Organisational Behaviour: Part I

1. Introduction to Module 1: Welcome to the first part of organizational behavior course. In this first section, we will introduce ourselves to the field of organizational behavior so that we will look at what does it meaning to say, organizational behaviour, and especially what fields are contributing into this field. And it's going to be sociology, psychology and even business administration that play a significant role here. And in the later part of the section, we will take a look at some interesting examples of organizational behavior in action, and it's gonna be especially the whole donor studies, as these experiments are, Studies or whatever you call it, have really redefined the management as we know it, because since the these experiments took place, the majors have really reef, accused on the human resource is in the organization. And as the understanding off individual has changed, and as the last video the section, we will take a look at the parking sun's low problem as Mr Parking Son when hey came to the British Navy, he found out that even though the number off ships in the Navy has decreased, the number of managers and officials has increased. That's quite interesting, so we will find out why this has happened 2. 1. What Is Organisational Behavior: If this is your very first video within the organizational behavior, well, then welcome to the new top again, the new field in these video, I would like to talk about What does it mean to say organizational behaviour and what kind of study this is. Well, we're going to have a definition over here, and then I will try to justify the existence off this field with these picture that May's local little bit Harry right now. So let's take a look at the definition itself. So organizational behaviour is the field off study that investigates the impact that individuals, groups and structure have fun. The and now it may change. The cower have on the behaviour within the organization within the organization, so that we have some individuals, groups and structure, and this is going toe help some impact, some impact on the behaviour within the organization. Maybe it still does not make a lot of sense right now, but let's think about it this way until the late. I think it was 19 eighties. The managers, the researchers and their scholars believed on, let me move it so I can make it nicer. So until then, the researchers believe that we should study the hard sciences such as accounting. So it's a we should study accounting. Or did we should study? Let's say okay, counting is a nice example in order to make organization much more efficient so that do we want to have a better organization? Well, it's study and let's work on the accounting or let's say, economics off the organization. And that way we can become better well. But it delayed 1980. Something happened. And since then the managers and as well the researchers realized that we have to study basically also the people. So people, if you would ask any kind of manager right now nowadays, what is the main problem within the organization? Well, most of them are going to say that the problems are associated with people themselves and is really is the justification for studying the organizational behaviour so that these individuals or people, as a groups, will do. What kind of impact do they have on the organization itself? So that is basically the definition. Now, let's take a look at this little bit off Harry picture. Well, we have on the very left side, we have something that we call independent variables independent variables, variables, and we have two of them. We helped change and stress, and as a second we have a human input. And then on the other side of this very big picture and growing, we have something that we call dependent variables, the bend variables. And maybe you understand that the dependent variables are dependable on the independent ones, and that is quite straightforward, immediate, quite often in your research so that we have our independent variables, which are changing stress and human input. Now, as you see, these two are affecting a lot of things within the organization, so human input is affecting the ability than the ability is affecting. Let me try to find it is affecting some individual decision making, and then it goes on and on and continues up here to the communication. Changing stress is as well affecting some values and attitudes as well. The communication. As you see it's very complex structure, but you can see free main points. We are going to study the organizational behaviour on free levels. There is going to be individual level. Then there is going to be group level, and finally organization systems level and also the upcoming trip. Tres and the upcoming videos are going to be structured this way that at first we look at the individuals within the organization. Then we look at the groups and finally at the organization as a system. Now what is the outcome of these? All of these free levels and the part within them are influencing something that we call human output or sort of the productivity. So as well, the group level and finally, the individual level. All these are influencing, human, culpable and then human opened can be understood under several perspectives. The productivity absence there in over off our employees, then some deviant workers, behaviors, citizenship, city special and those are dependent variables. Those are the things that are influencing our business. So do we want to increase the productivity? Well, then let's take a look back and look at these complex systems, and that is exactly the organizational behavior studies 3. 2. Disciplines Contributing To OB: any time when you are learning about some field or some, you know, some study, it is not a distinct study, or it is not a distinct discipline. We can say there always are some other disciplines which are contributing toe thes our given field, or these our given topic ending case off organizational behaviour. These contributing disciplines or contributing topics are goingto be four. It is going to be psychology, social psychology, sociology and anthropology. So it's the cook we have. All of these are some behavior off sciences and think so. Them We can better understand our organizational behavior science. So all of these have some sort of a contribution. And then there is some unit off analyzes and these look at it. We have told in a previous video about free levels within the organizational behavior, and that is exactly thes our parts. So some level individual group or organization as a system and then out of that very some output, which is off course going to be our study of organizational behavior. So let's take a look. We have up psychology. By definition, psychology seeks to measure, explain and sometimes change behavior off humans and other animals. So we're trying to measure, explain and sometimes change the behavior. And as our organizational behaviour is taking care about the behaviour, Welp psychology is the most relevant topic for us. With that would end. Here is the previous sleep psychology. When we're talking about organizational behaviour, has accused on some let's say, negative emotions. So psychology studied our emotions, surges Fradique or let's say, let's say boredom or boredom. However, nowadays we arm or talking about some positive emotions or some constructive impact that emotions can have on the organization. So those can be, let's say we can generally study emotions all we can focus, for instance, on a training. So training so frank. Stop psychology. We can increase the efficiency off training within our organization. Now let's see. So we have up psychology over here and you can see there is a least off contributions that the psychology makes for organizational behaviour, starting from learning than going through emotions than we have. Some employees selection, work, design, work, stress and as you see all of them are ending up within individual you need of analyzes or individual level. That is quite important for us. Secondly, we have social Samper. Sorry, social psychology. Thes blends concepts from both psychology and sociology to focus on people's influence on one another. So people's influence on one another so that you can already feel the source. Also, social psychology will take care about groups and we see the over here social psychology goes straight over to the groups and you can see the contributions are quite straightforward. Behavior change, attitudes change. So, General, we can say that we've seen social psychology. We take care mostly about change change when talking about organizational behaviour. Thirdly, we held sociology. These studies people in relation to their social environment and culture. Well, what I would immediately add here is that we feel organizational behaviour. We quite Lord talk as well about some organizational structure and I'm using wrong color. So no Onley culture, but as well structure and you will see that in later chapters. Now, when we look in these our simple graph, we have sociology which goes in tow some group level, which is over here by this well organization, a system. So here we have already quite the white perspective and finally we have anthropology. This is the study off societies to learn about human beings and their activities. Well, maybe it can sound a little bit Harry, but if we write down that unreported quite often within organizational behaviour, Take cares about some values, values or let's say attitudes off people so attitudes off people, then it starts to make a little bit more of a sense. And now it seems here we haven't reporting where we have some comparative values, competitive attitudes, cross cultural analyzes. Then we have some organization, culture, organization, environment, power. So here we have values and attitudes. Those are two important terms for us. And as you see it follows for the group level. And there's well 40 organization system level. And now all these disciplines, as they are sort of neighbouring toe. The organizational behaviour are making the sort of a contribution so that finally we have power study off organizational behaviour 4. 3. Main Approaches To Management: if you are going to study basically any kind off what organization theory studies, whether it's going to be a leadership organizational management about structure, whatever you are going to study, you are going to see some sort of a shift or or a timeline, how the approaches to these theories are or to these fields have evolved over time, so outdoors are going to change. Theories are going to change. And so in the treaty, I would like to talk about the main approaches to organization, structure and management. So we're going to help four off them. And you really can imagine a sort of a timeline how the ideas have evolved over time, so the very 1st 1 can be best described as a classical one. So here we have a colas, ical approach toe organization or management. So in this 1st 1 there wasn't emphasis on purpose formal structure, he heirarchy of management, technical requirements and common principles off organization. Well, just think about it. You have had all of these all of these factories that will be now there, let's say, producing car or some some industrial products, and that's why you have this this kind off. Let's say the classical approach most common one because you needed your workers to really understand what they're doing and why they're doing it. And that's why I also needed a hair care management because a lot of companies that were operating out there dead time, we're really focused on the fact that they management can really overview and control the employees in the appropriate manner. But these didn't work so well, and that's why we're moving toe a second approach that has evolved. If I remember correctly. I think if we say, let's say let's say early early 19th century, then we will not be wrong because there was something that we call a hold on studies. So hold or studies, and I'm going to do a special video about it because it's really interesting and original, you know you had. These are things such as bureaucracy B roll. Chrissy and you have tried so to really improve your organization through some technical requirements through some management and principles of organization. But these was missing some important aspect, and that was human relations. And that's where we're going now. Human relations and really, if I remember correctly, hold on studies where the studies that really started this approach of human relations because hold on studies, as you will see in the upcoming video, they have sort off three wheeled that thes social factors such as, Let's say, what's a relations between people at their workplace or within some groups, leadership? There is some inform organization. So these studies have really field that such things exist and that they're important for the organization to realize. So that was the second approach. Now we're moving a little bit later, and we're going toe study organizations as systems. So we are going toe systems because what's really definition and we'll find something interesting. The integration off the classical on human relations approaches well, that's kind of kind of simple. So we have. We have our classical approach, which was the 1st 1 and then we have our human relations, which was the 2nd 1 on the left side. That's kind of simple, but importance off the social technical system, the organization within its external environment. So under these approach, the writers kind of seen organization as a system. So let's say that you have some group within the organization, then you have some, another group within the organization. Then let's say you have AH management within your organization and you see you start to create kind of a system. All these subunits or subgroups are creating one big system, so you can say that all these that all these are sort of are sort off subsistence. We've seen the organization's subsystems and all together they're creating one big system, so it's ready down. So all together, it's one big system that needs toe our work together to really a Q three. The aims off the organization, but we have something mentioned over here. Look at that, the organization within its external environment. So the writers, at this point I started to realize that there is something or or the organization is interacting with its external environment. And that's why we're moving to the fourth approach, which is the newest one. And that's called the contingency approach contingency approach. So you see, he had read the last sentence, so they have started to think about the external environment. That's when the contingency approach arose, so no one best these high off organization. This is the four off structure management and success off the organization dependent up on a range off situational variables and really winning are going to study Alice Organizational Behaviour Organization theory. A lot of things that you are going to see are really based on this approach that let's say you are going toe peak. Let's say you're going to pick a structure. You would like to design the structure of your organization. So what you are going to do is that you are going to look at the situational variables or on the external environment that is around you, and you are going to design or decide about the structure of your organization according to the external environment. So let's say you are in a super competitive environment and you really have to create um, very flexible organizational structure. So you are going to go, let's say, for a matrix structure or let's say you might go for a boundary less organization, so boundary less organization. So on the other hand, if you would be in a very stable environment and you don't have to react that quickly would go for some mechanistic structure so mechanistic, so a lot of things that they were going to see is really based on this contingency approach to organizational design and management, but we have also shown ourselves how all of these approaches have evolved for a while the time. 5. 4. Hawthorne Studies: in this video, I would like to talk about the whole thorn experiments or hold on studies, which took place at Vester and Electrics, and I did a small mistake over here. So Western Electric's and I found a picture over here. I'm sorry for the quality, but these experiments took place some 100 years ago, so the quality of the visuals was not so good then. But you really can imagine a factory where where people are really having boring and repetitive jobs off off, assembling some some electrical parts or or phones. So it was not really a nice place to work it, But to be really honest, the Vester note electrics that time was an interesting company. They have tried toe innovate, for instance. They were offering some pension plans. The workers had the right to go for a occasion when they wanted, and so on and so on. So of external critics was innovating already. And then, um, let's say academics decided to do some experiments over there, which we call the whole door in experiments. And what's so interesting about them because it all started a totally new field or a totally new approach to management and generally toe organization theory. So we're going to see the least off four different experiments that took place here and the results are really interesting. Trust me. So the first experiment was called the illumination experiment. So the hell illumination elimination experiment ex. Very so in this experiment, really? The researcher just just came and they tried how the change in the elimination is going to change the output or the productivity of workers. So they took two groups. So what? So you have ah, one group of workers on. Let me just create more of these guys. So you are going to have one group and then you're going toe us can't group right over here on. You're going to try a different kind off elimination for these two groups. So let's say for the first group you are going to put illumination, which is going to be, which is going to be what I kind of normal So the regular one. But for the second group, you're going toe peak illumination. That is really stronger so that you can see better assembly room. So these guys have a stronger illumination. Now, the expectation waas that these group is going to perform better because they have better elimination now. What has happened? Both groups have increased in their efficiency, so increased efficiency and increased efficiency over here as well. And this was really, really puzzling. Well, even though the illumination here has not really changed that they had the same illumination as before and their their productivity has increased in these guys, well, it's understandable the elimination has increased and their productivity increase as well. So these part was understandable. But what happened here? They didn't know. So they tried a different experiment and they have created again for group of workers, and now they're going to try lower level off elimination. So for this, for group for expert group, you will create just a very, very small elimination just enough so that they can see what they're working with. And do you know what happened? The productivity increased again, increased against or whatever they did with the lights, Whether they remained the same or they increase the elimination or the elimination stayed the same, the productivity has increased, and this was a really big problem. If you're not familiar with academic research, well, this is a big problem for academics. Now. The researchers were called back to the university because the experiment just didn't work out well. But they remained, and they really tried toe discover what was going on and why all of these things happen. So they try to perform one more experiment that they asked the National Education Academy that they can try it least one more So let's see what was the 2nd 1 So the second experiment was called the really assembly room, the relay assembly room, assembly the room. So in this experiment they took six women, So one do free for and five and six. And they separated these six women from the from the everyday production. So they really took them out of the factory and close them in a separate room. So they had their separate a room. And if I remember it correctly, thes experiment, after all, took more than five years. And during those five years they were really consulting the six women about Ah, let's say you would ask them questions. How do you imagine your working hours? When would you like to work? When would you like to help breaks and what was happening was that as they were consulting the man and trying some different kind of approach e sto management and supervision, the productivity waas constantly rising over the period of these five years. And I think the overall rise was more than 30% off the productivity, and that's really overwhelming. So they started to see in this experiment that something is going on. So they have tried 1/3 experiment, which was the interview experiment or interviewing experiment. So in their viewing, I think that you wink x very man. Now what was going on here? Well, you had the one big experiment that was going on a few years ago. Another big experimental it was going on recently. So nice. Now they have tried toe interview all of the employees, so interview employees, and how would do they think about their management? Will do they think about their supervision? And they have tried it first, sort of sort of a very strict and given questioner. So really, the employee came to do interview and was asked a set off given and straight questions. Those questions were like, Who do you think is the best manager around you? Or do you think that your manager is being too hard on you? And what has happened that as they were in interviewing hundreds and hundreds of these employees, they have started to be bored. And they dislike the interview because they wanted to talk about different things as well, not only about their supervision. So then they have tried a different kind of interviews, and those were sort of non standardized, known, standardized. And now all of a sudden, employees started to be happy because they could have talked about anything. Imagine you're an employee and you come to sit down with your manager and you are free to Dole basically about anything. And after these nonstandard as interview, they have found out a load off information that we're valuable for them. So then they tried even the four experiment, which was something that we call the bank wiring bank wiring, observation room, bang wiring, observation, rule room. So I think in these case they took off 13 man and they they again separated them from from everyday life. So imagine these is being for the man, and they have told them something interesting. If you are, let's say you have a limit every day. You should produce every day you should produce, Let's say 100 chairs, 100 or or Okay, we're talking about Western Electric's so you should every day produce 100 meters off auf wir auf wir for every neater that you are going to produce over 100. So for everyone meter, you are going to get let's a $1 Wandell er benefit now what would you expect? Well, normally a people would expect that now they're going to work harder to produce more and more so that they can get some extra money. But what has happened is that these group has really closed itself and was producing even less than normally. So they were producing what's a 80 meters off cable or, let's say, 70 meters and the researchers were now really, let's say, depressed. The world has happened because they're normal. Output should be 100 meters, and now they're producing even less despite effect that they were offered a benefit if they produce more Well, something that we call norms within groups has a cured. So this group of workers have developed some sort of internal norms and and they put pressures on any kind of individuals. So if these individual would like to produce more, the group is going toe. What developed some sort of a pressures upon this individual so that he or she will not produce more. And but this is this is a different story. We're going to talk about the later on during the organizational behaviour course, the very important ones are these free our first experiments that talk boys. So the illumination experiment, the really assembly room and interviewing experiment. Because what it would these free experiments have revealed is that humans or people within the factories as employees there really matter. It's not just about supervision and productivity. What matters are the relationships within between people or their attitudes, emotions, feelings. So some sort of human relations approach human relations approach has developed thanks to the whole dorm studies, and it's really interesting. So try to go about it. Maybe 6. 5. Parkinson´s Law Problem: Welcome to the another organizational behaviour video where we're going toe talk about an interesting sort off problem or or experiment that happened in the past them and it really brings a nice example from which we can learn something. And this is the Parking Sons law problem. So we, Mr Parkinson and he was doing an experiment on British Navy, British, British navy. If I remember it correctly, it was during the years 1914 to 19 when the eight. So it has happened during this period during 1914 to 1918 there was a first world war, and then there was some period off bees. So what has happened in the British Navy was that a logically number off ships or number off these battleships, so number off shapes has decreased by 68% so number of ships has decreased by 68% but number number off, I think it was called number off Navy or fissures. Number off Navy fishers. Our officers has increased. So we had a blood off 79%. And even more overwhelming was that number off dockyard officials waas even higher number off on dockyard on the Cayard officials officials Waas again higher by 40%. So look at that. What has happened? We have less sheeps. We have 68% less sheeps, but at the same time that the lower number of shapes is logical because the first World War ended. But we have higher number of officials on higher number off officials. Now, Why's these going on? Well, let's imagine yourself. Let's say this is you and you are one of these. Let's say you are. You're a dockyard official. You are having some subordinate. So let's say this is your subordinate. This is your subordinate and then they have some subordinate. So do. And this one. Let's say he has free one. Do em free. And then at the same time you have some colleagues or or there are some people on the same here article level. So these are on the same same here, hierarchical level. Now the people that are sort of below you. These guys are on a low world here article level, and they are called the subordinates some or Dean aids. What would you like to the woody work toe? Help more people over here? Or would you like to help more people over here is your subordinate. Off course. You would like to be as many people as possible as your subordinates and as few people as possible at the same hierarchical or higher level as you are. So Mr Parkinson was thinking about it exactly the same way. And he brought to conclusions which I have written down. And these conclusions are simple. First on, says officials want to multiply subordinates US coordinates. No drivers who were rivals. Well, they're the ones were on the same hierarchical level as we are, and at the same time, officials make work for one another. So because you are going to help more and more subordinate over here, let's say he is going to be some here is going to be some what is going to happen. You have to monitor your subordinates monitor, and then they have to report to you about their work, their progress, so they're going to make work for one another. So that was the reason why, At the same time, the number of ships has decreased and the number off officials and the managers within the British Navy has increased in the experience. It is quite interesting example from organizational behaviour 7. Introduction to Module 2: in the second part of organizational behavior course, we will take a look at the individual within the organization because this is the main and the most basic building book now, while individuals so important, well, any person has some attitudes, and then these attitudes are influencing our behavior. And if we move even further, what is influencing our behavior are also our perceptions off the reality. And then comes the most important factor, and that is the motivation. That is what we would like to study. And the motivation, when it comes to individuals, can come from several sources and from several approaches. So we will take a look at the main theories on how to motivate individuals in an organisation and trust me that these are going to be really interesting concepts. 8. 1. Attitudes: in this video, I would like to talk about attitudes. What do we know about that? Well, maybe we can cannot right now define them. But you will see that attitudes are everywhere around us. We happened. We are creating for ourselves once every day because attitudes are some sort off evaluative statements. And with them we are, Or at least our mind is saying, How do we feel about something? So let's say I'm going to have a morning coffee. I'm having morning coffee and I already create some attitude towards this coffee. Was it good or was it bad? Then let's say I have got some kind off job and towards this job, I have some attitude as well, which is much more off a long term character, because either like my job or I do not like my job. But attitudes can be much more specific, and they're created out off confidence. So right now we're going to briefly talk about components components because they have free . There is a cognitive component. Then there is affective component, and finally there is behavior component, and as you can see how much how I have drawn it, there is they're building on one another at least a little bit. So let's take a look at the most basic one. There is a cognitive compliment, often attitude. This is evaluation, a description off or a belief in the way things are so whatsoever, some kind of a job. And I express my my cognitive component of an attitude. I evaluate that my pay is low. As you can see, there is no emotion in it. I'm gonna take no action out off this belief. I just think that things are as they are so that my pay is low. However, then I can move to another. That's a component, often attitude, and it's going to be affective. I'm going to express my feeling about this belief. So this is emotional or feeling segment off attitude. So not on Lee. I help pay my pace low as well. I am angry. So here we have a new part. I am angry over how little I am bay so you can see how it is building. So at first we had my pay is low, which is currently which is currently here and now. I have also the affective component of an attitude. Finally, we help behavioral component. This is action intention to behave in a certain way toward someone or something. So we know that my pay is low and I'm angry over how little I am paid. So I am going to look for another job. That is the action, the action, that is our intention to behave. And as you can see, all of these free components have, after all, constructing our attitude, which is some sort of an evaluative statements and saying, How do I feel about my celery? 9. 2. Behavior Follows Attitudes: We have already talked a good bit about attitudes. All these are how they are structured. What kind of components do they have? But the question still is, Why are attitudes still so important when we're studying organizational behaviour? And in this video, I would like to give you an answer. The behavior or organizational behaviour follows attitudes, and that is why the attitudes are so important for us, because the employees within the organization are going to help some attitudes, and it is going toe influence or even decide the terra mean what kind of behavior they are going to help. So let's take a locally. There are going to be too important ideas within this video. One is the so logic flow. How can behavior full of attitudes? And secondly, we're going to talk about quite important term cognitive dissonance. So let's see. At first we have some sort off attitude that is, our belief would do we believe in Let's say that I'm often attitude that US cars are good now what kind of behavior I'm going toe help. Well, let's say that I'm going toe, perform some action, some activity, and I'm going toe by a U. S. Car. This really makes sense. If I believe that the U. S cars are good, it's quite logical that I'm going toe by a U. S. Car. But what is in between there? So what is here? Let me just highlight it because this is important for us. There is something we call moderating variables, moderating variables so that we know that 82 can predict can predict the behavior. And these happens fru moderating variables. And though these are, there are four main ones. First is importance off the attitude. So we have importance. So how important it is that the consider US cars Good. Well, maybe as well. Consider, let's say but European cars Good. But I think that US cars are really much better. And it is a super important attitude, super important belief for me. So I'm definitely going toe by a U. S car. So the importance is simply moderating this attitude towards behaviour. Secondly, there is some sort of a correspondence to behavior. This is little bit more tricky toe explain. But think about it. How does the behavior correspond? Toe on attitude? Well, this is pretty straightforward. If I think that the U. S. Cars are good. Well, I'm going to buy us card. If it will be, Let's say, if I would consider you as products. Let's say this will be us for road acts are good. Well, it is not so straightforward because car is only one off the U. S. Product. So there is also a correspondence that is a moderating variable. Then we have accessibility toe behavior. So we have accessibility. Maybe I'm not able to afford the US car. Maybe I will have to go, Let's say for a bicycle. So due to that, because I do not have money, this behavior is not accessible to me. So it is another very strong and important moderating variable. Finally, we held direct experience. Maybe I believe that the U. S cars are good. But in the past, I didn't know the hell just a good experience. And I had also a bad experience and that they will also influence our this this logic flow so as we see, really, the behaviour follows the attitudes. Now let's take a look at something that we call cognitive dissonance because that is closer related. Cognitive dissonance is any incompatibility, so incompatibility between two or more attitudes or between behaviour and attitudes. So let's imagine an example. Still, let's keep the U. S cars. Let's say that I have some attitude. So this is going to be my This is going to be my attitude and it says that I think US cars are bad. Now we have some sort of a behavior. So what say this is going to be something that happens so we can consider it being being a behavior or some sort of an attitude? My debt buys me us car. Well, these these two are really incompatible. So it's highlighted. These two, these stool are in comfortable income that people and what are we going to do? Well, we are trying simply toe diminish this incompatibility because we do not like it. It's not comfortable for us, so it's no comfortable for us. So what I can do to feel more comfortable? Well, I can either try to change my I can try to change my attitude so I can try to change, and I will think that yours cars are good and they will simply keep my father's car or I can change the behavior I can try to sell. I can try to sell this card this car. So, as you can see when we get to a community of descendants, cognitive dissonance is everywhere around us. We quite often meet some incompatibility between two or more attitudes or behaviour and the attitude, and we always try to solve it somehow. Either we change our attitudes. All we can try to change our behavior. So as you have seen, behaviour follows attitudes and as well there is important that off cognitive dissonance. 10. 3. The Impact Of Dissatisfaction On Employees: it is not rare that employees can be sometimes this satisfied or what's a satisfied and ditto that in this video I would like to talk about the impact or the impact off satisfaction or dissatisfaction on employees or respectively, off employees. Let's say also off employees. And there is this one graph, which is which I think really grasps the wall idea and the concept, and then we'll talk about some more specific examples. So when one off these situations happens, what are the specific outcome? So specific specific outcomes which areas off our business can these outcomes influence? So we'll take a look at it. We can have two dimensions within the responses. So let's say we have some. What say we have some things satisfied. The city's fight this satisfied employees him. Lloyd E. Now one off four situations is goingto happen, and as you can see as well, we have the two dimensions. One dimensions differ from paseo response toe activity, sports and another dimension goes from constructive response, constructive response or destructive response. Let me write it down. So we are talking about responses, respond sees so our this hour dissatisfied employees. So these employees can be constructive and active well. The constructive and active response to our the satisfaction would be voice when we are really attempting to improve the conditions. Let's say we already satisfied with either no quality off coffee So we will come to our manger and we will tell him Well, our coffees bed. I would like to have a better coffee. So we are really trying toe improve the conditions that with which we are dissatisfied if we keep ourselves constructing. But in this case, we're going to be possible. Well, there becomes loyalty in this case. We would just wait for conditions to improve. So what? I'm dissatisfied with the quality of coffee, But I'm not going to be active. I will just wait. Maybe the conditions will improve. And in these an area I'm considered as a as a loyal My response is a loyalty. If we move toward a destructive part off this nice graph, if we still keep Paseo and destructive, we will simply neglect our response will be neglect. And what does it mean? Well, we'll allow conditions to worsen. So we'll see that every day the coffee machine is getting more and more broken and the coffee is worse and worse, we will not tell anyone. We will simply keep these said this fight and will allow the conditions the worse. And even more that is the worst case scenario for the company. When are the satisfied employees is possible? And as well destructive. The final response to the satisfaction can be exit, which would be leaving the organization. Let's say that I'm a terrible co feel our and if the coffee in my workplace is not good, I'm simply going to leave the organization that is distracting but active because I perform some action now. As you can see, maybe you have already Agresti in these two points. In these two points, there is quite important to understand that there is low, low or no productivity rolled the DVD, and that is why I really organizations try toe either incentivize or motivate employees to be constructive in their responses, because when productivity goes down or there is no productivity by employees, that is the worst case scenario. So the neglect and exit are really the worst case scenarios. So the companies try to get their employees either, you know, attempting to improve the conditions or well, if the conditions are not that good, at least wait for conditions to improve. Now let's get to some specific outcomes. So we have at our dissatisfied employees who reacted in one off the four ways to his dissatisfaction. Now, what can be the specific outcomes? The impacts could be that jobs, it, inspection and Joe performers well, the more happy our employees are, the higher performing they are going to be so job performance. And on the other hand, if our employees are not happy, their job performance is going to go down. All of these that you see, I think, are quite intuitive. It is just necessary to realize that man and, you know, keep them in mind. Secondly, job satisfaction and customer satisfaction. These do go quite hand in hand when it comes to some service jobs, so that if our frontline stop is satisfied, then it is more likely that our customers will be satisfied as well and vice versa. If our frontline stuff is not happy and not satisfied, the satisfaction of the customers might go down as well. Then we have and I have forgotten here one. My terrorist so we have against that this fiction. So we have jobs, that inspection and employee turnover absentees. Well, if our employees are not happy, they're going to be absent quite often. And the turnover off the employees is going to be much higher so that employees simply leave our organization when they are not satisfied. And on the other hand, if they're satisfied, they're going to remain and stay within our organization. Then we have jobs that inspection and workplace the device well, what to imagine? Under this point, let's say that if our employees are not happy, sometimes they can steal at their workplace and that is the workplace divides. Finally, we have managers often simply don't get it. As recent research shows, managers often think that they know and understand their workplace. They're either say okay, our employees are very happy or our employees are not happy. But when you ask them about the real reasons, they will give you some and when then you ask the actual employees, you will see that managers really don't get it. So that is why it is important so that managers will co cooperate and communicate with their subordinate. So those were the impacts off satisfaction or dissatisfaction off and on employees. We have learned this graph, which is very important to keep in mind and also some quite intuitive impacts that these can have. 11. 4. What are Emotions and Moods: when we are studying organizational behaviour, we are going to me the concept off. What are the emotions and what are the moods? Maybe it will surprise you, but this topic has been given little or no attention for decades. Well, what is the reason for that? We believe that there are two possible reasons why these were sort off undercovered field for decades. The first meet, or the first belief, is that the researchers or the majors were trying to create emotion free organization so that the employees were not supposed or not allowed to express any emotions. No fear, no anger, just, you know, be happy and smiling. So for dead reason, they were not studying the emotions, the second me or the second belief that the managers and the researchers thought that the emotions are Onley disruptive and negative, so that when an employee expresses some motion, well, it's gonna disrupt our Maybe our processes are our sales. So again, for these reasons, we are not or we were not studying the emotions. But as recent research shows or over a field off organizational behaviour, emotions can be constructive and as well contributing. So now you can see the ship off the recent decades. Now we see emotions and moods a little bit differently. So when you think about it, how emotions can be constructed and contributing well, if we keep our employees happy off course they are going to be more constructive. They're going to be more productive, so that is a little bit off order. Now let's get to the topic itself. As you can see, we have free terms over here so that we have emotions. Then we have the moods. And finally, we are going to have something that is called effect. Okay, so let's define these two emotions are some reactions to a specific, even so, this even can be what cities even can be. Some person we are reacting to some person, or we are reacting to some, even itself. So some even what could be the example. Let's say that you come to the work and they would like to enjoy morning coffee, but the coffee machine is broken. That is the negative reaction to some. Even that happened then, when we continue, these are usually very brief in duration. They usually are for seconds or minutes so that you got angry because you cannot help coffee, but this feeling is going toe last only for a couple of minutes. Then when we continue, they can be very specific and numero so that you can be angry. You can be feared or something. You can be said, or you can be happy. So as you can see, they're very specifically defined and as well. Usually they're accompanied with some facial expression so that you will somehow with your face with your facial expression, show that you are angry or you were set or happy. Then secondly, now we are moving to the moods. These are much more general and Uncle Year. Well, now we have the first comparison emotions helping specific. Now the moods are general, these air much longer in duration. They can last for hours or days, and now as well. We have specific and Romero's emotions, but moods are more. Generals were generally seeing them under two dimensions. They can be either positive or negative when they can have hydra positive or negative effect. So that lets say that okay, we will talk about later. Finally, these are usually not indicated by expressions and other comparision emotions. usually are a component of a facial expression. Bad moods are not now the comparison I wanted toe or the relationship between these two. I wanted to get a little bit earlier. So how do these to work together? Several emotions can construct a moot. So several several emotions emotions can construct can come struck some more. Let's keep our example of a broken coffee machine. So you came to work. You have experienced some negative, even so, that the coffee machine is broken. Then you came to your place and they wanted to start working by. Their colleagues were very noisy, and it was another negative emotion, some reaction toe persons around you. And now these two emotions have constructed a bad mood. So that now for a couple of hours, you are going to be said, or maybe a little bit angry on them now, the other way off the relationship moods. How moods go with the emotions. Let's say that I came to work and I'm happy. My general mood is that I'm happy, and now I'm gonna have maybe some emotions or I'm going to react to some events. Well, I came to the work happy and the coffee machine is broken. That is my even the reaction. But I'm happy. I don't care. I will take a coffee later when it will be fixed. Then again, I sit down to my place and my colleagues are noisy. But again, I'm happy, so I'm not going to care about that. So you see, there is a two way relationship between these two so that several emotions can construct a mood and then moves are expressed. What's ready down? Our are expressed, expressed as emotions as emotions. Now you see the relationship between these two and all of a sudden we have effect. That is a very general terms that is covering both the emotions and the moves with me. Try to highlight it. So all these we have been discussing can be defined or when I need to fix my drawing. So all these can be defined as an effect because that is, ah, burrowed range off feelings that people experience. So we have freedoms from this video and as well. We have seen a little bit of logic how the study of emotions and moods evolved 12. 5. The Basic Emotions: Have you ever wondered how many emotions are out there? Well, a lot. And so in this video, I would like to talk about the basic emotions so that which are really the basic ones that researchers or practitioners are able to classify. Well, you can see them up over here we have happiness, surprise, fear, sadness, anger and disgust. Well, and they have even place them on some sort off continuum from left to the right. So here we have some sort off, continue from the left to the right. So when you are happy, you are on the on the left end off this continuum. So on the most positive side. And on the other hand, when you are disgust on you are on the right end off this continuum and you are on the negative side of it. So you see how it falls. You can be happy. Then you're surprised you have some fear. Then you become said angry or even these guys. And another thing with this continuum. Some of these can be sort of miss, understood or misplace. So the closer some emotions are, the more likely you are to confuse them. So you might be happy, but you might confuse your mood with being surprised. But when we have two emotions that are very far from each other on this continuum, so for instance, happiness and let's say anger. These two are very far on the continuum, and you were very unlikely. Toe toe confused, these two. Now I would like to play some sort of a game. As you can see on the right side, I have least it very many emotions which we can see or very many effects. Now I have created the small graph. There are two dimensions you can see. We have a horizontal dimension, and then we have a vertical dimension. It's a little bit off, man, but I hope I can keep it very simple. Now the horizontal direction is telling us about the positive effects. So here we have a positive effect, and on the other hand, we have low positive effect. Then the vertical dimension is telling us about the negative effect. So here we have high negative effect, and here we have a low. They got to effect. And now, as you can see, we have created some sort of a space where we can place our emotions according to their positive or negative effect. So let's start. We have at first these four. We have nervous, excited, bored and relaxed, and let's try to place them on these spaces. So the most positive effect, the most negative effect, the mole are the lowest positive effect and the lowest negative effect. Let's try to play these four over our ends off our dimensions, so nervous we have nervous. Where can we place nervous will? Most likely, you are nervous when something has a very high negative effect on you. So it's placed nervous over here. Now we continue excited. When are you excited? Well, when something has a very high positive effect on you. So here we have excited. Now we continue with board. This is a little bit more tricky, but let's take a look. We have board and the relaxed well researchers have defined that you are bored when something has a low positive effect on you. So it is no negative, but it's also know really positive. So just a very low positive effect, and that's when you are bored. Now we continue. We have a relaxed and we also have a lost space here left. So let's place it toe hold. Negative effect. So then you are relaxed. Now it becomes more trick is you can see we have some spaces in between these that mentions and we will try to place the rest off emotions over here. Rest off the moods. And as you can see, we have four colors. 1234 and then we have four spaces over here. 1234 So two off these moods are going toe goto each off these quadrants or the segments of our graph. So let's take a look. At first we have content and happy. So when are you content and happy? Well, definitely wedding has, ah high positive effect on you and then, well, lonely gti with it because you can't be happy if something has high negative offended. So these two are definitely going to be right over here. But let's think about the order when you are happy. You are most likely having something that has high positive effect on you. So happy is going to be somewhere over here and then content. He's going to be a little bit more down so when something has also a low negative effect on you. So we were able to place first to now we have deked and call. So when are we call Man? When are we fatigue? Well, definitely calm. We are when we have no high effect on us. So no high negative effect, Niedere High positive effect. So these two are definitely going to be placed in these Our Sigmund. Now let's think about the order off these two. How can they be placed? Well, when you have relaxed over here than column is going to be a really close to it, So calm will be somewhere over here. And then there is the space left for fatigue, which will be over here, which is just next to board, which really makes sense. Now let's move to the next two. We have upset and said, Well, these two are both very negative moods, So of course, it's going to be next to the high negative effect and then next to low positive effect so we can move these two week and thes two right over here. Now let's think about the order off these two. We have nervous over here and board over here well said is very close to be bored when you're bored and something suddenly starts to help some negative effect on you. You are moving to set so said is going to be placed right over here. And then we are left with upset, which is quite close to a nervous so we can move it right over here. And we have final tool. We have tens and 11. So with me movie. And now let's think about the order. Well, you are excited and what is close to being excited? Well, being alert. When something starts to help negative effect on you, you start to be colored. So we move this one over here and then tens will be placed over a year now. We were able to construct our structure off the mood so we can see that something can have a positive or a negative effect. And it depends if it has high or low off these effects. And so you see our final moods. It's nice. Continue. You can see over here 13. 6. Function Of Emotions: Until now we have told you a little bit about emotions, moves. We also have defined ourselves some basic emotions. Now, in this video, I would like to talk about the function of emotions. So basically, why do we have emotions or why we are given these and what they can be good or what they can be bad for? Well, we have two opinions or two streams of a research. So here we have our 1st 1 and this is our 2nd 1 So according toa, one stream of ideas or one stream of research, emotions and rationality are in conflict forgotten de over here. So what may put it so here should be D and that if you exhibit emotion, you are likely to act irrationally so that in other words, if you are about to cry and you are on some business meeting, you should rather leave the room and not let the others to see that you are going to express this emotion and that you are going to cry so that to repeat it again, emotions and rationality are in conflict. Now The second stream of ideas is that emotions are actually critical to operational thinking so that we felt the emotions. We would not be ableto perform the relational thinking. Now you have the idea off the two streams that are out there. Let's think about these stories off Phineas Gage. This is a very interesting story, and I would really encourage you toe search for it. There is a very nice article on the Wikipedia. So on September 18 48 I don't barf through through his skull. I think it looks like it went from the low left, draw up toe the top. So it looked something like this. But those pictures are not very nice. And for that purpose, I picked the one which is sort of a mail truck. But this is a Phoenix gauge now. He survived this injury. He is well, was quite okay. He was able to read. He was able to speak and as well performed well on cognitive tests. So everything seemed fine. However, he lost his ability to experience emotions, and so he was acting emotionless. This is quite interesting. It does not happen that often, and that's why this story it's so interesting now he drifted from job to job. He was unable to hold the relationships. So as you can see, the second idea that emotions are actually critical toe emotional thinking, operational thinking is really supported by the story off Phineas Gage. Because, as you can see, everything was fine. He was able to read Speak, performed well in the cognitive tests. He just lost his ability to experience emotions. And so he was acting emotion list. And due to that, he was not really able to leave normal life anymore because he drifted from job to job and he was unable to hold the relationships. So what is the outcome from the story? And from this video? Well, we must have the ability toe experience, emotions, Toby operational. 14. 7. Emotional Labor: in this video, I would like to talk about something which is called emotional labour. It might sound as a weird them, but is he will see It's quite quite nice idea, and I would like to go a little bit deeper into it. So let's first take a look at the definition of emotional labor. This is on employees expression off organizationally desired emotions during interpersonal transactions. At work. Well, it's a little bit Harry, so let's take a deeper look a t. So we have some interpersonal transactions at work. So let's say you are working as Let's say, you're working as a cashier, so you are working as a cashier. Now we're going to help some interpersonal transactions at work so that someone comes and you are going to sell some item or you are going to interact. Talk a little bit, and this is a transaction. Now your organization has some desired emotions, so desired emotions, so that you, as a cashier, should always be. Let's say, happy, uh, happy and smiling. And now you can see there is an expression off these desired emotions. So that is the emotional labor, a lot off service minded jobs are, you know, falling under the emotional labour. Now what is the problem here? So we are moving to some problem, so some for real blame. And these problem is called emotional diesel engines. It's a weird there. Um, I never really remember it, but the definition is quite straightforward. And it says, when employees helped tow Project one emotion while feeling another. So let's say as we have mentioned, your organization requires you to be happy and smiling. So with me, just copy paste these so we records you to be happy and smiling. So that is the projection off the emotion that you are required. So it's these emotion right over here, but you are feeling some another emotion. So let's say let's say that you are Let's say, said said, or you are angry. And of course, when you are said and angry, this is thes and other emotion that you are feeling. You are not really willing to be happy and smiling when your customers are coming. And this is the emotional dissonance when we have to project something when we have to be happy, however, we are feeling some another emotion and were said and angry. So let's take a deeper look at it. We have something that we call felt emotions. Then we have some felt emotions, and then we have some displayed emotions. So now when we even without reading the definitions well, what are the displayed emotions? Well, they are over here, so this is what should be displayed. These are our displayed emotions, but our felt emotions are different. These are our felled emotions. So let's take a look at the definitions felt. Emotions are individuals, actual emotions so that we are said and angry. And then, on the other hand, there are some displayed emotions which are does that. The organization requires workers to show and considers appropriate in a given job, so that you can see that the emotional descendants or cures between these two, when we have some felt emotions and they're not the same as the displayed emotions. Now, what is the solution to this? Let's try to think about some solution well, basically, and this is very important sentence to keep in mind after watching this video, so I will light it well. Displaying fake emotions requires us to suppress real ones Well, how can we do that? How can we suppress our real emotions to display some some fake emotions? Well, there are two ways that we can try. The 1st 1 is called a surface acting. So we have, sir face acting. And then we have deep acting through the acting. Well, the surface acting is hiding inner feelings. So we're going toe hide inner feelings and for going emotional expressions in response to display URLs. So simply when you're said and angry, you are still going toe, you know, display that you're happy and smiling, even though inside of you you are feeling differently and know that goat. Then there is deep acting that is different. This is our why we're doing depicting. We're trying toe modify a true inner feelings based on a display rules. So even though we came to job said and angry, well, our customers are smiling and are happy, maybe, and things so that I will try to modify my real mood and as well I will try to be smiling and happy even inside of me, not just outside, not just displaying these, but the true inner feelings are going to be that I'm happy and smiling. So this was the emotional labor. We defied ourselves on emotional labor. Then we talked about the problem. The doc yours here, which is the emotional dissonance, which is when employees held to project while emotion while feeling another so that we have some failed emotions and then some displayed emotions. The solution to this is that this playing fake emotions requires us to suppress real ones and that we can go two ways either by a surface acting or by a deep acting. 15. 8. The Big Five Personality Model: when studying organizational behaviour, you will see Sarah were interesting models, and in this video we're going to talk about one of them. It's going to be the Big Five personality model. So in the past, researchers have been thinking, Are there some main or some basic dimensions within the human personality that will simply underlies all others? And when we simply are able to combine these, we can get any kind of personality. Well, they think there are, and these mobile has been proven to be very successful. And these researchers have defined the beak, five threats and what me fix my drawing. So the big five trades. So as you can see, we're going toe help five basic dimensions within the human personality that underlie all the others. And these are going to be emotional stability. Then we help extra version. I'm drawing very ugly, so extra version. Then we have openness to experience. Then we have agreeableness a agreeableness, and finally there is this word. I'm sorry I'm not a native speaker and I just can't pronouncing that as well. I think you will as well help problems with remembering it. So I remember it. It s carefulness, eso carefulness, carefulness and you will see what I mean by carefulness. So let's get to it. At first we have emotional stability that is one of the big Five trades. And now we're going to say, Why is it relevant to study when we are talking about organizational behaviour? And then we will learn, What does it affect? We feel, let's say, our company organization so emotional stability. It's basically and let me change my color. It's basically ability to withstand stress. So how are you able to three the stress when it is around you? How are you able to work under stressful situations? There are two weeks dreams. You either are sort of self confident, and you are withstanding the stress very well. Or on the other hand, you can be anxious, nervous and you know no bearing the stress very well. So why is this relevant? Well, people who are who have high emotional stability or well developed emotional stability and are able to withstand the stress very well are less negative, thinking they as well have fewer negative emotions and finally, they are less. He better vigilante with me highlight this term, So he pair vigilant, which is the vulnerability to stress. So it's right it over here. This is vulnerability bility to stress toe stress, which really makes sense. Well, if we are self confident and ableto handle, our emotions were well, we are less vulnerable to stress. And now all these how do they affect our organization or the performance of our employees? Well, our employees or the person is able to be better satisfied with the job and the life in general and also is having lower levels off stress. Let's get to 2nd 1 which is extra version. Are we simply extort? So let's let's write it over here We are talking about extroverts because maybe the four month off the word does not really give you a hint that we're talking about extrovert varicose intranet. And this is simply the comfort level. With relationships. We either are sociable, which would be extra words, or we are more reserved, which will be introvert. And why is this robot Well, extroverts have better interpersonal skills. They have greater social dominance and finally arm or emotionally expressive. However, there is also a downside. We can say there is also a downside downside well, the thing is that extroverts can be much more impulsive. So extroverts can be much more in Poolesville and can have some problems regarding the work so that they are more likely toe absent from the work because of some risky behavior, so that let's say they are not able to handle the level off alcohol consumed the evening before going to work so they can become more absent from the work. Now what does it affect? Higher performance, so that if we have better developed our extra version were more likely to help high performance in our job. Then we who enhanced leadership and finally we are more likely to be better satisfied with our job and life in general is third. We have openness to experience, which is, in other words, transferred, translated as fascination by novelty. So either and I have forgotten my hair over here. So these are the two extremes and now the extremes are so if we are really fascinated by the novelty, we are creative and if we are not, we are more off a conventional people. Now, the people who have very well developed openness to experience our are possessing the increased ability to learn, then they are more creative, more flexible and autonomous, which are all very positive aspect. Now what does it affect? Training, performance. So the people who are willing to accept and adapt to a new environment, they're going to be better at the training than they have in house leadership and finally are more adaptable to change, which really makes sense. As four, we help agreeableness. This is simply a propensity to defer toe others so that we either we either are cooperating and really agree with other people, or we are not really that cooperative and simply disagree with the others. This is a little bit tricky because both of these either if we are really cooperating or disagreeable, can be a really beneficial, let's, say, skills or positions within the employment, because the people who are really agreeable are better worked. So that if if our person within the company who is selling is really agreeable, well, this person will be better like because other people will agree with him or her. Then they are more competent than conforming. Now what does it affect? These people used to have higher performance and lower level off deviant behavior and there is the trick level off deviant behavior. In some cases, we would like people toe really have a TV and behavior so that they can find new things that can be creative and, you know, find or improve the processes that are currently existing. Now, finally, we have these word. I'm terribly sorry, but I cannot pronounce, but it simply sort of a carefulness, and it is measuring the reliability. We either are really responsible or we are distracted, you know, losing the attention. And that's that's why we are not reliable people and responsible. And why is this relevant? Because we have a greater afford and persistence, so that if we are reliable, responsible, we're going to put a lot off a Ford and we're going to be really persisting with our idea or our work. Then we have more drive and discipline. Finally, we have better organized, were better organized and are planning more. Finally, what does it effect? We are goingto have higher performance and house leadership and greater long Gaby longevity , and this is interesting thing. So researchers found that the people who are really we're really achieving high levels of reliability and are really careful. They are going to leave longer because they care more about themselves, about the relatives, about everything that is surrounding them. And that's why they're going to leave longer so that waas, in a very big detailed, explained the Big Five personality model. 16. 9. Person-Job Fit and Person-Organization Fit: Now we're going to see a very interesting theory, which is a person joke, feet and person, organizational feet. And that this This theory has been developed by John Holland, who was thinking about it this way. Why some persons feet, some positions or some jobs and why some people simply do not. And this well, why some people are more attracted to certain organizations than other people. And then the relationships can device a Verizon. Why people who are creating some joke positions are searching for a specific kinds of persons, and then why some organizations are searching for specific, kind off people, so history is pretty straightforward. There are two definitions. The 1st 1 is about the person job fit, and another one is about person organization feet. So it's a good look. Person Job fit is the satisfaction and propensity to leave a position depend on how well individuals match their personalities toe a job. So as you can see, we're going toe match together. Two things. Our personality and the job we are looking. And now John Holland has made a stratification in tow. Some sort of a hexagon. We can call it for now, Hexagon and you can see we have six types over people. We have a realistic people and let me just change my brush. So we have realistic people. Then we have investigative on. Then we have social. Then we have conventional enterprising and finally we have artistic. Now all of these we can see on our hexagon and there is a very nice logic within this hexagon as you will see the positions or the people who are next to it. The types are very similar. So realistic type is very similar to investigative type then as well. Investigative type is very similar to artistic type. However, when we look diagonally, we will see that these are the most differentiated types or the positions, so that the realistic people are very different from a social people regarding the job positions. So let's take a look at these specifically so the realistic people prefers physical activities that require skill, strength and coordination. Well, would would be the congre and occupation. Where would you like to employ such person Macon Inc drill press operator, assembly line worker or farmer? That makes a really lot of a sense, So these kind of persons are going toe feet these kinds of a positions, then we have investigative prefers activities that involve thinking, organizing and understanding. These people should be biologists, economists, mathematician news reporter. Now, when we have made these two, we have realistic and investigative. Let's take a look at our hexagon so realistic we have a right over here and investigate till we have just next to it. So according toa John Holland's definition, these two types should be quite similar. So we are right over here and these two should be quite similar. Let's continue. Maybe we'll find something interesting then. We have social prefers activities that involve helping and developing others, which would be social worker, teacher, counselor, clinical psychologist, while social people are right over here or social type of a personality which is right over here. And we see that this is exactly oppose it, too. Realistic people. So there should be three largest difference between these two, so it's take a look at the congre and occupations between these two. So now we're looking at these two. There should be a quite a significant difference. So on one hand we held mechanics, real press operators, assembly line workers farmers. And here we have social worker, teacher, counselor and clinical psychologist. So, as you can see, according to the theory, these two types and these two congruent occupations are very different. Then the final free. Let's take a brief look Then we have conventional people who prefers rule regulated, orderly and on a big U. S. Activities, which would be accountant, corporate manager, bank teller or file clerk. And finally, we have enterprising and artistic people. And I really would like to encourage you to take a a closer look at this theory because, at least from my perspective, it's really interesting. And now also, John Holland continued, and to go wider perspective. And he moved from person job, feet, toe, a person, organization feet. So now we're looking at a person and a specific kind of job. Now what about the person and some organization? People are attracted toe and selected by here, you see, are the vice a versa relationships. So persons are attracted toe and then as well selected by organizations that match their values that match their values and leave organizations that are incompatible with their personalities. So we really can see let's say that we have, Let's say that we have a realistic person. We have a realistic person who would like to join some biology company and would like to become a biologist. On one hand, this type of person will not be interesting in that sort of a position. And there's all this company will not be interested in such type of a person, so that was a person, job beat and person organization feet. 17. 10. What is Perception: What is perception? Let's think about what does it mean to say when we have some perceptions and why is it relevant to study while we're studying organizational behavior? So it first, let's take a look at the definition of a perception. The reception is protest by which individuals organize and interpret, interpret their sensory impressions in orderto give meaning to their environment. And this is a super important phrase for us. So these means the there is some reality out there. So let's say the disease reality, which is out there but we do not see, do not consider this being a reality. We are trying to give meanings to these reality, so give meanings, view, meanings and on Lee, these meanings, how we perceive the reality. That's what we consider our sort off personal reality, so personal a reality. So where do perceptions takes place in these ah little chain that I have just don't well, we see the reality with some sensory impressions. So we see or hear or smell, and then we give meanings to them. So he are going to be our perceptions. So right over here are our perceptions, perceptions, So let's get back to our definition real quick. So it is a process by which individuals organize and interpret their impressions in order to give meaning to their environment. So what is it going to be there now? Off course, our perception off a reality can be somehow lets it can be shaped. It can be, Oh, let's say shape, shape or sometimes it can be distorted the started. And there can be some factors so it can be shaped or distorted some by some factors, factors. And in the rest of this video, I would like to talk specifically about these factors that can shape or distort our understanding or or our perception of reality. And essentially, we can classify these vectors into free categories, so one is going to be perceive. Er, 2nd 1 is going to be target, and 3rd 1 is going to be situation. So let's think about it first category of factors that can shape or distort our perception of reality receiver. Your interpretation is influenced by your personal characteristics, so let's say let's say that your personal characteristic just change my color. So your personal characteristic is that you consider young people young people are lazy are lazy. Now let's emitting the do you see two people, you see Ah, some young person and you see some elder person. And if you imagine they both do the same job. So this person, let's say, let's say bright, The paper of rights paper and this person does the same so elder person also ride the paper right paper. Now, because of your personal characteristic that you consider young people being lazy. Even though these two papers may be off the same quality, you will consider a to leased from the beginning or a t least a little bit the paper off a young person, Toby. Worse then the paper off the elder person because you expect that the young person gave less effort to the paper. So that's that's the perceive er category. So our interpretations really are influenced by our personal characteristics. Now let's move to the second category, which we call target the relationship over target toe. It's background also influences our perception. Let's how the important part so relationship off target toe. It's big ground. So let's think about the this way. Let's imagine, um, let's say that there is some person which is standing in a group. So there are a couple off other people around this person. What's a want to free? There is some other person on some other and one more So as you can see, we have some group. We have some group which we can consider background in this case. So this group of people is the background and then thes individual, which we have here. So we have some in the vein. Jewel, this is what we considered it started. So, Sergey, now what this point or this category or factors that can shape or distort our perceptions is telling us that we have to always consider the relationship between the background and the target. So the relationship between background and target So the relationship of this person to the group of persons. Let's say that the's individual let's keep to our example. This person is 15 years old, 15 years old, and these other persons are, let's say, let's say, 50 years old, 50 years old Now our perceptions are going to be influenced by the suspect that there is a young person really standing in. A group of elder persons will be asked how so well, there can be something we're so we will perceive these overall group or this person itself somehow differently. Then then, if there was a 15 year old person standing among other 15 years old person. So you have to always think about the relationship between the target and its background. The context. Okay, let's get to Deford category. This is the situation. The time, location, light, heat and other situational factors influence our attention. So it's a we have here time, location and generally, let's let's imagine a situation. So let's think off tool situations. Let's think about Saturday, Saturday night. Or, let's say, Saturday evening, Saturday evening in some in some nightclub nightclub. And the other situation would be, What's a Monday? A Monday morning on the morning? Let's say office. You already can see the difference between these two situations on Saturday evening at a nightclub. Let's say, if we would see we would see or or the dress. Let's think about the dress. How would you dress yourself for the Saturday evening nightclub? And how do you dress yourself on Monday morning to the office? Well, you definitely are going toe have different kinds of others Why is it so? Because people are going to have a very different perceptions between these two situations . You also, if you would see the person dressed exactly the same on Saturday evening in a nightclub and on Monday morning in the office in one of these two situations, you would consider his or her dress being very outstanding. So we talked about what is the perception that we are somehow just giving meanings toe the reality. And this this process of giving meanings is influenced by the perceptions, then are some factors that can shave or distort our understanding of reality, and we somehow congrats them into three categories. Perceive, er, target and situation. 18. 11. Working With Perceptions: in the previous with you, we have told a little bit about the perceptions so that we have told ourselves that everyone has some sort of a perceptions and that these perceptions are influenced by different factors. Now, in this video, I would like to just briefly show you the importance of perceptions. So if we imagine not, say that you have two people, Well, let's say this is a manager and then you have another person which is of employees. So we have employees on the other hand, and now these two guys are going toe help different perceptions about things. So let's say we will handle some problems. Well, in these cases, I have I have chosen some optical illusions which are from the psychology we will know, but really take these in mind and really keep it there that when the manager and employee are going toe face or or see some problem or some challenge, they might see it from different perspectives or the solution toe. That thing is going to be seen from two different perspectives and thereafter. Either you, as a manager must and knowledge that an employee sees, sees the thing from different perception or you as an employee should understand. Okay, Maybe my manager is right, because Hey, sees the wall think from from a wider orebro older perspective. So we have this first picture over here. One of us can see this as a young lady which is facing you can see the over there, which is facing that direction over there. Here is her nose. He is there a year. Then we have some sort of a necklace over here, and these are her hair. So maybe our managers sees it as a young lady facing that direction. Well, employees can see there's an old lady, whereas he we have nose off the lady. Here, you have the mouth, and here is the back part of the head noun Second Arctic Ocean, which is over here. One of us can see this as a waste. So here we have. Maybe it can be standing on a table, and here we can put some flowers or or anything, so it's always but some of us can see the stool faces. So this is the first guy over here. And here is the nose. Here is the mouth. Here are the eyes and these will be the second guy. Whereas this is the nose, the eyes and the mouth. So again, two different perspectives how to see some issue now finally. Well, you're given. This is very well known. You are given on these two pictures and you are supposed to decide whether thes the circle which is right over here, is off the same signs as they circle right over here. Well, they are. So you have tow. The purpose of this video was toe really give you a strong, strong idea that perceptions are different and they're there sort of influenced by different sectors. And they're very important for any kind of manager within an organization. 19. 12. Attribution Theory: in this video, we are going to talk about quite an interesting and popular theory in organizational behavior, and it's called the attribution theory and it is a bit three key and it from the first look and seem a little bit Harry. So let's start simply of the definition, so attribution Theory tries to explain the ways in which we judge people differently. So this is a well known figure. We simply judged people differently, depending on the meaning. We attribute toe given behavior. So you see, we are goingto attribute some meaning toe the behavior, so meaning that is going to be a tribute. Ito given behavior we attempt toe the term in if it is internally and now it's meeting the power if it is internally or or externally coast. So this is the important part. So we are looking. Wood has caused the given behavior, whether it was internally or externally cost and after we determine if it was internally or externally coast. After that, we simply attribute some meaning to these behavior and according toe that we are going to judge people differently, So these definitions should be read, you know, from the back to the front a little bit to understand it better so this way. And then we move this way. So let's take a look at internal and external causes. We have defined both of these. So here we have our internal calls on right over here we have our external course. So when we say that something is internally coast, internally coast, are does we believe to be under the personal control off individual. So some situation happens and a person react to the situation when we believe that this behavior So it's ready down. So the behavior, the behavior. If the behavior has bean internal ical, we believe that it was under the personal control off individual. However, when the's on, let's write it down again. When these behavior has bean, external cost is what we imagine. The situation forced the individual to do force the individual to do so. Let's imagine some too simple situations before we get further. So let's say a person bought a milk in the shop and now is walking home Well, what do we How do we attribute this behavior? Do we believe it was internally caused the decision toe by a milk all rose it externally coast. Well, we believe, of course it was internally cost. However, we know that this person has a kid, so maybe we can now believe that we know that kid needs a milk. So we might believe that these behavior toe by a milk has been externally caused because the situation that this person has a kid has forced the individual to do so. Now let's go further and is going to be the graph that really defines the attribution theory. So at first we have some. We have some. What a observation. So we have some hope separation. And as we have mentioned in the previous video, we always interpret somehow our observations. So then we have in their presentation and finally from these interpretations we are goingto attribute the cause is what has caused the situation. So finally there is the attribution attribution off course, off course. So we are going to go from the West to the right. So as you can see the individual behavior off some person that we have just absurd, we're going toe evaluated under free dimensions or under three factors. So the first dimension is going to be distinctiveness. so that is the 1st 1 The second dimension or the second factor, is the consensus, and the 3rd 1 is the consistency is the consistency. And now in all of these free factors or all of these free interpretations were going toe, determine whether it gives us a hint that the attribution should be either external or internal. So let's say we have one over here. 2nd 1 over here, then internal agan and external again on Let me just finish my drawing. So we have eternal and external and let me also believe thes one. So we hope starvation. Then we interpreted under these three dimensions and then we attribute the cause either internally or externally. So the first thing when we observe someone's behavior and we're going to judge this behavior and what we consider first is the distinctiveness, whether on individual does the same in different situations. So let's say that we keep to our example of ah man who buys a milk in the shop. Well, let's imagine that there could be a different situation and now he went to a supermarket, which is a large store. Well, would he? Would he have the same behavior. Would he also by one, let's a cartoon off milk. Maybe he would not on. That's our first interpretation of the situation. Is he going toe react in a distinct you manner under different situations? Well, And then we decide whether it was internally and externally calls. So if this person would act, although it stated this way, if these behavior that we're observing that the man buys a milk, if we consider it usual, usual, then we attribute it internally. However, if we consider it unusual unusual, then probably the cause is attributed externally. Secondly, we held the consensus This inspector that are tells us or we judge it whether other face similar situation behave in the same way. So we are looking at the others and, well, it's quite the heart in the example. Maybe I did not give the best example, but you can. I think you can grasp it quite well. We have some situation and we think, Well, what would others do in these persons situations? And again, if this behavior is sort off usual, usual, then we can attribute it internally. However, if it is unusual, then we attribute it externally. Finally, on the consistency. Now this is a little bit tricky whether the person react the same over time. Now these think goes a vice a versa compared to the others. If the person would react the same over time, well, we can say that it was internally cost. And if the personal greed differently Well, we can say it was externally caused. So at least from my perspective, from the attribution theory, it is super important to remember that we always try to judge people differently. And we are giving a meaning toe their behavior. And we are trying to decide whether the behavior has been internally or externally cost. And now this flow of logic. We have some individual behavior and we are judging the Dunder free perspectives, which is the distinctiveness, uh, which is whether an individual does the same under different situations. Then we help consensus whether other who face similar situation, behaving the same way and finally, the consistence. If this person reacts the same overtime and finally you see, for instance, we're going to score so it's on. This one would score internally. This one would be externally and this one would be internally again. So As you can see, we have two points for internally and one point for externally. So we will decide that this behavior has bean internally caused. 20. 13. Rational Model, Bounded Rationality and Intuition: in this video, I would like to talk a little bit more about the decision making, and we're going to see ah sort of free different ways. How we make decisions, or how do we consider that other people are making decisions? So at first we will talk about the relational model and let me just change my brush. So the first will be the relational model. Then we will have bounded rationality and finally we will have on intuition. So let's say you can see the operational model I have described over here. Then we have our about the dress, you know anything and finally, our intuition, and you will see that there is some sort of a logic why I have chosen it to go this way. So let's start with the relational model so that we often think the best decision maker is a relational is racial consistent while making value maximizing choices. These follows a relational decision making model which we have right over here. This is the operational decision making model. However, as you will see, we are relying on assumptions and that is the big problem. As you will see. Let's start from the beginning at first. This our best decision maker who is this crowd right away defines the problem so it is necessary. Or we rely on the assumption that the decision maker is a really able to define the problem perfectly After the problem is defined. This best decision maker identifies the decision criteria so that lets say, after we have defined it, we tell ourselves, Okay, our criteria are that the decision has to be made quickly or it has to be made in one month . Then it has toe make. It has to bring some values to our shareholders. Then thirdly, we our Cade weights to the criteria so that what is more important, that our project will be finished in one month or that it will bring a lot of value to our shareholders. So we allocate these weights to the criteria. It's four. We developed the out there. Nothing's. So what are the out there not use to our initial decision? Or would what are all of the alternatives that we can make? Fifth, we will evaluate these alternatives, and then we will sell it the best out there Now. Now let's think about the assumptions well if we define the problem. This is the first assumption that in reality is not possible to be done. And as you will see, the bounded rationality will try to solve this problem. In any case, were unable to fully understand the problem. The consequences off the problem secondly, were unable to identify really the decision making criteria perfectly, just to some extent, then again allocating weight to the criteria. Now, here comes the biggest dispute. They're hoping the alternatives the receive the relational model presumes that we really have all the information so that we have all all information. And that is, as you probably know, impossible. We cannot know everything that is, you know, touching this problem we are trying to solve this is just impossible. And that is one of the assumptions on which we are relying it. And so you will see that the bounded rationality is trying to solve it. So we have our out there not use. Then we are evaluating the altar, not eels. And finally we sell it the best out there. Nothing. This is again a very strong presumption. So the best all they're not best, um, best how they're not you. They're nothing. Well, Are you really able to say when you are making some decision that you have made the best choice? You don't know. Maybe you could have decided faster. Maybe you could have decided a little bit differently. Or maybe you could help made the decision later. And it would be better. You never are able to really say if your decision wants the best. So now we move from the relational model to the bounded rationality. And he says, because Off LTD. Limited information processing capacity, it is impossible to understand all the information. This is much more realistic so that when there is some decision maker, well, he's not going to define the problem perfectly. But let's say just toe to certain extent, what's I don't satisfying, satisfying, extend satisfying extent. Then, when we are identifying the decision criteria, I locating ways, developing the alternatives and let's say, selecting the best alternative. All of these happens Justo a satisfying extend or to certain extent, or do a certain extent. And all of these is because we, as a human's, held these limited information processing capacity so that we are unable to understand all the information and really be able to say, Well, this is the best decision. So again we will get to some satisfying decision and still we can get to some third our understanding off decision making. So what? We just draw some arrows, which will be on intuition. Intuition is highly complex and highly developed form over reasoning. So it is a form of reasoning based on years off experience and learning, so that if we imagine that now we're being intuitive, if you imagine that, let's say we have been solving these kind off problems over the years and we have learned something so that first we will simply we will simply define the problem on the fine the problem. They find the problem and because our intuition, which was developed during the years of experience while working with these problems, we will simply jumped through all the phases. And we will know directly what is the solution that that is the best or that is the satisfying one. So we will jump directly to the solution. So, as you can see, these free understandings are quite different. The relational model is some sort of a theory. So this is this is a theory or the ideal state how we would like to solve the problems. Then we have the bound interational eating where we are trying to solve the problems to the city spying extent. And finally we have an intuition, which is some former reasoning which has been developed during the years of experience and learning. 21. 14. Biases and Errors In Decision Making: the managers in the organizations are living in some sort of a world of a bounded rationality they make mostly are good decisions. But sometimes it happens that some bias or error in their decision making cannot cure. And you really confined a load of these biases that are influencing the decision making and for the purpose of these video, have decided to pick free so that you will really see that thes thes biases may have happened also in your life or around you. So there are a total east. When I when I search for these, I found 11 straight away. So these are the free may be the most common one. First one, the overconfidence bias. This is when we are given factual questions and asked to judge the probability that our answers are correct. We tend to be fairly optimistic, which is called overconfidence Bias. So what? So you are asked a question. Well, let's say ho was the president of the United States in 1976 and you you tell some answer and then after you give this answer, you were asked, Well, how What is the probability off the Do you think that you are right, and now this person is going to say something like I am. I am. What's a 70%? 70% confident, confident that I am right? That, um, that I am correct car wreck. Now they're Researchers have done a lot of experiments upon the stopping, and when someone tells a number such as this 1 70% the truth is that this person is most likely Onley correct in 50% off situations. So we tend toe over what's a weed than to have a too high confidence in in the way, whether we are correct or not about some things. And this happens exactly in a case off managers they might have, they might be too optimistic or might help to high confidence and don't realize they might be wrong quite often. Secondly, we have the anchoring buys. The incurring buys is a tendency to fix it, toe initial information and fail to adequately adjust to subsequent information. Now, this is a pretty interesting and useful one. Well, it's you come to a job interview and you're asked about how high salary do you imagine. If you say that you imagine the initial celery off 110,000. That's the imagination of your salary. Now the employer, the potential employer, is going to hell or is going to think about the range from 50,000 50,000 to 60,000 Azat. Ah, reasonable negotiation rage. But if you are, are this question and the answer, Let's say 55,000 $650. Then the potential employer is going toe. Consider as a reasonable range for negotiation with you. 55,000. 55,000, 56,000 That's an interesting question or interesting problem, isn't it? So you really should be more concrete. And now this is the incurring pass. But it's a little bit tricky toe to explain that. So we fix it initially, information, which was in this case, the answer to how high celery we imagine. And then if we would continue talking about our salary, job expectation and so one, the potential employer would fail to adequately adjust toe the subsequent information. And this happens quite often in the minds of managers. Now, finally, this is maybe the most dangerous one, and that is the escalation of commitment. Escalation of commitment refers to staying with a decision. Even when there is clear evidence, it is wrong. So what? So you are a manager and you have invested into some project and you have invested. Let's say you have a project and you have made some investment into this project in the vestment off, let's say $100,000 now that the guy will go on and go on and there is a clear evidence that your decision was wrong and that you're going to lose thes $100,000 investment. But what is the discussion of commitment doing? Is that these manager who is invested into this project $100,000 we'll push Mawr and Mawr and maybe will invest $400,000 more just to avoid the fact off being wrong or toe admitted that he or she was wrong? So this is a really dangerous situation when some many drawer or anyone in the organization basically has escalation of commitment, and when there is some investment made, the person doesn't want with me that he or she was wrong. So these were the very basic biases and errors in decision making that happen 22. 15. What Is Motivation: if I will be asked about what is the most research subject within the up psychology organization theory? Well, it will definitely be motivation. And so, in the upcoming videos, we're going to talk a lot about various theories within the motivation. And in this video, I would like to introduce you to this topic. So what is a moderation, but just really? Briefly, we define motivation as the paralysis is that account for individuals. Intensity, direction and persistent toe afford the word attaining a goal? Well, we have three different things over here. We have intensity, then we have a direction. And finally, we help our resistance off a four toward attaining ago. Well, this is quite quite interesting idea f or toward attaining a goal. I think that would be the short isn't the most straightforward answer toward these motivation, but we're not going to study our this effort toward attaining any kind of goal. The word organizational goals that is our interesting are so organizational goals. So but we hold these free, different parts intensity, direction and persistent. So what's examine those free A little bit more so intense sitting these crimes, how hard a person tries so we could, let's say, say we have a scale from 1 to 10 and now let's say we will get some employees and we would great him with five points out of these scale. And so he tries quite hard toward attaining that Given or that articular goal. However, high intensity may not necessarily lead to a favorable job performance itself. The effort must be channelled in a direction. Here we have the second part in a direction that benefits the organization. So what if there is a person that tries really hard to be? I don't know. Popular are so so that many people like this person Well, that is not really benefiting our organization at all. We need the effort that will be channelled towards the direction that is benefitting directly the organization, so that let's say this person is trying hard to become better at some particle of skill that will benefit us. Now. A four directed toward and consistent with the organization's goals is the kind off effort we should be seeking. That's what we said previously. Finally, motivation has a persistence dimension. These measures how long a person can maintain effort. So maybe you can be persistent only for one week. Well, that's not really cool. You should be persistent over what's a few months or even years with this, your given motivation. So I hope this video gave you a little hint about what is coming in the next videos. We're going to study a lot about various motivation theories. 23. 16. Hierarchy Of Needs Theory: in this video, I would like to talk about the theory that has been developed by Abraham my slow quite a long time ago. And if I remember it correctly, it was the first theory that I have learned in sociology ever. So we are going to talk about the Here are key off needs theory by Abraham Maslow So probably most of you have already seen these quite a famous pyramids off needs. So we have some pyramid, um, be raw meat off needs off needs. And as you concede, has several off these building books or steps. And what we'll talk about is that generally, by our nature, we are given that through these steps through these blocks, we are going from bottom to the top. So we are going on these directions so that at first we try to satisfy our physiological needs so that our bodies simply needs briefing food, water or even sex. And all these we are seeking to satisfy first, then the second building bog off this pyramid are the safety needs so that we need a security off our body off. Employment of resource is off morality. Off the family off health off property. So you can imagine that, for instance, that the safety needs are not satisfied are not fulfilled during the war. So that when we have really satisfied our physiological and safety needs then we move one step up and we would like to have some love for belonging meets simply We would like to be along somewhere. So we want some friends, some friendship. So we would like to belong to a group of people whom we consider friends. Then, of course, we would like to help some family so that we have someone love and we feel that someone loves us. This is already 1/3 step. So as you can see, we have moved toe quite ah higher needs when we move to the third book. Now when even these needs are satisfied then we move toe esteem so that we have some What's I opposition? Within the society? We have some self esteem. Then we have a confidence at humint respect off others And this one I would like to highlight respect off others and respect by others respect off others and respect by others . As you see, these are already acquired a high needs which we are trying to satisfy, and finally we get to these self actualization. But what I would like to highlight here, this is not the end point. This is not. This is not the end point, Andi following it's some sort of a journey. We as humans are always tryingto achy you a perfect self actualization, but we never really get there. So with the journey towards which we are a mix, so self actualization is no the endpoint here we're striving for the sense of morality, creativity, spontaneity, problem solving like of justice or the acceptance off fact. So now, as you can see, we went through this pyramid of needs, which is basically the wall theory. But what is important toe mention, especially if we are studying, for instance, sociology or organizational behaviour when a need becomes substantially satisfied, So some need become substantially said. It's fine, then next one becomes dominant and this is the important point. So when we are, let's a full field to a substantial extent with our safety, then we are trying to set up a family friendship. When we are, let's a satisfied Onley in a physiological sense, to a substantial extent. Then we start to care about our safety. So as you can see, it really works everything together. Now what does thes need? What implication does it help for some sociology or motivation studies? It says, if you want to motivate someone you need to understand, would level off the Iraqi dead person is currently so that person is currently so all of us are on some what it can move throughout the life. But of course the little your therapies will be able to say that, Do you, as a person is currently on this or these level. And now if he or she would like to motivate you, then he will understand. Okay, So you have You have, ah, friendship. We have friends. You have. Let's say all of these needs that is fired and all of these needs And this one is, let's say no, perfectly substantially satisfying. So we need toe motivate you with the sense of a family, and only then you will be able to move one step up. So that was the basic overview off heirarchy of needs theory by Abraham Muscle 24. 17. Two Factor Theory: in this video, I would like to talk about the two factor theory, which was developed by Frederick Hedberg. It is a little bit criticized theory, but still the idea behind it that the two factors is really interesting and worth examining . So at first I will give you example of how we usually think about said inspection on little , some workplace. So how we usually think about said disaffection, so usually imagine that there is some one XY. So let's say that this is the excess and on the right side we have satisfaction, said Thies Fiction. And on the left side we have some dissatisfaction. So here we have a this and let me use the different color you will see later. Why? So we have these satisfaction and off course. Somewhere in the middle there is some let's say there is some no trial. So here we have some ultra and now we think that if we would ask, let's say, 100 employees if they're dissatisfied, er satisfied And what is causing their satisfaction or dissatisfaction off course they would mention something like Bay is important for us than there is some job security, job security job security. Then let's say there is some responsibility. Therese Bone see Billy theme. And now, essentially, if an employee will tell you that, well, I'm slightly dissatisfied. So our employees, somewhere over here, in his satisfaction with his work Now, if we would increase the pay now if we would increase the pay Our presumption is that these employees, you would move somewhere to the right on these our exes. If we would increase what's a job? Security again. These our employees would move later, be towed it to the right. And finally, if we would increase the responsibility, Then again, we would have some movement toward satisfaction. This is how we usually think about the satisfaction with job. However, now comes the two factor theory by Frederick Head back. Look at our exit. I'm gonna draw it differently because the reason our order, the fact proposed by Hedberg is that these two are separated, so we need to separate them and create two distinct ones. So the first Texas is the dissatisfaction. So this is going to be our These satisfaction exceeds these thes affection, and then the other one is going to be our satisfaction exes. So here we have our said Theis fiction. And from the beginning, it might not make Ah, we really clear sense would make so big difference when we separate the more where we put them together. And here are our neutral state. So here we are. No trauma, no trawl. And here we are Note that all is well. However, we are no just being Notre. We are no trout in the satisfaction in this case and no trout with satisfaction in this case. So we are in two ways. We can be no trouble. We may not be the satisfied neither we are really motivated. And now we are getting to this picture right over here. So at first our employees can be dissatisfied and the multi rated well, that would be right over here. So our employees is the city's fire than what means different color. So our employees is dissatisfied and also be motivated. So let's a say it's over here. They satisfied and the motivated. However, when we were with some hygiene factors which are a company policies, quality supervision, personal life rate, pay, job security. So if we work with the hygiene factors, hygiene factors, we can decrease the D satisfaction so we can move the words the Nell trial. Stay with the city special. So let's say if we increase the pay, if we increase the pay, our employees might get much less. They satisfied and he can get to know Trout State. And so he will not be dissatisfied but still not motivated. And what is the problem? These two are distinct. So these tools, the stool, are distinct. These things. And if the employee, thanks to increasing pay thanks, Toa work with these hygiene factors gets the note prostate. Even when we increase his pay even more, he will not be more satisfied. He will still be Nell troll, so he will not be dissatisfied but not motivated as well in order to increase the satisfaction. So to get from no trust, a tow, a real satisfaction, we have to work with the motivational factors and these air, for instance, human carrier advancement, personal growth, job interests, recognition and responsibility. So if we want to increase the satisfaction, we would, let's say, have to increase the what's a carrier advancement career advancement and let me state the name off the category. So motivational factors, motivational factors. So now you really can see Onley. Then when we really work with the hygiene factors and get to know this satisfied state Onley, then we can start to increase the motivation. But you see the difference. The hygiene factors which are usually accompanied with the D satisfaction, are sort off external so you can see the external nature here. So these are usually external, so those that lead to the satisfaction, However the ones that are connected with the satisfaction, the motivational factors are much more internal, so internal. So what is important to keep in mind is that these two exes are distinct and separating. And even though our example is the pay, even though you can increase the pay in order to not healthy satisfied workers, it will not work further than you will have toward with some motivational, some internal factors to achieve the real satisfaction 25. 18. McClelland´s Theory Of Needs: If you are about to study some motivation theories or how to motivate your employees most likely will stumble upon McClelland, STI or your needs. This is a really interesting but slightly complicated fury. So what's take a look at it? Basically, the wall theory is focusing on free needs, so our focus, our focus is on three needs three needs. As described by McClellan, the first is need for a human. The 2nd 1 is the need for power, and the 3rd 1 is the need for affiliation. And now, according to these Free the Walt, the Walt you're is being developed. But the largest focus was relate upon the need for a human, because the theory is most interesting for organizational behavior studies, and it is closely related to the managerial skills or managerial positions. So a need for its human on let me just change mine. So is to drive and excel in relation toe a set off standards to strive to succeed so that we would like Toa Excel. We would like to excel, and we would like to succeed, and I have forgotten one see over here so we would like to succeed. Then we have the need for power is the need to make others behave in a way in which they would not behave otherwise. Well, that's closely related to the monetary oppositions so that the employees will behaving the way otherwise they would not. Finally, we have the need for affiliation. This is the desire for friendly and close interpersonal relationships. And as you will see, the top managers really tend to help the need for power Azat high need for power, but a low need for affiliation. But as we have mentioned, we're going to focus on the need for achievement. So let's find an example. I have drawn a little bit off exercise over here, which is quite interesting and nicely displays this theory. So let's imagine that this is you and you are now given one bowl. So this is a ball and you are going toe Throw it. And really you have only one bowl and it up on the you, and you can decide on which off the targets you will. You will aim, and which of these you will try to take down. So the target A is going to give you a reward. Each of them is going to give you a reward. So the 1st 1 the reward will be, let's say, Let's I $2. The 2nd 1 will be $4. Then we have $8 then we have $16 finally we have $32. However, as you see as the rewards increase, the distance increases as well. So there is a lower probability that we will really hit the target. So let's in managing the 1st 1 It is really close to us, so there is 100% probability that we will hit the target if we aim for target a started BC The deal it's let's say this one is quite far from us. So let's put probability off 50% right over here and then the furthest one. The target e is super far and there is, let's say, 1% probability. I don't want to ride 0% because there is always some probability so one person and then over here we have 75% and then over here we have 25%. Now. If you were given these choice this exercise, if we were really standing here with the ball and you decide which started, he will try to take down. You are being tested for your need for achievement. And now let me guess if you will aim for a target, see if you will aim for this one, which gives a reward off a dollars and gives a 50% probability that he will hit their target. You are a high that you were. You are high and she were because really is. It was examined and discovered by McClellan's theory of needs. High achievers will not go here because here the rewards are too low. So here the rewards rewards are do low. However, on the other side, why wouldn't high achievers would try to go for for what's a probabilities off 25% or 1%? Well, because this is would hired you is considered gambling. This is a gambling, uh, gambling. And even if the high achiever would win the prize and would be rewarded 16 or $32 well, the high cheaper will not be satisfied because the reward was simply achieved by gambling. So we can conclude. And what was proposed by the McClellan's theory is that high achievers like to go for 50 50% chance. He's so 15 50% chances. And now it really continues with them. Managerial decision making and some interpret memorial skills and some of the conclusions has been drawn by the story. Let's take a look at them. So there is some relationship between a human and human need and Joe performance. So according toe, how high is your A human need? Well, this is going toe impact your job performance at first high achievers are successful in enter primordial activities, and here we have to mention so even one with a high need for a human decides for entrepreneurial activity. Well, again, this person is going to look for chances are 50 50% success. This person is not going to try to set up some enterprise if it would be gambling neither if the rewards are too low and I thrown this one really, really ugly. So what? Maybe write it. So we have we have needs are too low, and I just would like to make it nicer, so rewards are too low. Rewards rewards are too low because this is a really important toe, remember? So when such a person will try to set up with a company. He will need to go for two safe choices because the rewards are too low. Neither this person will go for gambling, because if even if he would succeed, he would consider it well, it was just a lock that I succeeded Well, second proposal. Hi, Itchy. Worse are not necessarily good managers that you high for themselves, not for others. Well, this means that many jurors, if you are a manager, you are supposed toe try toe influence others your subordinates to achieve a high. However, your need for high attunement is just for you and not for the others. Which means that when you have a high need for achievement, quien likely you are not going to be a successful manager and more likely you're going to be an entrepreneur. Firt. The best managers are high in their need for power, which is the 2nd 1 heavy over here and alot in their need for affiliation, blowing their need for affiliation, which is this one. So as this crime. But Michael on theory, the managers are going to have high need for power so that they will really try to make others behave in the way in otherwise, in which otherwise they would not. And they're going to be low in the need for affiliation so that they will not have really hard desire for friendly and closing their personal relationships. 26. 19. Self Determination Theory: another require the popular theory when we are come to the motivation theories is a self determination theory. And I brought a nice story, which is, I think, quite nicely describing the self determination theory. So let's take a located. It is strange, said Marzia. I started to work at the human society as a volunteer. I put in 15 hours a week helping people adopt pets. So I'm helping people pets, and I love coming to work. So she loved it. Then three months ago, they hired me full time. At $11 an hour. I'm doing the same work I did before. But I'm not finally get near as much fun. So not nearly as much fun. And I'm doing the same work as I did before. Well and sell determination Theory will tell us what happened in this story because the self determination theory says people prefer toe feel they have control over the actions, so they would like to have control over direction. So anything that makes a previously enjoyed task fear more like an obligation than freely chosen activity will undermine motivation. So what happened in the story was that there was a shift originally Marzia had had some interesting value so interim in the in green Sikh values. And now we move to some extrinsic values extreme Sikh values. And you see the shift So previously it was a freely chosen activity. So here it waas Ah, freely, freely chosen, freely chosen activity. So what was the motivation for Marcie? A. To do the job? Well, let's say that she loved pits. So she laughs. She loves bets and that is her primary motivation. And the motivation has an intrinsic character. But now it moved to some obligation. So now it feels like obligation that she has to go there. Obligation. And now you see, they hide her for a full time for $11 an hour. So now there is a motivation off money, rather, which is rather extreme sick. So, you see, before it was more of a more of a I won't to do this because I love it. Their loved pets. I want to help other people out of bed. But now the shift move toe. I have to do these because they hurt me. So I have toe help, other people, other bits. So this is the shift and these is the sheaf. And as you can see, what happened in March, See s case now she doesn't find it nearly as much fun when it is more of obligation. And the motivation for doing this activity is over. Other extrinsic character. Well, just do not confuse you. We are talking about some internal values. So here it is more internal or intrinsic. And now it is more of a external external. So if it is something inside us than motivators, we love it. Well, she loves the bed, so she loves her job. It is a freely chosen activity. But when the motivation is externalities some money motivation for us, well, then we might lose the motivation to do the job. So that will simply be solved. The termination theory. And it has a large impacts of organizational behavior and sociology studies. 27. 20. Self-Efficiacy Theory: when it comes to organizational behaviour or sociology, and you will studying within this field the motivation you will most likely stumble upon the self efficiency. Yuri, this is not an easy concept s. So I would just, like briefly touch it and explain the very basics off it. So we have the term self efficiency. It's little bit tricky term this refers to on individuals believe that he or she is capable off performing tasks so capable off performing task. Now, what is important? Cell efficiencies know about the actual ability or capability off performing the task. It is about the belief so about the belief. So maybe I'm not really capable of performing the stars, but I do not know about it. I think my believe is that I am really capable. So under. Well, under the perspective of self official security, it is going to be quite good that I believe that I am capable of performing these tasks. So what's the cool? Let's imagine that we have ourselves efficiency. So these would be how where these would be our self, our self officials seem so that we either have high. We either held high or low or low self efficiency, so that when it is high, we believe in ourselves so that we believe that we are capable of performing the task. So we are capable. That's our belief. Let me write it that way. So we believe we believe that we are capable that we are capable here. We do not believe that we are capable of performing the task. Now a manager comes and he's going to set some task. And of course the tasks can be either difficult or not really difficult. So can be under, Let's say difficulty off the task. So difficulty. Difficulty off the task off the task. Now what is proposed by the self official city, or E that when the difficulty off the task is high, it should be given to people who have high self efficiency so that they really believe that they are capable off really doing off performing this task. And if the difficulty off the task is low, well, then it can be given to people with a low self efficiency so that those who do not really believe in their skills, then what will turn out of this is that will help offered axes, we will have a for Texas, which is the actual performance. So we just finished my growing So this will be the actual performance performance. Now the performance can be again hi, or it can be low or it can be long. And now what self official city or recess is that people who really believe they're capable of performing the tasks so that people with high self efficiency, if they will be given a task with high difficulty, their performance is going to be high. And this is the war idea. Off the self officials that theory sort me highlighted so people with high self efficiency will be given high, demanding tasks, and they will have high performance. So if I am a manager, what would proposition or what should I do? According to solve officials? The theory? Well, where it breaks down, it all breaks down at the self officious. If we are really able to persuade people that they are capable of performing the task so that we increase, we increase, we increase their their beliefs, their beliefs about their capabilities. So about about the dare capabilities, OK, but abilities, then we can give them thes high demanding tasks, and then their performance is going to be high again. So this is the war idea. We should try to focus on this part. We should try to encourage our employees to really give them the self confidence or the self efficiency that they are capable of performing the task thanks so that we can give them tasks with high difficulty and they will have the high performance. So that was the self officials, a theory where he briefly touched. 28. 21. Equity Theory and Organizational Justice: in this video, I would like to talk probably about the most important theory. When it comes to organizational behavior studies, it is going to be the equity theory, and closely connected to that is the concept off organizational justice. It's quite a straightforward concept, but you have to keep in mind several things. So let's say we imagine a person. So the disease, some. Let's call him Let's call him Mike. So it is going to be Mike, and now this person has some job. So it's a This is This is a job, some task that Mike is performing every day and we always have some input. So there is going to be some is going to be some input, some input. And then there is going to be some output from this job, so we will have some output. Now let's imagine what the what input can be off course is going to be some effort that Mike puts into his job. So it's going to be, let's say it's going to be hours per day that Mike put into his job, then might need some education, so there will be there will be at the occasion a couple of years, Mike Hito go to some college or university where he received the degrees of education so that he's more capable to perform this job. And finally, let's say that the input can be experience. So finally, boot can be experience. Now. What can be the output? There can be several puts, but for a sick of simplicity, let's imagine just one, which would be sellers, which would be seller. Now let me copy basis, and we will help to people that way. So I will just copy on faced and these other person is going to be, Let's say is going to be Mark. So this other person is going to be Mark. And now you see both of these people have some job. They have some input into the job and some output. Now let's imagine some numbers. Well, let's say that Mike works every day for let's say, let's say eight hours. Then he needed toe. What's a go to the college in order to get this job for four years? And now he has three years of experience, and let's say that his salary is, let's say, let's say, $15 per hour so $15 per hour. Now we have Mark. And now let's say that Mark is also working for eight hours. He also was going to the courage for four years. But he has zero years of experience so that he has just now joined the work life. And then he is a total noise. And now he salary is also going to be $15 per hour. And I think you can already grasped the difference. You see, there is a difference in the input that these two persons are putting toe the job even though they work the same hours. They have the same education. They have a different number or different amount off experience. Mike has three years of experience. How remark has no experience at all. And now Mark and Mike, they're both getting the same the same output from this job, $15 salary. And so we are getting two. Some inequity. So my grill feel that this is just unfair if they are working for maybe same organization, So we will feel that it is unfair because there isn't in equity in equity because simply Mike is putting more into the job and receiving his output the same as his mark. So this is the equity or inequity theory, so that the employees are always trying to compare themselves with other people, maybe their colleagues, maybe people outside the organization. And they might feel the inequity when the situation like is Theis. One we have just described happens then, when employees perceive some inequity, we have a six reactions according to the equity theory, to such situations. So what cycle? Ooga them? Reaction number one. Change their imports less afford if underpaid Maura Ford, if overpaid. So if Mike finds out that he's getting less output from the joke, well, he will probably no longer work. For eight hours. He worked for maybe seven hours. And this way, Well, now it is equal. That's That's the That's a natural reaction, according to the equity theory. Secondly, change their outcomes. Higher quantity off units off lower quality. So you can imagine that, for instance, both Mike and Mark are working and are getting paid according to how many units Let's say they are making TVs. If you produce a one TV, better our you will get your $15 so my will all of a sudden start produced more off these to receive a higher salary. But of course this will be off a lower quality. Third, the stored perceptions off self. I thought I work harder or less than our others. So, for instance, Mike might have told it. Well, I'm getting a really good salary compared to my years of education, years of experience and hours I put in tow job. I really told them doing well. But now I see. When the home it mark that I'm actually being underpaid or or I'm working less than others , then the store perceptions off others. His job is not as desirable as I thought. So, for instance, this can be mark situations. So that went. Mark finds out that Mike is really in putting these many hours these many years of education, these many years of experience, he might change the perception off. Mike orginally Mark thought that Mike has a very good job, but now he feels like, Well, Mike, you don't really have that good job. 50. Choose a different referent. I'm no making as much as my brother, but I but more than my father in my age. So maybe these Tour brothers Mike and Mark are brothers. And now Mike found out that he's actually making less than Mark, so he will choose a different reference. So there will come 1/3 person. So there will be someone for and now my girl suddenly start to compare himself with this Fert person and he will forget about Mark Finally leave the field with the job off course. That is the natural reaction. If we would feel that we are being underpaid, we would leave the job. So that was the basics off the equity theory. Now get toe the organization on justice concept, which is a very thinly connected with these. When we are in the company, there are free kinds of a justice that we are looking. There is a distributed justice. Then we have a procedural justice and interaction all justice, all of these free are then going toe connect, and they are going to create something that we call and let me just finish my throwing something that we call the organization on justice. That is quite important in every organization. So let's see distributed justice, perceived fairness off outcome or the amount of rewards so that for instance, distributed justice in this. Our drone case is no very well done. According to Mike. He feels like he should be getting more so that distributed justice is not worry. We can say we're well developed in these organizations so that he feels that he should be getting more off the reward and that he's unfair with the outcome. Then we help procedure of justice. This is a more complicated. You can see that these free are sort of building up and are and are connected this way. Procedural justice, but received fairness off parole sis off perros iss usedto the terming outcome or the process of allocating rewards so that their salaries are based on something. Maybe their salaries are based purely on the number of hours that they put in the work. And it is just unfair for Mike, who has more experience than Mark so that this process of determining how much you're going toe earn is not. It's not fair for you. That's when you would feel that the procedure of justice is no well developed in your organization. Finally, we have interaction or justice perceived degree to which one is treated with respect and dignity, so that if these two guys have some balls or or operational manager, these managers should really treat them with respect and dignity so that they will feel that the interaction on justice has been fulfilled. Now, when all these free are fulfilled and satisfied, they're going to connect to the organization justice. And that is quite simple and straightforward concept that is, overall perception off. What is fair off what is fair in the workplace so that after all these beautiful field, all I can tell myself, I think this is a fair place, the work. So we went through the equity theory and then connected it with the organizational justice . 29. 22. Expectancy Theory: Another very interesting theory within organizational behavior studies is the expectancy theory. And as you see, I have already drawn one simple chain that is basically explaining the war, expecting city or so that within this change we have four different slots we have individual afford. Then we have individual performance, organizational rewards and individual goals. So all of these free concepts are pretty straightforward. Individual afford is basically what imagine number off hours that one imports into the job or how hard one tries to really do the job. Then there is individual performance, so that, let's say the performance now it's dependent on some individual afford. But what would, if I really perform harder or if I really put a load off effort into my job? But my performance is not really recognised so that my bosses are my managers are not really seeing the increase in performance. There are certain jobs where this is quite possible. Then we have organisational rewards. So, for instance, organizational reward can be ah, celery or my pay raise, Then finally, it is individual goals. All of us have different indicate Joeckel. Some of us would like to have ah have a challenging job or calm job. Some of us would like to earn a lot of money. So now when we have these four concepts, as you can see, there are relationships between all these. So here we have a first relationship, then we have a second relationship, and then we have 1/3 relationship. And basically, the wall expectancy theory is telling us about these free relationships, free relationships. So let's take a look at them. The 1st 1 the the A relationship is between afford and performance. So we have a relationship between effort between and I now drawing really ugly, so afford, therefore, and performance. They're Forman's. And here the question is, if I give maximum effort, will it be recognized in my performance appraisal? Well, for instance, if you are, let's say, if you're a seller, if you're a seller and you really put in the maximum effort, most likely it will be recognized. It will be recognized so that these relationship will be fulfilled so that the relationship is is full field or let's say it's functioning. It's functioning. However, if you are in a job, let's say let's say you are some sort of a manager. You are a manager, and now the performance appraisals within your company are based. Let's a on let's say on a senior or let's say we can imagine is based on loyalty. So in this case it would be based on loyalty, so that even though you are putting in your maximum effort, it will be not recognize, it will not be recognized. What does that mean? Well, the relationship is not functioning. The relationship is not functioning. He's not functioning so that the effort does not have a clear connection to the performance to the performance appraisals. Let's take a look at the second Relations should be. These is a relationship between the performance and rewards, so performance they're four months performance and rewards rewards. Now the question is, if I get the good performance appraisal, we lead lead to organizational rewards. Sold it. We can imagine that again. I am I must seller. So are and I really goat. We refine performance appraisal and now the question is willingly to organizationally words . Yes, it will. So I will receive some reward so that let's say, celery race. So I will be given more on my celery and then these relationship is worry well functioning , so it is again functioning. However, let's imagine our situation of a manager who's company is focusing on a loyalty of employees. And here, let's say that it will not only toe the reward because they are basing their salaries on a seniority level, so seniority seniority level. So even though these our manager has really a fine performance appraisal, it will notably toe the organizational rewards so that there will be no money and our manager will be set. And then these relationship is not functioning again, not functioning. I think you can see the differences in the connections now that there is this third relationship. See here the question is, if I'm rewarded, are the rewards attractive to me? So that let's say that both our cellar and our many germs count our seller has received on increasing salary, so he's bringing home or casual remind off. And then there is a manager who, as well, is now bringing more cash every month. But the question is, what is their interest? What is attractive to them? Let's say for a cellar, the reward is a really attractive so that he's really interested in earning more. So I dragged deal. However, the for this manager he was searching for a four, let's say some sort of societal, so side appraisal so that he would be more cherished by a society appraise appraisal. And now these relationship in case of a seller is functioning, is functioning and the salaries happy. However, even though managers earning more money, he's no happy. So the relationship is not functioning again, not functioning. And basically, now you can see that this expectancy the Orange is really putting together all these concepts so that we should look at the relationship between individual afford an individual performance so that our employees who puts in more effort should be recognized so that he will have a better performance appraisal. Now, if these are performance appraisal is higher, will it deeply to organizational rewards so that the employees will really receive the rewards. Then, if these employees is being rewarded, is it going to be attractive for him so that, as in case of our cellar, the higher salary was really attractive? As you can see, all of these should work finally, so that expectant city or his full field