Organisational Behaviour and Personnel Relations

  • Ukandi G. Damachi


It is difficult to define the subject matter of organisational behaviour (OB).1 It includes much of industrial psychology, industrial sociology, and sociology of occupations, most of organisational psychology and organisational sociology, political science, and anthropology; and nowadays it even entails a bit of computer sciences. However, it is less encompassing than organisational theory, which deals with hard normative subjects such as game theory, decision-making theory and mathematical models of a company.2 Besides, its nomenclature notwithstanding, organisational behaviour gives relatively little attention to the behaviour of organisations per se. Primarily it is concerned with the behaviour of people within organisations, and most especially businesses.


Collective Bargaining Organisational Behaviour Leadership Style Human Relation Labour Power 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    For a historical development of OB, see George Strauss, ‘Organizational Behavior and Personnel Relations’, in A Review of Industrial Relations Research, Vol. 1 (Industrial Relations Research Association Series, 1970) pp. 145–6. An analogy can be drawn between organisational behaviour and industrial relations in that both are applied fields that draw on more basic disciplines. Industrial relations is more a branch of economics; but the origin of OB is less certain. It tends to be an ‘interdisciplinary discipline’ in that it contains a bit of every behavioural science discipline.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    For details on organisation theory, see James March (ed.), Handbook of Organizations ( Chicago: Rand-McNally, 1965 ).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    C. Argyris, Personality and Organization (New York: Harper & Row, 1957 ).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    D. McGregor, The Human Side of Enterprise ( New York: McGraw-Hill, 1960 )Google Scholar
  5. D. McGregor, also The Professional Manager ( New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967 ).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    C. Argyris. Integrating the Organisation and the Individual ( New York: Wiley, 1964 ).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    F. Herzberg et al., The Motivation to Work ( New York: Wiley, 1960 ).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Robert House and Lawrence Wigdor, ‘Herzberg’s Dual Factor Theory of Job Satisfaction and Motivation. A Review of Evidence and a Criticism’, Personnel Psychology, vol. 20, 4 November 1967.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Victor Vroom, Some Personality Determinants of the Effects of Participation ( Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1960 ).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    George H. Litwin and Robert A. Stringer, Motivation and Organizational Climate ( Boston: Harvard University Press, 1968 ).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    David C. McClelland, The Achievement Motive ( Princeton, N.J.: Van Nostrand, 1961 ).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Victor Vroom and Floyd C. Mann, ‘Leader Authoritarianism and Employee Attitudes’, Personnel Psychology, vol. 3, no. 3 (summer 1960), pp. 125–40.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Amitai Etzioni, Modern Organizations ( Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press, 1961 ).Google Scholar
  14. Amitai Etzioni, See also his Comparative Analysis of Complex Organizations (Glencoe, Ill., 1961), pp. 12 and 66.Google Scholar
  15. 14.
    Dorwin Cartwright and Alvin Zander (eds), Group Dynamics: Research and Theory (Evanston: Row, Peterson & Co., 1953), p. 492.Google Scholar
  16. 15.
    Fred E. Fiedler, A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness ( New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967 ), p. 11.Google Scholar
  17. 18.
    Talcott Parsons, Sociological Theory and Modern Society ( New York: Free Press, 1967 ), p. 297.Google Scholar
  18. 19.
    Rensis Likert, New Patterns of Management ( New York: McGraw-Hill, 1961 ),p. 5.Google Scholar
  19. 23.
    L. Coch and J. R. P. French, ‘Overcoming Resistance to Change’, Human Relations, vol. 1, 1948.Google Scholar
  20. 26.
    N. C. Morse and E. Reimer, ‘The Experimental Change of a Major Organization Variable’, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, vol. 52, 1956.Google Scholar
  21. 29.
    Ralph M. Stogdill, Leader Behavior: Its Description and Measurement (Ohio State University, Research Monograph no. 88, 1956 ), p. 27.Google Scholar
  22. 33.
    Krech, Crutchfield and Ballachey, Individual in Society (McGraw-Hill, 1962), p. 432.Google Scholar
  23. 34.
    David Bowers and Stanley Seashore, ‘Predicting Organizational Effectiveness with a Four-Factor Theory of Leadership’, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. II, 1966, pp. 238–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 35.
    Fred Fiedler, A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness ( New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967 ).Google Scholar
  25. 36.
    Ronald Lippitt and Ralph White, Autocracy and Democracy ( New York: Harper and Brothers, 1960 ), p. 12.Google Scholar
  26. 45.
    Robert R. Blake and Jane S. Mouton, The Managerial Grid (Houston, Texas: Gulf Publishing Company, 1964), from which Figure 6.1 is takenGoogle Scholar
  27. and R. R. Blake, J. S. Mouton, L. B. Barnes and L. E. Greiner, ‘Breakthrough in Organization Development’, Harvard Business Review, November–December 1964, pp. 133–55.Google Scholar
  28. 48.
    Frederick H. Harbison and Charles Myers, Management in the Industrial World ( New York: McGraw-Hill, 1959 ).Google Scholar
  29. 49.
    Martin Patchin, ‘Participation in Decision-Making and Motivation: What is the Relation?’ Personnel Administration, vol. 27, November 1964.Google Scholar
  30. 50.
    Arnold Tannenbaum (ed.), Control in Organization ( New York: McGraw-Hill, 1968 ).Google Scholar
  31. 51.
    Henry Landsberger, ‘The Horizontal Dimension in a Bureaucracy’, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 6, 1961, pp. 298–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 52.
    Leonard Sayles, Managerial Behavior ( New York: McGraw-Hill, 1964 ).Google Scholar
  33. 53.
    George Strauss, ‘Tactics of Lateral Relationship’, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 7, September 1962, pp. 161–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 54.
    Paul Lawrence and Jay W. Lorsch, ‘Differentiation and Integration in Complex Organizations’, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 12, March 1967, pp. 1–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 55.
    Richard Walton et al., ‘The Management of Interdepartmental Conflict: A Model and a Review’, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 14, March 1969, pp. 73–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 56.
    James D. Thompson, Organizations in Action ( New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967 ).Google Scholar
  37. 57.
    F. H. Harbison and J. R. Coleman, Goals and Strategies in Collective Bargaining ( New York: Harper, 1951 ).Google Scholar
  38. 58.
    This government control seems to be more so in the developing countries. For details see Ukandi G. Damachi, The Role of Trade Unions in the Development Process: with a case study of Ghana ( New York: Praeger, 1974 ).Google Scholar
  39. 59.
    Richard Walton and Robert McKersie, A Behavioral Theory of Labor Negotiations ( New York: McGraw-Hill, 1965 ).Google Scholar
  40. 60.
    Robert Blake, Jane Mouton et al., Managing Inter-Group Conflict in Industry ( Houston: Gulf Publishing Company, 1964 ).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Ukandi G. Damachi 1978

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ukandi G. Damachi
    • 1
  1. 1.International Institute for Labour StudiesGenevaSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations