Evolusi Pemikiran Pengurusan (Evolution of Management Thought) Pendekatan Hubungan Manusia

ORGANIZATION BUSINESS GOVERNMENT HOME SOCIAL EDUCATION ORGANIZATION UNDERSTANDING HUMAN ORGANIZATION BUSINESS GOVERNMENT HOME SOCIAL EDUCATION ORGANIZATION

Aims to create a condusive working environment producing better output Human relations among workers = organizational behaviour (Complex human factors which looks at the cause and effect relationships) ‘OB’ dan ‘HR’ are completementary,covering the same subject - to improve behavior.

EMPHASIS Responsibility to develop human relations which successfully able to achieve organizational goals. Interasctions will bring quality human relations or the other way around. A manager’s responsibility to develop better relationship with everybody he/she manages. Everybody’s responsibility to make it happen.

So WHAT IS YOUR DEFINITION?

Definition HR is the integration of people into a work situation that motivates them to work together productively, cooperatively, with economic, social and psychological satisfaction. ‘HR’ is motivating people to develop productive and fulfilling teamwork.

KEY POINTS ‘cooperation’ - willingess to work together Focus on people not economic Must be in organised social environment Key activity is motivating persons Direction of motivation is towards teamwork Involve cooperation and coordination ‘cooperation’ - willingess to work together ‘coordination’ - effective time and sequence in performance activities.

EXERCISE HOW CAN YOU MAKE YOURSELF BETTER?

EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AS A WORKING PLACE LET’S DISCUSS

ACTIVITY 1 Choose a topic from the course synopsis and discuss in a group of three. As a group you have to make a presentation.

GROUP DYNAMICS Dynamics of members’ of formal or informal groups in the organization Kurt lewin (1930) - ‘how a group should be organized and conducted’ (democratic leadership, member participation, overall cooperation). Second view of group dynamics consist of a set of techniques such as: Role playing Brainstorming Buzz groups Group therapy Sensitivity training Team building Johari window

GROUP DYNAMICS Third view of group dynamics similar to Lewin’s concept - internal nature of the groups, how they form their structure and processes, how they function and affect members, others groups and the organization. Modern definition of group - is a collection of individuals in which there is” Interaction among members Perception of group membership Shared values and norms Fate interdependence (what happen to one group members affects the others)

HOW GROUPS ARE DEVELOP? Propinquity theory, proximity is the reason examples: sitting in classroom, mosque, staff room. Formation based on activities, interaction and sentiments, not becouse of proximity only but cooperation and problem solving. Balance theory - attracted to those who has similar attitudes toward relevant goals (religion, politics, life style, marriage, work, authority). If there is ‘no balance’ - dissolve the relationship.

HOW GROUPS ARE DEVELOP? Exchange theory - if rewards greater than cost than it is positive level - affiliation and attraction exists. If cost is greater than – anxiety, frustration, embarrassment and fatigue will occur. Practical reason - economic, social and security reason.

TYPE OF GROUPS Primary groups - small size, interaction face to face eg; family and peer group Coalition - Individual interactions Group’s objectives Free from organizational structure Mutual perception of membership Act as a group

WHAT ARE THE IMPACTS? Menyempurnakan tugas yang tak boleh dilaksanakan secara individu. Memperlihatkan kemahiran dan potensi diri’ Banyak idea untuk buat keputusan Mengawal tingkahlaku pekerja Menyempurnakan perubahan Kestabilan - transmit nilai kepada orang lain

WHAT ARE THE IMPACTS ON INDIVIDUAL? Membantu mempelajari tentang organisasi Mempelajari tentang diri sendiri Membantu mendapat kemahiran baru Ganjaran Puas hati - personal needs especially for social acceptance and affiliation. Cohesiveness: high cohesive group akan menjadi lebih powerful Low cohesive group - less powerful

EFFECTIVENESS Argyris (1964) - successful blending of individual needs and organizational goals as indicators of effectiveness (achieving top management goals at the expense of personal goals achievement leads to ineffectiveness) Mcgregor (1960), Blake and Mouton (1960), and Hill (1969), OE is the intergration of personal and organizational goals.