chapter - Pearson

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Chapter 1 Organizational Behavior and Management how factors such as the changing global environment, technology, and ethics affect work attitudes and behavior. Organizational Behavior in Action an Example The way in which individual, group, and organizational characteristics work together is illustrated in the way General Motors (GM) and Toyota cooperated to reopen a car assembly plant in Fremont, California—a plant that GM had previously closed because of its poor performance. (See Insight 1.1.) INSIGHT 1.1 O R G A N I Z A T I O N A L B E H A V I O R 9 NUMMI FORGES AHEAD At Nummi, supervisors and workers cooperate on an ongoing basis to find new and improved ways to assemble cars. Workers also receive training when any changes are made to the car model or method of assembly to ensure the high quality the car plant is known for. In 1963, GM opened a car plant in Fremont, California, 35 miles southeast of San Francisco. 3 The plant was a typical assembly-line operation where workers performed simple, repetitive tasks on cars that moved steadily past them on assembly lines. From the beginning, the plant experienced many problems that reduced its performance. Worker productivity was low, and the quality of the assembled cars was poor. Worker morale was also low, drug and alcohol abuse were widespread, and absenteeism was so high that hundreds of extra workers had to be employed just to make sure that enough workers were on hand to operate the plant. To try to improve the plant’s performance, GM managers tried many things, such as changing the workers’ jobs, increasing the speed of the production line, and instituting penalties for absenteeism. None of these actions seemed to work, and, seeing no chance of improving performance, GM closed the plant in 1981. In 1983, GM and Toyota announced that they would cooperate to reopen the Fremont plant. GM wanted to learn how Toyota operated its efficient production system, and Toyota wanted to know whether it could achieve a high level of productivity by using Japanese management techniques on American workers. In 1984, the new organization, New United Motor Manufacturing Inc. (NUMMI), reopened in Fremont under the control of Japanese management. By 1986, productivity at NUMMI was higher than productivity at any other GM factory, and the plant was operating at twice the level it had operated at under GM management. Alcohol and drug abuse had virtually disappeared, and absenteeism had dropped to near zero. A new approach to managing organizational behavior had brought about this miracle. At the NUMMI factory, Toyota divided the workforce into 200 self-managed work groups consisting of three to five teams (today it has over 700 groups4) led by a group leader, and made the group rather than the individual workers responsible for the performance of the group’s assigned task. Each worker was trained to do the
10 Chapter 1 Organizational Behavior and Management jobs of the other group members, and workers regularly rotated jobs, so their work experiences were less repetitive and boring. In addition, each worker was taught procedures for analyzing the jobs within the group and was encouraged to find ways to improve the way tasks were done. Work group members timed each other using stopwatches and continually attempted to find better ways to perform their jobs. In the old plant, GM had employed 80 managers to perform this analysis. Now, in the new plant, self-managed work groups not only perform job analysis but also take responsibility for monitoring product quality. With all workers divided into self-managed work groups, what role do managers play in the new factory? At NUMMI, a manager’s job is defined explicitly in terms of providing workers with support. In the new work system, the manager’s role is not to directly monitor or supervise group activities but to find new ways to facilitate these activities and give a group advice on how to improve work procedures. In setting up NUMMI’s organization, the plant’s upper management gave each group the authority to make its own decisions; however, group members and management are jointly responsible for coordinating and controlling work activities to maintain and improve organizational performance. Why did employees buy into this new work system? A number of factors came into play: NUMMI’s no-layoff policy, extensive worker training, and the use of flexible work groups, which give workers, not managers, control over how things are done on the production line.5 In May 1997, the NUMMI plant produced its 3-millionth vehicle, and it received J. D. Powers & Associates’ Bronze Plant Award for quality. In 1999, General Motors and Toyota signed a new five-year cooperative agreement to work on advanced technology vehicles, one result of which was the innovative new Toyota Echo model introduced in 2000.6 At NUMMI, a new approach to managing behavior has increased performance and well-being for workers and the organization, and both managers and workers are committed to working together to continually improve performance. ■ At the reopened Fremont plant, action to improve performance was possible only when managers realized the need to rethink the way they managed organizational behavior at all three levels of analysis. First, upper management changed organizational-level characteristics by moving from a system in which managers analyzed and controlled jobs and work processes to one in which self-managed teams controlled all aspects of a given task. At the group level, each team was given the authority and responsibility for designing group members’ tasks and for monitoring and controlling members’ behavior. At the individual level, work-group members became responsible for learning a wider range of tasks and for monitoring their own performance level so that performance could be increased at all levels in the plant. As the NUMMI story shows, the effective management of organizational behavior requires managers and workers alike to consider the impacts and effects of individual, group, and whole-organization characteristics as they try to achieve organizational goals. It requires them to continuously evaluate and find new and improved ways of managing organizational behavior to improve performance. ■ ■ ■ ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND MANAGEMENT A working knowledge of organizational behavior is important to individuals at all levels in the organization because it helps them to appreciate the work situation and how they should behave to achieve their own goals (such as promotion or higher income). But knowledge of organizational behavior is particularly important to managers. A significant part of a manager’s job is to use the findings of organizational
Page 1 and 2: chapter 1 ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR A
Page 3 and 4: 4 Chapter 1 Organizational Behavior
Page 5 and 6: 6 Chapter 1 Organizational Behavior
Page 7: 8 Chapter 1 Organizational Behavior
Page 11 and 12: 12 Chapter 1 Organizational Behavio
Page 31 and 32: ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR IN ACTION
Page 33 and 34: 4. When asked by the instructor, th
Page 35 and 36: CHAPTER APPENDIX A Short History of
Page 39 and 40: 40 ENDNOTES Chapter 1 Chapter 1 Org
Page 41: 42 Chapter 1 Organizational Behavio

chapter - Pearson

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?