To Improve Your Grade We Always Ready To Help You

  • 60,000+ Completed Assignments

  • 3000+ PhD Experts

  • 100+ Subjects

Equity Derivatives for Theory and Applications

Question:

Discuss about the Equity Derivatives for Theory and Applications.

Answer:

Introduction

By definition, organizational behaviour can be defined as a systematic study that utilizes application knowledge in regards to how individuals and groups react within the organization they work (Schermerhorn, 2005). Hence, organizational behaviour tends to create some form of discipline unique only for an organization. Therefore, the overall motive behind studying organizational behaviour is for the purpose of attaining several outcomes, good example includes work attitudes (job satisfaction and organizational commitment) and job performance (customer service and counterproductive work behaviours). Therefore, if one sets up of a correct organizational behaviour means that you are more engaged with you organizational members or employees thus the job delivered will be great as the stress levels lower, this makes decisions effective and work delivered by employees efficient (French, 2011).

Hence, in regards to our case study to effectively analyze the organizational behaviour we are going to utilize the employee engagement theory, organizational justice and equity theory of motivation to analyze our case study.

Looking at employee engagement theory it simply looks like common sense, but according to Bridger (2015) leaders in an organization must ensure that they engage employees to make sure that they are fully switched on to their jobs. The idea behind this theory entails that employees must be fully committed in a similar manner as the employer in regards to care of the business. Hence, employer engagement according to Bryne (2015) simply means that employees are fully involved and interested in working so as to hold their attention and inspire them to do their best. In regards to our case study, Fiona’s father is seen effectively applying this theory of employee engagement. Perhaps, it would be vital to at least try and outline how the old organization had motivational elements that pleased employees and the elements removed by Fiona during his reign in the organization.

The old organization motivational elements included:

  • When launching the company, Tim adopted an open management style. Such an act encouraged staff to walk into his office at any time to discuss issues about the company. This kind of style was reinforced by the office structure in Tim’s office, and consultant working space was on the same floor. They also shared the same dining area and washroom facilities. As a result, this increased informal interaction between Tim and the consultants. This style of management eased the ability to solve issues faster (Truss et al., 2013).
  • Tim, Fiona and the training consultants were also involved in all aspects of business. Hence, they would meet clients for the purpose of discussing training content, delivery schedules, marketing and promotion of XYZ Company. Here, staffs were allowed to participate in determination of their work schedule and were consulted before their work schedule was published. Therefore, this tends to be a great act of employee engagement as it offers them to state the correct schedule that fully supports their work life balance (Arvinen & Perkins (2013).
  • In regards to appraisal, Tim made decisions on the basis of each employee’s personal relationship with him. But, Tim was to make the final decisions on who should receive merit increases and performance bonus. Here, if one did a good job, he or she was rewarded this highly motivated the employees.

Hence, due to the above-discussed factors, XYZ Company did well over the past five years. The number of training consultants had increased significantly, and consultants were happy, treated fairly, received manageable workloads, and they also kept informed key happenings at XYZ through Friday meeting. It was unfortunate that Tim was diagnosed with a heart condition and gave out power to Fiona as the managing director. Therefore, the changes made by Fiona that discouraged employee engagement include:

  • Creating departments based on the type of training provided. It was to be headed by a HOD, and all training consultants were to meet their respective HOD on Friday, rather than Fiona.
  • There was also change in the grading system which resulted to the introduction of hierarchy system. This created some disparities in terms of employee engagement.
  • Fiona ultimately removed the concept of bonus and merit pay increase, as she replaced it with annual cross the board increases. Hence, this tarnished the concept of employee engagement in the organization.
  • It is also evident that in their new system they paid less attention to employee’s appraisal. Hence, this led to employees being work overloaded and soon the employees realized that under Fiona’s good books it was easy for you to receive better work and opportunities for training and promotion. Therefore, this discouraged employees whose names were not in her good books.
  • Fiona changed the office setting where he separated the HOD and herself from the rest of the employees. Compared to Tim, such an office layout developed some poor employee engagement and collaboration of team work. Hence, the changes made by Fiona tend to reduce the level of employee engagement.

On the other hand, using organizational justice and equity theory of motivation we could explain that the training consultant behaviour of the employees is distinctive. This is because the degree of fair treatment in relation to what other employees received could be postulated as an influence of motivation and performance (Overhaus, 2002). Hence, this tends to include their mixed intention as to whether they should stay or leave the organization. On the equity aspect, treatment can be related to the comparison made within or outside the organization. Therefore, in regards to our case study training consultant behaviour can be judged as procedural justice, this is because there tends to exist no fairness in the decision process in Fiona system compared to Tim. Perhaps, it would be significant to make analysis using procedural determinants to analyze and explain the employee’s character which are:

Consistency- in our case study Fiona built a new form of management where there was the introduction of HOD, and there is no consideration of staff appraisal. Therefore, there was no consistency as employees were work overloaded compared to Tim’s reign they felt that they should quit their job.

Accuracy- Fiona never took part in the Friday meeting. Staffs were to report to their HOD in case of anything. Hence, employees saw no significance of reporting any challenges that may affect the firm.

In conclusion, the maintenance of organizational justice and engagement should be key priorities for a firm. This is because it reduces the levels of incidence of workplace deviance, disengagement and counter productivity workplace characters. It also tends to encourage positive attributes such as trust and consistent communication.

References

Overhaus, M. (2002). Equity derivatives: Theory and applications. Hoboken, N.J: Wiley.

Truss, C., Delbridge, R., Alfes, K., Shantz, A., & Soane, E. (2013). Employee engagement in theory and practice.

Garber, P. R. (2013). The manager's employee engagement toolbox. 

Byrne, Z. S. (2015). Understanding employee engagement: Theory, research, and practice.

King, D., & Lawley, S. (2013). Organizational behaviour.

Schermerhorn, J. R. (2005). Organizational behaviour. Mississauga, Ont: J. Wiley & Sons Canada.

French, R. (2011). Organizational behaviour. Hoboken, N.J: Wiley.

Mustafa, A. (2013). Organizational behaviour.

Arvinen-Muondo, R., & Perkins, S. J. (2013). Organizational behaviour. London: Kogan Page.

Buchanan, D. A., & Huczynski, A. (2013). Organizational behaviour.

One of the finest academic solution providers in the UK, MyAssignmentHelp.co.uk, has introduced custom homework writing services that are specially designed to serve the specific requirements of various students. The experts at MyAssignmentHelp.co.uk are capable of handling all kinds of homework and provide the necessary homework help, no matter how complicated the topic is. We also guarantee on-time delivery of the order.

Place Your Order

Get help to our Experts
- +

Why Student Prefer Us ?

Top quality papers

We do not compromise when it comes to maintaining high quality that our customers expect from us. Our quality assurance team keeps an eye on this matter.

100% affordable

We are the only company in UK which offers qualitative and custom assignment writing services at low prices. Our charges will not burn your pocket.

Timely delivery

We never delay to deliver the assignments. We are very particular about this. We assure that you will receive your paper on the promised date.

Round the clock support

We assure 24/7 live support. Our customer care executives remain always online. You can call us anytime. We will resolve your issues as early as possible.

Privacy guaranteed

We assure 100% confidentiality of all your personal details. We will not share your information. You can visit our privacy policy page for more details.

Upload your Assignment and improve Your Grade

Order Now