In organizational development, there is a strong emphasis on ?->(Show Answer!)

1. In organizational development, there is a strong emphasis on

Write Comment

Comments

Tags

Show Similar Question And Answers

QA->The major emphasis of Third Five Year Plan was?....

QA->IN FIRST FIVE YEAR PLAN EMPHASIS WAS GIVEN TO WHICH SECTOR....

QA->On which Panchayat did the Ashok Mehta Committee greater emphasis?....

QA->WHO SAID " WHERE THERE IS NO LAW THERE IS NO FREEDOM "....

QA->How many members of African Development Bank are there?....

MCQ-> In making decisions about important questions it is desirable to be able to distinguish between ‘strong’ arguments and ‘weak’ arguments ‘Strong’ arguments so far they relate to the question ‘strong’ arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question ‘weak’ arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered as I and II You have to decide which of the arguments is a ‘strong’ argument and which is a ‘weak’ argument. Give answer a:if only argument I is strong Give answer b:if only argument II is strong Give answer c:if either I or II strong Give answer d:if neither I nor II is strong Give answer e:if both I and II are strong.Statement:Should the habit of late coming in educational institutions be checked ? Arguments: I.No Unit it affects the work II.Yes Discipline must be maintained.....

MCQ-> In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between 'strong' arguments and 'weak' arguments so far as they relate to the question. 'Strong' arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the questions. 'Weak' arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the questions or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a 'strong' argument and which is a 'weak' argument.Give answer a: if only argument I is strong Give answer b: if only argument II is strong Give answer c: if either I or II is strong. Give answer d: if neither I nor II strong. Give answer e: if both I and II are strong.Should all the power generation and distribution units in the State Y be handed over to the private sector ? Arguments : I. Yes, the State Government are not equipped to handle generation and distribution of electricity efficiently and it is not bene cial too. II. Yes, The private companies handle generation and distribution of electricity efficiently.....

MCQ->Individuals, groups and leaders who promote human development operate under strong institutional, structural and political constraints that affect policy options. But experience suggests broad principles for shaping an appropriate agenda for human development. One important finding from several decades of human development experience is that focusing exclusively on economic growth is problematic. While we have good knowledge about how to advance health and education, the causes of growth are much less certain and growth is often elusive. Further, an unbalanced emphasis on growth is often associated with negative environmental consequences and adverse distributional effects. The experience of China, with its impressive growth record, reflects these broader concerns and underlines the importance of balanced approaches that emphasize investments in the non-income aspects of human development. With reference to till' above passage, consider the following statements: 1. In developing countries, a strong institutional framework is the only requirement for human development and policy options2. Human development and economic growth are not always positively inter-related.3. Focusing only on human development should be the goal of economic growthWhich of the above statements is/are correct ?....

MCQ-> When people react to their experiences with particular authorities, those authorities and the organizations or institutions that they represent often benefit if the people involved begin with high levels of commitment to the organization or institution represented by the authorities. First, in his studies of people's attitudes toward political and legal institutions, Tyler found that attitudes after an experience with the institution were strongly affected by prior attitudes. Single experiences influence post- experience loyalty but certainly do not overwhelm the relationship between pre-experience and post- experience loyalty. Thus, the best predictor of loyalty after an experience is usually loyalty before that experience. Second, people with prior loyalty to the organization or institution judge their dealings with the organization’s or institution's authorities to be fairer than do those with less prior loyalty, either because they are more fairly treated or because they interpret equivalent treatment as fairer.Although high levels of prior organizational or institutional commitment are generally beneficial to the organization or institution, under certain conditions high levels of prior commitment may actually sow the seeds of reduced commitment. When previously committed individuals feel that they were treated unfavourably or unfairly during some experience with the organization or institution, they may show an especially sharp decline in commitment. Two studies were designed to test this hypothesis, which, if confirmed, would suggest that organizational or institutional commitment has risks, as well as benefits. At least three psychological models offer predictions of how individuals’ reactions may vary as a function of a: their prior level of commitment and b: the favorability of the encounter with the organization or institution. Favorability of the encounter is determined by the outcome of the encounter and the fairness or appropriateness of the procedures used to allocate outcomes during the encounter. First, the instrumental prediction is that because people are mainly concerned with receiving desired outcomes from their encounters with organizations, changes in their level of commitment will depend primarily on the favorability of the encounter. Second, the assimilation prediction is that individuals' prior attitudes predispose them to react in a way that is consistent with their prior attitudes.The third prediction, derived from the group-value model of justice, pertains to how people with high prior commitment will react when they feel that they have been treated unfavorably or unfairly during some encounter with the organization or institution. Fair treatment by the other party symbolizes to people that they are being dealt with in a dignified and respectful way, thereby bolstering their sense of self-identity and self-worth. However, people will become quite distressed and react quite negatively if they feel that they have been treated unfairly by the other party to the relationship. The group-value model suggests that people value the information they receive that helps them to define themselves and to view themselves favorably. According to the instrumental viewpoint, people are primarily concerned with the more material or tangible resources received from the relationship. Empirical support for the group-value model has implications for a variety of important issues, including the determinants of commitment, satisfaction, organizational citizenship, and rule following. Determinants of procedural fairness include structural or interpersonal factors. For example, structural determinants refer to such things as whether decisions were made by neutral, fact-finding authorities who used legitimate decision-making criteria. The primary purpose of the study was to examine the interactive effect of individuals a: commitment to an organization or institution prior to some encounter and b: perceptions of how fairly they were treated during the encounter, on the change in their level of commitment. A basic assumption of the group-value model is that people generally value their relationships with people, groups, organizations, and institutions and therefore value fair treatment from the other party to the relationship. Specifically, highly committed members should have especially negative reactions to feeling that they were treated unfairly, more so than a: less- committed group members or b: highly committed members who felt that they were fairly treated.The prediction that people will react especially negatively when they previously felt highly committed but felt that they were treated unfairly also is consistent with the literature on psychological contracts. Rousseau suggested that, over time, the members of work organizations develop feelings of entitlement, i.e., perceived obligations that their employers have toward them. Those who are highly committed to the organization believe that they are fulfilling their contract obligations. However, if the organization acted unfairly, then highly committed individuals are likely to believe that the organization did not live up to its end of the bargain.The hypothesis mentioned in the passage tests at least one of the following ideas.
....

MCQ->In organizational development, there is a strong emphasis on....