-
OB-based Analysis of a Film
(Due In-class (paper) and Online on Apr 3rd)
FORMAT
Your analysis should be at least 2,000 words in length, and not more than 2,500. It should be divided into two approximately equal parts, one reflective and the other critical. The paper should double-spaced, with 1” margins. The font should be 11-point Times New Roman, Cambria, or Helvetica. It should be submitted in the appropriate place on cuLearn by the deadline and a paper copy handed in to your ITs at the final lecture. The first thing to do, of course, is watch the film you have chosen from among the choices given. If you have already seen it, it is highly recommended that you watch it again.
CONTENT
In the reflective portion, ask yourself: What did I observe in this film and what possible meanings could these observations have? The key task here is to gather as many observations as possible from different points of view. The main skill to work on is perspective taking, or what some people call “re-framing.” Look at the narrative events and describe them from different perspectives. For example, how did certain characters view the situation and what did it mean to them? What would a neutral (“objective”) observer have seen and heard? What perspective did you have – in other words, how did it affect you? Reflect on these observations to discover the personal meaning that the material had for you. Write this.
In the second, conceptual portion, use at least two concepts or theories from the course material to look beneath the surface at why the main characters behaved the way they did. Provide the source for each reference to theory in an appropriate format and use quality external sources to enhance your analysis. In reviewing theoretical material, first, briefly define the concept or theory as you would for someone who was not familiar with it. Next, apply the concept thoroughly to your observations of the film. The tie-in should include the specific details of how the theory relates to and provides insight into the experiences of the main characters in the film. Does the example support or refute the theory? IMPORTANT: Avoid merely providing a “book report” of what you have observed in your film – you must discuss how you see concepts and theories relating to key examples, events, or characters. In other words, you must reframe the plot/action/behaviour of individuals in the context of the course material.
EVALUATION
Papers will be marked on the following criteria:
- Attention to purpose of the assignment (5pts). This means addressing the purpose, aims and themes of the assignment comprehensively, with enthusiasm and imagination.
- Clarity of expression (10pts). This includes flow and integration of material, overall organization of ideas, grammar.
- Reflectiveness (15pts). This means how deeply you observe and analyze the work that you choose, and how well you identify multiple perspectives as they relate to the theory. You are confident in reflecting on material; expression of insight and multiple perspectives shows your ability to explain effects of events on individuals. You use specific examples to support your analysis.
- For each of the two theories you choose, you will be evaluated on:
- Your knowledge of the theory (30pts). You demonstrate a sophisticated grasp of theory and innovativeness in the selection and handling of theory.
- Your analysis (30pts). You must analyze people and situations through application of theory, resulting in a compelling integration of theory & plot; your use of both of these elements in framing analysis must be persuasive, showing a high-level understanding.
| Subject | Literature | Pages | 10 | Style | APA |
|---|
Answer
Organizational Behavior Film Analysis
Introduction
Personal Reflection
The movie has several major characters around whom the storyline revolves. They include Christian Wolf, Ray King, Lamar, Dana Cummings and Marybeth Medina. The audience can draw several perspectives in the movie revolving around some of these characters.
Christian Wolf
Christian Wolf is the star character of the movie. According to the story, he runs a small accounting firm called ZZZ Accounting that reports tax returns of US$75,000 only. The name is unattractive and it could explain why the owner filed a small amount in tax. The common perspective for a casual observer would therefore be of a struggling firm with no secrets.
According to Ray King, the Treasury director of financial crimes, Christian Wolf is a criminal who launders money for serious crime offenders such as terrorists and gamblers. He has background information on Wolf and sets out to confirm his suspicion that he is a slippery accountant who manages the books of the world’s most dangerous criminals. The discovery that Wolf is the accountant for the three businesses adjacent to ZZZ Accounting’s physical location strengthens King’s misgivings about the real operations of Wolf. He wonders why the accountant has survived for so long despite working with the most dangerous clients. His opinion of Wolf is that of a dangerous man with killer instincts to survive with such creepy customers.
The CEO of Living Robotics, Lamar, hires Wolf to uncover the financial discrepancy at the firm. He reports that a parent to his potential client recommended Wolf for his expertise. As it later turns out, Lamar hired Wolf as a publicity stunt but did not expect him to discover the truth about the discrepancy, and at such speed. He obviously underestimated the quiet man’s abilities.
Upon reporting to Living Robotics, Wolf meets Dana Cummings, the firm’s accountant who discovered the discrepancy. Dana tries to connect with the external consultant (Wolf) without success. The man is detached and seems devoid of any emotions. He is polite yet unwelcoming to her overtures to be friendly. He must appear to her as a snob who is even too overconfident as he dismisses her offer of help.
To an unassuming and objective observer, Wolf was a neat man, always elegantly dressed and with a penchant for order in everything, he did. His organized manner of doing things would be an indicator of a man who paid attention to detail and knew his job. His apparent dislike for small talk and socialization could indicate a serious professional with a passion for his work.
The author observed Wolf as an efficient accountant with unique abilities and a dark history. The man had a conscience and a connection to his past as demonstrated by his charitable acts towards people with special conditions. He was disturbed by his unique childhood that haunted him in his adulthood and work. While he was unsocial with people, he directed his energies to his work for which had a deep passion and exemplary ability.
Lamar
Lamar was the CEO of Living Robotics, a company that manufactured prosthetics for persons with amputations. To the common observer, he was a straight and benevolent businessperson who wanted to serve the unfortunate people in society. His ‘concern’ in trying to uncover the suspected financial impropriety at his firm painted him as an entrepreneur who operated according to the law.
Dana Cummings, the young accountant at the firm must have felt bad that the CEO hired an external consultant to trace the discrepancy she discovered. She must have felt slighted and untrusted by Lamar to bring Wolf to do a job she could do well.
The objective observer would see a CEO of a stable company that was unable to sustain profitability despite having in operation for long. His fatherly nature was one of a man who wanted the best for his company and his employees. However, given the not-so-infrequent incidences of corporate crime, such an observer would view the financial discrepancy with some suspicion, especially with the Lamar as CEO.
The author observed a cunning man who led a double life, portraying a father figure to the public yet instigating a big crime to evade tax. He was evil enough to have his CFO murdered in an attempt to have a scapegoat for the discrepancy discovered by Dana and confirmed by Wolf. His later attempts to kill Dana and Wolf show a man to whom murder was normal. He was criminal enough to possess a security ring that acted as a killing squad. His overconfidence in his intellect and underestimation of Wolf led him to hire the smart accountant in the belief that he (Wolf) would not be able to find out the actual problem at the firm.
Marybeth Medina
Medina was a new recruit at the Treasury department under Ray King, the director of financial crimes. Her resume painted a very capable analyst with vast experience read off by King at the beginning of the movie. The common perspective was one of a successful young person; hardworking and rising up the ranks in her profession. Such an employee would be one with a clean record all her life.
Ray King had discovered a criminal record behind Medina in her juvenile years. Medina hid the record of her serious childhood crimes including drugs and attempted murder. King’s knowledge of the intentional lie gave him an opinion of the girl as a liar. He viewed her as a criminal who would not mind using unfair means to get her job and promotion. He would use this one offense to blackmail the girl to investigate the mysterious accountant that managed the books of the criminal world of America.
The objective observer would consider Medina a hardworking employee who had risen up the ranks in her career with bright future prospects. Her current position would however not be proof of a clean past. On the other hand, the objective observer would forgive the woman for her impropriety in her juvenile years, as minors are not fully responsible for their actions. However, her decision to lie when applying for the federal job remains criminal as that is the legal stipulation.
The author of this film finds Medina to be a hard worker and very intelligent. Her ability to identify Wolf as the mysterious accountant operating under pseudonyms is commendable. She is a remorseful person demonstrated by her failure to control her tears when confronted by King regarding her omission of her juvenile criminal record.
Critical Analysis
The behavior and actions of the characters in the movie can find explanation through various concepts and theories of organizational behavior. Behavioral scientists believe that each action of an individual has some driving factor behind it. Motivation is one such concept with various theories in existence to explain people’s behavior in the workplace.
Motivation
Motivation is the drive that gives an individual the desire to act in a certain way (Thomas 2010). The result of these drives could be to achieve something desirable or to avoid some undesirable consequences. Maslow’s hierarchy theory of needs is one explanation for the forces that drive an individual’s actions.
Maslow’s Hierarchy Theory of Needs
According to Abraham Maslow, an individual has certain needs that occur in a pattern of priorities (Latham 2011). The most basic needs of every individual are the physiological needs. A human would not be able to function normally without these needs and continued deprivation would lead to death. The individual must meet these needs to survive. These needs include food, air, sleep and sex (Schermerhorn 2010). An individual must satisfy these lower needs first before developing the desire for the next class. Safety needs assume importance after an individual has satisfied his physiological needs. An individual needs safety and security to operate normally. Security includes physical, emotional, psychological and even financial security (Woods and West 2010). Humans desire a predictable order of things to have this security. Social needs dominate an individual after meeting safety needs. These are the needs for love and belongingness. Next in the hierarchy are esteem needs. Individuals need appreciation and respect from other people to feel complete. Last, at the top of the hierarchy are self-actualization needs. Humans need to realize self-fulfillment in whatever he does. Maslow insisted that the needs order in that strict hierarchy and a lower need must be met before a higher need takes precedence over others (Jex and Britt 2008). This theory can explain some of the behavior the characters in the movie exhibited.
Application of the Theory to the Film
Ray King Ray King was about to retire when he blackmailed Medina to track the accountant. As an old man who had worked most of his life, it is logical to assume that he was capable of meeting his basic (physiological) needs of food, shelter and clothing. Air and sleep are a natural given that all humans receive in sufficient quantities. His position as the director of financial crimes must be paying well to provide financial security. With financial security, he can afford to pay for physical security as well. In his narration to Medina during the pursuit for Wolf, he explains that he had a family that he loved. It is reasonable to assume that the family loved him back. Besides, there is no indication or reason to assume that he did not have friends. It must be assumed therefore that, King had his social needs for love and belongingness well catered. The position of financial crimes director is very senior and many juniors under King must be working with the goal of reaching it. He had many successes credited to him during his career (even if wrongly so). Without doubt, King was a respected person both at work and in society. His self-esteem needs were provided. The only reason for an old man approaching retirement to go to the extent of betraying and threatening a young and hardworking girl to trace the accountant would be to achieve self-actualization. King must have set himself the realization of the goal as the pinnacle of his career as the accountant had evaded identification for long and he was involved in the most serious financial crimes of his time. Identifying this man would be a unique fulfillment for this man at the end of his stellar career.
McClelland’s Needs Theory
David McClelland expanded Maslow’s theory to develop an explanation for the personality of people. He theorized that each individual has three drivers that are operational in their daily lives and that the dominant of these drivers determines the character traits of the person (Schultz and Schultz 2016). According to him, these drivers are the need for achievement (n-ach), the need for affiliation (n-aff) and the need for power (n-pow). The need for achievement is the intrinsic drive for attaining goals (Shaffer 2009). This need drives the person to set goals whose achievement gives him the best satisfaction over all the satisfaction of the other needs. Typical characteristics of this person include setting of challenging goals, a tendency to plan the achievement of goals in an organized manner and working alone (John, Robins and Pervin 2008). Individuals with achievement as their major driver like receiving feedback on their progress and achievements. The need for approval from peers and seniors arise from the desire for affiliation. People driven by this need do not like taking risks, love working in groups, prefer collaborating with others rather than competing with them and tend to agree with group decisions to remain likeable (French 2011). The need for power as the dominant drive produces individuals who like dominating others in a controlling manner, strive to win arguments, enjoy competition and have a peculiar liking for status and recognition (Griffin and Moorhead 2014).
Application of the Theory to the Film
Christian Wolf: Christian Wolf is a character that worked with the most dangerous criminals and managed to avoid detection for long. Ray King wondered why the accountant had survived death from his clients given the illegal nature and long sentences that the offenses attracted when caught. In his passion for shooting, the movie shows an expert shooter who did not miss his targets despite the long ranges. When he took up the task to uncover the source of the financial discrepancy at Living Robotics, he was quite disturbed when the CEO stopped him before completion of his job. This is an individual who set high goals for himself and he always met them. Throughout his operations as an accountant, he worked with minimum assistance from other people. At the beginning of the film, he is seen disinterested in small talk with his secretary. When he arrived at Living Robotics, he rejected Dana’s offer for assistance in uncovering the source of the problem with accounts. The job of working with criminals was a risky affair in all senses that Wolf enjoyed. The mysterious voice that always called him gave him feedback on the progress of his assignments and praised him regularly. The above traits describe a person whose main driver was achievement.
Conclusion
Motivation theories explain the driving factors behind individual actions in every instance. The various major characters in the movie display different personalities that are not to appreciate with casual observation. The unique character of the star in the film, Christian Wolf, seems weird at first glance. The motivation for Ray King’s treatment of Medina is intriguing to say the least. An understanding of the needs theory by McClelland offers a perfect explanation for Wolf’s behavior while Abraham’s theory explains the driving force behind Ray’s actions against Medina.
References
|
French, R. (2011). Organizational behaviour. Hoboken, N.J: Wiley. Griffin, R. W., & Moorhead, G. (2014).Organizational behavior: Managing people and organizations. Mason, OH: South-Western/Cengage Learning. Jex, S. M., & Britt, T. W. (2008).Organizational psychology: A scientist-practitioner approach. Hoboken, N.J: John Wiley & Sons. John, O. P., Robins, R. W., &Pervin, L. A. (2008).Handbook of personality: Theory and research. New York: Guilford Press. Latham, G. P. (2011). Work motivation: History, theory, research, and practice. London: SAGE. Shaffer, D. R. (2009).Social and personality development. Australia; Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Cengage Learning. Schermerhorn, J. R. (2010). Management. Hoboken, N.J: Wiley. Schultz, D. P., & Schultz, S. E. (2017). Theories of personality. Australia: CEngage Learning. Thomas, K. W. (2010). Intrinsic motivation at work: What really drives employee engagement. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Woods, S. A., & West, M. A. (2010).The psychology of work and organizations. Andover, UK: South-WesternCengage Learning.
|