case study about employee behavior

How to manage employee behavior (essential traits, tips)

Wondering how to manage employee behavior ?

Your employees’ behavior in the workplace determines how well they function as a team. And with most teams working remotely due to COVID-19, maintaining proper conduct is the only way to ensure that your organization works smoothly.

That’s why all current human resource management strategies heavily focus on managing employee behavior and creating a positive organizational culture. Apart from increasing their job satisfaction, it’ll also boost their job performance.

In this article, we’ll go over everything you need to know about employee behavior management. We’ll cover its importance, the 6 essential qualities for any employee , how to instill those qualities and finally, how to deal with an employee’s negative behavior.

This article contains:

(Click on the links to jump to a specific section)

• What Is Employee Behavior?
• Why Should You Monitor Employee Behavior?
• How Should An Employee Behave?
• How Should An Employee Not Behave?
• How To Deal With A Toxic Employee?

Let’s get started.

What is employee behavior?

Employee behavior can be defined as how an employee responds or reacts under different circumstances in your workplace.

Apart from adhering to workplace rules and maintaining professionalism, your employees must act responsibly and empathetically to uplift your corporate culture. 

Why should you monitor employee behavior?

One of the key responsibilities of any company is maintaining a healthy work environment . 

A positive organizational culture boosts every employee’s job satisfaction level and increases your employee retention. And the easiest way to create such an environment is by monitoring employee behavior.

Besides improving team cohesion, employees with good behavior also help you mitigate the risks of thefts and illegal use of the company’s resources. 

How should an employee behave?

Once you understand the importance of monitoring employee behaviors in the workplace, the next question is: how should your employees behave in the workplace ?

Here are six behavioural qualities an employer should encourage their employees to have:

1. Humility

Humility is about acknowledging shortcomings, being eager to learn and not being boastful of one’s achievements. 

It’s also a desired behavior for proper team development. For example, a humble employee is more likely to take feedback positively and improve their performance.

To understand if a person is humble, ask questions during interviews and personality assessments like:

• “Whom do you hold responsible for your failures?”
• “Can you mention some instances when you have failed? ”

An arrogant, egotistical person is usually incapable of identifying their own failures, blaming others for the same. However, to instill humility in your workforce, you must lead by example . 

Your behavior must be supportive and mindful. Be polite when pointing out an employee’s mistakes or when asking them to do something. Additionally, try to offer constructive criticism when dealing with problems and acknowledge your own faults whenever necessary.

2. Adaptability

Your business is ever-evolving and so should your employees be.

Adaptability can be directly related to productivity and is an essential personal-development trait. The more adaptable an employee is, the less time they’ll take to adapt to a new role. 

Being adaptable enables an employee to wear multiple hats at the same time — which is crucial for startups and small businesses that might not have defined roles. 

An adaptable person usually replies positively to questions like:

• “How would you adjust to unforeseen events, like the resignation of your superior?”
• “How long would it take you to learn a new skill or tool?”

An inflexible person is reluctant, or even afraid, to shift from their comfort zone and is more concerned about the failure of implementing a new idea.

Conducting regular training sessions and encouraging your employees to propose alternative solutions to a problem are two easy ways to encourage adaptability.

3. Reliability

The reliability of an employee is a crucial factor in building teams, assigning tasks and meeting deadlines. 

A reliable employee can take a load off your shoulders, as you needn’t worry about supervising them. Reliability is also an essential leadership skill — and is something you should look out for in managers.

Remember, your employees are more likely to consult a reliable team leader with their concerns and problems.

You can judge how reliable an applicant/employee is by asking:

• “In case I need a turnaround, can you work outside of normal work hours?”
• “What’s the toughest work-related decision you had to make? Describe the outcome of the same”

People who are erratic or fickle are typically irregular at work, lack time management skills, change jobs frequently and are unwilling to account for their actions. 

Conducting periodic performance assessments and tracking the productivity of your employees — like their usual work hours and how long they spend on each project will give you an idea of their reliability.

Consider introducing a reward system for consistent performance and celebrate when an employee archives a target. This will boost the morale of your team and inspire them to work harder.

4. Communicativeness

Communication is what separates a team from the crowd.

A communicative employee talks about their concerns and opinion on every project. They notify team members about prior engagements and aren’t hesitant in seeking help.

Proper communication skills increase both employee performance and team spirit. 

It reduces the chances of communication failures and prevents an employee from feeling cornered under a heavy workload. It also helps sort out misunderstandings swiftly and uplifts the overall team spirit. 

To check if an employee or applicant is communicative, HR professionals usually ask them question  like:

• “How comfortable are you with voicing your concerns?”
• “Would you prefer to work alone or as part of a team?”

An uncommunicative worker will remain silent at every team discussion and on social media platforms. They are also likely to isolate themselves from their co-workers.

Communication depends on how comfortable your employees are around one another. Hold discussions with your employees regularly and encourage them to voice their opinions.

Additionally, hosting group-events like parties, outings and team games will have a positive effect on the communication between your employees. And with most teams working remotely now, conducting the right virtual team building activities is vital. 

Want ideas for effective virtual team building activities? Click here . 

5. Patience

A patient employee values the importance of the job even if it gets boring or repetitive and is usually more proficient in completing a complicated task. They’re unlikely to resign even when your business may not be growing as expected. 

Patient employees often possess excellent leadership skills and can be the best option when it comes to training/guiding new hires.

You can judge how patient a new hire is by asking:

• “Narrate an incident of repeated failures and how you finally succeeded.”
• “What do you do if someone gets on your nerves?”

Impatient employees are easily-frustrated and often lack emotional intelligence. They may even lack decision-making qualities and may execute a plan without prior evaluation of the circumstances.

One of the first steps in developing patience is having a healthy work -life balance — to ensure your employees aren’t neck-deep in work. Remember, if your employees have too many deadlines, they can’t help but rush through things and get frustrated easily.

Being level-headed while dealing with conflicts/disputes and encouraging employees to follow in your footsteps is a great way to instill patience in your employees.

6. Willingness To Learn

Every employee must strive for continuous improvement . It not only helps them realize their goals but also helps your business grow. 

One way to do this is by being in the constant loop of learning new things and implementing the knowledge in real-life. 

You can evaluate this behaviour of an employee/candidate by asking questions like

• “How do you plan to work on your skillset?”
• “Which areas do you think you can improve in?”

A disengaged employee is easily bored, takes frequent breaks/leaves and might consistently miss deadlines or targets.

Set individual targets for each employee based on their capabilities, and monitor their progress regularly. This will give you an idea of which employees work hard to improve. 

Additionally, hold regular coaching sessions to bring your employees up to speed on the latest technologies and trending business strategies.

How should an employee not behave?

We’ve covered some of the most important traits you should look for while assessing your employees’ behavior. 

But what about the behavioral issues that can disrupt your workforce or even sink your business?

Here are two examples of unacceptable behavior you should be wary of:

1. Over-ambitiousness

Being ambitious is great until it blinds your employees.

An ambitious employee is both reliable and self-improving . Their thirst for improving themselves also implies that they’re likely to be adaptable and self-reliant — both of which are positive behavior traits. 

However, it’s only positive until their behavior starts negatively affecting their co-workers.

Overly-ambitious behavior may also split your workforce into two groups — those who are dissatisfied with that specific employee but are unwilling to work as hard as they do and those who want to compete with them out of ego/jealousy. 

Why is this bad?

A team without a common goal can never be as productive as they should be. Not to forget, over-ambitious employees often change jobs. 

Two ways to manage the behavior of over-ambitious employees are:

• Steer them in the right direction: while you should appreciate their enthusiastic behavior, let them know how their conduct is affecting the workplace.
• Monitor their job satisfaction level: an employee trying to do more than what’s expected of them indicates their dissatisfaction with their current position. You should consider promoting them or assigning them greater responsibilities.

2. Defiance

Defiance can be defined as intentional, and often unreasonable, opposition.

A good employee will question you about your business strategy and workplace regulations. Voicing their concerns, insecurities and giving feedback on every business proceeding is what makes a healthy working environment. 

However, it shouldn’t come at the cost of your authority and the morale of your team.

As their leader, your behavior should be flexible and understanding. But not when it comes to setting counterproductive employee behavior straight. Otherwise, if others may start acting in the same manner, you’ll suffer from employee engagement issues. 

Here are two ways to deal with disobedient employee behavior:

• Explain your ways : if an employee fails to see how doing what you ask of them is beneficial, they’re likely to be unwilling to do the task. So reason with them and explain yourself.
• Appreciate their efforts: appreciating or rewarding your employees encourages them to work harder and to work as instructed. This also serves as motivation for other employees to grab the limelight the next time.

How to deal with unacceptable employee behavior?

We have already discussed specific ways to deal with employees who exhibit inappropriate behavior.

But what if that fails to change them and they still exhibit poor behavior ?

Should you just ask them to resign right away?

Nope. Remember, filling an open position is easier said than done. 

So offboarding an employee should be your last resort when dealing with problem employees.

Here’s how you could deal with a toxic employee:

1. Reassign them

An employee exhibiting counterproductive behavior can result in other employees exhibiting the same counterproductive behavior too.

Your first step must be to minimize the contact of the toxic employee with the rest of the team — especially if the employee is part of a newly assembled team. You can also place them in a team of seasoned professionals where they can learn the right behavior to improve their performance.

2. Try to understand them

Bad behavior often stems from insecurities and misunderstandings.

Talk politely and patiently to an employee with a behavioral issue and try to understand their perspective . This will not only help you identify what you might be doing wrong but also if any other employee is suffering from the same problems.

3. Explain the consequences

People are often unaware of the consequences of their actions.

You must explain the consequences of inappropriate behavior to your employees. For example, the fear of a salary cut might cause a behavior change and help put them back on the right track.

4. Give them one last chance

Everybody deserves a chance to set things straight.

And so do your employees. After all, you must’ve seen something in them while hiring. That’s why it’s always important to give your employees the benefit of the doubt and give them a chance to rectify their toxic behavior before taking any drastic measures like firing them.  

Wrapping up

Managing people’s behavior can be challenging. 

To minimize the time you would otherwise spend on monitoring employee behaviour and performance, only hire candidates who fit your company culture and exhibit all those positive behavior traits we listed. 

This way, they’re aware of how things work and will fit in well – right from the start!

And in case you have to deal with difficult employee behavior, just follow the techniques we listed and you’ll be ready to go.

What qualities do you think are part of good organizational behavior ?

Let us know in the comments section below.

Book a free demo of Time Doctor

Andy is a technology & marketing leader who has delivered award-winning and world-first experiences.

How to create an employee overtime policy (plus free template)

How to maintain workplace discipline (a guide), related posts, crafting a feedback culture for continuous improvement, developing a systemic approach to talent management and retention, mastering the workplace environment: key types, elements, and strategies  , offshore outsourcing at etech global services: a strategic move, how to foster a sense of belonging within your team, the impact of office environment on employee satisfaction and retention.

Using people analytics to drive business performance: A case study

People analytics— the application of advanced analytics and large data sets to talent management—is going mainstream. Five years ago, it was the provenance of a few leading companies, such as Google (whose former senior vice president of people operations wrote a book about it ). Now a growing number of businesses are applying analytics to processes such as recruiting and retention, uncovering surprising sources of talent and counterintuitive insights about what drives employee performance.

Much of the work to date has focused on specialized talent (a natural by-product of the types of companies that pioneered people analytics) and on individual HR processes . That makes the recent experience of a global quick-service restaurant chain instructive. The company focused the power of people analytics on its frontline staff—with an eye toward improving overall business performance—and achieved dramatic improvements in customer satisfaction, service performance, and overall business results, including a 5 percent increase in group sales in its pilot market. Here is its story.

The challenge: Collecting data to map the talent value chain

The company had already exhausted most traditional strategic options and was looking for new opportunities to improve the customer experience. Operating a mix of franchised outlets, as well as corporate-owned restaurants, the company was suffering from annual employee turnover significantly above that of its peers. Business leaders believed closing this turnover gap could be a key to improving the customer experience and increasing revenues, and that their best chance at boosting retention lay in understanding their people better. The starting point was to define the goals for the effort and then translate the full range of frontline employee behavior and experience into data that the company could model against actual outcomes.

Would you like to learn more about our People Analytics ?

Define what matters. Agreeing in advance on the outcomes that matter is a critical step in any people-analytics project—one that’s often overlooked and can involve a significant investment of time. In this case, it required rigorous data exploration and discussion among senior leaders to align on three target metrics: revenue growth per store, average customer satisfaction, and average speed of service (the last two measured by shift to ensure that the people driving those results were tracked). This exercise highlighted a few performance metrics that worked together and others that “pulled” in opposite directions in certain contexts.

Fill data gaps. Internal sources provided some relevant data, and it was possible to derive other variables, such as commute distance. The company needed to supplement its existing data, however, notably in three areas (Exhibit 1):

• First was selection and onboarding (“ who gets hired and what their traits are”). There was little data on personality traits, which some leaders thought might be a significant factor in explaining differences in the performance of the various outlets and shifts. In association with a specialist in psychometric assessments, the company ran a series of online games allowing data scientists to build a picture of individual employees’ personalities and cognitive skills.
• Second was day-to-day management (“ how we manage our people and their environment”). Measuring management quality is never easy, and the company did not have a culture or engagement survey. To provide insight into management practices, the company deployed McKinsey’s Organizational Health Index (OHI), an instrument through which we’ve pinpointed 37 management practices that contribute most to organizational health and long-term performance. With the OHI, the company sought improved understanding of such practices and the impact that leadership actions were having on the front line.
• Third was behavior and interactions (“ what employees do in the restaurants”). Employee behavior and collaboration was monitored over time by sensors that tracked the intensity of physical interactions among colleagues. The sensors captured the extent to which employees physically moved around the restaurant, the tone of their conversations, and the amount of time spent talking versus listening to colleagues and customers.

The insights: Challenging conventional wisdom

Armed with these new and existing data sources—six in all, beyond the traditional HR profile, and comprising more than 10,000 data points spanning individuals, shifts, and restaurants across four US markets, and including the financial and operational performance of each outlet—the company set out to find which variables corresponded most closely to store success. It used the data to build a series of logistic-regression and unsupervised-learning models that could help determine the relationship between drivers and desired outcomes (customer satisfaction and speed of service by shift, and revenue growth by store).

Then it began testing more than 100 hypotheses, many of which had been strongly championed by senior managers based on their observations and instincts from years of experience. This part of the exercise proved to be especially powerful, confronting senior individuals with evidence that in some cases contradicted deeply held and often conflicting instincts about what drives success. Four insights emerged from the analysis that have begun informing how the company manages its people day to day.

Personality counts. In the retail business at least, certain personality traits have higher impact on desired outcomes. Through the analysis, the company identified four clusters or archetypes of frontline employees who were working each day: one group, “potential leaders,” exhibited many characteristics similar to store managers; another group, “socializers,” were friendly and had high emotional intelligence; and there were two different groups of “taskmasters,” who focused on job execution (Exhibit 2). Counterintuitively, though, the hypothesis that socializers—and hiring for friendliness—would maximize performance was not supported by the data. There was a closer correlation between performance and the ability of employees to focus on their work and minimize distractions, in essence getting things done.

Careers are key. The company found that variable compensation, a lever the organization used frequently to motivate store managers and employees, had been largely ineffective: the data suggested that higher and more frequent variable financial incentives (awards that were material to the company but not significant at the individual level) were not strongly correlated with stronger store or individual performance. Conversely, career development and cultural norms had a stronger impact on outcomes.

Management is a contact sport. One group of executives had been convinced that managerial tenure was a key variable, yet the data did not show that. There was no correlation to length of service or personality type. This insight encouraged the company to identify more precisely what its “good” store managers were doing, after which it was able to train their assistants and other local leaders to act and behave in the same way (through, for example, empowering and inspiring staff, recognizing achievement, and creating a stronger team environment).

Shifts differ. Performance was markedly weaker during shifts of eight to ten hours. Such shifts were inconsistent both with demand patterns and with the stamina of employees, whose energy fell significantly after six hours at work. Longer shifts, it seems, had become the norm in many restaurants to ease commutes and simplify scheduling (fewer days of work in the week, with more hours of work each day). Analysis of the data demonstrated to managers that while this policy simplified managerial responsibilities, it was actually hurting productivity.

The results (so far)

Four months into a pilot in the first market in which the findings are being implemented, the results are encouraging. Customer satisfaction scores have increased by more than 100 percent, speed of service (as measured by the time between order and transaction completion) has improved by 30 seconds, attrition of new joiners has decreased substantially, and sales are up by 5 percent.

The CEO’s guide to competing through HR

We’d caution, of course, against concluding that instinct has no role to play in the recruiting, development, management, and retention of employees—or in identifying the combination of people skills that drives great performance. Still, results like these, in an industry like retail—which in the United States alone employs more than 16 million people and, depending on the year and season, may hire three-quarters of a million seasonal employees—point to much broader potential for people analytics. It appears that executives who can complement experience-based wisdom with analytically driven insight stand a much better chance of linking their talent efforts to business value.

Carla Arellano  is a vice president of, and Alexander DiLeonardo is a senior expert at, People Analytics, a McKinsey Solution—both are based in McKinsey’s New York office;  Ignacio Felix is a partner in the Miami office.

The authors wish to thank Val Rastorguev, Dan Martin, and Ryan Smith for their contributions to this article.

Explore a career with us

Related articles.

The CEO’s guide to competing through HR

Power to the new people analytics

People analytics reveals three things HR may be getting wrong

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Case Study: Should You Address a Colleague’s Erratic Behavior?

• John Quelch,
• Carin-Isabel Knoop,

A manager contemplates whether his peer has a mental health issue.

As Carlos Guerrero walked to the whiteboard where the app development team had gathered for its daily stand-up, he noticed that Larry Berman was absent again. But this time he didn’t bother to ask anyone about it. He just carried on.

• John Quelch is the Charles Edward Wilson Professor of Business Administration at Harvard Business School and holds a joint appointment at Harvard School of Public Health as a professor in health policy and management.
• Carin-Isabel Knoop is the executive director of the Case Research & Writing Group at Harvard Business School.
• Amy Gallo is a contributing editor at Harvard Business Review, cohost of the Women at Work podcast , and the author of two books: Getting Along: How to Work with Anyone (Even Difficult People) and the HBR Guide to Dealing with Conflict . She writes and speaks about workplace dynamics. Watch her TEDx talk on conflict and follow her on LinkedIn . amyegallo

Partner Center

Open Access is an initiative that aims to make scientific research freely available to all. To date our community has made over 100 million downloads. It’s based on principles of collaboration, unobstructed discovery, and, most importantly, scientific progression. As PhD students, we found it difficult to access the research we needed, so we decided to create a new Open Access publisher that levels the playing field for scientists across the world. How? By making research easy to access, and puts the academic needs of the researchers before the business interests of publishers.

We are a community of more than 103,000 authors and editors from 3,291 institutions spanning 160 countries, including Nobel Prize winners and some of the world’s most-cited researchers. Publishing on IntechOpen allows authors to earn citations and find new collaborators, meaning more people see your work not only from your own field of study, but from other related fields too.

Brief introduction to this section that descibes Open Access especially from an IntechOpen perspective

Want to get in touch? Contact our London head office or media team here

Our team is growing all the time, so we’re always on the lookout for smart people who want to help us reshape the world of scientific publishing.

Home > Books > Organizational Culture - Cultural Change and Technology

The Role of Employee Behavior and Organizational Culture in Strategy Implementation and Performance in a VUCA World

Submitted: 27 June 2023 Reviewed: 25 October 2023 Published: 16 January 2024

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.113830

Cite this chapter

There are two ways to cite this chapter:

From the Edited Volume

Organizational Culture - Cultural Change and Technology

Edited by Muddassar Sarfraz and Wasi Ul Hassan Shah

To purchase hard copies of this book, please contact the representative in India: CBS Publishers & Distributors Pvt. Ltd. www.cbspd.com | [email protected]

Chapter metrics overview

128 Chapter Downloads

Impact of this chapter

Total Chapter Downloads on intechopen.com

Total Chapter Views on intechopen.com

This paper examines the crucial role of employee behavior and organizational culture in successfully implementing strategies and achieving high performance in a VUCA world. It emphasizes the importance of effective strategy execution in dynamic environments. Drawing on social cognitive theory, goal-setting theory, and self-determination theory, the paper explores how employee behavior influences strategy implementation, highlighting the significance of goal clarity, feedback mechanisms, and employee participation. Factors such as intrinsic motivation, autonomy, competence, and relatedness are discussed for fostering employee engagement and commitment. The impact of organizational culture on strategy implementation is investigated using the Competing Values Framework, organizational socialization theory, and Schein’s model of organizational culture. The paper delves into the interplay between employee behavior, organizational culture, and strategy implementation, discussing theories such as person-organization fit and cultural congruence. Strategies for overcoming VUCA challenges are provided, including sensemaking theory, change management frameworks, and resilience theory. Measurement and evaluation of strategy implementation and performance are addressed through the balanced scorecard approach, organizational network analysis, and employee engagement theories. Real-life case studies and examples offer practical insights into the interrelationships among employee behavior, organizational culture, strategy implementation, and performance in diverse contexts.

• employee behavior
• organizational culture
• performance
• strategy implementation

Author Information

Dinko herman boikanyo *.

• Department of Business Management, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa

*Address all correspondence to: [email protected]

1. Introduction

In today’s rapidly evolving business landscape, organizations confront unprecedented challenges driven by the volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) nature of the world [ 1 ]. These challenges necessitate a fundamental reevaluation of conventional approaches to strategy implementation and performance management [ 2 ]. Within this context, the roles played by employee behavior and organizational culture have emerged as pivotal factors that can significantly influence an organization’s success in navigating the complexities of a VUCA world [ 3 ].

The primary objective of this chapter is to delve into the intricate relationship between employee behavior, organizational culture, strategy implementation, and performance within the VUCA framework. It seeks to provide a comprehensive understanding of how these interconnected elements influence one another and, in turn, shape an organization’s ability to thrive in an environment characterized by volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity.

The contemporary business landscape is characterized by unprecedented levels of volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity (VUCA) [ 4 , 5 ]. Rapid technological advancements, shifting consumer preferences, global economic fluctuations, and political uncertainties create a challenging environment for organizations across industries [ 2 ]. In this dynamic context, effective strategy implementation becomes paramount for organizations to navigate uncertainties, capitalize on opportunities, and achieve sustainable performance [ 6 , 7 ].

The success of strategy implementation is contingent upon the behavior of employees and the prevailing organizational culture [ 8 , 9 ]. Employee behavior plays a pivotal role in translating strategic objectives into actions and outcomes [ 10 , 11 ]. It encompasses the attitudes, actions, and decisions made by individuals at all levels of the organization [ 12 , 13 ]. Similarly, organizational culture, defined as the shared values, beliefs, and norms that guide behavior within an organization [ 14 , 15 ], influences the collective mindset, behaviors, and actions of employees during strategy execution [ 16 , 17 ].

Understanding the interplay between employee behavior, organizational culture, and strategy implementation is essential for organizations to effectively navigate the VUCA world. By aligning employee behavior with strategic objectives and fostering a culture that supports strategy execution, organizations can enhance their ability to adapt, innovate, and achieve superior performance outcomes [ 18 ].

While prior research has examined the individual effects of employee behavior and organizational culture on strategy implementation, there is a need for a comprehensive conceptual framework that integrates these two critical factors [ 19 ]. This conceptual paper aims to fill this gap by synthesizing recent literature and theoretical frameworks to develop a holistic understanding of the role of employee behavior and organizational culture in strategy implementation and performance in the VUCA world.

The paper is structured as follows: Firstly, the theories surrounding employee behavior and its impact on strategy implementation will be explored. Social cognitive theory, which emphasizes the role of cognitive processes, self-efficacy, and observational learning in shaping employee behavior [ 20 ] will be discussed. Additionally, goal-setting theory will be delved into, which highlights the importance of setting clear and challenging goals, providing feedback, and fostering employee motivation [ 21 ]. Furthermore, we will examine self-determination theory, which emphasizes the role of intrinsic motivation, autonomy, competence, and relatedness in driving employee engagement and commitment to strategic initiatives [ 22 ].

Secondly, the literature on organizational culture and its influence on strategy execution will be delved into. The Competing Values Framework is explored, which categorizes organizational culture into four types: clan, adhocracy, hierarchy, and market, each with distinct characteristics and implications for strategy implementation [ 3 ]. Additionally, organizational socialization theory is discussed, which highlights the role of socialization processes and organizational rituals in shaping employees’ beliefs, values, and behaviors [ 23 ]. Moreover, Schein’s model of organizational culture is explored, which emphasizes the existence of three levels of culture (artifacts, espoused values, and basic underlying assumptions) and their impact on strategy implementation [ 15 ].

Next, there will be an integration of these factors to examine their mutual influence and their joint impact on strategy implementation outcomes. Person-organization fit theory will be discussed, which emphasizes the importance of aligning individual values and behaviors with the organizational culture to enhance strategy execution [ 24 ]. Furthermore, cultural congruence theory is explored, highlighting how a strong alignment between employee behavior, organizational culture, and strategic goals leads to improved performance [ 25 ]. Additionally, social exchange theory is examined, which explores the reciprocal relationship between employees and the organization, emphasizing the role of trust, reciprocity, and commitment in fostering desired behaviors during strategy implementation [ 26 ].

Recognizing the challenges organizations face in a VUCA world, strategies to overcome them will be discussed. Sensemaking theory is explored, emphasizing the role of employee behavior and organizational culture in making sense of ambiguity and complexity during strategy implementation [ 27 ]. Additionally, discussing change management theories, including Lewin’s change model and Kotter’s 8-step model, offering frameworks for addressing resistance, fostering employee buy-in, and adapting to dynamic VUCA conditions [ 28 , 29 ]. Moreover, discussing resilience theory, underscoring the importance of individual and organizational resilience in navigating the uncertainties and disruptions associated with a VUCA world [ 30 ].

Lastly, highlighting the importance of measuring and evaluating strategy implementation and performance. The balanced scorecard approach will be discussed, which offers a comprehensive set of metrics and indicators across financial, customer, internal processes, and learning and growth perspectives to assess strategy outcomes [ 31 ]. Furthermore, exploring organizational network analysis, a valuable tool for understanding communication patterns, social networks, and the influence of employee behavior and organizational culture on strategy execution [ 32 ]. Additionally, considering employee engagement theories and measurement tools, recognizing the impact of engaged employees on strategy implementation success [ 33 ].

Adapting to a VUCA world : As the world becomes increasingly VUCA, organizations must adapt swiftly and effectively to remain competitive [ 34 ]. This paper will illuminate the strategies required not only to survive but to thrive in this challenging environment.

Maximizing human capital : Employees represent an organization’s most valuable asset. Understanding how their behavior impacts strategy execution and performance is critical in leveraging this resource optimally [ 35 ].

Culture as a competitive advantage : Organizational culture has emerged as a critical competitive advantage [ 36 ]. In a VUCA world, a strong culture that fosters innovation, agility, and resilience is essential. This paper will explore how organizations can cultivate such cultures.

Enhancing leadership and management practices : Leaders and managers play a pivotal role in shaping employee behavior and culture [ 37 ]. This paper will provide insights into effective leadership and management strategies for a VUCA world.

Practical implications : The findings of this research will have practical implications for leaders, managers, and policymakers [ 38 ]. It will offer actionable insights and recommendations to enhance strategy implementation and organizational performance.

Academic contribution : This paper contributes to the academic discourse by providing a comprehensive analysis of the relationship between employee behavior, organizational culture, strategy implementation, and performance, particularly in the context of a VUCA world [ 39 ].

2. Methodology

This chapter aims to explore and synthesize existing literature related to the topic. The methodology employed in this study is rooted in a comprehensive review of peer-reviewed articles, books, reports, and other scholarly sources pertinent to the chosen topic. The process followed a systematic approach to identify, select, and analyze relevant literature to develop a holistic understanding of the conceptual underpinnings and theoretical frameworks that surround the topic.

2.1 Ethical considerations

Given that this study relied solely on existing literature, ethical approval was not required. However, proper citation practices were observed to acknowledge the contributions of the authors of the selected works.

In conclusion, this conceptual paper aims to provide a comprehensive and detailed examination of the vital role played by employee behavior and organizational culture in effectively implementing strategies and achieving high performance in a VUCA world. By synthesizing theories, frameworks, and practical insights, the paper offers valuable guidance to organizations seeking to navigate the complexities and uncertainties of the modern business landscape. The insights derived from this paper will contribute to the existing body of knowledge and provide a foundation for future empirical research in this domain.

3. Understanding the VUCA world

3.1 definition and characteristics of a vuca world.

The term VUCA, coined by the U.S. Army War College, refers to a world characterized by volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity [ 4 , 5 ]. Volatility refers to the rapid and unpredictable changes that organizations encounter in the business environment, such as sudden shifts in market trends, technological advancements, and geopolitical events. Uncertainty reflects the lack of predictability and the difficulty in making accurate forecasts due to factors like rapid market fluctuations and disruptive innovations. Complexity highlights the intricate interdependencies and interconnectedness of various elements within the business environment, making it challenging to fully understand and navigate. Ambiguity arises from the existence of multiple interpretations, perspectives, and information gaps, creating a lack of clarity and consensus.

3.2 Impact of VUCA on organizations and their strategic management processes

The VUCA world has profound implications for organizations and their strategic management processes. Organizations operating in such an environment face increased levels of risk and uncertainty, making it difficult to rely on traditional long-term planning and linear decision-making processes [ 2 ]. The dynamic nature of the VUCA world necessitates a shift toward more agile and adaptive strategic approaches.

VUCA conditions introduce significant challenges, including rapidly changing customer preferences, disruptive technologies, and competitive landscapes [ 5 ]. Organizations must continuously scan their external environment, gather relevant data, and monitor market trends to stay abreast of the evolving dynamics. In addition, political and regulatory uncertainties can introduce unexpected shifts in the business landscape, requiring organizations to be vigilant and responsive.

3.3 The need for agility, adaptability, and resilience in strategy implementation

In the face of volatility, organizations need to be agile to effectively respond to and capitalize on changing conditions [ 40 ]. Agility enables organizations to sense market shifts, make rapid decisions, and swiftly execute strategies. It involves developing capabilities such as rapid experimentation, flexibility, and the ability to pivot quickly based on emerging opportunities or threats [ 41 ]. By embracing agility, organizations can stay ahead of the competition and seize new opportunities.

Uncertainty in the VUCA world demands adaptability from organizations. The ability to adapt involves continuously scanning the environment, monitoring trends, and remaining flexible in strategy formulation and execution [ 42 ]. Organizations must be willing to challenge their assumptions, adjust their strategies based on new information, and reconfigure their resources and capabilities to align with evolving market conditions [ 43 ]. Adaptability enables organizations to effectively navigate uncertain environments and stay resilient in the face of unforeseen challenges.

Complexity in the VUCA world necessitates organizational resilience. Resilience enables organizations to withstand disruptions, recover quickly from setbacks, and adapt their strategies and operations to changing circumstances [ 44 ]. Building resilience involves fostering a culture of learning, promoting collaboration and knowledge sharing, and developing robust systems and processes that can absorb shocks and adapt to unexpected events [ 45 ]. Resilience allows organizations to bounce back stronger and take advantage of emerging opportunities, even in the face of adversity.

4. Employee behavior and strategy implementation

4.1 importance of employee behavior in strategy execution.

The success of strategy implementation heavily relies on the behavior and actions of employees within an organization. Employees are the ones responsible for executing the strategic initiatives, translating strategic plans into action, and driving the desired organizational outcomes [ 46 ]. Their behavior influences the efficiency, effectiveness, and overall success of strategy implementation efforts. Therefore, understanding and managing employee behavior is crucial for achieving strategic objectives.

4.2 Social cognitive theory

Social cognitive theory provides insights into how individual attitudes, self-efficacy, and motivation influence employee behavior during strategy implementation. Attitudes play a key role in shaping employee behavior. Positive attitudes toward the strategy, its goals, and its potential outcomes are more likely to motivate employees to align their actions with the strategic objectives [ 47 ]. By fostering a positive attitude among employees, organizations can enhance their commitment and engagement in strategy implementation.

Self-efficacy, a central construct in social cognitive theory, refers to an individual’s belief in their capabilities to perform specific tasks or behaviors. Employees with high self-efficacy are more likely to take on challenging tasks, persist in the face of obstacles, and actively contribute to the implementation of strategic initiatives [ 48 ]. Building employee self-efficacy through training, support, and skill development programs can enhance their confidence and willingness to engage in behaviors that drive strategy execution.

Motivation is another critical factor in social cognitive theory. Employees’ motivation to participate actively in strategy implementation is influenced by their beliefs about the value and importance of the strategy, as well as the perceived rewards and consequences associated with successful implementation [ 22 ]. Intrinsic motivation, driven by internal factors such as personal satisfaction and fulfillment, is particularly important for long-term engagement and commitment to strategy implementation. Organizations can foster intrinsic motivation by creating a supportive work environment, offering opportunities for growth and development, and recognizing and rewarding employees’ contributions to strategy execution.

4.3 Goal-setting theory

Goal-setting theory highlights the role of clear goals, feedback, and employee participation in driving behavior alignment with strategic objectives. Clear and specific goals provide employees with a sense of direction and purpose, guiding their efforts toward achieving desired outcomes [ 21 ]. Well-defined goals help employees understand the relevance of their tasks to the broader strategic agenda and encourage them to align their behavior accordingly.

Regular feedback and performance evaluations are essential in goal-setting theory. Feedback enables employees to monitor their progress, identify areas for improvement, and make necessary adjustments in their behavior [ 31 ]. It provides employees with information about the effectiveness of their actions in contributing to the strategic goals, enhancing their understanding of what is expected and helping them stay on track.

Employee participation in the goal-setting process can significantly impact their commitment and motivation to achieve strategic objectives. When employees are involved in setting their own goals and have a say in determining how to accomplish them, they develop a sense of ownership and responsibility for their performance [ 49 ]. This participatory approach increases employees’ engagement and commitment to strategy implementation efforts.

4.4 Self-determination theory

Self-determination theory emphasizes the importance of providing employees with autonomy, competence, and relatedness to enhance their intrinsic motivation and engagement in strategy implementation. Autonomy refers to employees’ sense of control and independence in their work. Allowing employees to have autonomy in decision-making, task execution, and problem-solving empowers them to take ownership of their responsibilities and fosters a sense of accountability for strategy execution [ 50 ].

Competence represents employees’ belief in their abilities to perform effectively in their roles. Providing employees with the necessary resources, training, and support to develop their skills and competencies enhances their confidence and motivation to contribute to the successful implementation of the strategy [ 51 ]. Organizations should invest in employee development programs and provide ongoing learning opportunities to enhance their competence and enable them to effectively execute the strategic initiatives.

Relatedness refers to the sense of connection and belongingness employees experience within the organization. When employees feel valued, supported, and connected to their colleagues and leaders, they are more likely to be engaged and motivated in strategy implementation [ 50 ]. Organizations can foster a sense of relatedness by promoting teamwork, open communication, and collaboration, which enhance employees’ motivation to contribute to the collective goals of the organization.

5. Organizational culture and strategy implementation

5.1 definition and elements of organizational culture.

Organizational culture refers to the shared values, beliefs, assumptions, and norms that guide the behaviors and actions of individuals within an organization [ 15 ]. It represents the unique personality and character of an organization and influences how employees think, behave, and interact with each other and with external stakeholders. Organizational culture is composed of various elements, including symbols, rituals, stories, language, norms, and the overall organizational climate [ 3 ]. These elements shape the collective identity and provide a framework for decision-making and behavior within the organization.

5.2 Competing values framework

The Competing Values Framework (CVF) provides a model for understanding different types of organizational culture and their implications for strategy implementation [ 3 ]. The CVF identifies four types of culture: clan, adhocracy, hierarchy, and market. Clan culture emphasizes collaboration, teamwork, and a focus on employee development. Adhocracy culture values innovation, flexibility, and risk-taking. Hierarchy culture emphasizes stability, control, and a clear chain of command. Market culture focuses on competitiveness, results-orientedness, and external market forces. Each type of culture has distinct strengths and weaknesses in relation to strategy implementation. For example, a clan culture may foster employee engagement and commitment, while a market culture may drive a focus on performance and results.

5.3 Organizational socialization theory

Organizational socialization theory explains how culture shapes employee values, beliefs, and norms, which in turn influence their behavior during strategy implementation [ 9 ]. As employees enter and adapt to an organization, they learn the cultural values and expectations through socialization processes. This socialization influences their perception of what behaviors are desirable and acceptable in the organization, shaping their actions during strategy execution. For instance, if the organizational culture emphasizes innovation and risk-taking, employees are more likely to engage in proactive and creative behaviors to support strategy implementation.

5.4 Schein’s model of organizational culture

Schein’s model of organizational culture highlights three levels of culture: artifacts, espoused values, and basic underlying assumptions [ 15 ]. Artifacts are the visible and tangible aspects of culture, such as physical symbols, rituals, and behaviors. Espoused values represent the stated beliefs and norms that are promoted by the organization. Basic underlying assumptions are the deeply embedded, unconscious beliefs and values that guide behavior but may not be explicitly acknowledged. These levels interact and influence each other, shaping the organization’s culture and its impact on strategy implementation. For example, if the artifacts and behaviors reflect a culture of collaboration and adaptability, employees are more likely to exhibit cooperative and flexible behaviors during strategy implementation.

In conclusion, organizational culture plays a crucial role in strategy implementation. The Competing Values Framework helps identify different types of culture and their implications for strategy execution. Organizational socialization theory explains how culture shapes employee values and behavior. Schein’s model of organizational culture highlights the levels of culture and their impact on strategy implementation. Understanding the elements of culture and their influence on behavior can help organizations align their culture with strategic objectives and create an environment conducive to effective strategy implementation.

6. The interplay between employee behavior, organizational culture, and strategy implementation

6.1 examining how employee behavior and organizational culture interact to shape strategy implementation outcomes.

The interplay between employee behavior and organizational culture is a critical factor in determining the success of strategy implementation. Employee behavior is influenced by the prevailing organizational culture, while at the same time, employee behavior contributes to shaping and reinforcing the culture [ 52 ]. This dynamic interaction highlights the importance of understanding how these two factors interconnect to drive strategy execution outcomes.

6.2 Person-organization fit theory

Person-organization fit theory emphasizes the importance of aligning individual values and behaviors with the organizational culture to enhance strategy execution [ 24 ]. When employees’ values, beliefs, and behaviors align with the organizational culture, they experience a sense of fit and compatibility, which leads to positive outcomes such as higher job satisfaction, commitment, and performance [ 53 ]. Employees who share similar values and beliefs with the organization are more likely to exhibit behaviors that are consistent with the desired cultural norms, thereby facilitating successful strategy implementation.

6.3 Cultural congruence theory

Cultural congruence theory suggests that a strong alignment between employee behavior, organizational culture, and strategic goals leads to improved performance [ 54 ]. When employee behavior is congruent with the values, norms, and expectations of the organizational culture, it creates a work environment where employees feel a sense of belonging and identification. This alignment fosters employee engagement, commitment, and a shared focus on achieving strategic goals. In turn, this enhances communication, coordination, and collaboration among employees, facilitating the smooth execution of strategy.

6.4 Social exchange theory

Social exchange theory examines the reciprocal relationship between employees and the organization and how it influences behavior, trust, and commitment during strategy implementation [ 55 ]. According to this theory, employees evaluate the exchange relationship with the organization based on the perceived fairness and support they receive. When employees perceive that the organization values and supports their contributions, they are more likely to reciprocate by exhibiting positive behavior and higher levels of commitment. In the context of strategy implementation, a supportive organizational culture that recognizes and rewards employees’ efforts fosters a positive social exchange relationship. This, in turn, leads to increased motivation, cooperation, and dedication to achieving strategic objectives.

The interplay between employee behavior, organizational culture, and strategy implementation is a complex and dynamic process. The alignment between individual values, behaviors, and the organizational culture is crucial for successful strategy execution. Organizations need to ensure that their employees’ values and behaviors are consistent with the desired cultural norms and strategic goals. This can be achieved through effective recruitment, selection, and onboarding processes that focus on assessing and aligning values and cultural fit. Furthermore, fostering a positive social exchange relationship by providing a supportive work environment and recognizing employees’ contributions enhances their commitment and engagement in strategy implementation.

Recent research has increasingly recognized the interplay between employee behavior and organizational culture [ 44 ]. Lengnick-Hall et al. [ 44 ] argued that building a capacity for organizational resilience in a VUCA world involves aligning employee behaviors with a culture that encourages adaptability and knowledge sharing. Furthermore, Hitt et al. [ 39 ] explored how leaders can leverage both culture and behavior to drive strategic change and improve performance. These findings underscore the synergy between behavior and culture as a key driver of success in turbulent environments.

Despite the wealth of research in this area, several gaps persist in the literature. First, while existing studies provide valuable insights, they often lack a holistic view that integrates employee behavior, organizational culture, and strategy implementation in a VUCA context. Second, limited attention has been given to practical implications and actionable strategies for managers and leaders to navigate these challenges effectively. Finally, the dynamic nature of the VUCA world requires continuous adaptation, necessitating a focus on longitudinal research that examines the evolving relationship between behavior, culture, and performance.

7. Overcoming challenges in a VUCA world

7.1 identifying specific challenges faced by organizations in strategy implementation within vuca environments.

Strategy implementation in a VUCA world poses unique challenges for organizations. VUCA environments are characterized by volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity [ 34 ]. These challenges include rapidly changing market conditions, disruptive technologies, unpredictable customer demands, and geopolitical uncertainties. In such dynamic contexts, organizations need to navigate through these challenges to effectively implement their strategies.

7.2 Sensemaking theory

Sensemaking theory highlights the role of employee behavior and organizational culture in sensemaking processes to navigate ambiguity and complexity during strategy implementation [ 27 ]. Sensemaking involves interpreting and understanding the VUCA environment and its implications for strategy. Employee behavior influenced by the organizational culture plays a crucial role in sensemaking activities. Employees who actively seek information, engage in dialog, and share diverse perspectives contribute to collective sensemaking, enabling organizations to make sense of the VUCA world and align their actions with strategic goals.

7.3 Change management theories

Change management theories provide frameworks and strategies to address resistance, foster employee buy-in, and adapt to dynamic VUCA conditions. Lewin’s change model emphasizes the importance of unfreezing existing behaviors, implementing change, and refreezing new behaviors [ 29 ]. Kotter’s 8-step model offers a structured approach that includes creating a sense of urgency, building a guiding coalition, and empowering employees to embrace change [ 28 ]. These change management theories help organizations overcome resistance to change, enhance employee engagement, and facilitate the successful implementation of strategies in VUCA environments.

7.4 Resilience theory

Resilience theory explores how individual and organizational resilience can mitigate the negative impact of VUCA on strategy implementation and performance [ 56 ]. Individual resilience refers to the ability of employees to adapt, bounce back from setbacks, and thrive in challenging circumstances. Organizational resilience involves building agile structures, fostering a learning culture, and developing robust systems to respond to VUCA challenges. Resilience enables organizations to anticipate, absorb, and adapt to VUCA conditions, minimizing disruptions and enhancing strategy implementation outcomes.

In a VUCA world, organizations face numerous challenges during strategy implementation. Sensemaking theory highlights the role of employee behavior and organizational culture in making sense of complex and ambiguous environments. Change management theories provide frameworks to address resistance and foster adaptability in VUCA conditions. Resilience theory emphasizes the importance of individual and organizational resilience in mitigating the negative impact of VUCA and maintaining strategy implementation effectiveness.

8. Measuring and evaluating strategy implementation and performance

8.1 key metrics and indicators for assessing strategy implementation success in a vuca world.

Measuring and evaluating strategy implementation success in a VUCA world requires organizations to consider a range of metrics and indicators that go beyond traditional financial measures. Key metrics may include customer satisfaction, market share, innovation rate, employee productivity, and adaptability to changing market conditions [ 57 ]. These indicators provide a comprehensive view of strategy execution outcomes and help organizations assess their ability to navigate the challenges of a VUCA environment.

8.2 Balanced scorecard approach

The balanced scorecard approach offers a framework for evaluating the impact of employee behavior and culture on strategy outcomes by considering multiple perspectives. This approach includes financial, customer, internal process, and learning and growth perspectives [ 31 ]. By incorporating these perspectives, organizations can assess how employee behavior and organizational culture contribute to financial performance, customer satisfaction, operational efficiency, and employee development. The balanced scorecard approach provides a holistic view of strategy implementation outcomes and enables organizations to identify areas for improvement and alignment.

8.3 Organizational network analysis

Organizational network analysis (ONA) examines social networks and communication patterns within an organization to understand the influence of employee behavior and culture on strategy execution [ 58 ]. By mapping formal and informal networks, ONA helps identify key influencers, information flows, and collaboration patterns. It provides insights into how employee behavior and organizational culture impact the exchange of knowledge, decision-making processes, and coordination efforts during strategy implementation. ONA helps organizations identify both strong and weak ties in the network, facilitating effective communication and collaboration to support strategy execution.

8.4 Employee engagement theories

Employee engagement is a crucial factor in strategy implementation success. Various models and tools can be used to measure and assess employee engagement and its impact on strategy implementation outcomes. For example, the Gallup Q12 survey measures employee engagement by assessing factors such as clear expectations, supportive management, and growth opportunities [ 59 ]. The Job Demands-Resources model [ 60 ] examines the balance between job demands and resources to understand employee engagement. These models provide insights into the relationship between employee engagement, behavior, and strategy execution outcomes, helping organizations identify areas where engagement can be improved.

In measuring and evaluating strategy implementation and performance in a VUCA world, organizations should adopt a multidimensional approach that goes beyond financial metrics. The balanced scorecard approach provides a comprehensive framework for assessing the impact of employee behavior and culture across various dimensions. Organizational network analysis offers insights into the influence of behavior and culture on communication and collaboration networks. Employee engagement theories provide tools to measure and understand the relationship between engagement, behavior, and strategy execution outcomes.

9. Conceptual framework

In today’s volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) world, organizations must navigate multifaceted challenges to remain competitive and achieve their strategic objectives. Central to this endeavor is understanding the intricate relationship between employee behavior and organizational culture and how these elements collectively influence strategy implementation and organizational performance. This conceptual framework seeks to provide a structured perspective on this relationship, elucidating the key dimensions and their interconnections. The framework is shown in Figure 1 and the dimensions are discussed in the Figure 1 .

Conceptual framework. Source: Author’s compilation.

9.1 Key dimensions of the framework

9.1.1 employee behavior.

Alignment with strategy : The extent to which employee behaviors are consistent with the organization’s strategic objectives.

Proactiveness : The degree to which employees exhibit initiative and take proactive steps to contribute to strategy execution.

Adaptability : The organization’s ability to encourage and accommodate adaptive behaviors among employees in response to changing conditions.

Ownership and accountability : The sense of responsibility and ownership that employees feel toward the successful implementation of the organization’s strategy.

9.1.2 Organizational culture

Cultural types : The predominant cultural types within the organization, such as clan, adhocracy, market, or hierarchy [ 3 ].

Cultural values : The core values, beliefs, and norms that shape employee attitudes and behaviors.

Innovation and learning : The extent to which the culture encourages innovation, experimentation, and continuous learning [ 36 ].

Leadership influence : Leaders play a crucial role in shaping and reinforcing the ezculture by serving as role models and setting cultural expectations [ 37 ].

9.1.3 Interplay between employee behavior and organizational culture

Alignment : The degree to which employee behavior aligns with and reflects the cultural values and expectations of the organization.

Mutual reinforcement : How employee behaviors, when consistent with the culture, reinforce and strengthen the cultural norms, and vice versa.

Cultural evolution : The dynamic nature of culture and behavior reflects how changes in one can drive changes in the other over time [ 39 ].

9.1.4 Strategy implementation and performance outcomes

Efficiency and effectiveness : The successful execution of strategic initiatives leads to efficient processes and effective results.

Adaptability and resilience : The organization’s capacity to adapt to changing circumstances and maintain performance levels in the face of disruption.

Competitive advantage : How the alignment of employee behavior and culture contributes to a sustainable competitive advantage.

Employee satisfaction and engagement : The impact on employee satisfaction, engagement, and retention as a result of alignment with organizational culture and strategic goals.

9.1.5 External and contextual factors

Industry and market dynamics : How industry-specific factors influence the relationship between behavior, culture, and strategy.

Regulatory environment : The impact of external regulations on an organization’s culture, employee behavior, and strategic choices.

Globalization : The influence of global factors, such as international markets and cultural diversity, on the interplay between behavior, culture, and strategy.

This conceptual framework provides a structured lens to analyze the role of employee behavior and organizational culture in strategy implementation and performance, considering important dimensions and their interrelationships. By examining these components and their interactions within the context of external and contextual factors, organizations can better understand and leverage the dynamics at play in a VUCA world, ultimately driving strategic success and resilience.

10. Case studies and examples

Illustrating real-life case studies or examples highlighting the relationship between employee behavior, organizational culture, strategy implementation, and performance in a VUCA world can provide valuable insights into the practical application of theories and concepts discussed earlier.

10.1 Case study 1: Google’s innovation culture

Google is known for its innovative culture, which has played a significant role in its success. The company encourages employee behavior that fosters creativity, risk-taking, and continuous learning. This behavior is influenced by Google’s organizational culture, which emphasizes collaboration, experimentation, and a supportive work environment [ 61 ]. The social cognitive theory helps explain how individual attitudes, self-efficacy, and motivation influence employee behavior during strategy implementation. In Google’s case, employees’ belief in their capabilities, combined with a culture that supports innovation, drives their behavior to experiment with new ideas and contribute to the company’s continuous improvement [ 62 ].

10.2 Case study 2: Zappos’ customer-centric culture

Zappos, an online shoe and clothing retailer, is renowned for its customer-centric culture. The company focuses on creating a positive customer experience and has built its organizational culture around this principle. Zappos emphasizes employee behavior that prioritizes customer satisfaction, going above and beyond expectations. This behavior is influenced by the organizational socialization theory, which states that culture shapes employee values, beliefs, and norms. Zappos’ culture instills the importance of exceptional customer service and empowers employees to make decisions that align with the company’s customer-centric values [ 63 ]. The goal-setting theory further supports Zappos’ approach by highlighting the role of clear goals, feedback, and employee participation in driving behavior alignment with strategic objectives. Zappos sets clear goals related to customer satisfaction, provides regular feedback, and involves employees in decision-making processes to ensure that their behavior is aligned with the company’s strategic focus [ 21 ].

10.3 Case study 3: Southwest Airlines’ employee engagement

Southwest Airlines is recognized for its strong employee engagement, which has contributed to its success as a low-cost airline. The company’s organizational culture, characterized by a fun and supportive work environment, fosters employee behavior that is aligned with the company’s strategy. The self-determination theory emphasizes the importance of providing employees with autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Southwest Airlines allows its employees to have a degree of autonomy in decision-making, provides training and development opportunities to enhance competence, and promotes a sense of camaraderie and teamwork among employees [ 22 ]. This approach enhances employees’ intrinsic motivation and engagement in strategy implementation, leading to improved performance.

These case studies demonstrate how employee behavior and organizational culture interact to shape strategy implementation outcomes. The theories and concepts discussed earlier, such as social cognitive theory, goal-setting theory, and self-determination theory, play a vital role in understanding and explaining the relationship between employee behavior, culture, and strategy execution. These examples highlight the practical application of these theories in real-life organizations, providing insights into how specific behaviors and cultural attributes influence strategy implementation and performance in a VUCA world.

11. Some empirical studies

Study 1 : Dinh T. Q., & Nguyen H. T. [ 64 ] explored the impact of employee behavior and organizational culture on strategy implementation success in Vietnamese manufacturing firms. The study found that positive employee behaviors, such as commitment, initiative, and teamwork, were positively associated with successful strategy implementation. Additionally, a supportive and adaptive organizational culture that encourages collaboration and innovation enhanced the effectiveness of strategy implementation.

Study 2 : Marique G., et al. [ 65 ] examined the influence of organizational culture on strategy implementation in Belgian small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The study found that organizations with a clan culture, characterized by a supportive and nurturing environment, had higher levels of employee commitment and engagement in strategy execution. This positive organizational culture facilitated better alignment between employee behavior and strategic objectives, leading to improved strategy implementation outcomes.

Study 3 : Vasilaki A., et al. [ 66 ] investigated the role of employee behavior in strategy implementation in the hospitality industry. The study found that employees’ proactive behavior, such as seeking opportunities for improvement and taking initiative, positively influenced the effectiveness of strategy implementation. Moreover, the study highlighted the importance of a supportive organizational culture that encourages and rewards such proactive behaviors to enhance strategy execution success.

Study 4 : Mutonyi, Slatten Liean and Gonzalez-Pinero [ 67 ] examined the impact of organizational culture on strategy implementation outcomes in the healthcare sector. The study revealed that a culture characterized by shared values, open communication, and employee involvement positively influenced employee behavior during strategy implementation. This alignment between culture and behavior led to improved strategy execution and performance in healthcare organizations.

These empirical studies demonstrate the significance of employee behavior and organizational culture in strategy implementation and highlight the positive outcomes associated with their alignment. They provide evidence that supportive and adaptive cultures, along with positive employee behaviors, enhance strategy execution success across different industries and countries.

12. Recommendations

Clearly communicate strategic objectives : Ensure that employees have a clear understanding of the organization’s strategic objectives and their role in achieving them. This clarity helps align employee behavior with strategic goals and fosters a sense of purpose and direction.

Encourage employee involvement and participation : Involve employees in the strategy development process and decision-making. This promotes a sense of ownership and empowers employees to contribute their ideas and perspectives. Employee involvement enhances commitment and motivation, leading to proactive behavior in strategy implementation.

Provide continuous learning and development opportunities : Offer training programs and learning opportunities to enhance employees’ skills and knowledge. This fosters a culture of continuous learning and adaptability, enabling employees to navigate VUCA challenges effectively.

Foster collaboration and teamwork : Create an environment that encourages collaboration, information sharing, and teamwork. This helps break down silos and promotes collective problem-solving and innovation. Collaboration enhances employee engagement and facilitates the integration of diverse perspectives, leading to more effective strategy implementation.

Recognize and reward desired behaviors : Recognize and reward employees who exhibit desired behaviors aligned with the organization’s strategic objectives. This can be done through formal recognition programs, incentives, or career advancement opportunities. Recognitions and rewards reinforce the desired behaviors and motivate employees to continue their efforts in strategy implementation.

Lead by example : Leaders play a crucial role in shaping organizational culture and employee behavior. Leaders should model the desired behaviors, demonstrate adaptability, and promote a positive and inclusive culture. By leading by example, leaders inspire employees to emulate these behaviors and create a culture of continuous improvement and resilience.

Encourage risk-taking and learning from failure : VUCA environments require organizations to be open to experimentation and learning from failures. Encourage employees to take calculated risks, embrace innovation, and view failures as opportunities for growth and learning. Create a safe space where employees feel comfortable sharing their ideas and learning from their experiences.

Foster open and transparent communication : Establish open channels of communication where employees feel comfortable sharing their thoughts, concerns, and ideas. Transparent communication helps build trust, promotes engagement, and facilitates timely information flow, enabling employees to adapt and respond effectively to VUCA challenges.

Promote flexibility and agility : Encourage employees to embrace flexibility and adaptability in their work. Provide them with the necessary resources and support to respond quickly to changing circumstances and make informed decisions. This flexibility enables employees to navigate uncertainties and seize opportunities in a VUCA world.

Foster a learning culture : Create a culture that values continuous learning and encourages employees to acquire new knowledge and skills. Support employees in pursuing professional development opportunities, such as training programs, workshops, conferences, and online courses. A learning culture enables employees to stay ahead of emerging trends and technologies and adapt to dynamic market conditions.

Emphasize cross-functional collaboration : Break down departmental barriers and foster collaboration across different functions and teams. Encourage employees to collaborate with colleagues from diverse backgrounds and disciplines to solve complex problems and drive innovation. Cross-functional collaboration enhances organizational agility and enables a holistic approach to strategy implementation.

Encourage innovation and experimentation : Foster an environment that encourages innovation and experimentation. Provide employees with the freedom to explore new ideas, take calculated risks, and learn from failures. Implement mechanisms such as innovation labs, idea incubators, or designated time for creative pursuits to stimulate innovation and entrepreneurial thinking.

Promote diversity and inclusion : Embrace diversity and create an inclusive workplace where employees feel valued and respected. Encourage diverse perspectives, ideas, and experiences, as they contribute to a richer understanding of complex issues and better decision-making. A diverse and inclusive culture enhances adaptability and problem-solving capabilities in a VUCA world.

Establish feedback and performance management systems : Implement regular feedback mechanisms to provide employees with constructive feedback on their performance. Set clear performance goals aligned with the organization’s strategic objectives and provide ongoing feedback to support employee growth and development. This promotes accountability, continuous improvement, and alignment of individual behaviors with organizational goals.

Foster a supportive and well-being-oriented environment : Prioritize employee well-being and create a supportive work environment. Offer programs and initiatives that promote work-life balance, stress management, and mental health support. Recognize the importance of employee well-being in enhancing engagement, productivity, and resilience in the face of VUCA challenges.

Continuously monitor and adapt : Regularly assess the effectiveness of strategies, employee behaviors, and cultural initiatives in the context of VUCA environments. Monitor key performance indicators, solicit employee feedback, and conduct periodic organizational assessments to identify areas for improvement and adapt strategies accordingly.

By implementing these recommendations, organizations can foster the desired employee behaviors and cultivate an adaptive culture that thrives in VUCA environments. It is important to remember that every organization is unique, and strategies should be tailored to the specific context and needs of the organization.

13. Conclusion

In conclusion, this paper has explored the critical role of employee behavior and organizational culture in strategy implementation and performance within the context of a volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) world. The findings highlight the significance of aligning employee behavior and organizational culture with the strategic objectives of an organization to achieve optimal performance and navigate the challenges posed by a VUCA environment.

Firstly, it is evident that employee behavior plays a crucial role in strategy implementation and performance. Organizations need to foster a culture of commitment, engagement, and proactive problem-solving among employees. This involves providing clear communication, empowering employees, and fostering a sense of ownership and accountability. By aligning individual behaviors with strategic goals, organizations can enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of strategy execution.

Secondly, organizational culture has a profound impact on strategy implementation and performance. A strong and adaptive culture that values innovation, agility, and continuous learning is essential in a VUCA world. Organizations must promote an environment that encourages risk-taking, knowledge sharing, and collaboration, allowing employees to adapt and respond swiftly to changing circumstances. A culture that supports flexibility and resilience enables organizations to effectively implement strategies and achieve sustainable performance in the face of uncertainty and complexity.

Furthermore, the interplay between employee behavior and organizational culture is critical. The alignment of individual behaviors with the prevailing culture fosters a shared sense of purpose and direction. When employees exhibit behaviors that are consistent with the desired culture, it enhances organizational cohesion, employee satisfaction, and overall performance. Leaders and managers play a vital role in shaping and reinforcing the culture, serving as role models and providing necessary support and resources to employees.

To achieve optimal performance in a VUCA world, organizations must prioritize aligning employee behavior and organizational culture with strategic objectives.

Promoting a culture that encourages adaptive behaviors and embraces change is crucial for effectively responding to VUCA challenges and opportunities.

This alignment leads to improved strategy implementation, employee engagement, and overall organizational performance.

Developing practical frameworks and strategies for organizations to thrive in VUCA environments.

Cross-cultural analysis : Investigate how cultural differences influence the relationship between employee behavior, organizational culture, and strategy implementation in various regions and industries. Understand how cultural nuances impact adaptability and performance in a VUCA environment.

Leadership styles and organizational culture : Explore the impact of different leadership styles (e.g., transformational, transactional, servant leadership) on shaping and sustaining organizational culture. Examine how leadership behavior aligns with or diverges from the desired culture and its effects on strategy execution and performance.

Technology and digital transformation : Study how the integration of technology, such as AI, automation, and digital tools, influences employee behavior and organizational culture in the context of strategy implementation in a VUCA world. Investigate the role of digital culture and its implications.

Employee well-being and resilience : Research the relationship between employee well-being, mental health, and their ability to adapt to VUCA environments. Explore how organizational culture can foster resilience and support employees in times of uncertainty.

Change management strategies : Examine the effectiveness of various change management strategies in aligning employee behavior and culture with evolving strategic objectives. Identify best practices for leading and facilitating organizational change in VUCA settings.

Performance metrics and measurement : Develop comprehensive performance metrics and measurement frameworks that consider the impact of employee behavior and culture on strategy implementation. Explore novel methods for assessing performance in dynamic environments.

Knowledge management and learning organizations : Investigate how knowledge management practices and the creation of learning organizations impact strategy execution and performance in a VUCA world. Examine the role of continuous learning and knowledge sharing.

Sustainability and CSR : Explore the link between organizational culture, employee behaviors related to sustainability, and corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives. Assess how a culture of sustainability influences strategy implementation and long-term performance.

Crisis management and resilience : Analyze how employee behavior and organizational culture contribute to crisis management and resilience in VUCA scenarios. Identify strategies for building and maintaining resilience during crises.

Long-term vs. short-term focus : Investigate the tension between short-term and long-term strategic objectives and how employee behavior and culture contribute to organizations’ ability to balance these priorities in a VUCA world.

Case studies and industry-specific analysis : Conduct in-depth case studies and industry-specific analyses to provide practical insights into how different organizations address the challenges of VUCA through their culture and employee behavior.

Global workforce and remote work : Examine the impact of a global and remote workforce on organizational culture and employee behavior in VUCA environments. Explore strategies for fostering cohesion and alignment in distributed teams.

In conclusion, this paper underscores the importance of aligning employee behavior and organizational culture with strategic objectives to navigate the challenges of a VUCA world successfully. Theoretical and practical implications emphasize the need for organizations to embrace adaptability and change to achieve sustainable performance.

The successful implementation of strategies and achievement of high performance in a VUCA world require organizations to prioritize the alignment of employee behavior and organizational culture. By promoting a culture that encourages adaptive behaviors and embraces change, organizations can effectively respond to the challenges and opportunities presented by a volatile and uncertain environment. This, in turn, leads to improved strategy implementation, employee engagement, and overall organizational performance. Future research should continue to explore the dynamic relationship between employee behavior, organizational culture, strategy implementation, and performance to develop practical frameworks and strategies that organizations can adopt to thrive in a VUCA world.

• 1. Kaplan RS, Norton DP. The Execution Premium: Linking Strategy to Operations for Competitive Advantage. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business Press; 2008
• 2. Eisenhardt KM, Sull DN. Strategy as simple rules. Harvard Business Review. 2001; 79 (1):106-116
• 3. Cameron KS, Quinn RE. Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture: Based on the Competing Values Framework. 3rd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2011
• 4. Mitra T, Kapoor R, Gupta N. Studying key antecedents of disruptive technology adoption in the digital supply chain: An Indian perspective. International Journal of Emerging Markets. 2022. DOI: 10.1108/IJOEM-07-2021-1052 [Ahead-of-print]
• 5. O’Reilly CA, Tushman ML. Organizational ambidexterity: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Perspectives. 2013; 27 (4):324-338
• 6. Liedtka JM. Strategy implementation: An overview. In: The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Strategic Management. London Borough of Camden: Palgrave Macmillan; 2018. pp. 1-7
• 7. Teece DJ. Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long Range Planning. 2018; 51 :40-49. DOI: 10.1016/j.lrp.2017.06.007
• 8. Edmondson AC. The Fearless Organization: Creating Psychological Safety in the Workplace for Learning, Innovation, and Growth. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2018
• 9. Bauer TN, Bodner T, Erdogan B, Truxillo DM, Tucker JS. Newcomer adjustment during organizational socialization: A meta-analytic review of antecedents, outcomes, and methods. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2007; 92 (3):707-721
• 10. Chen G, Rong K, Wu Y. Reconceptualizing strategic management in the digital age: A fuzzy cognitive map approach. Journal of Business Research. 2019; 99 :238-246
• 11. Chen S, Chang Y, Lai Y. Strategic ambiguity, employee behaviors, and organizational performance. Journal of Business Research. 2019; 96 :238-249
• 12. Gong Y, Law KS, Chang S, Xin KR. Employee behavior in organizations: A multilevel perspective. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior. 2021; 8 :209-232
• 13. Gong Y, Wang H, Huang JC, Cheung SY. Proactive strategic behavior: A review and extension of the literature. Journal of Management. 2021; 47 (4):781-818
• 14. Denison DR, Haaland S, Goelzer P. Corporate culture and organizational effectiveness: Is Asia different from the rest of the world? Organizational Dynamics. 2012; 41 (4):287-295
• 15. Schein EH. Organizational Culture and Leadership. 4th ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2010
• 16. Lund DB. Organizational culture and job satisfaction. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing. 2003; 18 (3):219-236
• 17. Smircich L. Concepts of culture and organizational analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly. 1983; 28 (3):339-358. DOI: 10.2307/2392246
• 18. Knippenberg DV, Knippenberg BV, Cremer DD. Leadership, affect, and emotions: A state of the science review. The Leadership Quarterly. 2017; 28 (1):21-34
• 19. Lunenburg F. Self-efficacy in the workplace: Implications for motivation and performance. International Journal of Management, Business, and Administration. 2011; 14 (1)
• 20. Bandura A. Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1986
• 21. Locke EA, Latham GP. A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1990
• 22. Deci EL, Ryan RM. The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry. 2000; 11 (4):227-268
• 23. Van Maanen J, Schein EH. Toward of theory of organizational socialization. Research in Organizational Behavior. 1979; 1 :209-264
• 24. Kristof AL. Person-organization fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implications. Personnel Psychology. 1996; 49 (1):1-49
• 25. O’Reilly C, Chatman J, Caldwell D. People and organizational culture: A profile comparison approach to assessing person-organization fit. Academy of Management Journal. 1991; 34 :487-516. DOI: 10.2307/256404
• 26. Blau PM. Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York: Wiley, Transaction Publishers; 1964
• 27. Weick K. Sensemaking in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1995
• 28. Kotter JP. Leading Change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press; 1996
• 29. Lewin K. Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers. In: Cartwright D, editor. New York: Harper & Row; 1951
• 30. Masten AS, Best KM, Garmezy N. Resilience and development: Contributions from the study of children who overcome adversity. Development and Psychopathology. 1990; 2 :425-444. DOI: 10.1017/S0954579400005812
• 31. Kaplan RS, Norton DP. The balanced scorecard: Measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review. 1992; 70 (1):71-79
• 32. Cross R, Borgatti SP, Parker A. Making invisible work visible: Using social network analysis to support strategic collaboration. California Management Review. 2002; 44 (2):25-46
• 33. Macey WH, Schneider B. The meaning of employee engagement. Industrial and Organizational Psychology. 2008; 1 (1):3-30
• 34. Bennett N, Lemoine GJ. What VUCA really means for you. Harvard Business Review. 2014; 92 (1/2):27-29
• 35. Gong Y, Kim TY, Lee DR, Zhu J. A multilevel model of team goal orientation, information exchange, and creativity. Academy of Management Journal. 2010; 53 (2):434-449
• 36. Denison DR, Spreitzer GM. Organizational culture and organizational development: A competing values approach. Research in Organizational Change and Development. 1991; 5 :1-21
• 37. Schein E. Organizational Culture and Leadership. 3rd ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2004
• 38. Gittell JH, Douglass A. Relational bureaucracy: Structuring reciprocal relationships into roles. Academy of Management Review. 2012; 37 (4):709-733
• 39. Hitt MA, Ireland RD, Hoskisson RE. Strategic Management: Competitiveness and Globalization. 5th ed. Cincinnati: International Thomson Publishing; 2001
• 40. Doz YL, Kosonen M. Embedding strategic agility: A leadership agenda for accelerating business model renewal. Long Range Planning. 2008; 41 (3):315-334
• 41. Helfat C, Finkelstein S, Mitchell W, Peteraf M, Singh H, Teece D, et al. Dynamic Capabilities: Understanding Strategic Change in Organizations. Malden, MA: Blackwell; 2007
• 42. Eisenhardt KM, Martin JA. Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal. 2000; 21 (10-11):1105-1121
• 43. Tushman ML, O’Reilly CA. Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovator’s dilemma. Research in Organizational Behavior. 2007; 27 :1-44
• 44. Lengnick-Hall CA, Beck TE, Lengnick-Hall ML. Developing a capacity for organizational resilience through strategic human resource management. Human Resource Management Review. 2011; 21 (3):243-255
• 45. Sutcliffe KM, Vogus TJ, Dane E. Organizational resilience: A capability-based conceptualization. Academy of Management Annals. 2016; 10 (1):535-615
• 46. Brouthers KD, Nakos G, Dimitratos P. SME entrepreneurial orientation, international performance, and the moderating role of strategic alliances. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. 2018; 42 (5):737-760
• 47. De Clercq D, Haq IU, Azeem MU, Raja U. Does employees’ positive psychological capital strengthen their work engagement? A self-determination perspective. Journal of Business Research. 2018; 84 :416-425
• 48. Bandura A. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company; 1997
• 49. Kristof-Brown AL, Zimmerman RD, Johnson EC. Consequences of individuals’ fit at work: A meta-analysis of person–job, person–organization, person–group, and person–supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology. 2005; 58 (2):281-342
• 50. Gagné M, Deci EL. Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 2005; 26 (4):331-362
• 51. Rigotti T, Schyns B, Mohr G. A short version of the occupational self-efficacy scale: Structural and construct validity across five countries. Journal of Career Assessment. 2019; 27 (1):130-147
• 52. O’Reilly CA, Doerr B, Chatman JA. The promise and problems of organizational culture: CEO personality, culture, and firm performance. Group & Organization Management. 2014; 39 (6):595-625
• 53. Edwards JR, Cable DM. The value of value congruence. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2009; 94 (3):654-677
• 54. Chatman JA, Caldwell DF. Leading culture change in organizations. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science. 2014; 50 (4):481-511
• 55. Cropanzano R, Mitchell MS. Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management. 2005; 31 (6):874-900
• 56. Luthans F, Youssef-Morgan CM, Avolio BJ. Psychological Capital and beyond. New York: Oxford University Press; 2015
• 57. Sahin E, Robinson D. Building a resilient strategy for a VUCA world. MIT Sloan Management Review. 2021; 62 (1):14-16
• 58. Obstfeld D, Borgatti SP, Davis J. Network ethnography: A mixed-methods approach for the study of social networks in organizations. Organizational Research Methods. 2019; 22 (2):491-515
• 59. Gallup. Q12 Employee Engagement Survey. 2021. Available from: https://www.gallup.com/workplace/285674/q12-employee-engagement-survey.aspx
• 60. Bakker AB, Demerouti E. The job demands-resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology. 2007; 22 (3):309-328
• 61. Kim H. The analysis of innovation management in google. Journal of Economics and Management Sciences. 2020; 3 :10-19. DOI: 10.30560/jems.v3n4p10
• 62. Bandura A. Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 1991; 50 (2):248-287
• 63. Chatman JA. Matching people and organizations: Selection and socialization in public accounting firms. Administrative Science Quarterly. 1991; 36 (3):459-484
• 64. Dinh TQ , Nguyen HT. Employee behavior and organizational culture: Impacts on strategy implementation in Vietnamese manufacturing firms. Journal of Asian Business and Economic Studies. 2020; 27 (1):9-25
• 65. Marique G et al. Strategy implementation and organizational culture in Belgian SMEs. Journal of Organizational Change Management. 2019; 32 (4):462-483
• 66. Vasilaki A et al. The role of employee behavior in strategy implementation: The case of the hospitality industry. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management. 2021; 30 (4):500-520
• 67. Mutonyi BR, Slåtten T, Lien G, González-Piñero M. The impact of organizational culture and leadership climate on organizational attractiveness and innovative behavior: A study of Norwegian hospital employees. BMC Health Services Research. 13 May 2022; 22 (1):637. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-022-08042-x. PMID: 35562748; PMCID: PMC9102259

© 2023 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Continue reading from the same book

Organizational culture.

Edited by Muddassar Sarfraz

Published: 31 January 2024

By Peter Paul Kithae

64 downloads

By Matea Cvjetković and Tihana Babić

151 downloads

By Kivanc Bozkus

416 downloads

Critical Cases in Organisational Behaviour

• Latest edition
• J. Martin Corbett

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Part of the book series: Management, Work and Organisations (MWO)

1718 Accesses

18 Citations

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this book

Other ways to access.

Licence this eBook for your library

Institutional subscriptions

Table of contents (9 chapters)

Front matter, case study analysis of organisational behaviour, analysing individual behaviour in organisations, the meaning of work, motivation and commitment, the management of meaning, motivation and commitment, analysing group behaviour in organisations, interpersonal relations and group decision-making, analysing organisational behaviour, inter-group relations, organisational design and change, technology and organisation, analysing organisational environments, organisation and environment, back matter.

• organization
• problem solving

About this book

About the author, bibliographic information.

Book Title : Critical Cases in Organisational Behaviour

Authors : J. Martin Corbett

Series Title : Management, Work and Organisations

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-23295-6

Publisher : Palgrave London

eBook Packages : Palgrave Business & Management Collection

Copyright Information : Macmillan Publishers Limited 1994

Edition Number : 1

Number of Pages : XI, 304

Topics : Organization , Industrial, Organisational and Economic Psychology

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Tools and Resources
• Customer Services
• Affective Science
• Biological Foundations of Psychology
• Clinical Psychology: Disorders and Therapies
• Cognitive Psychology/Neuroscience
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational/School Psychology
• Forensic Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems of Psychology
• Individual Differences
• Methods and Approaches in Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational and Institutional Psychology

Personality

• Psychology and Other Disciplines
• Social Psychology
• Sports Psychology
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Organizational behavior.

• Neal M. Ashkanasy Neal M. Ashkanasy University of Queensland
•  and  Alana D. Dorris Alana D. Dorris University of Queensland
• https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.23
• Published online: 29 March 2017

Organizational behavior (OB) is a discipline that includes principles from psychology, sociology, and anthropology. Its focus is on understanding how people behave in organizational work environments. Broadly speaking, OB covers three main levels of analysis: micro (individuals), meso (groups), and macro (the organization). Topics at the micro level include managing the diverse workforce; effects of individual differences in attitudes; job satisfaction and engagement, including their implications for performance and management; personality, including the effects of different cultures; perception and its effects on decision-making; employee values; emotions, including emotional intelligence, emotional labor, and the effects of positive and negative affect on decision-making and creativity (including common biases and errors in decision-making); and motivation, including the effects of rewards and goal-setting and implications for management. Topics at the meso level of analysis include group decision-making; managing work teams for optimum performance (including maximizing team performance and communication); managing team conflict (including the effects of task and relationship conflict on team effectiveness); team climate and group emotional tone; power, organizational politics, and ethical decision-making; and leadership, including leadership development and leadership effectiveness. At the organizational level, topics include organizational design and its effect on organizational performance; affective events theory and the physical environment; organizational culture and climate; and organizational change.

• organizational psychology
• organizational sociology
• organizational anthropology

Introduction

Organizational behavior (OB) is the study of how people behave in organizational work environments. More specifically, Robbins, Judge, Millett, and Boyle ( 2014 , p. 8) describe it as “[a] field of study that investigates the impact that individual groups and structure have on behavior within organizations, for the purposes of applying such knowledge towards improving an organization’s effectiveness.” The OB field looks at the specific context of the work environment in terms of human attitudes, cognition, and behavior, and it embodies contributions from psychology, social psychology, sociology, and anthropology. The field is also rapidly evolving because of the demands of today’s fast-paced world, where technology has given rise to work-from-home employees, globalization, and an ageing workforce. Thus, while managers and OB researchers seek to help employees find a work-life balance, improve ethical behavior (Ardichivili, Mitchell, & Jondle, 2009 ), customer service, and people skills (see, e.g., Brady & Cronin, 2001 ), they must simultaneously deal with issues such as workforce diversity, work-life balance, and cultural differences.

The most widely accepted model of OB consists of three interrelated levels: (1) micro (the individual level), (2) meso (the group level), and (3) macro (the organizational level). The behavioral sciences that make up the OB field contribute an element to each of these levels. In particular, OB deals with the interactions that take place among the three levels and, in turn, addresses how to improve performance of the organization as a whole.

In order to study OB and apply it to the workplace, it is first necessary to understand its end goal. In particular, if the goal is organizational effectiveness, then these questions arise: What can be done to make an organization more effective? And what determines organizational effectiveness? To answer these questions, dependent variables that include attitudes and behaviors such as productivity, job satisfaction, job performance, turnover intentions, withdrawal, motivation, and workplace deviance are introduced. Moreover, each level—micro, meso, and macro—has implications for guiding managers in their efforts to create a healthier work climate to enable increased organizational performance that includes higher sales, profits, and return on investment (ROE).

The Micro (Individual) Level of Analysis

The micro or individual level of analysis has its roots in social and organizational psychology. In this article, six central topics are identified and discussed: (1) diversity; (2) attitudes and job satisfaction; (3) personality and values; (4) emotions and moods; (5) perception and individual decision-making; and (6) motivation.

An obvious but oft-forgotten element at the individual level of OB is the diverse workforce. It is easy to recognize how different each employee is in terms of personal characteristics like age, skin color, nationality, ethnicity, and gender. Other, less biological characteristics include tenure, religion, sexual orientation, and gender identity. In the Australian context, while the Commonwealth Disability Discrimination Act of 1992 helped to increase participation of people with disabilities working in organizations, discrimination and exclusion still continue to inhibit equality (Feather & Boeckmann, 2007 ). In Western societies like Australia and the United States, however, antidiscrimination legislation is now addressing issues associated with an ageing workforce.

In terms of gender, there continues to be significant discrimination against female employees. Males have traditionally had much higher participation in the workforce, with only a significant increase in the female workforce beginning in the mid-1980s. Additionally, according to Ostroff and Atwater’s ( 2003 ) study of engineering managers, female managers earn a significantly lower salary than their male counterparts, especially when they are supervising mostly other females.

Job Satisfaction and Job Engagement

Job satisfaction is an attitudinal variable that comes about when an employee evaluates all the components of her or his job, which include affective, cognitive, and behavioral aspects (Weiss, 2002 ). Increased job satisfaction is associated with increased job performance, organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs), and reduced turnover intentions (Wilkin, 2012 ). Moreover, traditional workers nowadays are frequently replaced by contingent workers in order to reduce costs and work in a nonsystematic manner. According to Wilkin’s ( 2012 ) findings, however, contingent workers as a group are less satisfied with their jobs than permanent employees are.

Job engagement concerns the degree of involvement that an employee experiences on the job (Kahn, 1990 ). It describes the degree to which an employee identifies with their job and considers their performance in that job important; it also determines that employee’s level of participation within their workplace. Britt, Dickinson, Greene-Shortridge, and McKibbin ( 2007 ) describe the two extremes of job satisfaction and employee engagement: a feeling of responsibility and commitment to superior job performance versus a feeling of disengagement leading to the employee wanting to withdraw or disconnect from work. The first scenario is also related to organizational commitment, the level of identification an employee has with an organization and its goals. Employees with high organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and employee engagement tend to perceive that their organization values their contribution and contributes to their wellbeing.

Personality represents a person’s enduring traits. The key here is the concept of enduring . The most widely adopted model of personality is the so-called Big Five (Costa & McCrae, 1992 ): extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability, and openness. Employees high in conscientiousness tend to have higher levels of job knowledge, probably because they invest more into learning about their role. Those higher in emotional stability tend to have higher levels of job satisfaction and lower levels of stress, most likely because of their positive and opportunistic outlooks. Agreeableness, similarly, is associated with being better liked and may lead to higher employee performance and decreased levels of deviant behavior.

Although the personality traits in the Big Five have been shown to relate to organizational behavior, organizational performance, career success (Judge, Higgins, Thoresen, & Barrick, 2006 ), and other personality traits are also relevant to the field. Examples include positive self-evaluation, self-monitoring (the degree to which an individual is aware of comparisons with others), Machiavellianism (the degree to which a person is practical, maintains emotional distance, and believes the end will justify the means), narcissism (having a grandiose sense of self-importance and entitlement), risk-taking, proactive personality, and type A personality. In particular, those who like themselves and are grounded in their belief that they are capable human beings are more likely to perform better because they have fewer self-doubts that may impede goal achievements. Individuals high in Machiavellianism may need a certain environment in order to succeed, such as a job that requires negotiation skills and offers significant rewards, although their inclination to engage in political behavior can sometimes limit their potential. Employees who are high on narcissism may wreak organizational havoc by manipulating subordinates and harming the overall business because of their over-inflated perceptions of self. Higher levels of self-monitoring often lead to better performance but they may cause lower commitment to the organization. Risk-taking can be positive or negative; it may be great for someone who thrives on rapid decision-making, but it may prove stressful for someone who likes to weigh pros and cons carefully before making decisions. Type A individuals may achieve high performance but may risk doing so in a way that causes stress and conflict. Proactive personality, on the other hand, is usually associated with positive organizational performance.

Employee Values

Personal value systems are behind each employee’s attitudes and personality. Each employee enters an organization with an already established set of beliefs about what should be and what should not be. Today, researchers realize that personality and values are linked to organizations and organizational behavior. Years ago, only personality’s relation to organizations was of concern, but now managers are more interested in an employee’s flexibility to adapt to organizational change and to remain high in organizational commitment. Holland’s ( 1973 ) theory of personality-job fit describes six personality types (realistic, investigative, social, conventional, enterprising, and artistic) and theorizes that job satisfaction and turnover are determined by how well a person matches her or his personality to a job. In addition to person-job (P-J) fit, researchers have also argued for person-organization (P-O) fit, whereby employees desire to be a part of and are selected by an organization that matches their values. The Big Five would suggest, for example, that extraverted employees would desire to be in team environments; agreeable people would align well with supportive organizational cultures rather than more aggressive ones; and people high on openness would fit better in organizations that emphasize creativity and innovation (Anderson, Spataro, & Flynn, 2008 ).

Individual Differences, Affect, and Emotion

Personality predisposes people to have certain moods (feelings that tend to be less intense but longer lasting than emotions) and emotions (intense feelings directed at someone or something). In particular, personalities with extraversion and emotional stability partially determine an individual predisposition to experience emotion more or less intensely.

Affect is also related as describing the positive and negative feelings that people experience (Ashkanasy, 2003 ). Moreover, emotions, mood, and affect interrelate; a bad mood, for instance, can lead individuals to experience a negative emotion. Emotions are action-oriented while moods tend to be more cognitive. This is because emotions are caused by a specific event that might only last a few seconds, while moods are general and can last for hours or even days. One of the sources of emotions is personality. Dispositional or trait affects correlate, on the one hand, with personality and are what make an individual more likely to respond to a situation in a predictable way (Watson & Tellegen, 1985 ). Moreover, like personality, affective traits have proven to be stable over time and across settings (Diener, Larsen, Levine, & Emmons, 1985 ; Watson, 1988 ; Watson & Tellegen, 1985 ; Watson & Walker, 1996 ). State affect, on the other hand, is similar to mood and represents how an individual feels in the moment.

The Role of Affect in Organizational Behavior

For many years, affect and emotions were ignored in the field of OB despite being fundamental factors underlying employee behavior (Ashforth & Humphrey, 1995 ). OB researchers traditionally focused on solely decreasing the effects of strong negative emotions that were seen to impede individual, group, and organizational level productivity. More recent theories of OB focus, however, on affect, which is seen to have positive, as well as negative, effects on behavior, described by Barsade, Brief, and Spataro ( 2003 , p. 3) as the “affective revolution.” In particular, scholars now understand that emotions can be measured objectively and be observed through nonverbal displays such as facial expression and gestures, verbal displays, fMRI, and hormone levels (Ashkanasy, 2003 ; Rashotte, 2002 ).

Fritz, Sonnentag, Spector, and McInroe ( 2010 ) focus on the importance of stress recovery in affective experiences. In fact, an individual employee’s affective state is critical to OB, and today more attention is being focused on discrete affective states. Emotions like fear and sadness may be related to counterproductive work behaviors (Judge et al., 2006 ). Stress recovery is another factor that is essential for more positive moods leading to positive organizational outcomes. In a study, Fritz et al. ( 2010 ) looked at levels of psychological detachment of employees on weekends away from the workplace and how it was associated with higher wellbeing and affect.

Emotional Intelligence and Emotional Labor

Ashkanasy and Daus ( 2002 ) suggest that emotional intelligence is distinct but positively related to other types of intelligence like IQ. It is defined by Mayer and Salovey ( 1997 ) as the ability to perceive, assimilate, understand, and manage emotion in the self and others. As such, it is an individual difference and develops over a lifetime, but it can be improved with training. Boyatzis and McKee ( 2005 ) describe emotional intelligence further as a form of adaptive resilience, insofar as employees high in emotional intelligence tend to engage in positive coping mechanisms and take a generally positive outlook toward challenging work situations.

Emotional labor occurs when an employee expresses her or his emotions in a way that is consistent with an organization’s display rules, and usually means that the employee engages in either surface or deep acting (Hochschild, 1983 ). This is because the emotions an employee is expressing as part of their role at work may be different from the emotions they are actually feeling (Ozcelik, 2013 ). Emotional labor has implications for an employee’s mental and physical health and wellbeing. Moreover, because of the discrepancy between felt emotions (how an employee actually feels) and displayed emotions or surface acting (what the organization requires the employee to emotionally display), surface acting has been linked to negative organizational outcomes such as heightened emotional exhaustion and reduced commitment (Erickson & Wharton, 1997 ; Brotheridge & Grandey, 2002 ; Grandey, 2003 ; Groth, Hennig-Thurau, & Walsh, 2009 ).

Affect and Organizational Decision-Making

Ashkanasy and Ashton-James ( 2008 ) make the case that the moods and emotions managers experience in response to positive or negative workplace situations affect outcomes and behavior not only at the individual level, but also in terms of strategic decision-making processes at the organizational level. These authors focus on affective events theory (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996 ), which holds that organizational events trigger affective responses in organizational members, which in turn affect organizational attitudes, cognition, and behavior.

Perceptions and Behavior

Like personality, emotions, moods, and attitudes, perceptions also influence employees’ behaviors in the workplace. Perception is the way in which people organize and interpret sensory cues in order to give meaning to their surroundings. It can be influenced by time, work setting, social setting, other contextual factors such as time of day, time of year, temperature, a target’s clothing or appearance, as well as personal trait dispositions, attitudes, and value systems. In fact, a person’s behavior is based on her or his perception of reality—not necessarily the same as actual reality. Perception greatly influences individual decision-making because individuals base their behaviors on their perceptions of reality. In this regard, attribution theory (Martinko, 1995 ) outlines how individuals judge others and is our attempt to conclude whether a person’s behavior is internally or externally caused.

Decision-Making and the Role of Perception

Decision-making occurs as a reaction to a problem when the individual perceives there to be discrepancy between the current state of affairs and the state s/he desires. As such, decisions are the choices individuals make from a set of alternative courses of action. Each individual interprets information in her or his own way and decides which information is relevant to weigh pros and cons of each decision and its alternatives to come to her or his perception of the best outcome. In other words, each of our unique perceptual processes influences the final outcome (Janis & Mann, 1977 ).

Common Biases in Decision-Making

Although there is no perfect model for approaching decision-making, there are nonetheless many biases that individuals can make themselves aware of in order to maximize their outcomes. First, overconfidence bias is an inclination to overestimate the correctness of a decision. Those most likely to commit this error tend to be people with weak intellectual and interpersonal abilities. Anchoring bias occurs when individuals focus on the first information they receive, failing to adjust for information received subsequently. Marketers tend to use anchors in order to make impressions on clients quickly and project their brand names. Confirmation bias occurs when individuals only use facts that support their decisions while discounting all contrary views. Lastly, availability bias occurs when individuals base their judgments on information readily available. For example, a manager might rate an employee on a performance appraisal based on behavior in the past few days, rather than the past six months or year.

Errors in Decision-Making

Other errors in decision-making include hindsight bias and escalation of commitment . Hindsight bias is a tendency to believe, incorrectly, after an outcome of an event has already happened, that the decision-maker would have accurately predicted that same outcome. Furthermore, this bias, despite its prevalence, is especially insidious because it inhibits the ability to learn from the past and take responsibility for mistakes. Escalation of commitment is an inclination to continue with a chosen course of action instead of listening to negative feedback regarding that choice. When individuals feel responsible for their actions and those consequences, they escalate commitment probably because they have invested so much into making that particular decision. One solution to escalating commitment is to seek a source of clear, less distorted feedback (Staw, 1981 ).

The last but certainly not least important individual level topic is motivation. Like each of the topics discussed so far, a worker’s motivation is also influenced by individual differences and situational context. Motivation can be defined as the processes that explain a person’s intensity, direction, and persistence toward reaching a goal. Work motivation has often been viewed as the set of energetic forces that determine the form, direction, intensity, and duration of behavior (Latham & Pinder, 2005 ). Motivation can be further described as the persistence toward a goal. In fact many non-academics would probably describe it as the extent to which a person wants and tries to do well at a particular task (Mitchell, 1982 ).

Early theories of motivation began with Maslow’s ( 1943 ) hierarchy of needs theory, which holds that each person has five needs in hierarchical order: physiological, safety, social, esteem, and self-actualization. These constitute the “lower-order” needs, while social and esteem needs are “higher-order” needs. Self-esteem for instance underlies motivation from the time of childhood. Another early theory is McGregor’s ( 1960 ) X-Y theory of motivation: Theory X is the concept whereby individuals must be pushed to work; and theory Y is positive, embodying the assumption that employees naturally like work and responsibility and can exercise self-direction.

Herzberg subsequently proposed the “two-factor theory” that attitude toward work can determine whether an employee succeeds or fails. Herzberg ( 1966 ) relates intrinsic factors, like advancement in a job, recognition, praise, and responsibility to increased job satisfaction, while extrinsic factors like the organizational climate, relationship with supervisor, and salary relate to job dissatisfaction. In other words, the hygiene factors are associated with the work context while the motivators are associated with the intrinsic factors associated with job motivation.

Contemporary Theories of Motivation

Although traditional theories of motivation still appear in OB textbooks, there is unfortunately little empirical data to support their validity. More contemporary theories of motivation, with more acceptable research validity, include self-determination theory , which holds that people prefer to have control over their actions. If a task an individual enjoyed now feels like a chore, then this will undermine motivation. Higher self-determined motivation (or intrinsically determined motivation) is correlated with increased wellbeing, job satisfaction, commitment, and decreased burnout and turnover intent. In this regard, Fernet, Gagne, and Austin ( 2010 ) found that work motivation relates to reactions to interpersonal relationships at work and organizational burnout. Thus, by supporting work self-determination, managers can help facilitate adaptive employee organizational behaviors while decreasing turnover intention (Richer, Blanchard, & Vallerand, 2002 ).

Core self-evaluation (CSE) theory is a relatively new concept that relates to self-confidence in general, such that people with higher CSE tend to be more committed to goals (Bono & Colbert, 2005 ). These core self-evaluations also extend to interpersonal relationships, as well as employee creativity. Employees with higher CSE are more likely to trust coworkers, which may also contribute to increased motivation for goal attainment (Johnson, Kristof-Brown, van Vianen, de Pater, & Klein, 2003 ). In general, employees with positive CSE tend to be more intrinsically motivated, thus additionally playing a role in increasing employee creativity (Judge, Bono, Erez, & Locke, 2005 ). Finally, according to research by Amabile ( 1996 ), intrinsic motivation or self-determined goal attainment is critical in facilitating employee creativity.

Goal-Setting and Conservation of Resources

While self-determination theory and CSE focus on the reward system behind motivation and employee work behaviors, Locke and Latham’s ( 1990 ) goal-setting theory specifically addresses the impact that goal specificity, challenge, and feedback has on motivation and performance. These authors posit that our performance is increased when specific and difficult goals are set, rather than ambiguous and general goals. Goal-setting seems to be an important motivational tool, but it is important that the employee has had a chance to take part in the goal-setting process so they are more likely to attain their goals and perform highly.

Related to goal-setting is Hobfoll’s ( 1989 ) conservation of resources (COR) theory, which holds that people have a basic motivation to obtain, maintain, and protect what they value (i.e., their resources). Additionally there is a global application of goal-setting theory for each of the motivation theories. Not enough research has been conducted regarding the value of goal-setting in global contexts, however, and because of this, goal-setting is not recommended without consideration of cultural and work-related differences (Konopaske & Ivancevich, 2004 ).

Self-Efficacy and Motivation

Other motivational theories include self-efficacy theory, and reinforcement, equity, and expectancy theories. Self-efficacy or social cognitive or learning theory is an individual’s belief that s/he can perform a task (Bandura, 1977 ). This theory complements goal-setting theory in that self-efficacy is higher when a manager assigns a difficult task because employees attribute the manager’s behavior to him or her thinking that the employee is capable; the employee in turn feels more confident and capable.

Reinforcement theory (Skinner, 1938 ) counters goal-setting theory insofar as it is a behaviorist approach rather than cognitive and is based in the notion that reinforcement conditions behavior, or in other words focuses on external causes rather than the value an individual attributes to goals. Furthermore, this theory instead emphasizes the behavior itself rather than what precedes the behavior. Additionally, managers may use operant conditioning, a part of behaviorism, to reinforce people to act in a desired way.

Social-learning theory (Bandura, 1977 ) extends operant conditioning and also acknowledges the influence of observational learning and perception, and the fact that people can learn and retain information by paying attention, observing, and modeling the desired behavior.

Equity theory (Adams, 1963 ) looks at how employees compare themselves to others and how that affects their motivation and in turn their organizational behaviors. Employees who perceive inequity for instance, will either change how much effort they are putting in (their inputs), change or distort their perceptions (either of self or others in relation to work), change their outcomes, turnover, or choose a different referent (acknowledge performance in relation to another employee but find someone else they can be better than).

Last but not least, Vroom’s ( 1964 ) expectancy theory holds that individuals are motivated by the extent to which they can see that their effort is likely to result in valued outcomes. This theory has received strong support in empirical research (see Van Erde & Thierry, 1996 , for meta-analytic results). Like each of the preceding theories, expectancy theory has important implications that managers should consider. For instance, managers should communicate with employees to determine their preferences to know what rewards to offer subordinates to elicit motivation. Managers can also make sure to identify and communicate clearly the level of performance they desire from an employee, as well as to establish attainable goals with the employee and to be very clear and precise about how and when performance will be rewarded (Konopaske & Ivancevich, 2004 ).

The Meso (Group) Level of Analysis

The second level of OB research also emerges from social and organizational psychology and relates to groups or teams. Topics covered so far include individual differences: diversity, personality and emotions, values and attitudes, motivation, and decision-making. Thus, in this section, attention turns to how individuals come together to form groups and teams, and begins laying the foundation for understanding the dynamics of group and team behavior. Topics at this level also include communication, leadership, power and politics, and conflict.

A group consists of two or more individuals who come together to achieve a similar goal. Groups can be formal or informal. A formal group on the one hand is assigned by the organization’s management and is a component of the organization’s structure. An informal group on the other hand is not determined by the organization and often forms in response to a need for social contact. Teams are formal groups that come together to meet a specific group goal.

Although groups are thought to go through five stages of development (Tuckman, 1965 : forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning) and to transition to effectiveness at the halfway mark (Gersick, 1988 ), group effectiveness is in fact far more complex. For example, two types of conformity to group norms are possible: compliance (just going along with the group’s norms but not accepting them) and personal acceptance (when group members’ individual beliefs match group norms). Behavior in groups then falls into required behavior usually defined by the formal group and emergent behavior that grows out of interactions among group members (Champoux, 2011 ).

Group Decision-Making

Although many of the decisions made in organizations occur in groups and teams, such decisions are not necessarily optimal. Groups may have more complex knowledge and increased perspectives than individuals but may suffer from conformity pressures or domination by one or two members. Group decision-making has the potential to be affected by groupthink or group shift. In groupthink , group pressures to conform to the group norms deter the group from thinking of alternative courses of action (Janis & Mann, 1977 ). In the past, researchers attempted to explain the effects of group discussion on decision-making through the following approaches: group decision rules, interpersonal comparisons, and informational influence. Myers and Lamm ( 1976 ), however, present a conceptual schema comprised of interpersonal comparisons and informational influence approaches that focus on attitude development in a more social context. They found that their research is consistent with the group polarization hypothesis: The initial majority predicts the consensus outcome 90% of the time. The term group polarization was founded in Serge Moscovici and his colleagues’ literature (e.g., Moscovici & Zavalloni, 1969 ). Polarization refers to an increase in the extremity of the average response of the subject population.

In other words, the Myer and Lamm ( 1976 ) schema is based on the idea that four elements feed into one another: social motivation, cognitive foundation, attitude change, and action commitment. Social motivation (comparing self with others in order to be perceived favorably) feeds into cognitive foundation , which in turn feeds into attitude change and action commitment . Managers of organizations can help reduce the negative phenomena and increase the likelihood of functional groups by encouraging brainstorming or openly looking at alternatives in the process of decision-making such as the nominal group technique (which involves restricting interpersonal communication in order to encourage free thinking and proceeding to a decision in a formal and systematic fashion such as voting).

Elements of Team Performance

OB researchers typically focus on team performance and especially the factors that make teams most effective. Researchers (e.g., see De Dreu & Van Vianen, 2001 ) have organized the critical components of effective teams into three main categories: context, composition, and process. Context refers to the team’s physical and psychological environment, and in particular the factors that enable a climate of trust. Composition refers to the means whereby the abilities of each individual member can best be most effectively marshaled. Process is maximized when members have a common goal or are able to reflect and adjust the team plan (for reflexivity, see West, 1996 ).

Communication

In order to build high-performing work teams, communication is critical, especially if team conflict is to be minimized. Communication serves four main functions: control, motivation, emotional expression, and information (Scott & Mitchell, 1976 ). The communication process involves the transfer of meaning from a sender to a receiver through formal channels established by an organization and informal channels, created spontaneously and emerging out of individual choice. Communication can flow downward from managers to subordinates, upward from subordinates to managers, or between members of the same group. Meaning can be transferred from one person to another orally, through writing, or nonverbally through facial expressions and body movement. In fact, body movement and body language may complicate verbal communication and add ambiguity to the situation as does physical distance between team members.

High-performance teams tend to have some of the following characteristics: interpersonal trust, psychological and physical safety, openness to challenges and ideas, an ability to listen to other points of view, and an ability to share knowledge readily to reduce task ambiguity (Castka, Bamber, Sharp, & Belohoubek, 2001 ). Although the development of communication competence is essential for a work team to become high-performing, that communication competence is also influenced by gender, personality, ability, and emotional intelligence of the members. Ironically, it is the self-reliant team members who are often able to develop this communication competence. Although capable of working autonomously, self-reliant team members know when to ask for support from others and act interdependently.

Emotions also play a part in communicating a message or attitude to other team members. Emotional contagion, for instance, is a fascinating effect of emotions on nonverbal communication, and it is the subconscious process of sharing another person’s emotions by mimicking that team member’s nonverbal behavior (Hatfield, Cacioppo, & Rapson, 1993 ). Importantly, positive communication, expressions, and support of team members distinguished high-performing teams from low-performing ones (Bakker & Schaufeli, 2008 ).

Team Conflict

Because of member interdependence, teams are inclined to more conflict than individual workers. In particular, diversity in individual differences leads to conflict (Thomas, 1992 ; Wall & Callister, 1995 ; see also Cohen & Bailey, 1997 ). Jehn ( 1997 ) identifies three types of conflict: task, relationship, and process. Process conflict concerns how task accomplishment should proceed and who is responsible for what; task conflict focuses on the actual content and goals of the work (Robbins et al., 2014 ); and relationship conflict is based on differences in interpersonal relationships. While conflict, and especially task conflict, does have some positive benefits such as greater innovation (Tjosvold, 1997 ), it can also lead to lowered team performance and decreased job satisfaction, or even turnover. De Dreu and Van Vianen ( 2001 ) found that team conflict can result in one of three responses: (1) collaborating with others to find an acceptable solution; (2) contending and pushing one member’s perspective on others; or (3) avoiding and ignoring the problem.

Team Effectiveness and Relationship Conflict

Team effectiveness can suffer in particular from relationship conflict, which may threaten team members’ personal identities and self-esteem (Pelled, 1995 ). In this regard, Murnighan and Conlon ( 1991 ) studied members of British string quartets and found that the most successful teams avoided relationship conflict while collaborating to resolve task conflicts. This may be because relationship conflict distracts team members from the task, reducing team performance and functioning. As noted earlier, positive affect is associated with collaboration, cooperation, and problem resolution, while negative affect tends to be associated with competitive behaviors, especially during conflict (Rhoades, Arnold, & Jay, 2001 ).

Team Climate and Emotionality

Emotional climate is now recognized as important to team processes (Ashkanasy & Härtel, 2014 ), and team climate in general has important implications for how individuals behave individually and collectively to effect organizational outcomes. This idea is consistent with Druskat and Wolff’s ( 2001 ) notion that team emotional-intelligence climate can help a team manage both types of conflict (task and relationship). In Jehn’s ( 1997 ) study, she found that emotion was most often negative during team conflict, and this had a negative effect on performance and satisfaction regardless of the type of conflict team members were experiencing. High emotionality, as Jehn calls it, causes team members to lose sight of the work task and focus instead on the negative affect. Jehn noted, however, that absence of group conflict might also may block innovative ideas and stifle creativity (Jehn, 1997 ).

Power and Politics

Power and organizational politics can trigger employee conflict, thus affecting employee wellbeing, job satisfaction, and performance, in turn affecting team and organizational productivity (Vigoda, 2000 ). Because power is a function of dependency, it can often lead to unethical behavior and thus become a source of conflict. Types of power include formal and personal power. Formal power embodies coercive, reward, and legitimate power. Coercive power depends on fear. Reward power is the opposite and occurs when an individual complies because s/he receives positive benefits from acting in accordance with the person in power. In formal groups and organizations, the most easily accessed form of power is legitimate because this form comes to be from one’s position in the organizational hierarchy (Raven, 1993 ). Power tactics represent the means by which those in a position of power translate their power base (formal or personal) into specific actions.

The nine influence tactics that managers use according to Yukl and Tracey ( 1992 ) are (1) rational persuasion, (2) inspirational appeal, (3) consultation, (4) ingratiation, (5) exchange, (6) personal appeal, (7) coalition, (8) legitimating, and (9) pressure. Of these tactics, inspirational appeal, consultation, and rational persuasion were among the strategies most effective in influencing task commitment. In this study, there was also a correlation found between a manager’s rational persuasion and a subordinate rating her effectively. Perhaps this is because persuasion requires some level of expertise, although more research is needed to verify which methods are most successful. Moreover, resource dependence theory dominates much theorizing about power and organizational politics. In fact, it is one of the central themes of Pfeffer and Salancik’s ( 1973 ) treatise on the external control of organizations. First, the theory emphasizes the importance of the organizational environment in understanding the context of how decisions of power are made (see also Pfeffer & Leblebici, 1973 ). Resource dependence theory is based on the premise that some organizations have more power than others, occasioned by specifics regarding their interdependence. Pfeffer and Salancik further propose that external interdependence and internal organizational processes are related and that this relationship is mediated by power.

Organizational Politics

Political skill is the ability to use power tactics to influence others to enhance an individual’s personal objectives. In addition, a politically skilled person is able to influence another person without being detected (one reason why he or she is effective). Persons exerting political skill leave a sense of trust and sincerity with the people they interact with. An individual possessing a high level of political skill must understand the organizational culture they are exerting influence within in order to make an impression on his or her target. While some researchers suggest political behavior is a critical way to understand behavior that occurs in organizations, others simply see it as a necessary evil of work life (Champoux, 2011 ). Political behavior focuses on using power to reach a result and can be viewed as unofficial and unsanctioned behavior (Mintzberg, 1985 ). Unlike other organizational processes, political behavior involves both power and influence (Mayes & Allen, 1977 ). Moreover, because political behavior involves the use of power to influence others, it can often result in conflict.

Organizational Politics, Power, and Ethics

In concluding this section on power and politics, it is also appropriate to address the dark side, where organizational members who are persuasive and powerful enough might become prone to abuse standards of equity and justice and thereby engage in unethical behavior. An employee who takes advantage of her position of power may use deception, lying, or intimidation to advance her own interests (Champoux, 2011 ). When exploring interpersonal injustice, it is important to consider the intent of the perpetrator, as well as the effect of the perpetrator’s treatment from the victim’s point of view. Umphress, Simmons, Folger, Ren, and Bobocel ( 2013 ) found in this regard that not only does injustice perceived by the self or coworkers influence attitudes and behavior within organizations, but injustice also influences observer reactions both inside and outside of the organization.

Leadership plays an integrative part in understanding group behavior, because the leader is engaged in directing individuals toward attitudes and behaviors, hopefully also in the direction of those group members’ goals. Although there is no set of universal leadership traits, extraversion from the Big Five personality framework has been shown in meta-analytic studies to be positively correlated with transformational, while neuroticism appears to be negatively correlated (Bono & Judge, 2004 ). There are also various perspectives to leadership, including the competency perspective, which addresses the personality traits of leaders; the behavioral perspective, which addresses leader behaviors, specifically task versus people-oriented leadership; and the contingency perspective, which is based on the idea that leadership involves an interaction of personal traits and situational factors. Fiedler’s ( 1967 ) contingency, for example, suggests that leader effectiveness depends on the person’s natural fit to the situation and the leader’s score on a “least preferred coworker” scale.

More recently identified styles of leadership include transformational leadership (Bass, Avolio, & Atwater, 1996 ), charismatic leadership (Conger & Kanungo, 1988 ), and authentic leadership (Luthans & Avolio, 2003 ). In a nutshell, transformational leaders inspire followers to act based on the good of the organization; charismatic leaders project a vision and convey a new set of values; and authentic leaders convey trust and genuine sentiment.

Leader-member exchange theory (LMX; see Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995 ) assumes that leadership emerges from exchange relationships between a leader and her or his followers. More recently, Tse, Troth, and Ashkanasy ( 2015 ) expanded on LMX to include social processes (e.g., emotional intelligence, emotional labor, and discrete emotions), arguing that affect plays a large part in the leader-member relationship.

Leadership Development

An emerging new topic in leadership concerns leadership development, which embodies the readiness of leadership aspirants to change (Hannah & Avolio, 2010 ). In this regard, the learning literature suggests that intrinsic motivation is necessary in order to engage in development (see Hidi & Harackiewicz, 2000 ), but also that the individual needs to be goal-oriented and have developmental efficacy or self-confidence that s/he can successfully perform in leadership contexts.

Ashkanasy, Dasborough, and Ascough ( 2009 ) argue further that developing the affective side of leaders is important. In this case, because emotions are so pervasive within organizations, it is important that leaders learn how to manage them in order to improve team performance and interactions with employees that affect attitudes and behavior at almost every organizational level.

Abusive Leadership

Leaders, or those in positions of power, are particularly more likely to run into ethical issues, and only more recently have organizational behavior researchers considered the ethical implications of leadership. As Gallagher, Mazur, and Ashkanasy ( 2015 ) describe, since 2009 , organizations have been under increasing pressure to cut costs or “do more with less,” and this sometimes can lead to abusive supervision, whereby employee job demands exceed employee resources, and supervisors engage in bullying, undermining, victimization, or personal attacks on subordinates (Tepper, 2000 ).

Supervisors who are very high or low in emotional intelligence may be more likely to experience stress associated with a very demanding high-performance organizational culture. These supervisors may be more likely to try to meet the high demands and pressures through manipulative behaviors (Kilduff, Chiaburu, & Menges, 2010 ). This has serious implications for employee wellbeing and the organization as a whole. Abusive supervision detracts from the ability for those under attack to perform effectively, and targets often come to doubt their own ability to perform (Tepper, 2000 ).

The Macro (Organizational) Level of Analysis

The final level of OB derives from research traditions across three disciplines: organizational psychology, organizational sociology, and organizational anthropology. Moreover, just as teams and groups are more than the sum of their individual team members, organizations are also more than the sum of the teams or groups residing within them. As such, structure, climate, and culture play key roles in shaping and being shaped by employee attitudes and behaviors, and they ultimately determine organizational performance and productivity.

Organizational Structure

Organizational structure is a sociological phenomenon that determines the way tasks are formally divided and coordinated within an organization. In this regard, jobs are often grouped by the similarity of functions performed, the product or service produced, or the geographical location. Often, the number of forms of departmentalization will depend on the size of the organization, with larger organizations having more forms of departmentalization than others. Organizations are also organized by the chain of command or the hierarchy of authority that determines the span of control, or how many employees a manager can efficiently and effectively lead. With efforts to reduce costs since the global financial crisis of 2009 , organizations have tended to adopt a wider, flatter span of control, where more employees report to one supervisor.

Organizational structure also concerns the level of centralization or decentralization, the degree to which decision-making is focused at a single point within an organization. Formalization is also the degree to which jobs are organized in an organization. These levels are determined by the organization and also vary greatly across the world. For example, Finnish organizations tend to be more decentralized than their Australian counterparts and, as a consequence, are more innovative (Leiponen & Helfat, 2011 ).

Mintzberg ( 1979 ) was the first to set out a taxonomy of organizational structure. Within his model, the most common organizational design is the simple structure characterized by a low level of departmentalization, a wide span of control, and centralized authority. Other organizational types emerge in larger organizations, which tend to be bureaucratic and more routinized. Rules are formalized, tasks are grouped into departments, authority is centralized, and the chain of command involves narrow spans of control and decision-making. An alternative is the matrix structure, often found in hospitals, universities, and government agencies. This form of organization combines functional and product departmentalization where employees answer to two bosses: functional department managers and product managers.

New design options include the virtual organization and the boundaryless organization , an organization that has no chain of command and limitless spans of control. Structures differ based on whether the organization seeks to use an innovation strategy, imitation strategy, or cost-minimization strategy (Galunic & Eisenhardt, 1994 ). Organizational structure can have a significant effect on employee attitudes and behavior. Evidence generally shows that work specialization leads to higher employee productivity but also lower job satisfaction (Porter & Lawler, 1965 ). Gagné and Deci emphasize that autonomous work motivation (i.e., intrinsic motivation and integrated extrinsic motivation) is promoted in work climates that are interesting, challenging, and allow choice. Parker, Wall, and Jackson ( 1997 ) specifically relate job enlargement to autonomous motivation. Job enlargement was first discussed by management theorists like Lawler and Hall ( 1970 ), who believed that jobs should be enlarged to improve the intrinsic motivation of workers. Today, most of the job-design literature is built around the issue of work specialization (job enlargement and enrichment). In Parker, Wall, and Jackson’s study, they observed that horizontally enlarging jobs through team-based assembly cells led to greater understanding and acceptance of the company’s vision and more engagement in new work roles. (In sum, by structuring work to allow more autonomy among employees and identification among individual work groups, employees stand to gain more internal autonomous motivation leading to improved work outcomes (van Knippenberg & van Schie, 2000 ).

The Physical Environment of Work

Ashkanasy, Ayoko, and Jehn ( 2014 ) extend the topic of organizational structure to discuss, from a psychological perspective, how the physical work environment shapes employee attitudes, behaviors, and organizational outcomes. Elsbach ( 2003 ) pointed out that the space within which employees conduct their work is critical to employees’ levels of performance and productivity. In their study, Ashkanasy and his colleagues looked at the underlying processes influencing how the physical environment determines employee attitudes and behaviors, in turn affecting productivity levels. They base their model on affective events theory (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996 ), which holds that particular “affective” events in the work environment are likely to be the immediate cause of employee behavior and performance in organizations (see also Ashkanasy & Humphrey, 2011 ). Specifically, Ashkanasy and colleagues ( 2014 ) looked at how this theory holds in extremely crowded open-plan office designs and how employees in these offices are more likely to experience negative affect, conflict, and territoriality, negatively impacting attitudes, behaviors, and work performance.

• Organizational Climate and Culture

Although organizational structure and the physical environment are important determinants of employee attitudes and behaviors, organizational culture and climate lie at the heart of organizational interactions (Ashkanasy & Jackson, 2001 ). Organizational culture derives from an anthropological research tradition, while organizational climate is based on organizational psychology.

A central presumption of culture is that, as Smircich ( 1983 ) noted, organizational behavior is not a function of what goes on inside individual employees’ heads, but between employees, as evidenced in daily organizational communication and language. As such, organizational culture allows one organization to distinguish itself from another, while conveying a sense of identity for its members.

Organizational Climate and its Relation to Organizational Culture

Organizational culture creates organizational climate or employees’ shared perceptions about their organization and work environment. Organizational climate has been found to facilitate and/or inhibit displays of certain behaviors in one study (Smith-Crowe, Burke, & Landis, 2003 ), and overall, organizational climate is often viewed as a surface-level indicator of the functioning of the employee/organizational environment relationship (Ryan, Horvath, Ployhart, Schmitt, & Slade, 2000 ). For instance, a more restrictive climate may inhibit individual decision-making in contrast to a more supportive climate in which the organization may intervene at the individual level and in which the ability/job performance relationship is supported (James, Demaree, Mulaik, & Ladd, 1992 ). In a study focused on safety climate, Smith-Crowe and colleagues found that organizational climate is essential in determining whether training will transfer to employee performance, and this is most likely because organizational climate moderates the knowledge/performance relationship. Gibbs and Cooper ( 2010 ) also found that a supportive organizational climate is positively related to employee performance. They specifically looked at PsyCap, the higher-order construct of psychological capital first proposed by Luthans and Youssef ( 2004 ).

Organizational Change

The final topic covered in this article is organizational change. Organizational culture and climate can both be negatively impacted by organizational change and, in turn, negatively affect employee wellbeing, attitudes, and performance, reflecting onto organizational performance. Often, there is great resistance to change, and the success rate of organizational change initiatives averages at less than 30% (Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015 ). In order to overcome this resistance, it is important that managers plan ahead for changes and emphasize education and communication about them. As organizations becoming increasingly globalized, change has become the norm, and this will continue into the future.

Additionally, as organizations become increasingly globalized, organizational changes often involve mergers that have important organizational implications. In this regard, Kavanagh and Ashkanasy ( 2006 ) found that, for a merger to be successful, there needs to be alignment between the individual values and organizational cultures of merging partners. Managers during a merger situation need to be especially cognizant of how this organizational change affects the company’s original organizational culture.

Organizational development (OD), a collection of planned change interventions, may be the way to improve organizational performance and increase employee wellbeing. OD focuses on employees respecting one another, trust and support, equal power, confrontation of problems, and participation of everyone affected by the organizational change (Lines, 2004 ). Moreover, when an organization already has an established climate and culture that support change and innovation, an organization may have less trouble adapting to the change.

Organizational change research encompasses almost all aspects of organizational behavior. Individuals and employees are motivated to achieve success and be perceived as successful. In this regard, each of the individual differences—personality, affect, past experiences, values, and perceptions—plays into whether individuals can transcend obstacles and deal with the barriers encountered along the journey toward achievement. Teams are similarly motivated to be successful in a collective sense and to prove that they contribute to the organization as a whole. In addition to individual differences, team members deal with bringing all those individual differences together, which can wreak havoc on team communication and cause further obstacles in terms of power differences and conflicts in regard to decision-making processes. Last, at the organizational level of organizational behavior, it is important to account for all of these micro- and meso-level differences, and to address the complexity of economic pressures, increasing globalization, and global and transnational organizations to the mix. This is at the top level of sophistication because, as emphasized before, just as groups equal much more than the sum of individual members, organizations are much more than the sum of their teams. The organizational structure, the formal organization, the organizational culture, and climate and organizational rules all impact whether an organization can perform effectively. Organizational behavior, through its complex study of human behavior at its very conception, offers much-needed practical implications for managers in understanding people at work.

• Adams, J. S. (1963). Towards an understanding of inequity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology , 67 , 422–436.
• Al-Haddad, S. , & Kotnour, T. (2015). Integrating the organizational change literature: A model for successful change. Journal of Organizational Change Management , 28 , 234–262.
• Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity . Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
• Anderson, C. , Spataro, S. E. , & Flynn, F. J. (2008). Personality and organizational culture as determinants of influence. Journal of Applied Psychology , 93 , 702–710.
• Ardichivili, A. , Mitchell, J. A. , & Jondle, D. (2009). Characteristics of ethical business cultures. Journal of Business Ethics , 85 , 445–451.
• Ashforth, B. E. , & Humphrey, R. H. (1995). Emotion in the workplace: A reappraisal. Human Relations , 48 , 97–125.
• Ashkanasy, N. M. (2003). Emotions in organizations: A multilevel perspective. In F. Danserau & F. J. Yammarino (Eds.), Research in multilevel issues (Vol. 2, pp. 9–54). Oxford: Elsevier.
• Ashkanasy, N. M. , & Ashton-James, C. E. (2008). Affective events theory: A strategic perspective. In W. J. Zerbe , C. E. J. Härtel , & N. M. Ashkanasy (Eds.), Research on emotion in organizations (Vol. 4, pp. 1–34). Bingley, U.K.: Emerald Group Pub.
• Ashkanasy, N. M. , Ayoko, O. B. , & Jehn, K. A. (2014). Understanding the physical environment of work and employee behavior: An affective events perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 35 , 1169–1184.
• Ashkanasy, N. M. , & Dasborough, M. T. (2003). Emotional awareness and emotional intelligence in leadership teaching. Journal of Education in Business , 79 , 18–22.
• Ashkanasy, N. M. , Dasborough, M. T. , & Ascough, K. W. (2009). Developing leaders: Teaching about emotional intelligence and training in emotional skills. In S. J. Armstrong & C. V. Fukami (Eds.), The Sage handbook of management learning, education and development (pp. 161–185). London: SAGE.
• Ashkanasy, N. M & Daus, C. S. (2002). Emotion in the workplace: The new challenge for managers. Academy of Management Executive , 16 , 76–86.
• Ashkanasy, N. M. , & Härtel, C. E. J. (2014). Emotional Climate and culture: The good, the bad, and the ugly. In B. Schneider & K. Barbera (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of organizational culture and climate (pp. 136–152). New York: Oxford University Press.
• Ashkanasy, N. M. , & Humphrey, R. H. (2011). Current research on emotion in organizations. Emotion Review , 3 , 214–224.
• Ashkanasy, N. M. , & Jackson, C. R. A. (2001). Organizational culture and climate. In N. Anderson , D. S. Ones , H. K. Sinangil , & C. Viswesvaran (Eds.), Handbook of work and organizational psychology (pp. 398–415). London: SAGE.
• Bakker, A. B. , & Schaufeli, W. B. (2008). Positive organizational behavior: Engaged employees in flourishing organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 29 , 147–154.
• Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory . Alexandria, VA: Prentice Hall.
• Barsade, S. G. , Brief, A. P. , & Spataro, S. E. (2003). The affective revolution in organizational behavior: The emergence of a paradigm. In J. Greenberg (Ed.), Organizational behavior: The state of the science (pp. 3–50). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Bass, B. M. , Avolio, B. J. , & Atwater, L. E. (1996). The transformational and transactional leadership of men and women. Applied Psychology: An International Review , 45 , 5–34.
• Bono, J. E. , & Colbert, A. E. (2005). Understanding responses to multi‐source feedback: The role of core self‐evaluations. Personnel Psychology , 58 , 171–203.
• Bono, J. E. , & Judge, T. A. (2004). Personality and transformational and transactional leadership: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology , 89 , 901–910.
• Boyatzis, R. E. , & McKee, A. (2005). Resonant leadership: Renewing yourself and connecting with others through mindfulness, hope, and compassion . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Brady, M. K. , & Cronin, J. J., Jr. (2001). Customer orientation: Effects on customer service perceptions and outcome behaviors. Journal of Service Research , 3 , 241–251.
• Britt, T. W. , Dickinson, J. M. , Greene-Shortridge, T. M. , & McKibbin, E. S. (2007). Self-engagement at work. In D. L. Nelson & C. L Cooper (Eds). Positive Organizational Behavior (pp. 143–158). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Brotheridge, C. , & Grandey, A. (2002). Emotional labor and burnout: Comparing two perspectives of “people work.” Journal of Vocational Behavior , 60 , 17–39.
• Castka, P. , Bamber, C. J. , Sharp, J. M. , & Belohoubek, P. (2001). Factors affecting successful implementation of high performance teams. Team Performance Management: An International Journal , 7 (7/8), 123–134.
• Champoux, J. E. (2011). Organizational behavior: Integrating individuals, groups and organizations (4th ed.). Florence: Routledge.
• Cohen, S. G. , & Bailey, D. E. (1997). What makes teams work? Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management , 23 , 239–290.
• Conger, J. A. , & Kanungo, R. N. (1988). Charismatic leadership. The elusive factor in organizational effectiveness . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Costa, P. T., Jr. , & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO five-factor inventory (NEO-FFI) manual . Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
• De Dreu, C. K. W. , & Van Vianen, A. E. M. (2001). Managing relationship conflict and the effectiveness of organizational teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 22 , 309–3278.
• Diener, E. , Larsen, R. J. , Levine, S. , Emmons, R. (1985). Intensity and frequency: Dimensions underlying positive and negative affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 28 , 1253–1265.
• Druskat, V. U. , & Wolff, S. B. (2001). Building the emotional intelligence of groups. Harvard Business Review , 79 , 81–90.
• Elsbach, K. D. (2003). Relating physical environment to self-categorizations: Identity threat and affirmation in a non-territorial office space. Administrative Science Quarterly , 48 , 622–654.
• Erickson, R. J. , & Wharton, A. S. (1997). Inauthenticity and depression: Assessing the consequences of interactive service work. Work and Occupations , 24 , 188–213.
• Feather, N. T. , & Boeckmann, R. J. (2007). Beliefs about gender discrimination in the workplace in the context of affirmative action: Effects of gender and ambivalent attitudes in an Australian sample. Sex Roles , 57 , 31–42.
• Fernet, C. , Gagne, M. , & Austin, S. (2010). When does quality of relationships with coworkers predict burnout over time? The moderating role of work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 31 , 1163–1180.
• Fiedler, F. E. (1967). A theory of leadership effective ness. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Fritz, C. , Sonnentag, S. , Spector, P. E. , & McInroe, J. (2010). The weekend matters: Relationships between stress recovery and affective experiences. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 31 , 1137–1162.
• Galunic, D. C. , & Eisenhardt, K. M. (1994). Renewing the strategy-structure-performance paradigm. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 16, pp. 215–255). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
• Gallagher, E. C. , Mazur, A. K. , & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2015). Rallying the troops or beating the horses? How project-related demands can lead to either high performance or abusive supervision. Project Management Journal , 46 (3), 10–24.
• Gersick, C. J. G. (1988). Time and transition in work teams: Toward a new model of group development. Academy of Management Journal , 31 , 9–41.
• Gibbs, P. C. , & Cooper, C. L. (2010). Fostering a positive organizational culture and climate in an economic downturn. In N. M. Ashkanasy , C. P. M. Wilderom , & M. F. Peterson , The handbook of organizational culture and climate (2d ed., pp. 119–137). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Graen, G. B. , & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Development of LMX theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level, multi-domain perspective. Leadership Quarterly , 6 , 219–247.
• Grandey, A. (2003). When the show must go on: Surface and deep acting as predictors of emotional exhaustion and service delivery. Academy of Management Journal , 46 , 86–96.
• Groth, M. , Hennig-Thurau, T. , & Walsh, G. (2009). Customer reactions to emotional labor: The roles of employee acting strategies and customer detection accuracy. Academy of Management Journal , 52 , 958–974.
• Hannah, S. T. , & Avolio, B. J. (2010). Ready or not: How do we accelerate the developmental readiness of leaders? Journal of Organizational Behavior , 31 , 1181–1187.
• Hatfield, E. , Cacioppo, J. T. , & Rapson, R. L. (1993). Emotional contagion: Current directions. Psychological Science , 2 , 96–99.
• Herzberg, F. (1966). Work and the nature of man . Cleveland, OH: World Publishing.
• Hidi, S. , & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). Motivating the academically unmotivated: A critical issue for the 21st century. Review of Educational Research , 70 , 151–179.
• Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist , 44 , 513–524.
• Hochschild, A. R. (1983). The managed heart: Commercialization of human feeling . Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Holland, J. (1973). Making vocational choices: Q theory of careers . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
• Janis, I. L. , & Mann, L. (1977). Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choice, and commitment . New York: Free Press.
• James, L. R. , Demaree, R. G. , Mulaik, S. A. , & Ladd, R. T. (1992). Validity generalization in the context of situational models. Journal of Applied Psychology , 77 , 3–14.
• Jehn, K. A. (1997). A qualitative analysis of conflict types and dimensions in organizational groups. Administrative Science Quarterly , 42 , 538–566.
• Johnson, E. C. , Kristof-Brown, A. L , van Vianen, A. E. M. , de Pater, I. E. , & Klein, M. R. (2003). Expatriate social ties: Personality antecedents and consequences for adjustment. International Journal of Selection and Assessment , 11 , 277–288.
• Judge, T. A. , Bono, J. E. , Erez, A. , & Locke, E. A. (2005). Core self-evaluations and job and life satisfaction: The role of self-concordance and goal attainment. Journal of Applied Psychology , 90 , 257–268.
• Judge, T. A. , Higgins, C. A. , Thoresen, C. J. , & Barrick, M. R. (2006). The Big Five personality traits, general mental ability, and career success across the life span. Personnel Psychology , 52 , 621–652.
• Judge, T. A. , Ilies, R. , & Scott, B. A. (2006). Work-family conflict and emotions: Effects at work and home. Personnel Psychology , 59 , 779–814.
• Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal , 33 , 692–724.
• Kavanagh, M. H. , & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2006). The impact of leadership and change management strategy on organizational culture and individual acceptance of change during a merger. British Journal of Management , 17 , S81–S103.
• Kilduff, M. , Chiaburu, D. S. , & Menges, J. I. (2010). Strategic use of emotional intelligence in organizational settings: Exploring the dark side. Research in Organizational Behavior , 30 , 129–152.
• Konopaske, R. , & Ivancevich, J. M. (2004). Global management and organizational behavior: Text, readings, cases, and exercises . New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Latham, G. P. , & Pinder, C. C. (2005). Work motivation theory and research at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Annual Review of Psychology , 56 , 485–516.
• Lawler, E. E. , & Hall, D. T. (1970). Relationship of job characteristics to job involvement, satisfaction, and intrinsic motivation. Journal of Applied psychology , 54 , 305–312.
• Leiponen, A. , & Helfat, C. E. (2011). Location, decentralization, and knowledge sources for innovation. Organization Science , 22 , 641–658.
• Lines, R. (2004). Influence of participation in strategic change: Resistance, organizational commitment and change goal achievement. Journal of Change Management , 4 (3), 193–215.
• Locke, E. A. , & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
• Luthans, F. , & Avolio, B. J. (2003). Authentic leadership development. In K. S. Cameron , J. E. Dutton , & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship: Foundations of a new discipline (pp. 241–261). San Francisco: Barrett-Koehler.
• Luthans, F. , & Youssef, C. M. (2004). Human, social, and now positive psychological capital management. Organizational Dynamics , 33 , 143–160.
• Martinko, M. J. (1995). The nature and function of attribution theory within the organizational sciences. In. M. J. Martinko (Ed.), Advances in attribution theory: An organizational perspective (pp. 7–14). Delray Beach, FL: St. Lucie Press.
• Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review , 50 , 370–396.
• Mayer, J. D. , & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? In P. Salovey & D. J. Sluyter (Eds.), Emotional development and emotional intelligence: Educational implications (pp. 3–31). New York: Basic Books.
• Mayes, B. T. , & Allen, R. W. (1977). Toward a definition of organizational politics. Academy of Management Journal , 2 , 635–644.
• McGregor, D. (1960). The human side of enterprise . New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Mintzberg, H. (1979). The structuring of organizations: A synthesis of the research . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
• Mintzberg, H. (1985). The organization as a political arena. Journal of Management Studies , 22 , 133–154.
• Mitchell, T. R. (1982). Motivation: New directions for theory, research, and practice. Academy of Management Review , 7 , 80–88.
• Moscovici, S. , & Zavalloni, M. (1969). The group as a polarizer of attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 12 , 125–135.
• Murnighan, J. K. , & Conlon, D. E. (1991). The dynamics of intense workgroups: A study of British string quartets. Administrative Science Quarterly , 36 , 165–186.
• Myers, D. G. , & Lamm, H. (1976). The group polarization phenomenon. Psychological Bulletin , 83 , 602–627.
• Ozcelik, H. (2013). An empirical analysis of surface acting in intra-organizational relationships. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 34 , 291–309.
• Ostroff, C. , & Atwater, L. E. (2003). Does whom you work with matter? Effects of referent group and age composition on managers’ compensation. Journal of Applied Psychology , 88 , 725–740.
• Parker, S. K. , Wall, T. D. , & Jackson, P. R. (1997). “That's not my job”: Developing flexible employee work orientations. Academy of Management Journal , 40 , 899–929.
• Pelled, L. H. (1995). Demographic diversity, conflict, and work group outcomes: An intervening process theory. Organization Science , 7 , 615–631.
• Pfeffer, J. , & Leblebici, H. (1973). Executive recruitment and the development of interfirm organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly , 18 , 449–461.
• Pfeffer, J. , & Salancik, G. R. (1973). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective . Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
• Porter, L. W. , & Lawler, E. E. (1965). Properties of organization structure in relation to job attitudes and job behavior. Psychological Bulletin , 64 , 23–51.
• Rashotte, L. S. (2002). What does that smile mean? The meaning of nonverbal behaviors in social interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly , 65 , 92–102.
• Raven, B. H. (1993). The bases of power: Origins and recent developments. Journal of Social Issues , 49 , 227–251.
• Richer, S. , Blanchard, C. , & Vallerand, R. J. (2002). A motivational model of work turnover. Journal of Applied Social Psychology , 32 , 2089–2113.
• Rhoades, J. A. , Arnold, J. , & Jay, C. (2001). The role of affective traits and affective states in disputants’ motivation and behavior during episodes of organizational conflict. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 22 , 329–345.
• Robbins, S. P. , Judge, T. A. , Millett, B. , & Boyle, M. (2014). Organisational behaviour (7th ed.). French’s Forest, NSW, Australia: Pearson Education.
• Ryan, A. M. , Horvath, M. , Ployhart, R. E. , Schmitt, N. , & Slade, L. A. (2000). Hypothesizing differential item functioning in global employee opinion surveys. Personnel Psychology , 53 , 531–562.
• Scott, W. G. , & Mitchell, T. R. (1976). Organization theory: A structural and behavioral analysis . Homewood, IL: Irwin.
• Skinner, B. F. (1938). The behavior of organisms: An experimental analysis . New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
• Smircich, L. (1983). Concepts of culture and organizational analysis. Administrative science quarterly , 28 , 339–358.
• Smith-Crowe, K. , Burke, M. J. , & Landis, R. S. (2003). Organizational climate as a moderator of safety knowledge-safety performance relationships. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 24 , 861–876.
• Staw, B. M. (1981). The escalation of commitment to a course of action. Academy of Management Review , 6 , 577–587.
• Tepper, B. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal , 43 , 178–190.
• Thomas, K. W. (1992). Conflict and negotiation processes in organizations. In M. D. Dunnette , & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (2d ed., Vol. 3, pp. 652–717). Mountain View, CA: Consulting Psychologist Press.
• Tjosvold, D. (1997). Networking by professionals to manage change: Dentists’ cooperation and competition to develop their business. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 18 , 745–752.
• Tse, H. M. M. , Troth, A. M. , & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2015). Leader-member exchange and emotion in organizations. In B. Erdogan & T. N. Bauer (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of leader-member exchange (pp. 209–225). New York: Oxford University Press.
• Tuckman, B. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin , 63 , 384–399.
• Umphress, E. E. , Simmons, A. L. , Folger, R. , Ren, R. , & Bobocel, R. (2013). Observer reactions to interpersonal injustice: The roles of perpetrator intent and victim perception. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 34 , 327–349.
• Van Erde, W. , & Thierry, H. (1996). Vroom’s Expectancy models and work-related criteria: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology , 81 , 576–588.
• Van Knippenberg, D. , & Van Schie, E. L. S. (2000). Foci and correlates of organizational identification. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology , 73 , 137–147.
• Vigoda, E. (2000). Organizational politics, job attitudes, and work outcomes: Exploration and implications for the public sector. Journal of Vocational Behavior , 57 , 326–347.
• Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation . New York: Wiley.
• Wall, J. , & Callister, R. (1995). Conflict and its management. Journal of Management , 21 , 515–558.
• Wallach, M. A. , Kogan, N. , & Bem D. J. (1964). Diffusion of responsibility and level of risk taking in groups. Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology , 68 , 263–274.
• Watson, D. (1988). The vicissitudes of mood measurement: Effects of varying descriptors, time frames, and response formats on measures of positive and negative affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 55 , 128–141.
• Watson, D. , & Tellegen, A. (1985). Toward a consensual structure of mood. Psychological Bulletin , 98 , 219–235.
• Watson, D. , & Walker, L. M. (1996). The long-term stability and predictive validity of trait measures of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 70 , 567–577.
• Weiss, H. M. (2002). Deconstructing job satisfaction: Separating evaluations, beliefs and affective experiences. Human Resource Management Review , 12 , 173–194.
• Weiss, H. M. , & Cropanzano, R. (1996). Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of the structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 18, pp. 1–74). Westport, CT: JAI Press.
• West, M. (1996). Reflexivity and work group effectiveness: A conceptual integration. In M. A. West (Ed.), The handbook of work group psychology (pp. 555–579). Chichester, U.K.: Wiley.
• Wilkin, C. L. (2012). I can’t get no job satisfaction: Meta-analysis comparing permanent and contingent workers. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 34 , 47–64.
• Yukl, G. , & Tracey, J. B. (1992). Consequences of influence tactics used with subordinates, peers, and the boss. Journal of Applied Psychology , 77 , 525–535.

Related Articles

• Organizational Sensemaking
• Human Resource Management and Organizational Psychology
• Overqualification in the Workplace
• Communication and Intergroup Relations
• Justice in Teams
• Training from an Organizational Psychology Perspective
• Dual Process Models of Persuasion

Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, Psychology. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 13 May 2024

• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility
• [66.249.64.20|185.80.151.41]
• 185.80.151.41

Character limit 500 /500

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

UNDERSTANDING EMPLOYEES' INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR: A CASE STUDY

2020, Personnel Review

Purpose-The purpose of this study is to provide a deeper insight into the organizational factors and personal motivations of intrapreneurs which may foster intrapreneurial behaviors of employees in a new technology-based firm (NTBF). Design/methodology/approach-The paper takes a qualitative approach to exploring organizational and individual antecedents of employees' intrapreneurial behavior. A single case study was conducted based on semi-structured interviews with the founders and top managers of the firm and with intrapreneurial employees. Findings-Results show that intrapreneurial projects may arise in firms whose top managers support Corporate Entrepreneurship (CE) in a non-active manner. Intrapreneurial behaviors of employees can emerge despite the lack of time and limited resources available for undertaking projects. Moreover, work discretion and mutual confidence and the quality of the relationship between employees and top managers are the most valued factors for intrapreneurs. Practical implications-Based on the intrapreneurial projects studied, this paper helps to contextualize intrapreneurs' perception of organizational support and the personal motivations for leading projects within an NTBF. Originality/value-Traditionally, the literature has mainly focused on the top-down implementation of entrepreneurial projects within large firms. This paper contributes to the understanding of the combination of firm-and individual-level factors that facilitate intrapreneurial behaviors of employees. It also illustrates the contextual conditions and the firms' orientation on CE within an NTBF.

Related Papers

Anand Teltumbde

SOCIETY. INTEGRATION. EDUCATION. Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference

The article focuses on the characteristics of intrapreneurship as an area of corporate entrepreneurship. Attention was paid to the essence and importance of intrapreneurship in the organization. Then, based on the analysis of activities supporting intrapreneurship undertaken in an international corporation of the banking sector and literature research on this subject, a model was developed to stimulate the creation of intrapreneurship within large organizations. The tools used in the model are divided into tools from the category of people management (soft) and tools related to working methods.

Journal of International Studies

Elżbieta Szczygieł

Due to the role corporations play in modern world, they are becoming an interesting area for theoretical considerations and a research object. The subject of the paper is intrapreneurship, which is a form of corporate entrepreneurship that refers to the individual behaviour of corporate employees. The main goal of the research was to analyse and evaluate the entrepreneurial potential of corporate employees and the working climate that affect significantly the development of intrapreneurship. The article is based on the author's research, which was conducted by means of a survey among 320 employees and 60 executives at different levels taken on in 41 different types of corporations conducting business activity in Poland. By entering the research, it was assumed that the corporation was entrepreneurial if it employs entrepreneurial employees, and its working climate is conducive to undertaking entrepreneurial initiatives. The research showed the importance of the work climate for the development of intrapreneurship, which can be considered a dimension supporting the development of corporate entrepreneurship. It was also featured that not those employees who had intrapreneur potential were more involved in risky ventures, but those who felt that the company supported their actions.

Universidad Empresa

Manuel Alfonso Garzon Castrillon

IJAERS Journal

The present paper objective is to develop a conceptual model of intrapreneurship, or as it is also known, corporate entrepreneurship (CE). The intrapreneurship, through the encouragement of innovation in big companies, can represent both a competitive advantage and also the survival of a company nowadays. For being a current theme, intrapreneurship had its aspects explored more by the authors in recent years, however there are no conceptual standards designed and disseminated that can help to have a general view of the subject. Based on the assumption that intrapreneurship can be grounded on pillars of various themes, the main and more important dimensions found in the literature were gathered. These dimensions, such as innovation capacity, risk taking, resources, among others, are considered essential for corporate entrepreneurship. This paper proposes to discuss each one of the nine points raised and integrate them into one model. By the development of the subject, it was possible to obtain a well-grounded model with the key practice points of the intrapreneurship in large corporations. The nine dimensions were clustered in three core pillars (Structure, Management and Agents) in an intersection model, representing the interdependence between them.

Manuel Garzon Post PhD

This research is focused on an exploratory study developed with Pymes managers and their roles as intrapreneurs. Using their leadership to impel innovation into organizations. Looking to determined how Pymes employers incentive into organizations individuals or group innovations. Therefore, it is possible to think that managers lead the innovation process, which is classified gradually according to companies needs in order to improve their competitiveness. Organization must have intrapreneuring and organized culture with flexible structure to generate individual autonomy. A characteristic is the amount of capital risk needed; that is why it is necessary encourage their work and their risk tolerance. Key Words: Intrapreneur, innovation, high intra-entrepreneurs, intrapreneur organizational culture, medium and small size companies

Periodica Polytechnica Social and Management Sciences

Fernando Almeida

Intrapreneurship is becoming a key factor in the growth of a company in a highly dynamic and progressively more competitive business environment. The idea of intrapreneurship is to encourage greater employee involvement within the organisation in which they work, giving them the freedom to innovate and experiment in a proactive, creative, and innovative way. In the startups, the role of intrapreneurship is of great relevance knowing that startups are designed to scale and grow exponentially in a short time and with few resources. Innovation is at the core of a startup and intrapreneurship initiatives allow leveraging this capacity in startups. Accordingly, this study seeks to explore the phenomenon of intrapreneurship in startups, seeking to understand how formal and informal intrapreneurship initiatives are taken on by startups, and also exploring the role played by existing resources to support these initiatives. The results of the study allow us to conclude that startups value intrapreneurship initiatives despite financial constraints that overlap with time constraints that affect what can be allocated to these activities. Finally, medium-sized startups and those with more qualified human capital tend to value and support intrapreneur initiatives more intensely. In contrast, startups with less academically qualified human capital offer worse conditions and support to intrapreneur activities.

Veronica Maier

This paper provides a review of theoretical studies on the concepts of entrepreneurship and intrapreneurship, pinpointing the similarities and differences between them. Entrepreneurship continues to thrive in almost all corners of the world. Entrepreneurs are reshaping the business environment, creating a world in which their companies play an important role in the vitality of the global economy. But there is not always necessary to establish a company in order to implement new ideas. A great potential lies in applying business principles within existing organizations.

RELATED PAPERS

Holz als Roh- und Werkstoff

Sustainability

Water & Wastewater Mag …

Ali Torabian

Revista Tendencias Retos

Fernanda Bernal

Scientific Electronic Archives

Marcio Roggia Zanuzo

Chris Frith

Raimundo Mateos

Carlos Julián Martínez Soria

Tectonophysics

Josep M Pares

Esther Pearl

Jurnal Ushuluddin

Abdul Fatah

Thermochimica Acta

Ahmad Sadegheih

Biochemical Journal

Robert Eady

Ferran Estrada

Ishaya Longdet

Nordiske Studier I Leksikografi

Margunn Rauset

brianna ward

Transactions of the Indian Ceramic Society

Moenis Azooz

Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica

Juan Carlos Nassif

Frontiers in Pediatrics

Michael Weiss

Maria Josten

European Physical Journal B

Akhilesh Tanwar

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• Browse All Articles
• Newsletter Sign-Up

Employees →

• 09 Apr 2024

Why Work Rituals Bring Teams Together and Create More Meaning

From weekly lunch dates with colleagues to bedtime stories with children, we often rely on rituals to relax and bond with others. While it may feel awkward to introduce teambuilding rituals in the workplace, the truth is, the practices improve performance, says Michael Norton in his book The Ritual Effect.

• 02 Apr 2024
• Research & Ideas

Employees Out Sick? Inside One Company's Creative Approach to Staying Productive

Regular absenteeism can hobble output and even bring down a business. But fostering a collaborative culture that brings managers together can help companies weather surges of sick days and no-shows. Research by Jorge Tamayo shows how.

• 15 Mar 2024

Let's Talk: Why It's Time to Stop Avoiding Taboo Topics at Work

Few people enjoy talking about succession plans, performance problems, and pay, but sometimes you must. Christina Wing offers five rules for navigating thorny conversations in the workplace, and makes the case for tackling even sensitive topics, like age, health, and politics.

• 04 Mar 2024
• What Do You Think?

Do People Want to Work Anymore?

Surveys indicate that US employee engagement and job satisfaction are down. To what degree are attitudes toward work to blame? asks James Heskett. Open for comment; 0 Comments.

• 27 Feb 2024

Why Companies Should Share Their DEI Data (Even When It’s Unflattering)

Companies that make their workforce demographics public earn consumer goodwill, even if the numbers show limited progress on diversity, says research by Ryan Buell, Maya Balakrishnan, and Jimin Nam. How can brands make transparency a differentiator?

• 23 Jan 2024

How to Keep Employees Productive: Support Caregivers

Three-quarters of US employees are balancing caregiving with their careers. If companies could prevent five of them from quitting, they could save $200,000. Joseph Fuller offers a seven-point plan for supporting the sandwich generation and beyond.

• 02 Jan 2024

10 Trends to Watch in 2024

Employees may seek new approaches to balance, even as leaders consider whether to bring more teams back to offices or make hybrid work even more flexible. These are just a few trends that Harvard Business School faculty members will be following during a year when staffing, climate, and inclusion will likely remain top of mind.

• 14 Nov 2023

The Network Effect: Why Companies Should Care About Employees’ LinkedIn Connections

What do Honeywell, IBM, and Pfizer have in common? Employees with strong professional networks. A study of 2 billion employee relationships on LinkedIn probes the power of such connections—and potential benefits for companies. Research by Frank Nagle.

• 03 Oct 2023

Layoffs Can Be Bad Business: 5 Strategies to Consider Before Cutting Staff

Many companies are quick to reduce headcount when economic headwinds appear, but they risk weakening their businesses. A case study by Sandra Sucher explores the hidden costs of layoffs.

• 14 Sep 2023

Working Moms Are Mostly Thriving Again. Can We Finally Achieve Gender Parity?

The pandemic didn't destroy the workplace advancements moms had achieved. However, not all of the positive changes forced by the crisis and remote work have stuck, says research by Kathleen McGinn and Alexandra Feldberg.

• 28 Aug 2023

How Workplace Wellness Programs Can Give Employees the Energy Boost They Need

At a time when many workers are struggling with mental health issues, workplace wellness programs need to go beyond providing gym discounts and start offering employees tailored solutions that improve their physical and emotional well-being, says Hise Gibson.

• 08 Aug 2023

The Rise of Employee Analytics: Productivity Dream or Micromanagement Nightmare?

"People analytics"—using employee data to make management decisions—could soon transform the workplace and hiring, but implementation will be critical, says Jeffrey Polzer. After all, do managers really need to know about employees' every keystroke?

• 24 Jul 2023

Part-Time Employees Want More Hours. Can Companies Tap This ‘Hidden’ Talent Pool?

Businesses need more staff and employees need more work, so what's standing in the way? A report by Joseph Fuller and colleagues shows how algorithms and inflexibility prevent companies from accessing valuable talent in a long-term shortage.

• 17 Jul 2023

Money Isn’t Everything: The Dos and Don’ts of Motivating Employees

Dangling bonuses to checked-out employees might only be a Band-Aid solution. Brian Hall shares four research-based incentive strategies—and three perils to avoid—for leaders trying to engage the post-pandemic workforce.

• 16 May 2023

How KKR Got More by Giving Ownership to the Factory Floor: ‘My Kids Are Going to College!’

KKR turned around a struggling door company and sold it for 10 times its investment—giving factory workers a life-changing cut of the returns. A case study by Ethan Rouen and Dennis Campbell offers lessons for companies trying to instill an owner's mindset in employees.

• 27 Feb 2023

How One Late Employee Can Hurt Your Business: Data from 25 Million Timecards

Employees who clock in a few minutes late—or not at all—often dampen sales and productivity, says a study of 100,000 workers by Ananth Raman and Caleb Kwon. What can managers do to address chronic tardiness and absenteeism?

• 21 Feb 2023

Are Your Employees Passing Up Incentives? Try Promoting the Programs More

Employees who bow out of a company's wellness program or retirement savings plan might not know these perks exist. Leslie John offers advice for motivating workers to participate in incentive programs.

• 17 Jan 2023
• In Practice

8 Trends to Watch in 2023

Quiet quitting. Inflation. The economy. This year could bring challenges for executives and entrepreneurs, but there might also be opportunities for focused leaders to gain advantage, say Harvard Business School faculty members.

• 05 Dec 2022

5 Companies Where Employees Move Up the Ladder Fast

IBM, Southwest Airlines, and other companies proactively help workers advance their careers to try to retain them, says research by Joseph Fuller. The findings show just how important an employer can be to future salary and job prospects.

• 29 Nov 2022
• Cold Call Podcast

How Will Gamers and Investors Respond to Microsoft’s Acquisition of Activision Blizzard?

In January 2022, Microsoft announced its acquisition of the video game company Activision Blizzard for $68.7 billion. The deal would make Microsoft the world’s third largest video game company, but it also exposes the company to several risks. First, the all-cash deal would require Microsoft to use a large portion of its cash reserves. Second, the acquisition was announced as Activision Blizzard faced gender pay disparity and sexual harassment allegations. That opened Microsoft up to potential reputational damage, employee turnover, and lost sales. Do the potential benefits of the acquisition outweigh the risks for Microsoft and its shareholders? Harvard Business School associate professor Joseph Pacelli discusses the ongoing controversies around the merger and how gamers and investors have responded in the case, “Call of Fiduciary Duty: Microsoft Acquires Activision Blizzard.”

Governor Newsom Unveils Revised State Budget, Prioritizing Balanced Solutions for a Leaner, More Efficient Government

Published: May 10, 2024

The Budget Proposal — Covering Two Years — Cuts Spending, Makes Government Leaner, and Preserves Core Services Without New Taxes on Hardworking Californians

Watch Governor Newsom’s May Revise presentation here

WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW:  The Governor’s revised budget proposal closes both this year’s remaining $27.6 billion budget shortfall and next year’s projected $28.4 billion deficit while preserving many key services that Californians rely on — including education, housing, health care, and food assistance.

SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom today released a May Revision proposal for the 2024-25 fiscal year that ensures the budget is balanced over the next two fiscal years by tightening the state’s belt and stabilizing spending following the tumultuous COVID-19 pandemic, all while preserving key ongoing investments.

Under the Governor’s proposal, the state is projected to achieve a positive operating reserve balance not only in this budget year but also in the next. This “budget year, plus one” proposal is designed to bring longer-term stability to state finances without delay and create an operating surplus in the 2025-26 budget year.

In the years leading up to this May Revision, the Newsom Administration recognized the threats of an uncertain stock market and federal tax deadline delays – setting aside $38 billion in reserves that could be utilized for shortfalls. That has put California in a strong position to maintain fiscal stability.

“Even when revenues were booming, we were preparing for possible downturns by investing in reserves and paying down debts – that’s put us in a position to close budget gaps while protecting core services that Californians depend on. Without raising taxes on Californians, we’re delivering a balanced budget over two years that continues the progress we’ve fought so hard to achieve, from getting folks off the streets to addressing the climate crisis to keeping our communities safe.” – Governor Gavin Newsom

Below are the key takeaways from Governor Newsom’s proposed budget:

A BALANCED BUDGET OVER TWO YEARS.  The Governor is solving two years of budget problems in a single budget, tightening the state’s belt to get the budget back to normal after the tumultuous years of the COVID-19 pandemic. By addressing the shortfall for this budget year — and next year — the Governor is eliminating the 2024-25 deficit and eliminating a projected deficit for the 2025-26 budget year that is $27.6 billion (after taking an early budget action) and $28.4 billion respectively.

CUTTING SPENDING, MAKING GOVERNMENT LEANER.  Governor Newsom’s revised balanced state budget cuts one-time spending by $19.1 billion and ongoing spending by $13.7 billion through 2025-26. This includes a nearly 8% cut to state operations and a targeted elimination of 10,000 unfilled state positions, improving government efficiency and reducing non-essential spending — without raising taxes on individuals or proposing state worker furloughs. The budget makes California government more efficient, leaner, and modern — saving costs by streamlining procurement, cutting bureaucratic red tape, and reducing redundancies.

PRESERVING CORE SERVICES & SAFETY NETS.  The budget maintains service levels for key housing, food, health care, and other assistance programs that Californians rely on while addressing the deficit by pausing the expansion of certain programs and decreasing numerous recent one-time and ongoing investments.

NO NEW TAXES & MORE RAINY DAY SAVINGS.  Governor Newsom is balancing the budget by getting state spending under control — cutting costs, not proposing new taxes on hardworking Californians and small businesses — and reducing the reliance on the state’s “Rainy Day” reserves this year.

HOW WE GOT HERE:  California’s budget shortfall is rooted in two separate but related developments over the past two years.

• First, the state’s revenue, heavily reliant on personal income taxes including capital gains, surged in 2021 due to a robust stock market but plummeted in 2022 following a market downturn. While the market bounced back by late 2023, the state continued to collect less tax revenue than projected in part due to something called “capital loss carryover,” which allows losses from previous years to reduce how much an individual is taxed.
• Second, the IRS extended the tax filing deadline for most California taxpayers in 2023 following severe winter storms, delaying the revelation of reduced tax receipts. When these receipts were able to eventually be processed, they were 22% below expectations. Without the filing delay, the revenue drop would have been incorporated into last year’s budget and the shortfall this year would be significantly smaller.

CALIFORNIA’S ECONOMY REMAINS STRONG:  The Governor’s revised balanced budget sets the state up for continued economic success. California’s economy remains the 5th largest economy in the world and for the first time in years, the state’s population is increasing and tourism spending recently experienced a record high. California is #1 in the nation for new business starts , #1 for access to venture capital funding , and the #1 state for manufacturing , high-tech , and agriculture .

Additional details on the May Revise proposal can be found in this fact sheet and at www.ebudget.ca.gov .