Organisational Behavior Reflective Paper

Organisational Behavior Reflective Paper

MGMT1011 Organisational Behaviour (OB)

Assessment 1 : Reflective Writing
Task Overview
The purpose of assessment is to develop an understanding of OB theories, frameworks and practices. You are required to critically reflect (which includes interpreting, describing and evaluating) 2 to 3 theories/frameworks (see the recommended list below) that you have either found interesting, have a personal affinity for or feel a sense of connection with. These theories/frameworks must be covered in the first four topics (Weeks 1, 2, and 3) of the unit. Reflective writing is an opportunity to articulate what you have learned so it is not just a description or
summary of these theories and frameworks, and you are required to evaluate. Hence, it is crucial that you read widely and thinking critically about what you are learning or have learned in the unit.

Organisational Behavior Reflective Paper ExampleĀ 

Organizational behaviour entails the study of peopleā€™s behaviour in corporate settings, the corporation itself, and the interface between individual behaviour and the firm. One of the primary objectives of organizational behaviour is to establish a more comprehensive conceptualization of company life and revitalize organizational models. Pursuing the course has enhanced my ability to use various frameworks such as the MARS model, and the five-factor theory to understand, control, and predict human behaviour in firms.

MARS Model of Individual Behaviour and Performance

The MARS model was the most interesting theory I tackled in the course. It outlines four factors that influence worker behaviour and performance: situational factors, role perceptions, ability, and motivation (Maurer, Hartnell, & Lippstreu, 2017). The performance of an employee will significantly decline if one of these variables weakens. For instance, enthusiastic employees who understand their role assignments and have enough resources may not do their jobs properly if they have inadequate skills. The MARS framework is a necessary individual behaviour and results model. I can use it to analyze the factors that directly affect the behaviour of workers and the results of their performance. The most critical aspect of this model, in my opinion, is motivation. Employees have choices concerning where to exert their effort. They have a sense of the goals they are trying to fulfil, and at what level of quantity and quality. From the discussions in the Lecture notes, I can conclude that motivation is not random: it is goal-directed.

Order from Course Researchers Organisational Behavior Reflective Paper Assessment 1
Order a Customized One for $12 per Page/275 words

The insight of this model contributes to my further understanding of the significance of understanding the examples of organizational behaviour. People who study organizational behaviour like me are interested in various outcomes such as job performance and work attitudes (Maurer et al., 2017).Ā  Before taking this course, I was unable to explain how situational factors can influence employee performance. However, by studying the lecture notes, I realized that employee performance and behaviour depend on how much particular situations such as consumer preferences, time, physical work facilities, and budgets interfere with or support their goals.

I find this theory valuable to me because it allows me to reflect on my strengths and weaknesses as a potential employee. During my past corporate experience, a human resource specialist advised me in a workshop that I have particular weaknesses and strengths that may make me relatively inferior or superior to other people in performing some activities or tasks. The MARS theory ties in with and expounds on this understanding by classifying the overall ability of an employee into three groups: physical, emotional, and cognitive abilities (Dasborough & Ashkanasy, 2002). The three capabilities illustrate what I can do as a worker. Lecturers always encourage us to do some assignments in groups so that we can complement our abilities and improve on our weaknesses by learning from each other. The theory supports this view by describing abilities as stable characteristics related to the maximum mental and physical traits of people. I can prove my abilities by completing my roles accurately and quickly following specific standards or methods.

The understanding of the MARS theory will be essential in my future career in the finance department. It has given me insights into how workers perform and behave. It has also helped me to understand the aspects that can motivate employees, enhance their performance and help enterprises in establishing outstanding and trusting relationships with the workers. When I become a finance manager of a firm I will be able to identify and encourage positive behaviours in the department, motivate the staff members to demonstrate prosocial traits, identify and tackle antisocial behaviours among employees, and assess their likely response before implementing a change in my department.

Five-Factor Model (Personality)

Another critical theory that I learned was the Five-factor Model (FFM) of personality. It encompasses a set of five domains of traits: openness to expertise, extraversion, neuroticism, agreeableness, and conscientiousness (Judge & Zapata, 2015). Highly extraverted employees are assertive and sociable rather than reserved and quiet. Agreeable workers are polite and competitive rather than rude and antagonistic. Conscientious staff members are orderly and task-oriented, rather than disorganized and distractible. Neurotic workers tend to experience adverse emotions like irritation, depression, and anxiety, rather than exhibiting emotional intelligence. Finally, highly open people have a wide, rather than a limited range of aspirations, are assertive and tend to prefer novelty to routine. In my view, this theory uses a limited set of dimensions to represent as much variability in the personalities of workers as possible. All five aspects are critical in evaluating workers because they indicate the most crucial personality differences among people.

The insight of this theory expands my understanding of the essential traits that act as the building blocks of peopleā€™s personalities. Behaviour entails an interaction between peopleā€™s underlying personalities and situational factors (Day et al., 2014). The situations in which people find themselves play significant roles in how they react. However, in most instances, people tend to respond to situations following their personality traits. Before taking this course, I did not understand how I can evaluate my personality and those of my friends or colleagues in the workplace. However, after pursuing the course, I now understand that I can use this model to gauge my big five personality traits. I can measure how I stack up on the five dimensions of personality. The personality trait I find most important in this theory is conscientiousness because it describes an individualā€™s tendency to be goal-oriented and organized. My level of consciousness influences everything from my success at work and in school to my chances of engaging in some behaviours, such as becoming addicted to alcohol and other drugs.

I find this theory valuable to me because it allows me to understand my personality. During my past corporate experience, I used to strive to come up with new ways of handling tasks. I have also remained proactive during group discussions, making efforts to devise new strategies to ensure the assignments provided to us are completed in time. After studying the lecture notes, I have realized that this has been because of my high openness to new experiences. The theory supports my personality by explaining that highly open people tend to possess a wide range of interests, are curious concerning other people and the world, and eager to learn.

Order from Course Researchers Organisational Behavior Reflective Paper Assessment 1
Order a Customized One for $12 per Page/275 words

The understanding of the FFM is critical to my future career in the field of finance because it will help me to identify the best organization to work. It will also enable me to understand my personality and the personalities of my colleagues at the workplace (Wille et al., 2013). Using this framework, I will be able to describe the personalities of my colleagues as low, average, or high levels of the five factors. Every factor is independent. A person may be high in agreeableness and low in extraversion. To acquire a full picture of people using this model, it is critical to understand how they rank on each of the listed dimensions.


I can use various theories such as the MARS model and the five-factor framework to understand, control, and predict human behaviour in firms. Specifically, I can use the MARS model to understand my strengths and weaknesses and those of my colleagues.Ā  I can also use the FFM to measure my levels of the big five traits by taking the big five personality test.


Judge, T. A., & Zapata, C. P. (2015). The personā€“situation debate revisited: Effect of situation strength and trait activation on the validity of the Big Five personality traits in predicting job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 58(4), 1149-1179. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43589388

Day, D. V., Fleenor, J. W., Atwater, L. E., Sturm, R. E., & McKee, R. A. (2014). Advances in leader and leadership development: A review of 25 years of research and theory.Ā The Leadership Quarterly,Ā 25(1), 63-82.

Wille, B., De Fruyt, F., & De Clercq, B. (2013). Expanding and reconceptualizing aberrant personality at work: Validity of fiveā€factor model aberrant personality tendencies to predict career outcomes.Ā Personnel Psychology,Ā 66(1), 173-223.

Maurer, T. J., Hartnell, C. A., & Lippstreu, M. (2017). A model of leadership motivations, error management culture, leadership capacity, and career success.Ā Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology,Ā 90(4), 481-507.

Dasborough, M. T., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2002). Emotion and attribution of intentionality in leaderā€“member relationships. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(5), 615-634.

error: Content is protected !!