<
>
Download

Bericht
Personalwesen

Indian Institute of Management, Rohtak

2013, Dr. Malay Biswas, uses references( mentioned)

Peter R. ©
4.00

0.13 Mb
sternsternsternsternstern_0.2
ID# 35720







Organizational Behavior 

A Paper on

 Organizational Cynicism


Contents

Abstract2

Cynicism2

Variables. 3

Job Attitude and Cynicism4

Impact of Cynicism on Organizational Performance. 5

Dealing with Organizational Cynicism7

References:10


Abstract

The Oxford English dictionary defines cynicism as “an inclination to believe that people are motivated purely by self-interest”. This paper examines cynicism from an organizational point of view and how it impacts the organization’s performance. Various theories have been applied to organizational cynicism in the past. We have primarily focused on relating cynicism to job attitudes and job satisfaction.

We have also explored the impact of cynicism on organizational change. The paper aims to provide solutions to the organizational cynicism on the basis of different contemporary motivation theories. Impact of different types of leadership on organizational cynicism has also been explored while finding solutions.


Cynicism
The word cynic seems to covey negative ideas in modern languages. It creates the image of someone who is unduly critical and suspicious, apathetic about certain issues and rebellious in response to others, selfish, and indifferent toward traditions and accepted beliefs, antagonistic to public welfare. Cynicism, however, has an ancient meaning, the roots of which are traceable to the classical Greeks, specifically to Socrates and his associates in the late fifth century B.C. A review of the history of Cynicism reveals that its meaning is significantly different from what modern cynicism has come to mean.

Modern cynics are very different from classical cynics. Meaning of modern cynicism appears to have been transformed into the opposite of what it once meant. There are, however, external similarities between the old and the new cynics. We can define Cynicism as a practical philosophy that exhibits a permeating and inflexible commitment to saying no to the values, norms, beliefs, practices, traditions, and all other forms of living which, in the light of what the Cynics called clarity of mind, appear to be senseless or misguided.

The Cynics persisted in the conviction that most people live as if immersed in a cloud of smoke that prevents them from seeing clearly and does not allow them to use that which distinguishes humans from animals—namely, the capacity to reason. In abandoning this capacity, people forsake their true nature. Cynics exemplified a human tendency found among a small number of people of every culture and time to stand in opposition to what is unnatural and irrational.

In the modern sense, cynicism takes the form of rebelliousness arising from selfishness and irrationality, and in the ancient definition, it assumes a stance of defiance rooted in a desire to return humanity to its true nature, which entails a return to reason (paraphrased from “New History of Ideas”,2005).


        Variables


Organizations are becoming increasingly global in nature. The very nature of a global economy requires that organizations constantly improve processes and operations. Despite implementation being one of the most important aspects of effective organizational change, many organizational leaders lack a clear understanding of the necessary steps leading to successful change implementation (Armenakis & Harris, 2002).

Disruptive technologies are leading to changes in organizational dynamics and acquired skills are becoming increasingly outdated at a fast pace. In such a context managing cynicism becomes even more difficult and leaders need to analyze ways to align employee expectations with organizational goals. The effect of corporate cultural variables like power attribution, subjectivity etc on employees is critical.

Recent research indicates that many workers do identify with the organization as a result of these management strategies, they have also shown that some workers resist through dis-identification, in particular cynicism. Managerial literature views cynicism as a psychological defect that needs to be "corrected," while a radical humanist approach constructs cynicism as a defense mechanism, a way of blocking the colonization of a pre-given self (Fleming et al,2003).

The way a management tends to look at cynicism has a deep impact on the organization as a whole. Questions have been raised as to whether cynicism is an employee disposition or if it is actually created by the management. Previously conducted research hints at it being a combination of the two actually. Thus, it may be of interest to any organization’s management to study the ways to ensure that the leadership does not promote cynicism within the organization.  

Employees react negatively when they think they are uninformed, have not been involved in the decision-making process, or that the outcomes of such changes will not be beneficial. Conversely, if individuals can make sense of proposed changes and see the need for them, they are likely to exhibit less cynicism about organizational change.

Additionally, if they have faith in the change agents' abilities, particularly their knowledge, employees are more likely to have lower rates of cynicism about organizational change (Broner and Karolyn, 2003).

Cynicism remains an un-quantified part of an employee’s character.

Ethics and morality have been explored in the organizational sciences by studying various individual perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors, and many of these concepts have been linked to moral predisposition. Concepts such as pro-social behavior, the affective component of organizational commitment, and trust are quite likely manifestations of a moral predisposition.

Altruism and cynicism are also individual predispositions for moral behavior; they are attitudes both driving and enabling cooperative and helping behaviors between individuals. Scales have been developed to measure all of these organizational pro-social constructs, yet a valid and reliable measure of cynicism for ethics and organizational research has not been advanced (Turner, James et al., 2001)

Moreover, employee support for organizational change has been suggested as a necessary condition for the success for a change.     Consistent with this increasing emphasis on individual-level variables, cynicism has received some attention, albeit limited, as a potential antecedent for resistance to organizational change.

Organizational cynicism is an outcome of an employees’ belief that organizations lack honesty. More specifically, expectations of morality, justice, and honesty are violated. Over the years, researchers have become more interested on issues relating to organizational cynicism. The concept of cynicism has become the subject of various disciplines in social sciences like philosophy, religion, political science, sociology, management and psychology (Ince & Turan, 2011).


        Impact of Cynicism on Organizational Performance

Cynicism is a negative attitude including the three dimensions developed by a person to his organization, namely; cognitive, affective, and behavioural structure of the cynical construct. The cognitive dimension of organizational cynicism is the belief that organization lacks honesty and transparency. The affective dimension of organizational cynicism refers to the emotional and sentimental reactions to the organization.

The behavioural dimension of organizational cynicism refers to negative tendencies (Dean et al., 1998, Stanley et al., 2005). Organizational cynicism interferes in the relationship employees develop with their supervisors, with consequences to performance.

People with strong work ethics work hard and in return they expect their organization to treat them with respect and dignity and do justice to their contribution. However, the organization's failure to meet their expectations is likely to result in disappointment and disillusionment, making them susceptible to cynicism. On the other hand, people who care less or not at all about dishonesty or lack of sincerity will probably not become cynical as a consequence of their experiences.

The consequences of cynicism  can be Psychological and Emotional. “Employees experiencing job insecurity have an increased risk for anxiety, depression, substance abuse, and somatic complaints” (Canaff, Wright, 2004).It can have Marital and Family effects. Spouses and children can feel the crossover effects of work tensions brought home from the workplace.

Low energy level which affects home management is another consequence. Negative feelings in Organizations effect employee morale, turnover rate, commitment to the organization (Canaff, Wright, 2004). Reduced organizational citizenship behaviour and compliance with unethical request are two possible outcomes of organizational cynicism (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1977).

The affective and behavioral consequences, such as a decrease in organizational commitment, motivation and job satisfaction (Abraham, 2000; Goldner et al., 1977; Johnson & O'Leary-Kelly, 2003; Reichers et al., 1997; Turner & Valentine, 2001; Urbany, 2005; Wanous et al., 1994, 2000), an increase in suspicion, distrust and contempt of the organization (Kanter & Mirvis, 1989, 1991; Reichers et al., 1997; Thompson et al., 2000), and other forms of psychological disengagement and detachment (Andersson, 1996; Feldman, 2000; Fleming, 2005; Guastello et al., 1992; O'Brien et al., 2004; O'Leary, 2003).

Such responses can be expected to have inhibiting and disruptive effects on interpersonal relationships (Cotterell, Eisenberger, & Speicher, 1992). Other researchers, looking beyond these immediate effects, point at the undermining of the authority of leaders and their institutions (Andersson, 1996; Feldman, 2000; Goldner et al., 1977), and the underutilization of human capital (O'Brien et al., 2004).

One of the main coordinating mechanisms in organizations is the system of interdependent authority relationships and allocation of responsibilities. If this system is no longer respected or even taken seriously by a significant part of the workforce, the long-term consequences of organizational cynicism can be dramatic, as the organization literally starts to disintegrate.

Indeed, in the long run the effectiveness and viability of the organization may be at stake.

The effect of cynicism can be disastrous, particularly if the cynic is a manager. Mirvis and Kanter (1989, p. 382) explain that the attitude of the cynical manager "leads to a workplace environment dominated by a feeling of temporariness, an absence of a lasting vision of what the company and its products ought to be." Cynical managers convey their attitudes by running the business only for the bottom line, treating long-term strategies as subordinate to those of the short-term, treating employees as "hands," and tolerating shoddy products.


        Dealing with Organizational Cynicism

Leadership has a great amount of impact. As reported earlier, studies have proven that cynicism breeds in organizations where leaders distance themselves from the employees and where there is lack of involvement of employees in the decision making process.

Various theories of motivation, primarily the Goal Setting theory stresses on the importance of involvement of the employees in decision making in order to achieve best results. The goal setting theory even goes so far as to state that a more difficult goal set in consultation with employees is more likely to be achieved than an easier goal set without employees’ involvement.

Thus the implication of the involvement of employees is clear. The leaders in organizations that are harboring change need to go beyond the transactional viewpoint and cross over into the domain of transformational leadership.

An exploratory study indicated that the effectiveness of one's supervisor is an important antecedent to employee cynicism about organizational change (Wanous, Reichers, & Austin, 2000).

The Employees' interpersonal justice perceptions are mechanisms that mediate transformational leadership influences (Xiang et al., 2007).

Informational justice and interpersonal justice, formerly conceptualized as interactional justice, are differentiated from procedural justice in that their consequences are delivered through leaders as opposed to the organization as a system (Masterson et al., 2000). These constructs are identified as leader referenced and therefore would be closely related to leadership effectiveness.

Often, cynicism has been stated as being a disposition of the employees but of late this perception has changed. Cynicism is an outfall of the breach of psychological contract and a series of unpleasant incidents at the workplace (Andersson & Bateman, 1997; Johnson & O'Leary-Kelly, 2003).

Cynicism is also a product of the way an employee views the change agents and supervisors in an organization. In this regard the leaders need to be credible and respectable (ethos) and connect with the employees (pathos). The best form of leadership for winning over the employees trust is using expert power. Expert power arises from the leader’s knowledge about the core business of the organization and his/her ability to use this knowledge to affect positive change in the organization.

Cynicism due to organizational changes is more visible amongst hourly employees than managers because managers are better informed about events happening and reasoning for decisions taken. Lack of good opportunities to participate in decision making , being uninformed about general issues are some of the reasons which support to the idea that cynicism is an attempt to make out of disappointing or puzzling events.

Some solutions to these problems suggest dealing with common resistance to changes. Most people address issues of validity and relationship between employees and agents. Most of the people report that they would like a high degree of participation in important decision making in an organization, but hardly few are involved.

By being involved, employees mean to be heard and given respectful and careful consideration. Participation in decision making tends to be associated with higher commitment and provides opportunities to get more information. Therefore, more involvement in decision making activities is associated with less cynicism.

Employees, who are well informed about organizational changes, can connect the dots and find the missing pieces of information. If there are many informed changes producing successful results, and if rare failures are diligently acknowledged, the need to blame is lessened, this in turn reduces pessimism and cynicism due to changes in organization is minimized. Enhancing the effectiveness of timings is very important.

If questions regarding a change in an organization are not answered properly, either independently or through interaction with coworkers, cynicism increase. It is always better to avoid surprising people. People who feel more involved and informed are less likely to possess cynical attitudes. Routinely informing employees about what is happening in an organization prevents them from being caught off guard.

If it is very difficult to thoroughly lay the groundwork before announcing a change, extreme care should be taken while announcing the change and all the answers to possible questions should be pre decided. Managers should take the initiative to anticipate the questions and decide answers and not depend on the employees to voice their concerns.

Consistency in words is important too. Using variety of channels like newsletter, memos, formal meetings and casual conversations with knowledgeable people helps to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to receive information through their respective preferred medium. People differ in their capability to understand written and spoken communications, repetitions helps in understanding and retention of information.

Employees become less cynical and more optimistic about future change attempts if they are made aware of the organizations past success.

If managers fail to understand how employees view change and successes and are unaware that a change created hardships for employees or are insensitive to that hardship, they may fail to understand why employees are getting cynical. A manager unaware that his actions created hardships can hardly be expected to take responsibility and apologize. It is very important to keep all these points in mind to reduce employee cynicism.

References:

1)Reichers, Arnon E; Wanous, John P; Austin, James T(1997).Understanding and managing cynicism about organizational change .The Academy of Management Executive 11.1 48-59

3) Naus, Fons; Ad van Iterson; Roe, Robert.(2007).Organizational cynicism: Extending the exit, voice, loyalty, and neglect model of employees' responses to adverse conditions in the workplace. Human Relations 60.5 .683-718

4) Fleming, Peter; Spicer, Andre(2003). Working at a cynical distance: Implications for power, subjectivity and resistance. Organization 10.1 : 157-179 .

5) Broner, Carolyn K (2003). Cynicism about organizational change: Disposition, or leadership's creation? The reactions of K--12 educators undergoing systems change. Walden University, ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing, 2003. 3118888

6) Dean, J.W, Jr; Brandes, P.; Dharwadkar, R.(1998). Organizational cynicism. The Academy of Management Review 23.2 :341-352.

7) Turner, James H; Valentine, Sean R.(2001). Cynicism as a fundamental dimension of moral decision-making: A scale development. Journal of Business Ethics 34.2: 123-136.

8) Andersson, Lynne M; Bateman, Thomas S.(1997). Cynicism in the workplace: some causes and effects. Journal of Organizational Behavior (1986-1998) 18.5 :449.

10) Nafei,W.A.(2013). Organizational Change: A Study from Egyptian Context.University of Sadat City, Menoufia,

11) New History of Ideas,University of Chicago Press, 2005

12) Egypt

14) McNamara,C.(2006).Overview of Cynicism in Business Organizations. Authenticity Consulting, LLC.

15) Canaff; Audrey L.; Wright,W. (2004). High Anxiety: Counseling the Job- Insecure Client. Journal of Employment Counseling


| | | | |
Tausche dein Hausarbeiten