942 Users found this project useful
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY
In today’s competitive environment, the capacity to stimulate output performance has become a critical factor in an organization’s survival. Organizational rigidity is one of the most critical factors that influence the organization’s response to its external environment (Schein, 1985). The common rigid values of an organization provide a framework that influences and directs employees’ behavior. Research suggests that organizations that focus on internal stability and conformance with rigidity without an open systems approach (Senge, 1990) to cope with today’s fast-moving, technology-driven external environment are at a significant competitive disadvantage, as they lack the capacity to produce meaningful output (Hult, Ketchen, & Nichols, 2002). However, the current research is examining the impact of organizational rigidity on output performance. Given the importance of stability in improving firm’s output performance, a number of studies have attempted to identify the factors that can enhance organizational rigidity (Koc & Ceylan, 2007). Currently one of the variables deemed to have great influence on output performance is organizational rigidity (Büschgens, Bausch, & Balkin, 2013; Lin, Donough, Lin, & Lin, 2013). Because organizational rigidity influences employees’ behavior, it may lead the personnel to accept output performance as a fundamental value of the organization and to feeling more involved in it (Hartmann, 2006).
The idea of viewing organization as having rigid is a recent phenomenon and it originated as an independent variable affecting employees’ performance and output performance. Coupled with the recent academic interest on this concept, researchers have sought to identify and elaborate the theoretical construct that underpins rigidity in order to develop a more comprehensive theory. Organization(s) constitute an element of a society and people bring different ideology from their own society into the organization. Organizations possess the paradoxical quality of being “part of” or “a part” of a society; which are embedded in a social context. Then, the norms that has been keeping the company going must remain unchanged. The organizations are communities in their own right with distinctive rules and values, organizational rigidity fosters success and it is therefore one of the most important factors that can account for success or failure of an organization. Organizational Rigidity is an anthropological term that refers to the underlying values, beliefs, codes of practice that makes a community what it is (Alvesson, 2002; Huczynski and Buchaman, 2001; Smith, Kleiner & Brian, 1987). Numerous theoretical debates have centred on whether organizational rigidity should be managed in the same way that other organizational variables can be controlled. Organizational development has some particular features that can increase sustainability on basis of effectiveness.
The enhancement in output performance contributes to employee commitment while norms, values and objectives contribute in maintaining rigidity in an organization (Awadh & Saad, 2013). Most of us contribute a great part of their time in organizations. The organizational behaviour which is related to practitioner’s values and beliefs is based on rigid elements and norms that influence personality and performance of organization (Sondergaard, 1994). These rigid organizational elements and personality effects behaviour and sustainability of organization (Schwartz, 1994) the strong relationship of organizational rigidity has been identified several research. Output performance is comprised of the actual output or results of an organization as measured against its intended outputs (or goals and objectives). One of the most important reasons that explain the interest in organizational rigidity is the assumption that certain organizational rigid values lead to an increase in output performance. (Ilies & Gavrea). Output performance comprises the actual productions as well as outcomes or outcomes of an organization which are measured against its expected outcomes. According to (Kaplan & Norton, 1992) no single measure can provide a clear performance target, so managers have to choose between financial and operational measures.
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEMS
While these foundations have been given by researchers such as Alvesson (2002); Parker and Bradley (2000); Thompson and McHugh (2002); Smith et al (1987) on organizational rigidity, they have generally ignored the practical aspect of output performance. For instance, Alvesson (2002) survey of US Corporations, reported that firms that were perceived to believe in something or stands for something are the high performers and they believe in rigid culture. In a UK study, Ogbonna and Harris (2001) research on 50 companies reported that about 94% of organizations were undergoing or have experienced unchangeable value and pattern. Such empirical evidence showed that there is a gap between academic theories (which are critical of the idea of planned rigid values) and the actions of the practitioners, (who are the ones involved in the various forms of organizational interaction). This research will examine the different perspectives to organisational rigidity and the classification of the concept as an asset or liability.
The reason being that human resource of every organization is its backbone, such that the successes or failures of any organization now depends on the workers. Organizations not only want to survive but also to grow and take over or even overtake existing competitors. These compels organizations to devise strong and unchangeable values, beliefs, behaviours, norms and strategies targeted at not just attracting, cultivating and retaining their employees but also giving the organization competitive edge. Consequently, lack of these rigid values, beliefs and norms (organizational rigidity) could result in undesirable outcomes such as job dissatisfaction, lack of commitment, absenteeism, low productivity and overall poor output performance.
1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The following are the objectives of this study:
1. To examine the influence of organizational rigidity on output performance in an organization.
2. To analyze the advantages and disadvantages of organizational rigidity.
3. To find out the determinants of output performance in an organization.
1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1. What is the influence of organizational rigidity on output performance in an organization?
2. What are the advantages and disadvantages of organizational rigidity?
3. What are the determinants of output performance in an organization?
1.5 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS
HO: There is no significant relationship between organization rigidity and output performance in an organization.
1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
The following are the significance of this study:
1. The findings from this study will form a useful organizational framework for business managers, other organizational stakeholders and the general public in managing organizational rigid values and norm to produce the needed output performance.
2. This research will be a contribution to the body of literature in the area of organizational rigidity and output performance, thereby constituting the empirical literature for future research in the subject area.
1.7 SCOPE OF THE STUDY
This study is limited to Cadbury Plc, a multinational organization in Nigeria. It will also cover the company’s organizational rigidity and output performance
1.8 LIMITATION OF THE STUDY
Financial constraint- Insufficient fund tends to impede the efficiency of the researcher in sourcing for the relevant materials, literature or information and in the process of data collection (internet, questionnaire and interview).
Time constraint- The researcher will simultaneously engage in this study with other academic work. This consequently will cut down on the time devoted for the research work.
1.9 ORGANIZATION OF THE VARIABLES
Dependent Variable: Organizational rigidity
Independents Variable: Output performance
1.10 DEFINITION OF TERMS
Performance: is deemed to be the fulfillment of an obligation, Output: the amount of something produced by employees, machine, or industry
Rigidity: inability to be changed Values: principles or standards of practices/behaviour; organizational judgement of what is important in the work settings.
