Seaward, of Bureaucratic Organisational Structure. Bizfluent. Retrieved 2
2016. Essentials of managing stress. Jones & Bartlett Publishers.
Rock, D., 2014. Quiet
leadership. HarperCollins e-books.
Potts, M., 1992. Toward a
Boundary-less Firm at General Electric. The Challenge of Organisational
Change: How Companies Experience it and Leaders Guide it, p.450.
OB. 2018. Case Studies List
– Download pdf files. Management Case Studies and Articles. Retrieved 2
January 2018, from http://www.bing.com/cr?IG=7C9D3B320AA14DB1A0A3E3A0B2B89671&CID=241D7F90DEC867230EEF74EDDF6766F6&rd=1&h=4fGAHb56u8iN3BU2xMNiczMnyNUrG8V_g3EQ15s83r4&v=1&r=http%3a%2f%2fwww.casestudyinc.com%2fcasedown&p=DevEx,5069.1
Munnich Jr, L.W. and Schmit,
M.P., 2017. Roadway safety policy and leadership: case study of six midwest
states. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation
Research Board, (2635), pp.19-27.
2017. Instructional models in physical education. Taylor & Francis.
Hoel, H., Glasø, L., Hetland,
J., Cooper, C.L. and Einarsen, S., 2010. Leadership styles as predictors of
and observed workplace bullying. British Journal of
Management, 21(2), pp.453-468.
Healy, K., 2016. A Theory of
Human Motivation by Abraham H. Maslow–reflection. The British Journal of
Psychiatry, 208(4), pp.313-313.
Hanks, G. 2018. Advantages
& Disadvantages of Bureaucratic Organisational Structure. Bizfluent.
Retrieved 2 January 2018, from https://bizfluent.com/info-7760003-advantages-disadvantages-bureaucratic-organisational-structure.html
Cummings, G.G., MacGregor, T.,
Davey, M., Lee, H., Wong, C.A., Lo, E., Muise, M. and Stafford, E., 2010.
Leadership styles and outcome patterns for the nursing workforce and work
environment: a systematic review. International journal of nursing studies, 47(3),
Botana, L.F.S. and Neto,
P.L.D.O.C., 2015. The Development of an Incrementally Evolving Management Model
for Small Brazilian Printing Companies based on Maslow’s Theory of the
Hierarchy of Needs. Business and Management Review, 4(7), pp.423-442.
Bird, J.L., 2018. Constantly
Connected: Managing Stress in Today’s Technological Times. In Handbook of
Research on Human Development in the Digital Age (pp. 385-402). IGI
Band, G., Shah, N.V., Sriram, R.
and Appliances, E., 2016. Herzberg Two Factor Theory among the Management
Faculty in Nagpur City. In International Conference on Management and
Information Systems September (Vol. 23, p. 24).
Alshmemri, M., Shahwan-Akl, L.
and Maude, P., 2017. Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory. Life Science
The case study illustrates
the Birmingham Fitness Gym, a much known fitness centre situated in the heart
of Birmingham. However, the case study has analysed that due to the change and
expansion of gym members, the employees were quite disturbed and were exposed
to stress which was badly affecting their work behaviour. Moreover, the report
comprises of motivational theories and steps to cope up with stress and steps
to improvise leadership styles that will help the BF gym to make a healthy
strategy to enhance the organisational behaviour in an effective manner.
the leaders must be active in building good relationships with the employees to
know the real strength and weakness of the employees as this could make the
leader to help the co-workers to cope up with their weaknesses. Last but not
the least, the characteristics or trait that every leader must have is he or
she must be humble as modest behaviour makes a great leader and through this
the employees will trust in the vision and words of the leader that is highly mandatory
(Munnich and Schmit, 2017).
There are some recommendations to
improve the leadership style and skills of the employee as it is important to
enhance it and it directly affects the organisational behaviour of the
employees. In order to become an effective and a talented leader, it is
important for the employee to find passion to inspire other employees, improve
communication skills as the leader is always positive and less aggressive that
makes him or her a good communicator (Rock, 2014).
Recommendation to become better leader
The autocratic leadership style
leads the manager to become extremely dominant that makes the employees feel
that there is no such respect of their opinion. This dominancy is not good for
the organisational environment as it makes the employees behaviour unsatisfactory 2010). The employees in the BF gym were not happy with
the autocratic leadership style of Philip as it made them to become less
responsiveness in the meeting.
Participative leadership style is
sometimes called democratic style as in this style and approach, the team
members have a right to speak up their problems and issues and they are allowed
to give suggestions (Cummings et al., 2010). Kate seems to be participative
as she invited all the group members to openly negotiate with her in order to
solve the problems and in order to decrease the turnover rate to make the organisational
environment sustainable and healthy. Kate ensures the employees that they can
give their opinion and she will respect their opinion and will take corrective
actions to improve the situation. The participative behaviour of Kate motivates
Jane to give a creative idea to resolve the problem.
For discussing the problems in
the organisation, Kate had invited the employees in the meeting so that they
can put their viewpoints with respect to the present situation of the organisation.
While only two of the employees speak up in the meeting that were Jane and
Philip consequently Kate and Philip showed their leadership in coming up with
the problem. The leadership style that Kate showed was participative while
Philip was bit dominant and showed autocratic style of leadership.
Leadership Style of Kate and Philip
The above described steps are some of the
healthy approaches that could lead the management and the employees to
implement stress management in an effective manner to enhance the organisational
behavior. On all of the above steps, the most important step that could
decrease the stress factor in the gym is negotiating with the employees. The
case study describes that during the meeting all of the employees were not
participating actively while there were two employees who showed their
leadership skills which is not acceptable as by not negotiating with the upper
management the problem could not be solved.
· Negotiate openly with the Supervisor
· Stay Calm and relax
· Be active
· Establish Limitations
· Build up Healthy Response
· Follow the Stressors
some of the factors that could be managed to deal with stress in the organisation
however; some effective points could let the management of the gym to deal with
the stress in an effective manner. Those steps are:
in changing the routines and alignment of tasks
in the environment
Biasness with the
Structure in the organisation
There are so many reasons that have made the
employees discourage from the work and they started to get into chronic and
acute stress. Stress factor does not always work negatively as sometimes it
makes the employees to work with more energy while sometimes it affects the
behavior of the employees in a worst manner. Stress prevents your body and
brain to work and this cause the employees to become ineffective in the organisation (Seaward, 2016). Some of the stress factors in
the BF gym are:
Factor at BF gym
· Unfair treatment with new appointed
· Less participative environment
· Unchangeable and fixed Routines
· Changes in the gym by expanding the
amount of members in one class
· Bored and uninspiring environment
Birmingham Fitness gym was lagging behind with
the management perspective due to lack of motivation to the employees. Above
stated motivational charts are the main elements of influencing the employees
and one missing factor discourages the behavior. Some of the reasons due to
which the employees were not motivated are:
of Lack of Motivation at BF Gym
Administrative Quality (Band, Shah, Sriram and
Financial payment and compensations
Assurance of Job Security
Presence of Flexibility in the working
Managerial Structure of the company
Policies and procedures of the company
There are some of the hygiene factors described in the
Herzberg Theory of motivation that either leads the employee behaviour towards
satisfaction or dissatisfaction. Those important actors are:
Motivation Theory is another motivation theory for employees which is a two
factor theory that defines the aspect that leads to job satisfaction and
dissatisfaction. Moreover, according to the theory, there are different factors
associated to the job satisfaction and dissatisfaction (Alshmemri,
Shahwan-Akl and Maude. 2017).
The physiological needs are one
of the basic needs without which the employees are deprived off including food,
thirst and sleep. While other steps leads to safety needs that describes the
security of the employees, social needs in which the employees needs to engage
with their loved ones, self-esteem needs in which the employees have a desire
of gaining self-respect and self-actualization that develops the potential of
employees. After the advancing on these steps, the employees can be motivated
towards their work (Botana and Neto, 2015).
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is a
motivation theory that is very useful for the organisations to satisfy every
need of the employee in an effective manner. The theory states all the
important needs of the employees that includes physiological needs, safety
needs, social needs, esteem needs and self-actualization needs. According to an
effective hierarchal, representation all needs are important to be fulfilled and
the absence of one need can discourage the employees that directly affect the
progress of the organisation (Metzler, 2017).
Maslow Motivation Theory
As the structure of BF gym is
bureaucratic, there was a well-built chain of order and specialisation but the
employees were still dissatisfied because they were not feeling comfortable in
doing their duties. Lack of flexibility and openness has made their behaviour
bored and disruptive due to which they were unable to think creatively to make
advancement in the gym.
The bureaucratic structure of the
organisation makes the company’s environment very strict and rigid that reduces
the innovative and creative side of the employees. Due to this, the employees
exert limited efforts in the organisation and do not think innovatively and out
of the box to promote advancement in the organisation (Metzler, 2017).
Lack of Creativity and Advancement
Due to the implementation of
Bureaucratic structure in the organisation, the employees of the company feels
less flexible and open to speak up for something. However, the responsiveness
rates of the employees becomes low which is a drawback for the company as the
employees will not be productive if they are not granted flexibility
Lack of Flexibility and Openness
Some of the disadvantages of
Bureaucratic management in the organisation are:
The structure that was organised
through bureaucracy always influences the level of interest derived from the
task as every department has set up some of the rules, regulation and structure
that lead the employees to perform particular task according to his or her
ability. This advantage influences the organisation in a broader perspective
especially when the company is expanding or appointing new employees (Potts,
Implementation of Bureaucratic
structure in the organisation leads to a well-built chain of order that makes
their business structure stable. In this structure, the chain of order starts
from the upper hierarchy that includes the president, a chairman who orders the
middle managers to plot the duties to other staff members. While, everyone is
strictly liable to the one who is giving order and this makes the environment
of the organisation stable and steady.
Well-built chain of order
that the BF gym gained by imposing the bureaucratic structure are:
The case study analyses the fact
that the management structure of the gym was Bureaucratic and the employees
were not satisfied with their duties as their schedule and tasks were same from
past several years that had made them bored and disruptive. In a bureaucratic
structure of organisation, there is a strong dominancy of upper management that
leads to severe boundaries and lessen the flexibility in the organisation. This
structure is sometimes effective for the organisation but sometimes it makes a
bad effect on the behaviour of the employees that directly impacts their work
in the organisation (Hanks, 2018).
Advantages and Disadvantages of Bureaucratic
Structure at Gym
Kate is the
head of BF gyms and manages the behaviour of employees while analysing the
situation of the gym every week to evaluate the functions of the gym. Presently,
Kate analysed that many of the employees are not satisfied with the job and are
giving up on the jobs and this makes Kate worried. She decided to look into the
matter seriously to know the real cause behind the high turnover rates of
employees. There were 5 employees who were distressed and their behaviour
towards the work had changed unfavourably and those are Philip, Jane, Jo, Robin
and Nick. Kate decides to organise a meeting for the employees to know their
view points and to know some recommendations and solutions to cope up with this
issue. In the meeting Philip and Jane speak up for the issue while Philip
sounds to be very dominant in the meeting and the idea of Jane looks very participative. Other group members look very disinterested and
tired during the discussion (OB, 2018).
The case study elaborates about
the Birmingham Fitness Gym which is one of the popular fitness centres for the
people of Birmingham city. However, it is a standard sized fitness centre that
aims to provide best healthy benefits to the people. The gym is located at the
middle of the city so that everyone can easily approach it. Moreover, friendly
staff members and social atmosphere makes the reputation of the gym better than
other fitness centres. The management of the gym is distributed in an efficient
manner; about 50 employees are giving their time to serve in this gym that includes personal trainers, instructors of class,
administrative authorities and lower staff (OB, 2018).
Behaviour Issues: Birmingham Fitness Gym
Running Head: Organisational Behaviour