented by Watson (2003) who outlines what he calls organisational mischief: [Organisational mischief involves] [a]ctivities occurring within the workplace that (a) according to official
structure, culture and rules of the organisation, ‘should not happen’, and (b) contain an element of challenge to the dominant modes of operating or to dominant interests in the organisation (2003: 230).
Samples of misbehaviour at work
Arson, Blackmail, Bribery, Bullying, Cheating, Discrimination, Dishonesty, Espionage, Fraud, Incivility, Intimidation, Kickbacks, Lying, Misinformation, Privacy violation, Revenge, Sabotage, Sexual harassment, Substance abuse, Theft, Threats, Whistle blowing, Withholding information. Four types of antecedents to misbehavior: individual, job, group, and organizational.
A model of Organizational Misbehaviour adapted from Yoav Vardi and Ely Weitz, Misbehaviour in Organizations (Mahwah, NY: Lawrence Eribaum, 2004), p 251, states the following:
The antecedent conditions A are the characteristics of (a) individual like values, attitudes, personality,emotion, stress (b)job like task identity,task significance,task variety,emotion,stress (c) Organizational like strategy,goal,culture,history,systems,ethics (d)group like norm development, cohesiveness and leadership.
The mediators B are (a)normative force like organizational pressure and expectations and instrumental force like personal interest and belief which together determines the intention to misbehave and (b) management interventions in terms of focus on antecedents like selection, education and training and focus on outcomes like sanctions,suspensions,EAPs, termination.
Management Interventions
Management interventions are the actions taken by managers (representing the organization) to prevent, control, or respond to harmful misbehavior. The figure displays three specific points for management intervention: A, B, and C. At "A" management can carefully screen and refuse to hire "risky" individuals. Management also can intervene at the other antecedent points -Job, group, and organizational. The problem with interventions at these points is that the person is already employed. The most efficient intervention point is during the pre employment phase.
Management intervention at "B" requires affecting the normative force, as well as the instrumental force. The goal of this intervention point is to reduce the possibility of a job, group, or organizational antecedent triggering misbehavior. For example, some organizations use mentor programs to provide a role model of proper (normative) attitudes and behavior and communicate-through mentor-mentee discussion consequences of misbehaving (instrumental).
The attention of an intervention at "C" shifts from prevention to deterrence. The manager works to reduce the possibility of the intention to misbehave. A member of a team that values being a part of the unit may learn that misbehavior could mean being transferred to another unit. She may decide that staying with the preferred unit is important and elect to behave properly. The threat of a transfer may be powerful enough to evoke a change in behavior plans.
Physical- Verbal dimension
Active-Passive Dimension
Direct-Indirect Dimension
Direct Indirect
Physical Active (Cell I)
Homicide
Assault
Sexual assault
Dirty looks Interrupting others Obscene gestures
(Cell 2)
Theft
Sabotage
Defacing property
Consuming needed resources
Passive (Cell3)
Intentional work slowdowns
Refusing to provide needed resources Leaving area when target enters
Preventing target from expressing self
(Cell 4)
Showing up late for meetings
Delaying work to make target look bad
Failing to protect the target's welfare
Causing others to delay action
Verbal Active (Cell 5)
Threats
Yelling
Sexual harassment Insults and sarcasm Flaunting status
(Cell 6)
Spreading rumors Whistle- blowing
Talking behind target's back Belittling opinions
Unfair performance evaluation Attacking protege
Transmitting damaging information
Passive (Cell7)
Failing to return phone calls Giving target the silent treatment
Damning with faint praise Refusing target's request
(Cell 8)
Failing to transmit information
Failing to deny false rumors Failing to defend target
Failing to warn of impending danger
Bullying is repeated actions that are directed to another worker which are unwanted which may be done deliberately or unconsciously but cause humiliation. Researchers have found that many victims perceive envy as the reason for the hostility directed at them; they also have inadequate coping skills, are introverted, and have low self-esteem. Other researchers have found that overachievers are bullied more frequently than average performers.
Workplace Incivility involves acting rudely, discourteously, or in a demeaning manner toward others. It is on the low end of the continuum of abuse. Incivility is not violence or harassment, but it is a lack of respect for others. Incivility appears to be on the increase both outside and inside the workplace. It is important for individuals that are interacting and working together to conduct themselves in a civil way. It is also important for employees to treat customers or external individuals interacting with an organization with respect. Being civil or polite with regard to others in an organization is preferred and constitutes organizational citizenship behavior (OCB).Incivility has taken on a vast number of behaviors, such as condescending remarks, being disruptive in meetings, ignoring others, insulting another person, being abrupt, giving negative eye contact, not answering when asked a question, refusing to say "thank you" or "please," interrupting another person who is speaking, and sending flaming e-mails. Some of the reasons for incivility are alienation from work, fear of future, sheer workload etc.
Theft is defined as the unauthorized taking, consuming, or transfering of money or goods owned by the organization. This definition of theft should indicate that stealing is not limited to tangible property. Data, information, and intellectual property can and are stolen as well. Why do employees steal anything from their employers? This is a difficult question to answer. Some believe that people steal because they have an opportunity to do so. This perspective offers the employer choice of eliminating opportunities (e.g., impose inventory control systems, lock up merchandise, and' surveillance cameras). However, the elimination of all opportunities is problematic and not likely. The individuals who have the same opportunities as thieves and never steal are subjected to the same controls and surveillance. Another perspective focuses on individual differences. Employee theft is assumed to be better controlled at the entry point when a person is selected for employment.
The STEAL Model
Greenberg and associates believe that the motives underlying theft misbehavior are complex. These searchers categorize the motives behind theft as being either prosocial (helpful) or antisocial (harmful). The term STEAL refers to four motives behind theft behavior-S(upport), T(hwart), E(ven the score ) and A(pprova)L. These four motives and the intentions of the person are presented below.
Approach Motive- Most managers work to prevent theft. However, in some cases there is an unwritten of conduct that permits (approves) some theft. For example, some managers allow observed theft or may participate in the stealing. Some research has found that managers permit the theft as a part of the worker’s reward.
Support Motive -A work group with deviant norms about theft can have a powerful influence on theft behavior. The group can, through behaviors, display what, when, and where to steal. The group establishes the plan, shows how to execute it, and rewards participating members. The colleagues participating in the thefts are considered members in good standing.
The art of stealing and participating displays an allegiance to the group. By being recognized as a good group member, the thief has his or her stealing behavior reinforced. Stealing is supported by the group and more stealing occurs. The thief under this type of support considers the stealing behavior as accepted and good,
Even the Score Motive- An antisocial behavior is designed to inflict some form of harm on the organization. Evening the score is a way of attempting to harm an organization for something it has done (e.g.._rejected a request, didn't promote, reprimanded for not completing a job on time). Stealing is an attempt to bring about a balance in the mind of an aggrieved employee who wants to get even.
Thwart Motive-The thwart motive is proposed to oppose group norms that regulate theft. The rationale is to harm the employer by striking out at members of one's work group. It is an attempt to thwart the group's attempt to control theft. By challenging group norms, a person that steals is likely to create strong pressure. This pressure can involve isolation, being chastised, having work flow disrupted, or being rudely treated. Responses from the challenged group members may be sullen or severe.
Greenberg offers suggestions that focus on managerial actions that may be taken in an attempt to weaken STEAL motives. He recommends rotating group membership, communicating the personal costs of theft and treating employees equitably. The STEAL model provides a reasonable, but not complete, heuristic framework for helping managers cope with theft. There is no complete solution to employee theft. Recognizing the problem, attempting to understand the motives behind theft behavior, establishing a culture of trust and respect, and using fair, predictive selection tools to minimize the entry of those candidates with poor integrity and high dishonesty tendencies are some of the actions that can legally be taken by managers
Questions
- Define misbehaviour. Describe different misbehaviours in the organization with suitable examples
- Write short notes on (a) aggression and violence (b) Theft with special reference to STEAL model.
