Global Environment Essay Sample
- Pages: 9
- Word count: 2,227
- Rewriting Possibility: 99% (excellent)
- Category: communication
Get Full Essay
Get access to this section to get all help you need with your essay and educational issues.Get Access
Introduction of TOPIC
In this competitive environment, competing and managing on a global basis, it is always important that every organization must find out ways of entering into the foreign markets despite huge problems of unstable government, higher risks, huge indebtedness, tariff and non tariff barriers etc. The way the organizations adapt to the variations in the different cultures gives indication the effort required to train and provides them a platform for internationalizing its operations. Local firms which are involved in planning, operating and coordinating their activities on a global count captures the R&D, production, logistics, marketing , financial, operational synergies from the counterparts which exists in the international environment. Certain scholars put forth certain styles and theories to provide a base for the firms to start up and utilize the advantages to proceed higher in the global market.
Lewin’s three step model of change:
According to “Organization Development Journal” , In the context of studying global environment, it is very much necessary for the organization to study the group dynamics that follow by understanding the contexts and the situations that arise. In this model of organizational change Lewin introduced a three step model constituting of Unfreeze, Move and Refreeze concept. It is very much known that this process speaks about the ideas and the strategies that need to be implemented at the force field. In the global context, the aim of Lewin was to help firms change the existing situation and the context (Unfreeze). The next step would be to shift and move to a different behavior of the performance level (MOVE or Change) and lastly revise the behavior or the performance level which is than set as a new rule and a norm for the organization.
During this process proper analysis should be conducted by the firm’s with respect to the situational analysis by critically reviewing the forces for change and the resistances to change which will help in determining the level of performance with time as a variable (Rosch, Ed, 2002).
According to “The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science“ ,In recent years there has been a discussion on the cultural limits and the total efficiency and effectiveness of organizational development process which highlight the difficulties and problems faced by the organizations. These issues were addressed by Lewin in his three stage model of change which helps in analyzing the cultural traditions and understanding the different assumptions which have been revealed in the change process. Based on the different cultures and traditions of different countries, organizations have to adapt their change models and approaches depending on the situations and the environmental perspectives. The various cultures, cosmologies and traditions need to be looked upon in the change management system in order to change the organizational development change theories and change practices which will help in dealing with the latest and the recent trends and contemporary issues in management (Marshak, R. 1993).
Theory X and Theory Y (Leadership Theory):
According to the journal “Journal of Experimental Psychology “, with the growing and increasing interconnection across the various markets throughout the globe there has been a change and a transformation in the knowledge driven work environment which provide guidance to the firms in their production and service operations. McGregor understood the need for such a system of change and hence came up with a model having different managerial views of the employees in both the theories of X and Y. These views were in relation to the relationships that exist between the employees towards their work on areas of participation, authenticity, innovativeness, involvement, flexibility, interdependency etc. Theory X and Y is a model which helps the firms in managing the human factor which is a huge resource for the organizational growth and success. This leadership theory talks about the assumptions which are considered to manage people in an effective way.
Theory X Assumptions: includes some of the traditional ways of approach.
- An average human being will dislike the work and will abstain from it if possible.
- Because of this behavior of being pessimistic they can be managed only by coercive power or by punishment, controlling, directing and being threatened.
- The normal person will lack responsibility and the determination towards their work life and will ask for security and status above all.
Theory Y Assumptions: this category includes optimistic, dynamic, flexible and positive attitude.
- An average human bei
ng doesn’t unlike work in normal circumstances and situations at workplace. Employees are
These styles and theories have been adopted by modern managers into today’s business models (Cutcher, J et al, 2006).
In the journal “Journal for Quality and Participation”, McGregor portrayed the above same assumptions in a different way by highlighting on the statement of goals of each theory. Theory Y speaks about those individuals who will reach their goals and achievements by their own personalized efforts which are not the case in theory X. According to this journal the perspective is that theory Y people are conditioned from the right side of their brain while theory X are been conditioned from the left side of their brains which suggests that individuals behave differently based on their conditioning and very less effort can be incurred to change this aspect.
It is clearly seen in this theory that the evolution and the contrast behavior change has been a revolution in the concepts of management which every organization has to take care of when they manage their resources globally. With the economic changes happening in the external world it is sure that such styles of people exist with a revolutionary development year after year. The shift from theory X to theory Y will not happen suddenly as these theories constitute different categories of individuals with diverse characteristics. Thus the ideology and discussion was if the present economy demands such kind of leadership styles or not (Paul, et al, 2000).
Bureaucracy (Bureaucratic Organization Structure, Max Webber 1946)
According to the journal of “The American Journal of Sociology”, in the era of global change environment this school of classical management emphasizes the requirement of the organizations to function on a legal-rational and charismatic approach. In this class of bureaucratic society, Max Webber observed that control should be exercised over the social, economic and political life in a state which was administered by the bureaucratic behavior of the leaders in the group. It’s also critically analyzed that the kind of social structure that would exist is that which would be constituted by a type of its own. In his discussion Webber states that charismatic bureaucracies are irresponsible while legal-rational bureaucracies are rational and responsible in their approaches. This study gave insights into the understanding that there exist different social structures which could be characterized as capitalism, slavery and feudalism. In this journal the author says that the bureaucratic class wasn’t seen as a ruling class because it was limited to the fact that it rests in the discretion of a third person to adopt this system. Hence Webber just started of with the study of historical genesis which was left half done due to his death (Constas, H. 1958).
According to “American Journal of sociology”, it is analyzed that Weber focused on the charismatic authority which instills qualities to actions, persons, institutions and other cultural objects. He gave more emphasis to the charismatic personality which means that an individual inhibits in himself/herself the qualities of being extraordinary, magnificent and exercising disturbing state of authority. It was also argued that Weber dealt with only one variant of charismatic propensity which was very hard to believe as compared to the thought he had displayed in this theory of Bureaucratic approach. In his tenure he never found that other than charismatic power no other legitimate power had been followed which was also been critically analyzed upon (Shils, E. 1973).
Place Time Model of Social Interaction (Communication and Negotiation Theory)-
According to the book “Applied communication theory and research”, it is known that the communication theory is said to be the set of rules or a body of rules which is very much relevant in the context of global perspectives. This theory provides and establishes rules for the work place and the work community on a whole which helps in understanding the behavior of an individual. Cooke in this research analysis stated that employees were able to participate better and control the work in a much organized manner then those who only follow rules. While going global, it is necessary to understand the formal and informal communication that exists in the organization structure which enhances the performance of the people at work as higher participation is observed due to the rules and policies set by the organization. Thus the web of rules play an important role in the communication and negotiation theory because both of which requires great effort in identifying the variables required (Kreps, G. et al, 1990).
In another review it is realized that Communication and Negotiation is very much relevant in the context of intercultural diversity in the global market dynamics. Globalization of politics, education and private industry are the necessities of today’s scenario of managing organizations and this communication and negotiation theory helps the firms in understanding the cultural dimensions and the influences of intercultural communication and intercultural negotiation (Jansen, D. 2002).
Studying the various theories and the styles which are granted to the firms in the form of management principles provide a historical base which helps the newer and the older firms to march towards their goals and objectives by competing in the global competitive environment by managing people and the other stakeholders in an organized manner. If these schools of thought are not been followed certain blunders in management are bound to exist in the international marketing concept.
Cutcher, J. (1936). “The Human Side of Enterprise” The Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1936, 19, No. 5. http://www.lib.uwo.ca/business/dougmcgregor.html
Constas, H. (1958). “Max Weber’s Two Conceptions of Bureaucracy” The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 63, No. 4 (Jan., 1958), pp. 400-409
Jansen, D. (2002). “Intercultural communication in engineering: a research programme to investigate the cultural influences in the negotiation of research projects” World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Transaction: Vol.1, No.1,
Kreps, G. et al, (1990). “Communication and Negotiation” Applied communication theory and research,
Marshak, R. (1993). “Lewin Meets Confucius: A Review of the OD Model of Change” The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Vol. 29, No. 4, 393-415, http://jab.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/29/4/393
Paul et al, (2000). “Does the new economy require a new type of leadership?” The Journal for Quality and Participation,
Rosch, Ed, (2002). “Lewin’s field theory as situated action in organizational change” Organization Development Journal, http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa5427/is_200207/ai_n21313515
Shils, E. (1973) “Charisma, Order and Status” The American Journal of Sociology, 1973, vol. 78, pp. 20-32
Sorry, but full essay samples are available only for registered usersChoose a Membership Plan