organization Behavior- Case Study Analysis Case Study

Organization Behavior- Case Study Analysis

There is both healthy competition and unhealthy competition in the market from companies that operate on the same industry platform these types of competition may have active and negative impacts on the organization performance. Similarly, the productivities of the enterprise can be influenced by the competition of the market share of the customers. For instance, in our case study we have two companies that as both the health competition and unhealthy competition. The Big Energy Company is private investors who operate in the same market industry, as the XYZ Energy Company is government owned. The XYZ Energy Company it has the internal health completion of the employees while, the Big Energy Company is having unhealthy market end. Because of unhealthy competition in the market share of the consumers, the XYZ Energy Company was to be overtaken by its competitor The Big Energy Company. However, as much as the Big Energy Company had more resource and ability to manage its business risks, the productivities of the company were low. On the other hand, the XYZ Energy it has added competitive advantages of internal health competition and better management that enable it to improve the productivities of the company (Barker 2010).
However, once the Big Energy Company took over the XYZ Company things were not the same as they were happening before the business was sold. The decision of the Big Energy Company to start making some management in the XYZ Company it has the impacts that affected the employee. The employee attitude towards the work changed to due to the change of control environment (Barrel 2000). The old management had better leadership, where they reorganized the entire employee by allowing contributing the decision-making that will affect the XYZ family. Additionally, the employee management had trust for the few employees and encouraging to work towards the vision and goals of the company thus, they managed to increase the sales of the enterprise. However, when the new management of Big Energy took over the administration role littoral did know removing the management of XYZ will affect the attitude of the employees' towards working. The new management was put more emphases on the systems that will robust the productivities of the absorbed XYZ energy activities. However, strategies the big energy used were unfamiliar to XYZ employee and changed the working attitudes that affect the productivity of Big Energy Company (Champagne & Mcafee 1989).
In addition, the idea of removing the staff members of the XYZ Company had an impact on the employee. The employee had the fear for the job security and the kind of relationship of the new management systems. The workers of XYZ had adapted well working with the old staff management who reorganized them as one family of XYZ. Likewise, the old management they were practicing good leadership enabling the employee to understand the real vision and goals of the organization. These allowed the XYZ employee to work towards to the common interest of the organization of improving the sales of the company. However, once the new management of the Big Energy Company took control and starting removing the old management staffs, the XYZ employee motivation was reduced (Chan 2002). The workers felt that their working family had been eliminated, thus even them they are not part of the new family of the Big Energy Company. As a result, of lay-off and changing the position, the reading citizenship staff worker behaviors they changed. (Index to Group & Organization Management Volume 29, (n.d Some of the motivation was reduced, and others were absent most of the time and even other quits the job due to unfavorable conditions from Big Energy.
For instance, the Energy Management they rarely visited the remote new team members and the employees to show the high-level leadership as in the case of XYZ organization used to be. As a result, they workers' feet they are not united with Big Energy group and end up demotivated in workplace. For example, it is evident as the management did not take into account the idea of Sally of having loyalty to the XYZ employees, and the employees started to show the redundancies (Clarke 2009).
The reaming employees' feel disappointed with the performance of the Big Energy management. That is because the employee's old working philosophy is not the same as that of the Big Energy (Williams 1997). As result, the behavior of the former employees started to change in terms of performance of work and the quality of working also reduced. In addition, the positive attitude of the worker was reduced since they are not allowed to compete for their jobs based on merit as before, and they were ending up disappointed. The workers were demotivated that led to Big Energy advantage to drop compared to that of XYZ. As a result, it will take time for the absorbed employee to adapt the introduced culture and at the same time reducing the daily productivities of the Big Energy Company (Dess & Picken 1999).

The proposed management at Big Energy

Introduction
The performance and the success of the organization it depends on the management of the organization. In addition, the kind of the leadership will have the impact of the productivities of the organization (Ellis 2009). A number of factors make the management improve the quality and its products. Some of this is the right leadership styles, charismatic leaders, and proper management channels. Similarly, real communication channel will open the good ideas that will enable the management make a sound decision that improve the culture of the company. Therefore, for the start Big Energy Company to begin grows the productivities of the sale, they should correct and Implement the following (Greenberg 2003). Proposed solutions
They should start with want they have at hand such as by borrow the strategies that the XYZ Energy used and improved some of the critical areas. Since both the organization was operating in the same industry, the Big Energy should take the advantage of the experienced skills of the employee to expand the market share. These old employees of the XYZ company have been the organization that was performing thus they understand the expectation of the organization (Griffin & Moorhead 2012). Likewise, they know the quality of the product and service the consumers they need to the market since they have proved through increased sales there before.
Equally important, the management should introduce some internal training such as coaching and workshops. These strategies will enable the employees to improve the areas where they have limited skills and experiences (Harris & Hartman 2002). In addition, the workers can share the ideas and feel united has one working family. Likewise, the will ease and less costly way of teaching the workers the innovation in the production industry thus, Big Energy will be able to produce goods and services that meet the current market demands. Nevertheless, the Big Energy should carry out external benchmarking to other similar organization that has excelled in the same industry. That will enable workers of Big Energy to borrow other constructive innovation and management skills that enable the Big Energy to improve the quality of the productivities (Khosrow-Pour 2013). Recommendation
On the other hand, Big Energy should come up with better strategies that well motivate the employee. Some of these motivation strategies are promoting the employee based on the excellent work performance at work (Kubr 2002). Likewise, the Big Energy will try to meet the needs of the employees at the workplace. Thus, they can have positive input towards the work. The organization can also, reward the performing employee with other things such as salary increase. When the group sales growth, they should share some of the profits with employee since those employees are the one that makes the body to make the profit.Conclusion
In conclusion, the performance and the success of the organization it depends on the management of the organization encouragement of better leadership that will have the impact of the productivities of the organization (Miner 2006). Therefore, for the start Big Energy Company to begin improving the productivities of the sale; the company should come up with better strategies that well motivate the employee. Equally important, the management should introduce some internal training such as coaching and workshops. In addition, Big Energy should carry out external benchmarking to other similar organization that has excelled in the same industry to borrow better-working techniques.

Reference List

BARKER, A. (2010). Improve your communication skills, revised second edition. London, KoganPage. http://www.books24x7.com/marc.asp?bookid=36856.
BARRELL, R. (2000). Productivity, innovation, and economic performance. Cambridge [u.a.], Cambridge Univ. Press.
Calás, M., & Smircich, L. (n.d.). Introduction: Spirituality, Management and Organization. Organization, 327-328.
CHAMPAGNE, P. J., & MCAFEE, R. B. (1989). Motivating strategies for performance and productivity: a guide to human resource development. New York, Quorum Books
CHAN, J. F. (2002). Communication skills for managers. Saranac Lake, N.Y., American Management Association.
CLARKE, S. (2009). Evolutionary concepts in end user productivity and performance: applications for organizational progress. Hershey, Information Science Reference.
DAVIES, J. W., & DAVIES, J. W. (2001). Communication skills: a guide for engineering and applied science students. Upper Saddle River, NJ, Prentice Hall.
DESS, G. G., & PICKEN, J. C. (1999). Leveraging human capital. New York, American Management Ass.
ELLIS, R. (2009). Communication skills: stepladders to success for the professional. Bristol, UK, Intellect.
GREENBERG, J. (2003). Organizational behavior: the state of the science. Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum.
GRIFFIN, R. W., & MOORHEAD, G. (2012). Organizational behavior: managing people and organizations. Mason, OH, South-Western/Cengage Learning.
HARRIS, O. J., & HARTMAN, S. J. (2002). Organizational behavior. New York, Best Business Books.
Index to Group & Organization Management Volume 29. (n.d.). Group & Organization Management, 709-712.
KHOSROW-POUR, M. (2013). Cases on performance measurement and productivity improvement: technology integration and maturity. Hershey, PA, Business Science Reference.
KUBR, M. (2002). Management consulting: a guide to the profession. Geneva, International Labour Office.
MAGEE, G. B. (1997). Productivity and performance in the paper industry: labour, capital, and technology in Britain and America : 1860-1914. Cambridge [u.a.], Cambridge Univ. Press.
MINER, J. B. (2006). Organizational behavior 3. Armonk, N.Y., M.E. Sharpe.
NELSON, D. L., & QUICK, J. C. (2012). Organizational behavior: science, the real world, and you. Mason, Ohio, South-Western.
ROLSTADÅS, A. (1995). Performance management: a business process benchmarking approach. London, Chapman & Hall.
SCHERMERHORN, J. R. (2012). Organizational behavior. Hoboken, N.J., Wiley.
VAN SERVELLEN, G. M. (2009). Communication skills for the health care professional: concepts, practice, and evidence. Sudbury, Mass, Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
WILLIAMS, D. (1997). Communication skills in practice: a practical guide for health professionals. London, J. Kingsley Publi