assessment should be of HD as this is my last semester so i will have to pass it at any cost otherwise i ll have to extend my student visa that would be very expensive for me.
English language should not be too high that our lecturer doubtful that i have bought this assessment from somebody else.consider that student is from non English speaking country
i need all the sources like articles, journals that u are going to use in this assignment.
use sources from my university library SCU library
we would be penalised for late submission so plz make sure that u delivered it on time.
Organisational Behaviour (MNG82001)
Assignment 2 Guidelines & Marking Criteria
Title: Assignment 2 â€“ Reflective Case Study
Marks: 35 (which is 35% of the unit grade)
Due: Prior to 11pm on Monday 21st December (week 10), 2015.
Task: Drawing on your own personal experience, write a mini case-study (max 1500 words) on one of the following OB-related topics:
â€¢ When Teamwork failed to meet its objective
â€¢ The appropriate use of power in the workplace
â€¢ Organisational Change
Following the case-study, two questions should be posed which encourage the reader to examine and analyse different aspects of the case in close detail. Students should also provide a brief 200-300 word example answer for each question in order to demonstrate the potential learning outcomes of the case.
Purpose: This assignment seeks to achieve 2 key learning outcomes.
Firstly, it seeks to develop a studentâ€™s awareness for the way in which â€˜teamworkâ€™, â€˜powerâ€™ or â€˜changeâ€™ is manifest in organisations.
Secondly, understanding workplace behaviour can be greatly informed by periodic â€˜reflectionâ€™. Through this assignment it is hoped that students recognise the value of setting aside time in their busy work schedule to reflect upon and analyse, issues that influence the behaviour of themselves and others in the workplace.
Format: The single document submitted for this assignment is to contain the following components and formatting features:
a) Assignment â€˜Coversheetâ€™ (document is available in the Assignment file on Blackboard).
b) Assignment â€˜Coverpageâ€™ identifying the unit name & code, assignment title, student name & ID, and the report word count (note: Reference List content does not contribute to the word count).
c) Case Study (maximum of 1500 words). See below for the type of structure and style to adopt.
d) Two Case Study questions and example answers (max 300 words each)
Adopt the following formatting features for the paper:
o Apply page numbers. Page 1 comes after your coverpage.
o Font style: Times New Roman, 12pt, justified, 1Â½ line spacing.
o Margins â€“ top and bottom to be 2.54cm. Left and right to be 2.54cm. No page boarders.
o Spelling – if using a Microsoft package, specify Australian English language/grammar when running your spell-check.
o Writing and grammar must conform to the standards of a professional report.
Submit Process: All assignments are to be submitted through â€˜Turn-it-in,â€™ which can be accessed from the â€˜Assignment 2â€™ folder on Blackboard. The link will be activated in week 7 and you can submit the assignment at any time leading up to the due date.
The file you submit should be labelled in the following manner:
Surname, initial, student code, MNG82001, asmt 2
For example â€“ Gillett, P, 012345, MNG82001, asmt 2
Feedback: Students who submit their report by the due date will receive feedback within 2 weeks. This feedback will be in the form of a marking rubric and a copy of your report with electronic comments made by the marker.
Structure and style of the Case-Study
There is no prescribed structure for the case.
It is advised that students develop a catchy title; one that gives a clue as to the focus or purpose of the case.
Although not mandatory, students might use sub-headings to help structure their case story.
The general aim is to write an interesting story which clearly illustrates a good lesson in Organisational Behaviour. It is important that the key concepts associated with the lesson are discussed in the case and that this information is presented in a logical manner (i.e. it is effectively â€˜contextualisedâ€™ and the story has good â€˜flowâ€™).
At the same time, students should avoid being too blatant with the learning-related details. It is important for readers of the case to pick-up numerous small clues about the particular OB concept themselves and to recognise the relevance.
While the case is based on your own experience, you should not be referring to yourself specifically (e.g. I thoughtâ€¦, I didâ€¦, etc). Rather, you should adopt the perspective of someone who is observing and subsequently describing the case details as they unfold.
Many textbooks across a range of disciplines provide case studies that adopt this type of perspective. Students who are unfamiliar with the approach should therefore review various textbooks for examples.
For students who have no workplace experience on which to base their case, it is suggested that they identify and interview someone who can provide the required first-hand insight. This will provide for a more realistic case story; as compared to simply making things up. Students can however, use a small degree of â€˜artistic licenseâ€™ to help promote the OB issue at the centre of their case.
It is important that you use pseudonyms to protect the identity of the organisation and the individuals concerned.
Refer to the documents â€˜Writing the Case Studyâ€™ and â€˜Reflective Writingâ€™ (located in Assignment 2 folder) for further advice and tips that are specific to this assignment.
A. Written communication
(weight = approx 30% of marks)
1) Unsatisfactory. The writing is ineffective due to numerous spelling and/or grammatical errors.
2) Pass. Proof-read the final document to identify and correct minor errors in spelling and grammar. Plan for and undertake additional drafts as this will help to improve the quality of your written work.
3) Credit. A good standard of writing is provided (no spelling errors), however there is room for improvement in terms of higher-order writing skills (e.g. vocabulary and sentence structure). Work on developing the logic within your discussion.
4) Distinction. Higher-order writing skills are evident in parts. Greater consistency will improve the overall quality of your work.
5) HD. The quality of writing is exceptional. Well done.
B. Case Content
(weight = approx 30% of marks)
1) Unsatisfactory. The case details are highly ambiguous. No lesson in Organisational Behaviour can be logically deduced from the case story.
2) Pass. The case story highlights a basic lesson in Organisational Behaviour. Some of the details may be unnecessary or unrelated to the OB topic.
3) Credit. The case details offer good insight into the OB topic. Presenting the content in a more subtle manner will increase the learning impact.
4) Distinction. The case details reflect a good understanding of the OB topic. Further details could be provided which provide a more comprehensive lesson outcome.
5) HD. The case provides a very effective lesson in Organisational Behaviour. It is well constructed, believable and relevant to the OB context.
C. Questions and Answers
(weight = approx 30% of marks)
1) Unsatisfactory. The Q&As are poorly conceived. They do not contribute in any noteworthy way to a particular learning outcome
2) Pass. The questions are appropriate however the answers are ambiguous or they identify issues that are not present in the case.
3) Credit. Both the Q&As are linked to the Case details. The answer content reflects a solid basic learning outcome.
4) Distinction. The questions clearly encourage the reader to consider and analyse key OB features imbedded within the case. The answers could be developed a little further to show greater insight into the OB topic.
5) HD. The Q&As reflect a very strong understanding of the OB topic. In combination they clearly reveal how the case provides the opportunity for a very effective learning outcome
D. Features and Formatting
(weight = approx 10% of marks)
1) Unsatisfactory. The assignment document is unprofessionally presented (refer to the assignment guidelines).
2) Pass. A number of formatting style features are missing which should have been picked up in the final proof-read.
3) Credit. Two formatting style features are missing.
4) Distinction. One formatting style feature is missing.
5) HD. The assignment document adopts all the required formatting features and is professionally presented.
How to Write a Case Study
What Is a Case Study?
A case study is a puzzle that has to be solved. The first thing to remember about writing a case study is that the case should have a problem for the readers to solve. The case should have enough information in it that readers can understand what the problem is and, after thinking about it and analyzing the information, the readers should be able to come up with a proposed solution. Writing an interesting case study is a bit like writing a detective story. You want to keep your readers very interested in the situation.
A good case is more than just a description. It is information arranged in such a way that the reader is put in the same position as the case writer was at the beginning when he or she was faced with a new situation and asked to figure out what was going on. A description, on the other hand, arranges all the information, comes to conclusions, tells the reader everything, and the reader really doesn’t have to work very hard.
When you write a case, here are some hints on how to do it so that your readers will be challenged, will “experience” the same things you did when you started your investigation, and will have enough information to come to some answers.
There are three basic steps in case writing: research, analysis, and the actual writing. You start with research, but even when you reach the writing stage you may find you need to go back and research even more information.
The Research Phase:
1. Library and Internet research. Find out what has been written before, and read the important articles about your case site. When you do this, you may find there is an existing problem that needs solving, or you may find that you have to come up an interesting idea that might or might not work at your case site. For example, your case study might be on a national park where there have been so many visitors that the park’s eco-system is in danger. Then the case problem would be to figure out how to solve this so the park is protected, but tourists can still come. Or, you might find that your selected site doesn’t have many tourists, and one reason is that there are no facilities. Then the case problem might be how to attract the right kind of businesses to come and build a restaurant or even a hotel — all without ruining the park.
Or your case study might be on historic sites that would interest tourists â€“IF the tourists knew where the sites were or how to get to them. Or maybe your case study is about how to interest people in coming to your country so they can trace their familyâ€™s historic roots (origins).
Once you have decided on the situation or issue you would like to cover in your case study (and you might have several issues, not just one), then you need to go to the site and talk to experts.
2. Interview people who know the place or the situation. Find knowledgeable people to interview — they may be at the site itself or they work in a government office or company that deals with the historic preservation. In addition to people who work in the site, talk to visitors.
When you are interviewing people, , ask them questions that will help you understand their opinions, questions like the following: “What is your impression of the site (maybe itâ€™s an old fort, or a burial site, or an excavation of historic interest)?”
“How do you feel about the situation?”
“What can you tell me about how the site (or the situation) developed?”
“What do you think should be different, if anything?
You also need to ask questions that will give you facts that might not be available from an article, questions like:
“Would you tell me what happens here in a typical day?”
“What kind of statistics do you keep? May I have a copy?
“How many businesses are involved here?”
When you ask a question that doesn’t let someone answer with a “yes” or a “no” you usually get more information. What you are trying to do is get the person to tell you whatever it is that he or she knows and thinks — even though you don’t always know just what that is going to be before you ask the question. Then you can add these facts to your case.
Remember, your readers can’t go to your site, so you have to “bring it to them.”
The Analysis Phase:
1. Put all the information in one place. Now you have collected a lot of information from people, from articles and books. You can’t include it all.
So, you need to think about how to sort through it, take out the excess, and arrange it so that the situation at the case site will be understandable to your readers. Before you can do this, you have to put all the information together where you can see it and analyze what is going on.
2. Assign sections of material to different people. Each person or group should try to figure out what is really important, what is happening, and what a case reader would need to know in order to understand the situation. It may be useful, for example, to put all the information about visitors on one chart, or on a chart that shows visitors to two different sites throughout a year.
3. Try to formulate the case problem in a few sentences. When you do this, you may find that you need more information. Once you are satisfied with the way you have defined the problem you want your readers to think about, break the problem down into all its parts. Each one represents a piece of the puzzle that needs to be understood before the problem can be solved. Then spend some time discussing these with the others in your group.
For example, suppose:
a. Your heritage site doesn’t have many visitors, but many people say they would like to visit if it had services
b. There is unemployment in the village around the site,
c. The town is big enough to be able to accommodate many more visitors, and
d. The surrounding environment (animals, trees and plants) need to be protected from too many visitors
e. The town is far away, but there are no places to eat or sleep around there
f. The government owns the location, but the government does not want to own and operate either a restaurant or a hotel
Ask yourselves: â€œHow much information do people who will read your case study need to have in order to be able to discuss items a through f?
One answer to “a.” is that they need to know data about past numbers of visitors, and they need to know what evidence exists that more people want to visit but are discouraged from going there. Your evidence will come from the articles and statistics you have gathered, and from the interviews you have completed.
Once you have broken down the problem into pieces, you can analyze the information you now have and see if you can think about possible answers to each of the pieces. If you have enough information, then you can think about how to write the case study itself.
Writing the Case Study:
1. Describe the problem or case question you want the reader to solve.
In a detective story, the crime happens right at the beginning and the detective has to put together the information to solve it for the rest of the story. In a case, you can start by raising a question. You can, for example, quote someone you interviewed. For example, suppose you interviewed a tourist official and she told you she thought more people should be interested in visiting, and she canâ€™t understand why they donâ€™t come. Then you could write something like this,:
The historic town of XX is located in the mountains of country X. The town tourism supervisor, Mrs. Joan Smith, said that she thought “many more people should visit here, but they just donâ€™t come. I donâ€™t know why â€“ maybe we don’t have the right kinds of places for them to eat or sleep and it’s too far to travel in one day from the nearest big city.”
The case writers wondered what would have to happen in order to make the town more attractive to tourists.
Because you are the authors, you and your fellow students, can write questions like this and set the stage for the rest of your case story. What your introduction does is give clues to the reader about what they should be thinking about.
Once you have told the reader what one person associated with the tourist area thinks the problem is — how to make the place more attractive — you can give them the information they need to come to their own conclusions
2. Organize the sections of the case.
You will probably need to organize your information under topics like the following:
a. Introduction to the problem
b. Background on the place — where is it, how big, what climate, etc. â€“ this part should be a brief, overall description. Think about having 2 pages of written material, photos, or even a video, so that your readers can really get a feel for what the place. looks like. Summarize the main features of the place. What makes it special?
c. Visitors to the place — you want to make the reader do some work, so you can say that the number of visitors are shown on a table or chart you have compiled. You might want to include a chart that shows the number of visitors that come to another similar kind of place that does have facilities. This will let your readers make some comparisons. If possible, include information you received when you talked to visitors – what did they like, dislike? What did visitors think should happen to make the place more attractive?
d. Government Policy — include information about what government policy is with respect to this place. What is allowed, what is not allowed. Can policy be changed, and by whom?
e. Business Opportunities — you have already said there are not enough facilities for tourists. Well, now you need to provide information on what it might cost to put a nice restaurant for tourists. Suppose in one of your interviews, you talked to a business person who said that it would cost $25,000 to put a snack bar by the historic site. You need to give your reader that information, but that’s not all. You also have to provide some information about what a typical snack bar menu would have, how much the food would cost to make and sell, and what price the owner would have to put on each item so that the price would not be too high for people to pay. And your reader has to figure out how many people would have to eat there in order for the snack bar to make money. This is where the statistics come in. Are there enough people who visit now that the snack bar cold expect to make money? How about the number of visitors to the other similar places — what if that same number of people came? How would the snack bar do then?
f. Potential employees. You can’t add facilities without adding people to staff them. Are there enough people in the local community to fill the new jobs that would be added? Do they have the right kind of education and training to fill those jobs, or would the snack bar owner, or the new
hotel owner, have to train people, or bring people in from other locations? Could the local school system provide the necessary training?
You don’t have to do all the calculations for the reader, but you need to do them yourself so that you know the reader will have enough information in the case to do them. For example, before you can decide whether a snack bar might be a good idea, you have to estimate whether you could get more visitors –and how many more. Can you match the number that go to the other similar place that has facilities? Or is your location so much farther to travel that you don’t think that many more people would come. And just how many people have to use the snack bar in order for the owner to get back his $25,000 investment and also make some profit to pay himself a salary? This kind of analysis is really looking at the question of what kind of business opportunities are there. Would a souvenir shop be a good idea?
Did you do this kind of analysis before writing? If not, then you will have to stop and think some more. Maybe you will need to find more information before you can continue writing.
g. Environmental Implications for Animal and Plant Life of Changes in the Area. Since you already know that more visitors will cause a change, an important factor to consider is what will be the impact on plants and animals. Some places protect the plants by only letting visitors walk on special paths and visitors cannot pick any flowers or plants. Others say visitors can’t feed the animals, or rules say visitors must hire a guide if they are going into certain areas. Whatever the situation, you need to consider this question very carefully.
Other sections of the case. Depending on the case you are researching and writing, the sections of the case will need to be organized so that each type of information is in its own section and understandable to the reader. You might not use all the sections described above, but certainly your case study will need to consider the business and economic implications of tourists for your area, and equally important, the implications for the plant and animal life. Tourism has economic implications and environmental implications. Good planning must take both into account.
Conclusion. Your case will need a conclusion. Rather than putting in your answer in the case, leave the reader with some more questions. For example, you might have learned that there is a government policy that says “No private enterprise is allowed to change any part of the historic site.” So you might conclude with a paragraph like this:
The mayor and tourism minister discussed with the case writers whether or not it would be a good idea to prepare a plan for putting a snack bar inside the old fort without changing the way the building looks. The plan could be used to show the government that a policy change to allow private enterprise would be a good idea. “Is there enough value in adding jobs in the village?” asked one of the case writers. Another said, “I think there is enough evidence that expansion would be the right thing to do.” Still another case writer disagreed. What is your conclusion?
By ending your case on a question like this, you let your readers discuss the situation themselves. If you have written a good case, they will have enough information to understand the situation and have a lively class discussion.
The whole purpose of writing cases and sharing them with others is to share experience without all of us actually having to be in the same place. There is a trade-off between developing a place to make it more accessible to tourist so local jobs can be created and on the other hand protecting the environment from too many visitors. And this is a question that faces more than one country.
But how the trade-off is resolved can vary from country to country. One country’s solution might be useful for another country to know.
Making Sure Your Case Can Be Used in Another Country
Since different countries have different languages and cultures, you need to prepare a Note for the Instructor gives additional background material that the teacher might need to know in order to help guide the student discussions.
It is often interesting to record any changes that actually occurred after or while the case was being researched and written. Once students have learned about a situation, they find it is very interesting to learn more. But this information should be separate from the case study so that it doesn’t influence the class discussions.
If your case uses special terms, words, or refers to cultural customs that people in another country might not recognize, information about them should be put in the case (at the end in an appendix) or in the Note for the Instructor
Organizational Behavior: When Teamwork failed to meet its objective
The situation started when the training department at a local factory decided to take a break and engage in a teambuilding activity that would increase the cohesiveness of the team. The entire department was called to a meeting where a venue for the team building exercise was to be selected as the site where the department shall have its activities. There was heated debate between two groups of employees. One group wanted the department to engage in outdoor activities while the other group favored indoor activities. The two teams could not reach an agreement and the head of the department had to call for a vote in order to decide on the location for the team building activities (Spector, and Meier, 2014). Finally, the decision was made to go with the outdoor activities as more people were in favor of this decision. The group that wanted to participate in indoor activities was highly disgruntled and efforts to pacify them were fruitless. Preparations got underway in readiness for the day that had been set for the outdoor activities. The venue had already been selected, but plans had to be made to ensure that the entire department could be able to make it to the venue on time and participate in the day’s activities.
People were divided into groups and each group was given responsibilities in order to ensure that the team-building activities would be successful. The group that had failed in its bid to get the entire department to participate in the indoor activities was dragging its feet in terms of participating in the weekend’s activities. The team was still campaigning for the indoor activities, but the decision had already been made. The losing team’s campaign trying to get the venue changed was threatening to affect the entire weekend, where some of the activities planned included speeches and other outdoor activities that were meant to bring the entire department closer (Luoma, 2016). Many in the department were excited to be going on a weekend getaway, but the team that was opposed to the idea was working day and night to dissuade members from attending the retreat. A stern warning from the head of the department seemed to have stopped their campaigns as they stopped the campaign, but were still reluctant to participate in the weekend program. However, there was no stopping the rest of the department as plans were underway and many were excited to be spending two days with their colleagues outside the office.
The day finally arrived where the weekend getaway was supposed to kick off and everyone arrived at the meeting point on time. However, trouble started at the meeting point when the bus that was suppose to transport the entire department to the venue for the event was late and it was raining. This spelt bad news for the outdoor activities that had already been planned way in advance. The people that were opposed to the outdoor activities took this opportunity to remind the rest that they could have chosen to participate in indoor activities. However, this did not dampen the mood of the employees who were excited for the opportunity of having a getaway (Zuber, 2015). The bus finally arrived and the department was on its way to the venue of the two-day retreat. Luckily, the schedule for the first day was composed of a series of speeches where guest speakers were supposed to address the group on the value of teamwork at the workplace. Therefore, although the weather was unfriendly for outdoor activities, there were just a few activities that were scheduled for the outdoor that day. The speeches went on well and they were highly effective as they encouraged the entire department to be more collaborative at the workplace. The day ended without much drama, but the mood was a bit low because it was still raining.
The second day kicked off to a morning shower of rain, but it was just a drizzle and the day was expected to get warmer later into the afternoon. A series of indoor team building activities were organized where the group in support for indoor activities took a leading role as they were happy that the team got to participate in indoor activities. The rest of the team members were a bit disappointed as they were looking forward to exploring the nature trails that were present in the park where the event was taking place. The group had also planned for horseback riding activities if the weather could allow. The group had to settle for indoor activities where it was decided that the department would discuss issues related to work that they felt could be addressed by the entire department (Haines, and Sumner, 2013). The discussions were supposed to take the entire morning and the outdoor activities had been pushed to the afternoon pending the fact that it first had to stop raining before any outdoor activities could begin. The group discussions turned into something else where some members decided to say all the negative things that they could remember about the behavior of their colleagues at work.
The discussions started nicely, but ended in a fiasco as different members started accusing each other of wrongdoing at work. Some of the more notable accusations included team members who were accused of misusing work resources such as carrying work resources home including printing paper. Other members were accused of being lazy and always relying on others to do their work for them. As the accusations piled upon each other some had interesting revelations about how other members used to leave work early and head home while requesting others to sign out for them in the work logs. Other accusations included how some members used the work phones to make private phone calls where they spent hours on the phone talking to friends, family and business associates (Ajmal, and Lodhi, 2015). Some revelations during the heated debate that followed included the fact that some employees were misusing the company cars for their own private errands. The negative revelations could not stop despite the chairman urging participants to be civil with each other and respect each other’s privacy by ending the personal revelations. Some members even threatened that they had evidence of other members embezzling funds from the organization and they were willing to reveal this information.
The meeting went into total turmoil as threats were leveled against individual members regarding their conduct at work and especially the use of company resources at the workplace. The chair of the department had to leave the meeting when it became clear that the badmouthing was not about to stop as more and more accusations were leveled against members with each person revealing the other’s dirty linen. The chair tried to encourage the members to stop badmouthing each other and instead look for ways of reporting any wrongdoing through the proper channels at the workplace (Grodal, Nelson, and Siino, 2015). The turmoil that was the discussion demonstrated how fragmented the department was in terms of employee cohesion and how much resources were being misused by the employees. The discussion ruined the mood of the entire getaway and threatened to erode even the effect of the speeches on teamwork. The discussion had to be stopped midway because of the numerous accusations and counter-accusations that had turned it into a shouting match with almost everyone leveling accusations against their fellow coworkers. The getaway ended on a negative note as the afternoon activities had to e cancelled based on the sour mood of the participants. In the evening everyone retired to their rooms waiting to head back to work in the morning unsure of what awaited them at work.
The next morning everyone was silent as they awaited the bus for transportation back into the city. The getaway had turned into a disaster because of the discussion, which had taken on a negative tone and had ruined the entire getaway. The head of the department had a lot on his mind as he wondered what could have gone wrong so as to ruin the good plans that he had in mind for the getaway. However, the discussion had highlighted an important aspect that there was a lot of disunity in the department as well as the fact that there was rampant misuse f resources in the department. The chairman vowed to look into these matters once they got back to work after the brief break that they had taken to go on the weekend getaway. A full investigation was launched into the accusations of the misuse of departmental resources as well as the accusations of the embezzlement of funds within the department. The chairmen also selected a committee of some of the senior employees within the department to assess what needed to be done in order to boost employee cohesiveness and teamwork within the department. All these efforts resulted in a highly effective department a few months after the incident when the investigation was complete and the department was able to work as a team.
Ajmal, M., and Lodhi, S. A., 2015. Exploring Organizational Consciousness: A Critical Approach towards Organizational Behavior. Pakistan Journal Of Commerce & Social Sciences, 9(1), 202-217.
Fatima, M., Shafique, M., Qadeer, F., and Ahmad, R., 2015. HR Practices and Employee Performance Relationship in Higher Education: Mediating Role of Job Embeddedness, Perceived Organizational Support and Trust. Pakistan Journal Of Statistics & Operation Research, 11(3), 421-439.
Fedorowicz, J., and Konsynski, B., 1992. Organization Support Systems: Bridging Business and Decision Processes. Journal Of Management Information Systems, 8(4), 5-25.
Graham, K., Ziegert, J., and Capitano, J., 2015. The Effect of Leadership Style, Framing, and Promotion Regulatory Focus on Unethical Pro-Organizational Behavior. Journal Of Business Ethics, 126(3), 423-436.
Grodal, S., Nelson, A. J., and Siino, R. M., 2015. Help-Seeking And Help-Giving As An Organizational Routine: Continual Engagement In Innovative Work. Academy Of Management Journal, 58(1), 136-168.
Haines, E. L., and Sumner, K. E., 2013. Digging deeper or piling it higher? Implicit measurement in organizational behavior and human resource management. Human Resource Management Review, 23(Measuring Implicit Content and Processes at Work: A New Frontier within the Organizational Sciences), 229-241.
Jia, H., and Liden, R. C., 2015. Making A Difference In The Teamwork: Linking Team Prosocial Motivation To Team Processes And Effectiveness. Academy Of Management Journal, 58(4), 1102-1127.
Luoma, J., 2016. Model-based organizational decision making: A behavioral lens. European Journal Of Operational Research, 249(3), 816-826.
Ning, L., Kirkman, B. L., and Porter, C. H., 2014. Toward A Model Of Work Team Altruism. Academy Of Management Review, 39(4), 541-565.
Ployhart, R. E., 2015. Strategic Organizational Behavior (Strobe): The Missing Voice In The Strategic Human Capital Conversation. Academy Of Management Perspectives, 29(3), 342-356.
Spector, P. E., and Meier, L. L., 2014. Methodologies for the study of organizational behavior processes: How to find your keys in the dark. Journal Of Organizational Behavior, 35(8), 1109-1119.
Tudorescu, N., Zaharia, C., Zaharia, I., and Zaharia, G. C., 2010. Rationality And Organizational Behavior. Economics, Management & Financial Markets, 5(3), 266-271.
Zuber, F., 2015. Spread of Unethical Behavior in Organizations: A Dynamic Social Network Perspective. Journal Of Business Ethics, 131(1), 151-172.
Žydžiūnaitė, V., and Lepaitė, D., 2009. Aspects of social processes within a business organisation for a positive development of organisational behaviour. Current Issues Of Business & Law, 4, 103-121.
Žydžiūnaitė, V., and Lepaitė, D., 2010. Aspects Of Social Processes Within A Business Organisation For A Positive Development Of Organisational Behaviour. Issues Of Business & Law, 2, 74-84.