8/2/2019 Ob Concept

1/6

Application of Organizational BehaviorConcepts Through Student WorkshopsDorothy M. HaiSaint Bonaventure University

Introduction

EducationalObjective and Basis

Applying organizational behavior concepts in the classroom often takesplace through experiential learning exercises, case discussions, andother techniques. Although these can be positive experiences, they fre-quently do not introduce students to real-life managers and problems.The Student Seminar Series was designed to help OB students applyconcepts while interacting with managers a nd executives.

Experiential learning is often used by teachers in the classroom and inconsulting situations. In most cases the transfer of learning goes fromprofessor to student or professor to participant.

Graduate students in a Health Services Management program wererequired to take an organizational behavior (OB) course, where this in-structor offered the option of conducting a workshop in lieu of a termpaper.

We applied the medical school concept of See one, do one, teachone. Early in the semester, the class participated in a day-long workshop(seeing) , facilitated by the instructor. A s the course progressed, studentswere involved in experiential exercises, cases, and theories (doing). Fi-nally, the class produced its own workshop (teaching).

The projects learning objectives, using Blooms [I] and Bruners [ 2 ]learning theories as a model were, (1) o know and understand the pur-pose and use of workshops; ( 2 ) to be able to apply this knowledge byplanning and conducting workshops and to apply various OB conceptsin the process; and (3 ) to analyze and evaluate the product.

According to Bruner [ 2 , pp.48-491 the process of learning involvesthree almost simultaneous processes, that is, acquisition of new infor-mation, transformation and manipulation of knowledge, and evaluation.

Blooms [ I] taxonomy of educational objectives identifies six levels ofAddress reprint requests to : Dr. Dorothy M. Hai, Chair and Associate Professor, Departmentof Management Science, Saint Bonaventure University, Saint Bonaventure, NY 14778.

fournal of Experiential Learning and Simulation 3-4: 197-ZOZ(1981) 197

8/2/2019 Ob Concept

2/6

I198 D.M. Hai

Dorothy M. Hai, Chair and Associate Professor in St. Bonaventure UniversitysDepartment of Management Scjences, previously taught at Arizona State Univer-sity. Dr. Hai holds a bachelors degree from the University of Wisconsin, a mastersdegree from the University of Pittsburgh, and another masters and a doctoratefrom the University of Massachusetts. She has written and published about 20articles, which have appeared in various journals, books, and proceedings, inaddition to conducting extensive professional development programs.

learning: knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis,and evaluation. By the end of the semester, the Student Seminar Seriesoffered the opportunity for the students to learn on all six levels, asexplained below.KnowledgeStudents were able to recall a wide range of material, such as facts,concepts, principles, and theories relating to organizational behavior andgroup dynamics, as they had to do extensive research in preparation forthe workshop.ComprehensionStudents understood the principles and concepts and were able to knowwhich OB concepts fit with particular case problems and exercises. Inaddit ion, they began to comprehend which theories fit the problems theythemselves were facing, that is, group and interpersonal issues.ApplicationThey developed the ability to determine which experiential exercisescould be applied to achieve a certain objective, while at the same timelearning to apply principles of communication, group theory, and soforth to their developing groups.AnalysisOne area of analysis developed by the students was the ability to rec-ognize specific techniques used in organizing and delivering a trainingprogram. Another exercise was to analyze what had occurred in theirgroup-determining which issues were relevant and how to handlethem.SynthesisThree areas of synthesis were employed: the ability to use a personalexperience effectively while discussing a concept; planning a unit ofinstruction for this particular teaching situation; and bringing all theirlearning together to solve their own group organizational problems.EvaluationStudents participated in a general feedback session and were later re-quired to turn in a written evaluation of the total workshop, as well asevaluations of their personal performances.

8/2/2019 Ob Concept

3/6

Organizational Behavior in Workshops 199OB ConceptsApplied Working together on this group project for 10weeks proved an intenseexperience for the eight students, partly because it was a new type of

program for them to develop, but also because they were required toperform in front of managers and executives. This was no simple class-room presentation, and they rightly believed that much was at stake here.

As a result, the 10 weeks proved a minilab of sorts, wherein vari-ous OB issues surfaced. The students had to learn to deal with themand solve their grouphndividual problems, which included the fol-lowing:1. Cohesion. As the project group spent more time together planning

and generally interacting, they naturally became a more cohesivegroup [3 ] . This meant the other people in the course were now theout group, causing tension to arise between the two groups [4]. There-fore, in order to maintain a comfortable climate in the classroom,students were forced to downplay allegiance to the project groupduring class periods. Nonetheless, the out group still felt left out andits members, too, learned about advantages and disadvantages ofcohesion.

Another issue relating to cohesion was a type of groupthink [5].As planning for the workshop developed, the groups cohesivenessgrew as well, and there was a tendency to avoid criticism of othersideas. The instructor intervened a few times to make them aware thatgroupthink was counterproductive to the final outcome.

Both times the workshop option was offered, studentleaders emerged in the groups. They turned out to be students whoenjoyed high external status within the larger student body and alsowithin the class [6]. Although the students selected one of the classmembers to be the emcee or introducer of the workshop, this personwas not necessarily the informal leader who emerged. After the work-shop, during the evaluation or debriefing, a useful exercise is to iden-tify the informal leaders and to determine their leadership styles, inorder for the student to See these principles in operation.

As the 10weeks progressed, i t became clear to the groupthat various levels of commitment existed within the group. It thenbecame important for the group to analyze the motivational factorsinvolved and to keep the group together, rather than having sotnemembers become uninvolved. This was an issue of group norms anddealing with the deviants, who were not contributing as much as theothers [ 3 , 7 ] .

As the group progresses, it is useful to analyzethe stages it goes through. We used the Cogs Ladder model [ 8 ] , butanother excellent model is Cohen et als developmental phases ofgroups 171.

Because of the perceived im-portance of the task, the groups felt under pressure to perform well;communication gaps created anxiety. Analyzing the source of theproblem (i.e., coding differences,faulty assumptions, personality con-flicts, and so on) works well in helping the student understand whatis happening and how to resolve the difficulties.

6. Communication Ski lls -Group. Nearly everyone on the projectgroups presented a lectufe or experiential exercise during the work-shops. Each participant practiced diligently, received feedback fromfellow students as well as the instructor, and generally was betterequipped to present the material after several weeks of rehearsals.

2. Leadership.

3. Motivation.

4. Group Development.

5. Communication Skills-Interpersonal.

8/2/2019 Ob Concept

4/6

2 0

The Procedure

D. M. Hai

This especially brought out the more reserved students. But every-ones self-confidence increased after participation in the workshop,because the feedback from the participants was very positive.

For those interested in using the Student Seminar format, a descriptionof the procedure is include here.

Planning for the workshop was done by the students with periodicfeedback sessions with the instructor. Knowles [9] gives supportive a r-gument for learners accepting responsibility for planning and operatingtheir learning experiences, as well as having them participate activelyin the learning process itself. Development of the workshop went asfollows:

1. Learning about WorkshopsDefinition, purpose, possible audiences, and so forth. To develop a n ap-preciation for the what and how of workshops, students were early ongiven two readings from the University Associates Handbooks (see[10,1111.About 3 weeks into the semester, the whole class attended a full-dayworkshop on group dynamics facilitated by the instructor. The twofoldpurpose was (1) o develop a more cohesive group and (2) to give thestudents a clearer understanding of what a workshop is.

2. Decision: Who Will Be the Workshop Team?After learning about workshops and basically how they are put together,the s tudents were given the option of devoting their time to the workshopor to a term paper.

3. Selection of Target AudienceStudents chose middle managers in health-care organizations. Becauseof their status as graduate students, students believed that an appropriateaudience would be middle managers. However, a number of chief ex-ecutive officers (CEOs) and top-level managers attended the workshops.4. Assignment of ResponsibilitiesStudents decided who would take care of the needs analysis, brochure,mailing and distribution of brochure, room and meal arrangements, andcurriculum; who would facilitate each section; and who would be emcee.Emcee. As the workshop was to be facilitated by a number of stu-dents, an emcee was chosen who would represent the thread of conti-nuity for the attendees. The students were asked not to choose this po-sition on a volunteer basis, but rather to critically examine the skills ofgroup members, as it was a vital position.Other position. Some students wanted to do more behind-the-sceneswork, such as brochure preparation and room and meal arrangements.Others chose to spend more time on curriculum development and facil-itation.

8/2/2019 Ob Concept

5/6

Organizational Behavior in Workshops 2015. Needs Analysis of Target AudienceA group of 30 heal th-care middle managers were surveyed with a needs-assessment ins trument by two group members who at tended a courseth e 30 s tudents were taking. Motivat ion and communicat ion came outas the greates t needs for t rain ing program.6. Development of Educational Objectives and CurriculumStude nts were asked to l ist a few basic object ives , such as being able toident i fy common communicat ion blocks , and to develop the 6-hr pro-gram based on those objectives . At the e nd of the worksh op, the part ic-ipants sh ould have achieved these object ives , an d al l exercises had to berelated to them .Th e emphasis w as o n s implici ty , that is , to avoid too many object ivesor too many short exercises . A chang e of pace an d cont inuo us mom en-tum b u i ldup w ere bu i lt in to the p rogram.

7. Working with Experienced Seminar Staff People to Prepare aBudgetI tems to consider: brochure prin t ing, handout dupl icat ion, notebooks,nametags , f ilm rental , m eals , coffee breaks , and the univers i ty overheadof 15%.8. Brochure Design, Printing, and DistributionTh e orig inal idea was to mim eograph a nd fold a brochure and the n m ailit out. But after some del iberat ion, the s tudents opted for a profess ional lyprinted broch ure. Although i t cost more, w e were certain i t made a greatdifference, that is , bringing in more and higher-level registrants. Postagewas conserved by dis t r ibut ing the brochure through our network of aalumni and adminis t rat ive res idents .9. Dress Rehearsal of WorkshopThe day befo re the workshop , the ins t ruc to r spen t abou t 4-hr goingover each faci l i tators lead-in and conclusion. Cri t ical feedback wasgiven tactful ly , so that more posi t ive feedback would be given by thea t tendees .10.Facilitating Actual WorkshopIn order to increase at tendance, we planned the workshop for a Friday,going from 8:30 AM to 3:30 PM, with a 1 -h r schedu led lunch . About 30middle- to upper-level managers at tended both workshops.11.EvaluationEvaluat ion forms containing each s tudent faci l i tators name and an ef-fectiveness scale of 1 to 10 were dis t r ibuted to the part icipants at theen d. Rat ings for the workshops w ere general ly h igh. In addi t ion, s tude ntfac il it a to rs and ins truc tor spen t 1 -h r a t the en d o f the day rev iewing thetotal workshop. F inal ly , s tudent faci l itators were required to sub mit theirow n wri t t en eva lua tions.

8/2/2019 Ob Concept

6/6

202 D.M. HaiTimetable On the basis of o u r experience, the following was developed:

1.

2.3.4.5.6.7 .8.

Date and workshop topic, along with educational objectives chosen7-8 weeks before workshop.Brochures to printer at least 6 weeks before workshop. Brochures inmail a t least 4 weeks before workshop.Lunch room reserved and meal arranged 4-5 weeks before workshop.Flow of topics for workshop chosen 4 weeks before.Newspaper article written 4 weeks before; article sent to press 3 weeksbefore workshop.Specific exercises chosen 3 weeks before.Handouts given for duplication 2 weeks before.Practice and ready to go last week before workshop.

Conclusion The Student Seminar Series proved a successful venture. The studentshad the opportunity not only to apply OB concepts, but also to be aninstructor to managers. In addition, the community responded favorably,because the cost was relatively low-about $20 per person to attend. Infact, we received several invitations to repeat our workshop for individ-ual organizations.

It should be noted, however, that while the first workshop was beingplanned, the instructor-also the present writer-was somewhat anxiousabout the results. The risk was great. What if they did a poor job? Howmuch would it reflect on their professional credibility in the community?Fortunately, though, the first workshop went extremely well, and duringthe planning for the second one, less concern was felt over potentialfailure.

Such an ambitious project cannot be taken lightly, however. A greatdeal of planning, directing, and evaluating must go into it. But the re-wards-in o u r case at least-were great.

References 1."L .

3.4.

9.

Bloom, Benjamin, S . , Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York:McKay, 1969.Bruner, Jerome S., The Process of Education. New York: Vintage, 1963.Homans, George C., Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms. New York: Har-court, Brace, Jovapovich, 1961.Blake, R., and Morton, J . , Reactions to Intergroup Competition Under Win-Lose Competition. Management Science July, pp. 420-425 1961.Janis, Irving, Victims of Groupthink. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1972.Zaleznik, A., Christensen, R., and Roethlisberger, F., The Motivation, Pro-ductivity, and Satisfaction of Workers. Boston: Harvard University Press.Cohen, Alan R., Fink, Stephen L., Godon, Herman, and Willits, Robin, Effec-tive Behavior in Organizations. Homewood, I L Richard D. Irwin, 1980.Charrier, George O., Cog's Ladder, in The 1974 Annual Handbook fo r GroupFacilitators (J . William Pfeiffer and John E. Jones, Eds.). La Jolla,CA: Uni-versity Associates, 1974, pp. 8-12.Knowles, Malcolm S., The Modern Practice of Adult Education. New York:Associated Press, 1970.

10. Middleman, R. R., and Goldberg, Gale, The Concept of Structure in Exper-iential Learning, i n The 1972 Annual Handbook for Group Facilitators. (J. W.Pfeiffer and J . E. Jones, Eds.). Palo Alto, CA: University Associates, 1972, pp.1 3

203-210.Pfeiffer, J. W., and Jones J. E., Design Considerations in Laboratory Educa-tion, in The 1973 Annual Handbook for Group Facilitators (J . W. Pfeiffer andJ. E. Jones, Eds.). Palo Alto, CA: University Associates, 1973, pp. 177-194.