Organizational Commitment

Organizational Commitment and Communication Paper Week 3 COM/530 10/27/2011 Introduction A look at an organization’s communication and leadership styles can say a lot about the organization as a whole. Google has a relaxed atmosphere, where management allows workers to create their own schedules; and fosters creativity by allowing and encouraging their workers to explore side projects (Google Culture, 2011). What would happen if the leadership style were to change? This is one of the elements this paper will explore. A look will also be taken at: sources of power within the organization, the employee’s commitment to Google, how communication within Google relates to the worker, other motivational theories which would work at Google and how communication plays a part in the functioning of these theories. Different Leadership Styles Google has recently embarked on â€Å"Project Oxygen,† a plan to make a better manager (Bryant, 2011). An examination of data sets, compiled from employee surveys, awards given, and managers who performed well, was conducted. This resulted in Google wanting employees to feel empowered, know their managers were available, and have a better overall feeling about the work they did (Bryant, 2011). Google has made the shift to transformational leadership by inviting their employees to be more active in roles they play and working to develop managers that encourage creativity (Robbins, 2011). Having leader member exchange theory in practice at Google would serve to undermine Project Oxygen. This theory states managers have their trusted employees, who tend to get special considerations over other employees (Robbins & Judge, 2011). Having this theory in play, would only serve to drive a wedge between employees and employee supervisor relationships and reduce communication. The studies conducted by Google show employees want respect and equal opportunity from management (Bryant, 2011). Another example of a leadership style that would take away from Google’s goal would be the laissez-faire style of leadership, as employees have stated they don’t want weak willed passive managers (Bryant, 2011). Having a leader using this style would reduce the amount the employees spoke to this individual and cause disarray among the teams. Sources of Power at Google One might expect that Google, being a technical company, places a high importance on expert power as greater knowledge of writing computer code will mean more employees will come to that person for help. The company may have placed emphasis on this in the past, but has since discovered employees want to follow managers whom they like and identify with, which more closely relates to referent power (Robbins, 2011). As Robbins and Judge (2011) explain this type of power deals more with an employee having respect and admiration for their manager. Referent power will lead to employees communicating openly with their superiors and should influence a more positive attitude overall within the organization, as negative views and opinions will diminish among the workers. Legitimate power is also wielded by Google as they have employees who must complete work or they risk losing their jobs. This type of power serves to keep employees in line with company views and reduce negative communication within the organization as employees will not want to suffer the consequences. Reward power is also in use as employees are allowed to set up their own schedules and vie for more prominent positions (Google Culture, 2011). This power also serves to create a positive attitude by giving employees what they desire in the work environment. Employee Commitment and Communication Employees appear to have a strong organizational commitment to Google. Based on the freedoms granted to their employees, workers look to stay with Google out of affective commitment. This type of commitment suggests workers have an emotional attachment to the company and believe in the core values (Robbins, 2011). Google has a commitment to meeting the needs of the employee by modifying compensation packages to suit the employee, giving bonuses, and making the employee feel valued for what they do by providing other amenities most companies would not provide. Google has on site gymnasiums, chefs, laundry service, and shuttles (Google culture, 2011). By providing for employees, Google works towards establishing an emotional attachment. Open communication is encouraged and ideas are rewarded showing employees they have value in the eyes of Google. This communication is necessary to create a sense of freedom at work and allow for an open exchange of ideas. Different Motivational Theories Google could benefit from the use of self-determination theory as they look to empower their employees. This theory suggests workers want to feel they have free will in choosing their work activities and take joy in what they do without feeling it has become an obligation (Robbins, 2011). Communication plays an integral part in the application of this theory. Workers need to know they have choices within the work they do and that managers are available for discussion of changing roles or work activities. Google is a corporation that wants it employees to interact at all levels and across teams. This environment may be excellent for reinforcement theory, as this theory looks to reward positive actions immediately to ensure they are repeated and also to punish negative actions to ensure they are not repeated (Robbins, 2011). If open communication is encouraged and workers discuss goals they achieved and how they were rewarded for this, a general effect should be seen on surrounding employees. This means other employees should repeat the rewarded action to reap the rewards. The same can be said for actions which are negatively reinforced. A third and final motivational theory which would serve Google’s open form of communication is the equity theory. This theory looks at the motivation behind having a fair workplace (Robbins, 2011). Employees want to feel they are paid or otherwise compensated for their work based on experience and accomplishments. Communication is vital to this theory as the more open employees are with each other it provides the opportunity for salary and compensation to be discussed. As long as Google is handling their employees in an equal manner this should serve to show workers the more they work and strive to be better at their jobs, the more they can expect to earn. Conclusion Google has chosen to study their management styles that work best, â€Å"Project Oxygen;† and then train managers in tasks they have found work well for top performing managers. This has caused a shift towards transformational leadership. Google has found other types of management styles which are, for example, too strict are failing and causing high turnover (Bryant, 2011). As stated, having different types of leadership styles in use at Google, such as leader member exchange theory or laissez-faire style would undermine current goals and lead to poor communication within teams, leading to loss of faith in management. Google uses referent power, meaning employees have respect and admiration for their managers to keep employees happy (Robbins, 2011). The company also employs the use of rewards such as compensation packages suited to the employee and on site amenities (Google Culture, 2011) as rewards to keep employees happy. Google’s efforts appear to lead to an affective commitment to the organization as the employee develops an emotional attachment to their job (Robbins, 2011). Motivational theories such as: self-determination, reinforcement theory, and equity theory would most likely fit with in Google’s company culture. Each theory looks to place the emphasis on the employee through enriching their work experience or giving compensation. In short Google is looking to keep employees long term through positive work environments and structure. References Adam Bryant (2011, March 12). Google’s Quest to Build a Better Boss. New York Times Retrieved October 29, 2011, from http://www. nytimes. com/2011/03/13 /business/ 13hire. html? pagewanted=all, Google Culture. (2011). Google. Retrieved October 29, 2011, from www. google. com/about/corporate/company/culture. Robbins, S. P. , & Judge, T. A. (2011). Organizational behavior (14th ed. ). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson- Prentice Hall.