MGT2103 Organisational Behaviour

Question 2

Compare, contrast and analyse the different personalities of Mr. Chen and Mr. Soren. You may choose any personality theories that you have learnt.

Question 3

Discuss with detailed explanation and examples, the favourable behaviour of Mr. Lin toward Ms. Astrid. Comment whether Mr. Lin behave professionally by applying theories that you have learnt.

Question 4

Discuss and recommend suitable reward(s) to be given the staff of Jepson Corporation. Justify your answers.  

Assignment guide

1.Complete ALL questions in four (4) pages. In the event if you exceed the page requirement, additional pages will not be reviewed. All answers must be supported by the theories/principles of Organisational Behaviour (OB).

Indicate your question number accurately in your individual assignment.

2.Use font type Arial, font size 12, paragraphing 1.5.

3.Please refer the rubric in Blackboard for the marking scheme.

4.20 marks will be deducted for late submission.

Answer:

In the given case study it can be observed that the culture of Denmark is quite different from that of China and these differences can be easily notified in the manner in which the different managers taking over the departments have acted in the procedure of the acquisition. With respect to the Power Distance Index of Hofstede`s cultural dimension it can be clearly witnessed that, China ranks higher and they accept inequalities among the members (Gelfand et al. 2017). It can be considered to be true because, the HR manager failed to consider the views of the different members during the policy change. On the other hand, the prior manager of the firm, Mr. Soren was displeased by this because the cultural orientation of Denmark is quite different from that of China whereby the PDI OF Denmark is at 18 whereby inequalities are not accepted and everyone is treated with equal consideration. In the same way, in the other dimensions like Individualism and Indulgence, Denmark has a particularly high score which is quite different from the ethics of the Chinese company, QD Corporation. Moreover, the culture of the organization with respect to masculinity, are also different in the sense that the society is driven with respect to success rather than strong culture which was reflected in the debt collection regime (Mazanec et al. 2015). For this reason the culture of both the companies can be stated to be quite different from one another.

In order to compare and contrast between the personalities of Mr. Chen and Mr. Soren, the personality theory named traits theory will be used. The trait theory or the trait approach can be essentially described as one of the most critical areas of study in psychology which helps to identify and regain the personality of an individual by using specific characteristics to define the person and identity their responses in various situations. With respect to the trait theory of Personality it can be stated that the personality of Mr. Chen can be described to be Authoritative in nature. He is an observant person and can be described to be fairly efficient as well, however, in lieu to the implementation of the policies, he did not feel a need to consult the different employees which shows that he did not consider the employee engagement to be important (Luthans, Luthans and Luthans 2015). On the other hand, the personality of Mr. Soren can be described to be quite different from that of Mr. Chen whereby the personality of Mr. Soren can be stated to be democratic in nature. He is calm and is quite aware of the fact that he must abide by everything which his seniors say. It is due to this reason that although he did not agree with what Mr. Chen said, he did not reflect upon his inner turmoil but was empathic towards the other employees who were not allowed to take valid decisions.

With respect to the behaviour been displayed by Mr. Lin it can be stated that he is portraying a favourable behaviour towards Ms. Astrid. Ms. Astrid was a junior in the company and since the beginning of the tenure, Mr. Lin has been working quite closely with her and aligning all the plans together. Along with this, he has also recommended an overseas training plan for her which is quite unusual during the initial days of any organization (Wagner III and Hollenbeck 2014). Lastly, without even thinking about the outcome of the training program, he plans to increase her salary. This behaviour of Mr. Lin can be described to be quite different than that of the general organizational culture of China whereby the other leaders of QD enterprise can be described to be quite authoritative in nature and tend to ensure that they are not at the same page with the subordinates. However, Mr. Lin has been defying all odds and in favour of Ms. Astrid. According to the theory of bureaucracy it can successfully be stated that large organizations are generally based on hierarchy aspects and this hierarchy needs to be followed strictly. According to Miner (2015), the promotion of the different employees and their increase is based on accountable aspects and cannot be done based on favouritism. Moreover, their hire and promotion is based on hard work and not on favouritism. However, the behaviour of Mr. Lin can be described to be against the given theory of bureaucracy and he is indulging in favouritism which is incorrect.

The different rewards which can be given to the Employees of Jepson Corporation are as follows:

Team dinner: Special team dinners can be held in order to encourage and motivate the different team members.

Team shopping spree: Moreover, as a reward the different team members should be allowed to go on a shopping spree which shall then allow them to shop freely at the expense of the company (Pinder 2014).

Quarterly bonus: The different employees should be provided with a quarterly bonus, which will act as a motivator.

Gala nights: Lastly, gala nights can be organized for the employee entertainment.

References

Gelfand, M.J., Aycan, Z., Erez, M. and Leung, K., 2017. Cross-cultural industrial organizational psychology and organizational behavior: A hundred-year journey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(3), p.514.

Hofstede-insights.com (2018). China & Denmark. [Online]. Available at: https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/china,denmark/ (Accessed on: 08 Oct. 2018).

Luthans, F., Luthans, B.C. and Luthans, K.W., 2015. Organizational Behavior: An EvidenceBased Approach. IAP. 

Mazanec, J.A., Crotts, J.C., Gursoy, D. and Lu, L., 2015. Homogeneity versus heterogeneity of cultural values: An item-response theoretical approach applying Hofstede's cultural dimensions in a single nation. Tourism Management, 48, pp.299-304.

Miner, J.B., 2015. Organizational behavior 1: Essential theories of motivation and leadership. Routledge. 

Pinder, C.C., 2014. Work motivation in organizational behavior. Psychology Press. 

Wagner III, J.A. and Hollenbeck, J.R., 2014. Organizational behavior: Securing competitive advantage. Routledge.