Human Skills In An Organization Assessment Answer

‘Psychological Type’ theory refers to the psychological classification of different kinds of people. One can distinguish personality types of a person through various traits of character. According to the Type theory, there are two kinds of people in the society. One is introvert, and other is extrovert. The Trait theory refers to the aspect where extraversion and introversion can be considered as the part of a continuous dimension of many people. Personality typology states that the behavior of every person is related to the term of opposite and individual characteristics. In the aspect of personality type theory, Meyer Friedman and his co-workers invented the Type A and Type B personality theory (Robbins et al. 2013).

They considered the Type A and Type B as two patterns of individual differences and personality. Type A personality always remains hard-working and takes high risks. On the other hand, Type B people remain relaxed, less competitive as well as lower risk. This theory also states that there are always many people who are the mixture of A and B types of personality.

In this respect, Myers–Briggs Type Indicator is also a relevant model for knowing the difference in the character of a person. This model demonstrates knowledge of different factors of personality that can be useful to learn the types of a character of an individual. This model is being used to test personality type of an individual.

Models:

The Five Factor model is a very relevant example in the aspect of personality and organizational behavior. The purposeful behavior of work integrates higher order implicit goal with different principles of Five Factor Model of personality. This model also helps to expand the job characteristics model to explain the effect of personality traits on the outcome of work. ‘Five- Factors Model’ is considered as a psychological model of personality.  Various psychologists have categorized different systems for the differentiating personality of every individual. These five factors help to classify unique personality of an individual. These five factors personality traits are related to the emergence of leadership within the organization (Wagner and Hollenbeck 2014).

In the aspect of organizational behavior, big five personality traits are considered as compelling elements. Five-Factor model of personality can be viewed as personality traits of hierarchical organization. Personality traits are included with five dimensions. The five dimensions are ‘Extraversion’, ‘Conscientiousness’, ‘Agreeableness’, ‘Openness to Experience’ and ‘Neuroticism’. These factors are involved in the aspect of the effective behavior of an organization. Every human being has these five traits of personality. Therefore, every company should consider these factors while creating environment and culture for the organization.

Openness: This personality trait shows originality and individuality in every situation. They seek to provide the creativity. They also take keen interest to try new things. They can also emerge as an effective leader in a position of leadership.

Conscientiousness: According to Wright et al. (2012), this personality trait is also related to the aspect of leadership within an organization. Conscientiousness people stay organized within different situations of leadership. Conscientiousness seeks to take initiative and responsibility within the group. These types of people also emerge as leaders. They are very effective in the role of leaders.

Extraversion: It can be stated that extroverts are energetic as well as assertive and socially active. Extraverts enjoy interacting with other people within the social environment. Extroverts also demonstrate self-confidence in different situations. Extraversion can be related to the aspect of leadership. The employee always accepts an extravert leader. Extroverts are both sociable and dominant within the business environment. Extraverts can emerge as an effective leader in the wide variety of situations (Cerasoli et al. 2014).

Agreeableness:  It is a positive trait when consensus is critical. This character is active when shared decision is rewarded. On the other hand, Michel et al. (2013) stated that Agreeableness can become the obstruction when the critical success factor of the particular organization is competition. However, an effective manager should be able to use extraversion and agreeableness both to make the cohesive team in the group. The leader can make strong relationship within the team of the organization.

Neuroticism: It refers to the extent of the emotional ability of a human being. It refers to the leader who is anxious, moody and temperamental (Bellé 2013).

From many types of research, it can be stated that extraversion and conscientiousness are two useful personality traits those can be related to leadership. Extravert personality can provide better guidance to the members of a team.

Relationship of ‘personality and individual differences’ with organizational behavior:

As stated by Mitchell et al. (2012), every person is different from each other using his/her personality. Human behavior is a very complex phenomenon. Therefore, it is a challenge to every organization to match every task with the subordinate employee to the manager of the group. Every human being is the practical as well as the valuable resource for each cluster.   Every manager should consider the internal as well as external stimuli of the unconscious mind of every human being (Parker 2014).

Every company should examine the theories of organizational behavior while managing the group of employee within a particular organization. There are relevant theories of organizational behavior. Taylor has proposed the theory of scientific management that discusses the development of rational methods to increase the productivity. According to the great management thinker Henry Fayol, there should be certain principles of management while operating an organization. His view is related to the aspect of administrative management (Shafritz et al. 2015).

In the current section of control, McGregor has explained modern theories of behavior. McGregor has developed the assumption of theory X and theory Y (Kopelman et al.  2008).

Employee motivation:

Employee motivation is considered as the level of energy, creativity and commitment of an employee while completing his/her work. Employee motivation is also considered as the standard of productivity of every employee. With the changing phase of an economy, every business industry has engaged in competition. However, maintaining the motivation among the employees is always remained a concern of management of an organization. Every employee should get the motivation to continue his/her job in an organization. However, management should always consider the demand or requirement of employees of an organization (Locke and Latham 2013).

On the other hand, Mischel (2013) stated that employee motivation is the aspect of encouragement. There are different factors those affect the motivation of employees within the organization. Motivation is considered as the internal drive of an employee. The motivation of an individual is influenced by intellectual, social, emotional and biological factors. Management should provide many activities those will motivate the employees within the organization.

As discussed by Costa and McCrae (2013), there are some effective factors those can motivate workers who are present within the organization. Many employees find these below mentioned factors as motivating aspect of business.

The action as well as decision of leadership and management can empower the workers

Regular and clarified communication with different employees can also motivate the highest number of workers in the organization

Management should put respect and dignity to the employee

Managers should provide regular recognition to every workers

Reward, benefits and compensation must be provided from the HR department of an organization

Managers should provide enthusiasm to the workers which enable them to give best productivity to the organization ()

Impact of ‘personality and individual differences’ on employee motivation:

Motivation can depend on the aspect of individual differences of every person. As discussed by Cooper (2015), motivation is the link between knowing and doing the work. The level of motivation depends on the personality of a person. Motivation is the vital link between thinking and action as well as performance and competence. It is the duty of an employer to motivate the employees while producing active service of the company. The essential aspect of motivation is involved within intensity, direction as well as the duration of behavior. However, the mind and psychology of every individual are different from each other. Therefore, there is a situational constraint for every person. However, the individual difference has played a useful role in achieving the extraordinary level of motivation. The individual difference also plays a useful role to avail different types of job in the market (Verhulst et al. 2012).

On the other hand, Verhulst et al. (2012) stated that maintaining the high level of motivation among the employees is considered as the duty of an employer or manager. A manager or a company also holds the different view of work. There are different types of managers who see employees as the valuable resource of the enterprise. Therefore, they always seek to provide various factors of motivation for the employees. On the other hand, many managers think that profit is the only thing that should be always maintained by a business organization.

As stated by Muscanell and Guadagno (2012), it has been found in history that sometime manager and a leader does not hesitate to terminate employees for achieving more profit in turmoil situation of the business. Personal behavior, as well as individual difference, plays a significant role in motivating the employees of an organization. Management of an organization is involved with four respective functions; those are the attainment of a goal, decision making, group maintenance, and integration. The effectiveness of leadership can be measured by the aspect of motivating the behavior of every worker of the organization. A leader can avail constitutional process, involved process as well as identification of goal while motivating the employees of the organization. Individual difference helps to gain different types of self-concept for each person (Hirsh et al. 2012).

Motivation theories:

There are various theories of Human Resource Management those explains the factors and related things of motivation among the employees of an organization. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, Herzberg’s two-factor theory, Locke’s Goal theory and Vroom’s Expectancy theories are the valid theories of motivation (Trull et al. 2014).

Herzberg’s ‘Two-factor’ theory:

In the context of personality and individual differences, the theory of Herzberg is the most significant as well as a relevant theory of motivation. Fredrick Herzberg has developed ‘Two-factor’ theory of motivation that is based on satisfaction and dissatisfaction of every individual while doing the job in the organization.

The aspect of job satisfaction and dissatisfaction depends on different persons. These can be helpful in determining the individual traits of job satisfaction. The aspect of job dissatisfaction is influenced by various hygiene factors of an organization. The condition of work, relation with the co worker, rules and policies, quality of supervisor, base wage and salary are the factors of job dissatisfaction. On the other hand, there are other factors those affect the aspect of job satisfaction among the employees of the organization. Achievement, responsibility, recognition, work, advancement and personal growth are related to the aspect of job satisfaction among the workers of a business organization (Cooper 2015).

According to the ‘Two factor theory’, some possible combinations can become the ideal situations for every employee. High hygiene and high motivation can become the ideal situation where employees should be highly motivated. In this context, employees have few complaints. On the other hand, the combination of high hygiene and low motivation refers to the situation where every employee has few complaints. In this context, employees are not highly motivated by the management of the organization (Robbins et al. 2013).

On the other hand, in the combination of low hygiene and high motivation, employees can be motivated by the management. In this context, the workers have many complains also. This context refers to the aspect where the job is challenging but the work condition and salaries or mental hygiene are not suitable for working in the organization. The context of low hygiene and low motivation refer to the worst situation of management. In this situation, employees have many complains and they are not been motivated by the management. In this context, employees cannot work effectively. This situation is harmful for the total productivity as well as quality of an organization (Antonakis et al. 2012).

However, in this aspect, personality and individual differences matter for the overall management approach of an organization. A person who likes to work in low motivational place can work in many situations. The aspect of job satisfaction and dissatisfaction are also related to the personality as well as ability and differences of every individual person. Management cannot provide the level of satisfaction for some people due to individual differences of those people. However, the factor of job satisfaction is solely related to the different personality of individual person (Verhulst et al. 2012).

McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y:

Theory X and theory Y is considered as one of the important theories of human motivation and management. The factors of this theory are associated with the differences of personality and ability of different human beings. This theory has discussed two contrasting models of motivation and management. ‘Theory X’      stresses on the importance of external penalties and rewards as well as supervision or control of the management. On the other hand, ‘Theory Y’ helps to highlight the motivating role of job satisfaction that allows the workers to approach the task more effectively and creatively.

As discussed by Jonassen and Grabowski (2012), ‘theory X’ is considered as the ‘authoritarian management style. ‘Theory X’ considers that average person dislike work. Average person seeks to avoid his/her work as much as he/she can. This tendency of people is related to the aspect of individual differences and personality. In this context, it can be stated that average person is being forced to provide productive work. According to the average personality of human being, an employee must be forced with the threat of punishment in the organization. They tend to work according to the objective of the organization.

On the other hand, Ackerman (2014) stated that personality of average people is willing to be directed under the guidance of manager or supervisor. Average people want to be directed by the management. They seek to avoid prior responsibility while working in any organization. They want proper security while working in an organization.

On the other hand, Nisbett et al. (2012) argued that ‘theory Y’ can be considered as participative management style. People often seek to apply self direction and self control without any external control of punishment or threat. A worker who is committed towards the objective of the organization can achieve rewards for his job.

However, this theory has provided effective information and discussion regarding the psychological factor of doing job. ‘X and Y’ theory of motivation provides assumptions regarding the potential of man. This theory also discusses the factors those should be recognized by every business organization.

Conclusion:

From the above study, it can be concluded that individual difference and personality can influence the behavior of a person. A person can be motivated through many factors of an organization. Every people need motivation to continue his/her work within an organization. Everyone is different from each other therefore; the level of motivation depends on the personality of a person. However, an employer should also consider the individual differences while providing factors of motivation. Every experienced manager should understand personality and behavior of every human being of the organization. Every manager should also know the fundamental aspect of human cognition. A manager should always use existing resources of employees for completing the aspect.

 

References

Shafritz, J., Ott, J. and Jang, Y., 2015. Classics of organization theory. Cengage Learning.

Kopelman, R.E., Prottas, D.J. and Davis, A.L. 2008, "Douglas McGregor's Theory X and Y: Toward a Construct-valid Measure", Journal of Managerial Issues, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 255-271.

Ackerman, P.L., 2014. Nonsense, common sense, and science of expert performance: Talent and individual differences. Intelligence, 45, pp.6-17.

Antonakis, J., Day, D.V. and Schyns, B., 2012. Leadership and individual differences: At the cusp of a renaissance. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(4), pp.643-650.

Arthaud-Day, M.L., Rode, J.C. and Turnley, W.H., 2012. Direct and contextual effects of individual values on organizational citizenship behavior in teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(4), p.792.

Bellé, N., 2013. Experimental evidence on the relationship between public service motivation and job performance. Public Administration Review, 73(1), pp.143-153.

Cerasoli, C.P., Nicklin, J.M. and Ford, M.T., 2014. Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic incentives jointly predict performance: A 40-year meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 140(4), p.980.

Cooper, C., 2015. Individual differences and personality. Routledge.

Cooper, C., 2015. Individual differences and personality. Routledge.

Costa Jr, P.T. and McCrae, R.R., 2013. The five-factor model of personality and its relevance to personality disorders. Personality and Personality Disorders: The Science of Mental Health, 7, p.17.

Dörnyei, Z. and Ushioda, E., 2013. Teaching and researching: Motivation. Routledge.

Gagné, M., Forest, J., Vansteenkiste, M., Crevier-Braud, L., Van den Broeck, A., Aspeli, A.K., Bellerose, J., Benabou, C., Chemolli, E., Güntert, S.T. and Halvari, H., 2015. The Multidimensional Work Motivation Scale: Validation evidence in seven languages and nine countries. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24(2), pp.178-196.

Goetsch, D.L. and Davis, S.B., 2014. Quality management for organizational excellence. pearson.

Hirsh, J.B., Kang, S.K. and Bodenhausen, G.V., 2012. Personalized persuasion tailoring persuasive appeals to recipients’ personality traits. Psychological science, 23(6), pp.578-581.

Jiang, K., Lepak, D.P., Hu, J. and Baer, J.C., 2012. How does human resource management influence organizational outcomes? A meta-analytic investigation of mediating mechanisms. Academy of management Journal, 55(6), pp.1264-1294.

Jonassen, D.H. and Grabowski, B.L., 2012. Handbook of individual differences, learning, and instruction. Routledge.

Knutson, B., Wolkowitz, O.M., Cole, S.W., Chan, T., Moore, E.A., Johnson, R.C., Terpstra, J., Turner, R.A. and Reus, V.I., 2014. Selective alteration of personality and social behavior by serotonergic intervention. American Journal of Psychiatry.

Locke, E.A. and Latham, G.P. eds., 2013. New developments in goal setting and task performance. Routledge.

Ma, W.W. and Chan, A., 2014. Knowledge sharing and social media: Altruism, perceived online attachment motivation, and perceived online relationship commitment. Computers in Human Behavior, 39, pp.51-58.

Michel, J.W., Kavanagh, M.J. and Tracey, J.B., 2013. Got support? The impact of supportive work practices on the perceptions, motivation, and behavior of customer-contact employees. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 54(2), pp.161-173.

Milfont, T.L. and Sibley, C.G., 2012. The big five personality traits and environmental engagement: Associations at the individual and societal level. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 32(2), pp.187-195.

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

Mischel, W., 2013. Personality and assessment. Psychology Press.

Mitchell, J.I., Gagné, M., Beaudry, A. and Dyer, L., 2012. The role of perceived organizational support, distributive justice and motivation in reactions to new information technology. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(2), pp.729-738.

Muscanell, N.L. and Guadagno, R.E., 2012. Make new friends or keep the old: Gender and personality differences in social networking use. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(1), pp.107-112.

Rodgers, G. (2015). WHAT’S YOUR MYERS-BRIGGS PERSONALITY TYPE?. [online] Dying Words. Available at: https://dyingwords.net/whats-your-myers-briggs-personality-type/#sthash.gyeyjLfg.dpbs [Accessed 18 Jan. 2016].

 Nisbett, R.E., Aronson, J., Blair, C., Dickens, W., Flynn, J., Halpern, D.F. and Turkheimer, E., 2012. Intelligence: new findings and theoretical developments. American psychologist, 67(2), p.130.

Parker, S.K., 2014. Beyond motivation: Job and work design for development, health, ambidexterity, and more. Annual review of psychology, 65, pp.661-691.

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

Robbins, S., Judge, T.A., Millett, B. and Boyle, M., 2013. Organisational behaviour. Pearson Higher Education AU.

Trull, T.J., Widiger, T.A., Lynam, D.R. and Costa Jr, P.T., 2014. Borderline personality disorder from the perspective of general personality functioning. FOCUS.

Verhulst, B., Eaves, L.J. and Hatemi, P.K., 2012. Correlation not causation: The relationship between personality traits and political ideologies. American Journal of Political Science, 56(1), pp.34-51.

Verhulst, B., Eaves, L.J. and Hatemi, P.K., 2012. Correlation not causation: The relationship between personality traits and political ideologies. American Journal of Political Science, 56(1), pp.34-51.

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

Weiner, B., 2012. An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. Springer Science & Business Media.

Wood, S., Van Veldhoven, M., Croon, M. and De Menezes, L.M., 2012. Enriched job design, high involvement management and organizational performance: The mediating roles of job satisfaction and well-being. Human relations, 65(4), pp.419-445

Wright, B.E., Moynihan, D.P. and Pandey, S.K., 2012. Pulling the levers: Transformational leadership, public service motivation, and mission valence. Public Administration Review, 72(2), pp.206-215.

Robbins, S., Judge, T.A., Millett, B. and Boyle, M., 2013. Organisational behaviour. Pearson Higher Education AU.