Editing Organizational behavior (section)

==History==

As a multi-disciplinary science, organizational behavior has been influenced by developments in a number of related disciplines, including [[sociology]], [[industrial/organizational psychology]], and [[economics]].

The [[Industrial Revolution]] is a period from the 1760s where new technologies resulted in the adoption of new manufacturing techniques and increased mechanization. In his famous [[iron cage]] metaphor, [[Max Weber]] raised concerns over the reduction in religious and vocational work experiences. Weber claimed that the Industrial Revolution's focus on efficiency constrained the worker to a kind of "prison" and "stripped a worker of their individuality".<ref>Weber, M. (1993). ''The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism'' (T. Parsons, Trans.). London, England: Routledge. (Original work published 1904–1905)</ref> The significant social and cultural changes caused by the Industrial Revolution also gave rise to new forms of organization. Weber analyzed one of these organizations and came to the conclusion that bureaucracy was "an organization that rested on [[rational-legal]] principles and maximized technical efficiency."<ref name="Weber1947">[[Weber, Max]]. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. Translated by A.M. Henderson and Talcott Parsons. London: Collier Macmillan Publishers, 1947.</ref>

A number of organizational behavioral practitioners documented their ideas about management and organization. The best known theories today originate from [[Henri Fayol]], [[Chester Barnard]], and [[Mary Parker Follet]]. All three of them drew from their experience to develop a model of effective organizational management, and each of their theories independently shared a focus on human behavior and motivation.<ref name=Barnard1938>{{cite book |title= The Functions of the Executive |last= Barnard |first= Chester I. |author-link= Chester Barnard |year= 1938 |publisher= Harvard University Press |location= Cambridge, MA |oclc= 555075}}</ref><ref name=Fayol1917 >{{citation | last=Fayol | first=Henri | year=1917 | title=Administration industrielle et générale; prévoyance, organisation, commandement, coordination, controle | publisher =Paris, H. Dunod et E. Pinat | language=fr | oclc=40224931}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|title=Dynamic Administration: The Collected Papers of Mary Parker Follett|last=Follett|first=Henry C.|publisher= Routledge|isbn=978-0415279857|year=2003}}</ref> One of the first [[management consulting|management consultants]], [[Frederick Winslow Taylor|Frederick Taylor]], was a 19th-century engineer who applied an approach known as the [[scientific management]]. Taylor advocated for maximizing task efficiency through the scientific method.<ref name="Taylor1911">{{Citation | last = Taylor | first = Frederick Winslow | author-link = Frederick Winslow Taylor | year = 1911 | title = The Principles of Scientific Management | publisher = Harper & Brothers | location = New York, NY, USA and London, UK | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=HoJMAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA3 | oclc = 233134 | postscript =. ''[https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/6435 Also available from Project Gutenberg].'' | lccn = 11010339}}</ref> The scientific method was further refined by [[Lillian Moller Gilbreth|Lillian]] and [[Frank Bunker Gilbreth, Sr.|Frank Gilbreth]], who utilized [[time and motion study]] to further improve worker efficiency.<ref name="price1989">Price, B 1989, ‘Frank and Lillian Gilbreth and the Manufacture and Marketing of Motion Study, 1908-1924’, Business and Economic History, vol. 18, no. 2</ref> In the early 20th century the idea of [[Fordism]] emerged. Named after automobile mogul [[Henry Ford]], the method relied on the standardization of production through the use of assembly lines. This allowed unskilled workers to produce complex products efficiently. Sorenson later clarified that Fordism developed independently of Taylor.<ref>Sorensen, C. E. (1956). ''My forty years with Ford''. New York, NY: Collier Books.</ref> Fordism can be explained as the application of bureaucratic and scientific management principles to whole manufacturing process. The success of the scientific method and Fordism resulted in the widespread adoption of these methods.

In the 1920s, the [[Hawthorne Works]] [[Western Electric]] factory commissioned the first of what was to become known as the [[Hawthorne Studies]]. These studies initially adhered to the traditional scientific method, but also investigated whether workers would be more productive with higher or lower lighting levels. The results showed that regardless of lighting levels, when workers were being studied, productivity increased, but when the studies ended, worker productivity would return to normal. In following experiments, [[Elton Mayo]] concluded that [[job performance]] and the so-called [[Hawthorne Effect]] was strongly correlated to social relationships and job content.<ref name = "Cullen">Cullen, David O'Donald. ''A new way of statecraft: The career of Elton Mayo and the development of the social sciences in America, 1920–1940.'' ProQuest Dissertations and Theses; 1992; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text.</ref> Following the Hawthorne Studies [[motivation]] became a focal point in the Organizational behavioral community. A range of theories emerged in the 1950s and 1960s and include theories from notable Organizational behavioral researchers such as: [[Frederick Herzberg]], [[Abraham Maslow]], [[David McClelland]], [[Victor Vroom]], and [[Douglas McGregor]]. These theories underline employee motivation, [[work performance]], and [[job satisfaction]].<ref name = "Miner"/>

[[Herbert A. Simon|Herbert Simon]]'s ''[[Administrative Behavior]]'' introduced a number of important Organizational behavior concepts, most notably decision-making. Simon, along with [[Chester Barnard]], argued that people make decisions differently inside an organization when compared to their decisions outside of an organization. While classical economic theories assume that people are rational decision-makers, Simon argued a contrary point. He argued that cognition is limited because of [[bounded rationality]] For example, decision-makers often employ [[satisficing]], the process of utilizing the first marginally acceptable solution rather than the most optimal solution.<ref name = "Simon1997">[[Simon, Herbert A.]] (1997) ''Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organizations'', 4th ed., The Free Press.</ref> Simon was awarded the [[Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences|Nobel Prize in Economics]] for his work on organizational decision-making.<ref>{{cite web|title=Press Release: Studies of decision-making lead to prize in economics|url=https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/1978/press.html|publisher=Nobelprize.org|access-date=11 May 2014|date=16 October 1978}}</ref> In the 1960s and 1970s, the field started to become more [[quantitative research|quantitative]] and [[resource dependence|resource dependent]]. This gave rise to [[contingency theory]], [[institutional theory]], and [[organizational ecology]].<ref>{{cite journal
| author= Covaleski, Mark A.; Dirsmith, Mark W.; Samuel, Sajay 
| title= Managerial Accounting Research: The Contributions of Organizational and Sociological Theories
| journal=Journal of Management Accounting Research
| year=1996
| volume=8
| pages=1–35
}}</ref> Starting in the 1980s, cultural explanations of organizations and organizational change became areas of study, in concert with fields such as [[anthropology]], [[psychology]] and [[sociology]].