Question: Refer to attachment.

The essay needs be well structured and coherent such that it clearly communicates insightful and critical thinking. This assessment piece will be assessed primarily on their ability to recognise, analyse and discuss the key issues, theories and practices relevant to the case study. Students will be assessed based on their ability to demonstrate a clear understanding of the scenario and the OB theories that underpin the particular case study. When completing the essay please refer to the specific criteria provided within the essay as well as the assessment rubric that has been published on Blackboard.

Introduction:

An organization behaviour (OB) study is done to analyse the behaviour of an individual or group of organization. It helps in analysing employees’ job satisfaction, motivational method, psychology, emotions, personality and attitude towards his/her job (Adhikari, 2003). As per the given case study, it is noted that Big Energy being a giant in the private sector, acquired XYZ Energy, a major government owns Energy Company. Big Energy can influence his new employees after knowing their behaviour, personality, performance etc. This particular study is aiming at understanding the impact of the integration model employed by Big Energy in acquiring XYZ Energy on the overall attitudes, values and behaviour of the individual as well the groups exists in the XYZ organization. It is used to study the behaviour of both groups, as well as the individual performance in the organization. This particular study has been executed following the below-mentioned steps –

• Analysing the impact of integration model followed by Big Energy in acquiring XYZ Energy on the overall attitudes, values and behaviour influenced by individual personality;
• Providing recommendations to help in motivating employees as well as help in developing good team or groups.

Impact of Absorption of XYZ Energy by Big Energy:

As per the given case study, it is noted that Big energy has acquired XYZ Energy due to which the organization evidenced several adverse effects on their current business model as well as on current employee’s performance, attitude etc. In this section of the study, the impact of this integration model has been analysed based on several bases:

Psychological study: This study helps in analysing the behaviour of an individual, changes in an individual behaviour or work performance due to this absorption process (Glăveanu, 2008). The result of this analysis shows that the employees of XYZ Energy are having problem in working strategy, methods of Big Energy that gives an adverse effect on the old employees as well as business performance of the organization.

Sociology Analysis: This analysis is done to identify the behaviour of different group of the organization (Macionis, 2007). Both the organizations were having groups working on the common task of absorption of XYZ Energy with Big Energy groups may be separated due to which many issues occurred in the long run programs.

Social Psychology Analysis: This analysis is done to know both the positive and negative effect of each other working in the organization. When different people of different cultures are working in a group for the common goal, there should be proper coordination as well as the understanding among all of them so that the performance of work is better. In the long run job, if the coordination, understanding among the employees is not good there will be several adverse effects.

The main focus of Big Energy after absorption of XYZ energy should be managing old as well new employees so that the work for a common goal in the long term (Middleton, 2002). After absorption of the new organization, the Big Energy should try to manage their workforce diversity by improving their work culture, work model, etc. so that both the employees are comfortable in it (Hartnell, Ou and Kinicki, 2011). The organization is aware of the old employee’s behaviour, beliefs, thoughts, working style but after absorption company conduct this study to know the attitude, personality, beliefs, thoughts and etc of new employees who are going to work in Big Energy environment (Thompson and McHugh, 2009). To maintain the company’s name in the market Big Energy should try to work taking into consideration both employees working style, ability to perform the work so that both can understand each other first and then they will be a better group with a positive impact on organization (Biswas, 2009). Big Energy should conduct the study of OB so that they can know the level of loyalty, commitment towards work for their previous organization and with the help of that analysis result they can estimate loyalty and commitment level toward Big Energy.

Impact on attitude:

In order to understand the impact of integration model on attitude of the employees, there is requiring assigning their roles and responsibilities so that Big Energy can understand whether they are satisfied with their job or not (Ajzen, 2011).  This attitude related study shows that they are facing problem regarding environment of the organization (Harms, 2008). Therefore, the first think that the organization has to see is that whether this specific issue decrease the loyalty of employees towards the organization (Card and Giuliano, 2011). It is also noted that Big Energy having different groups working on common task or objective, so group meeting is required to know the problem that an individual of that group are facing. This can be in coordination with other employees (El-Katsha and Watts, 2002).

Impact on values:

As per the McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y, impact on values of the people working in the organization can be assessed (Hoffman et al, 2011). In the context of values analysis, Theory X indicates that it is the employees of the organization who are not satisfied with their job and if they get the chance any instance will avoid doing their job. Big Energy therefore needs to identify whether the new employees who are coming from XYZ organization are of this kind is not.

Again, the Theory Y assesses whether the employees of Big Energy followed their duties according to the goals and objective for better performance or not (Valle Santos and Teresa Garcia, 2006). It is noted that there are few employees in the organization think that by setting objectives and goals before starting the work will help in improving their performance as well as will increase organizations performance also (McGregor, 2002).  After absorption organization has to conduct this study as to know the loyalty of every individual towards his/ her work. There are different methods by which Big Energy can know the problem if any employees are facing regarding organization culture, style of working, his/her roles and responsibilities, in coordinating with other co-workers (Hargreaves, 2011).

On the basis of these methods also organization can know the behaviour, thoughts, attitude, and personality of the any individual or group members. Some organizations conduct various in-house competitions like photo elicitation, management or technical games, art or drawing related competition (Dulaimi, Ling and Bajracharya, 2003). Big Energy can also organize these competitions to increase or motivate their employees to perform better. These methods help in knowing the qualitative behaviour of the employees by knowing which organization can motivate them to work. To motivate employees to work as some employees are from other working environment knowing their behaviour is important (Hiriyappa, 2009).  After knowing the behaviour organization can change their rules and regulation, working style etc., but taking into consideration both new as well as old employees (Eatough et al, 2011).

Impact on behaviour:

After the absorption of XYZ Energy by Big energy many things changes like the employees attitude towards the organization, their working condition etc., which de-motivated many employees. After the absorption process, the culture and behaviour of both organizations were combined to strength the ability of achieving goals but, in this case, there were seen some side effects of the absorption or acquisition (Kehoe and Wright, 2013). The main focus of Big Energy should be on motivating their employees after absorption. It can be done by analysing the behaviour, personality, attitude, beliefs of an individual present in the group manager or the team lead will motivate their subordinates to work accordingly (Robbins, 2001). Managers are also motivated by their lead to work properly to achieve the objective or goal decided (Latham, 2007). With the help of study of OB, organization can improve the interpersonal skills of individual as well as the group present in Big Energy (Ferrell, Fraedrich and Ferrell, 2005). The interpersonal skills are like leadership, negotiation, team building, motivation etc. By knowing the behaviour of the individual present, in the organization manager can easily motivate his team members that improve his leadership skill (Chiang and Hsieh, 2012). Every group of Big Energy has people from different culture, personality, attitude, level of loyalty towards work as well as towards organization, to manage them and make them work for a common goal is the biggest task which every team lead has to face (Gagné, n.d.). By knowing their personality, attitude, beliefs, working style will help the manager in managing its team lead. Big Energy after absorbing XYZ Energy should conduct the study of OB so that the leads of the group are aware of their subordinates behaviour and personality that will help them to influence them to work up to the expectation level of the organization. If the organization after absorbing XYZ Energy has to change or improve the working environment both new employees and old are to be considered (Pinder, 2008). New employees of Big energy are from the different working environment so to make them comfortable with the working environment of Big Energy, organization has to change its style of working, environment in which both the employees can do work.

Recommendations

The integration model adopted by Big Energy aims at competitive advantage of the organization that helps in gaining long term profit. The main focus of this model is on integration rate of the organization. The big Energy should analyse the behaviour of the employees to increase the efficiency of organization i.e. behavioural model. The management of Big Energy should always be transparent and efficient in understanding the behaviour, attitude and value of their employees. The recommendation for the management of the Big Energy can be explained with the help of OB model. There are various models that Big Energy organization uses to conduct the study of OB is:

Autocratic Model – This model describes the power, roles and responsibility of the employees working in Big Energy. Every employee according to his or her is given power or authority, and they have to work according to that only (Miner, 2007). The main focus of this model is to describe the power and authority of the employees who are working in the organization and the employees who are new in the organization. If the authorities are not described to old and new employees, then there are chances of adverse affect in the long run program or job.

Collegial Model – The main focus of this model is teamwork of the organization. After absorbing XYZ Energy, there are many new employees and the team present have added many new subordinates that can make the problem for the team leader (O’Shaughnessy, 2013). So this model helps the lead to manage the team work of the organization and develop a good coordination among all the employees of the team (Suppiah and Singh Sandhu, 2011).

Supportive Model – This model helps in knowing the leadership quality of the team lead (Zedeck, 2011). Each team is having new members, so the team lead should be aware of the behaviour of their subordinates that will help them in managing their team.

Big Energy should work on the morale of their employees to motivate them for performing better and in coordination. In this case after integration of both organization the morale of remaining employees were going down which de-motivated them from working, so Big Energy should firstly try to increase the level of value system, organization culture so that remaining employees can work comfortably in the new atmosphere after absorption.

References

Adhikari, H. (2003). Organizational Change Models: A Comparison. SSRN Journal.

Ajzen, I. (2011). The theory of planned behaviour: reactions and reflections.Psychology and health, 26(9), 1113-1127.

Bailey, C. (2007). A guide to qualitative field research. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Pine Forge Press.

Biswas, S. (2009). Impact of Interaction between Organizational Culture and Organizational Structure on HR Practices. Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation, 5(2), pp.102-108.

Card, D. and Giuliano, L. (2011). Peer effects and multiple equilibria in the risky behavior of friends. Cambridge, Mass.: National Bureau of Economic Research.

Chiang, C. F., and Hsieh, T. S. (2012). The impacts of perceived organizational support and psychological empowerment on job performance: The mediating effects of organizational citizenship behavior. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(1), 180-190.

Dulaimi, M., Ling, F. and Bajracharya, A. (2003). Organizational motivation and inter-organizational interaction in construction innovation in Singapore. Construction Management and Economics, 21(3), pp.307-318.

Eatough, E. M., Chang, C. H., Miloslavic, S. A., and Johnson, R. E. (2011). Relationships of role stressors with organizational citizenship behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(3), 619.

El-Katsha, S. and Watts, S. (2002). Gender, behavior, and health. Cairo: American University in Cairo Press.

Ferrell, O., Fraedrich, J. and Ferrell, L. (2005). Business ethics. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.

Gagné, M. (n.d.). The Oxford handbook of work engagement, motivation, and self-determination theory.

Glăveanu, V. (2008). Research Methods in Social Psychology: A Comparative Analysis. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 4(1).

Gordon, J. (2003). Pfeiffer’s classic activities for developing leaders. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.

Gordon, J. (2007). The Pfeiffer book of successful leadership development tools. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.

Hargreaves, T. (2011). Practice-ing behaviour change: Applying social practice theory to pro-environmental behaviour change. Journal of Consumer Culture,11(1), 79-99.

Harms, P. (2008). One or many.

Hartnell, C. A., Ou, A. Y., and Kinicki, A. (2011). Organizational culture and organizational effectiveness: a meta-analytic investigation of the competing values framework’s theoretical suppositions. Journal of Applied Psychology,96(4), 677.

Hiriyappa, B. (2009). Organizational behavior. New Delhi: New Age International.

Hoffman, B. J., Bynum, B. H., Piccolo, R. F., and Sutton, A. W. (2011). Person-organization value congruence: How transformational leaders influence work group effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 54(4), 779-796.

Kehoe, R. R., and Wright, P. M. (2013). The impact of high-performance human resource practices on employees’ attitudes and behaviors. Journal of Management, 39(2), 366-391.

Latham, G. (2007). Work motivation. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.

Macionis, J. (2007). Sociology. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson/Prentice Hall.

McGregor, J. (2002). THE ARCHITECT AS STORYTELLER: Making Places in John Hedjuk’s Masques. Architectural Theory Review, 7(2), pp.59-70.

Middleton, J. (2002). Organizational behavior. Oxford, U.K.: Capstone Pub.

Miner, J. (2007). Organizational behavior 4. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe.

O’Shaughnessy, J. (2013). Patterns of business organization. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis.

Pinder, C. (2008). Work motivation in organizational behavior. New York: Psychology Press.

Robbins, S. (2001). Organizational behavior. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

Schermerhorn, J., Osborn, R. and Hunt, J. (2000). Organizational behavior. New York: Wiley.

Suppiah, V., and Singh Sandhu, M. (2011). Organisational culture’s influence on tacit knowledge-sharing behaviour. Journal of knowledge management, 15(3), 462-477.

Thompson, P. and McHugh, D. (2009). Work organisations. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Valle Santos, M. and Teresa Garcia, M. (2006). Organizational change: The role of managers’ mental models. Journal of Change Management, 6(3), pp.305-320.

Zedeck, S. (2011). APA handbook of industrial and organizational psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.