Management Case Study: Organisational Theory and Behavior

Organizational Theory and Behaviour
Author’s Name
The Institutional Affiliation
Course Number and Name
Instructor Name
Assignment Due Date
Organizational Theory and Behaviour
Question 1
Use theories of ‘stressors’ and ‘stress management’ to explain likely employee reactions to MAS management suggestions of working differently, longer shifts, and shorter layovers (6 marks).
Answer: The management of MAS requires workers to put extra effort without considering to increase their benefits accordingly (Magdalene, n.d.). By showing the intention to this change, the management of MAS has acted as a stressor as the change is synonymous with “stress” for the employees. It can be understood in light of the theories of stress.
According to Selye, the stress engenders an emotional or psychological response to an environmental change (Christiana, 2018). While seen from this perspective, the emotional response from the employees can be resignation. As for the physical response, overwork may lead to deterioration of health, which may also result in burnouts in the long run. According to Holm’s theory, stress is the reaction to stimulus stemming from the need for the change (Christiana, 2018). The stress among the employees of MAS is linked to this theory as it arises from the management’s call to be prepared for the extra effort. Here, it is vital to refer to the context of MAS, where employees have powerful unions. Therefore, instead of embracing the change, employees are likely to resist by utilizing their bargaining power.
Question 2
Define ‘ethical leadership’ (1 mark). Discuss, using the virtues required for ethical leadership, whether the current MAS management team would be considered ethical leaders (3 marks).
Answer: In the context of organizational behaviour, a leader is deemed ethical whose actions and decisions are based on moral values. The leader cares about his actions and decisions on others, allowing him to maximize the benefit and minimize the harm (McManus et al., 2018). While seen from the “people-first” criterion of ethical leaders, the management of MAS does not qualify for as ethical. The decisions of the management towards employees stem from the drive to maximize the profit in favour of which they intend to cut corners on employee benefit (Magdalene, n.d.). In other words, the management is looking to maximize the benefit of shareholders at the cost of employees’ well-being.
The leadership is also unethical while seen from the perspective of Freeman’s stakeholder theory. According to this particular approach, a business or a leader has an obligation to all stakeholders, whereas stakeholder is every single entity attached to a business (including employees). The deontological perspective of ethics also emphasizes the same idea (McManus et al., 2018). These ethical perspectives are at odds with the position of MAS’ management in a given situation where a stakeholder (employees...