Mushroom management

Disciplines > Leadership > Leadership articles > Mushroom management Description | Why it happens | What to do about it | See also

Description
In a common metaphor, the 'mushroom manager' plants you knee-deep (or worse) in the smelly stuff and keeps you in the dark. In practice, this means you get to do all the work that they do not want. They do not communicate and generally ignore you, so you do not know their plans or what else might be going on in the organization.

Why it happens
Mushroom managers are often more concerned about their own career and image. Anyone who appears as a threat may well be deliberately held back as their ability may make the mushroom manager look bad. Mushroom managers may also have their favorites on whom they lavish attention and the plum jobs. Others are swept away and given the dross. Managers may take the mushroom route is that they just do not care about some or all of their people. Sometimes mushroom managers are just incompetent and know no better.

What to do about it
If you are a quiet mouse who likes to keep your head down and avoid other people, then you may like a mushroom manager, just so long as they do not over-do it. Somebody has to handle the unpopular work which may make you feel safe and comfortable. Staying away from other work is fine as it lets you go home at a regular hour. Not everyone needs high ambition. On the other hand, a mushroom manager may annoy you as they hold back your career and give you little opportunity to shine. Be assertive. Talk to them about what they are doing and the effect they are having. Do not lie down and be the doormat who says 'thank you' for any scraps they care to throw you. Remember that you always have more power than you think you have.

mushroom management A management philosophy prescribing to the theory that to best motivate your employees, you must at all times: 1. Keep them in the dark. 2. Feed them full of shit. This form of management applies to every situation where management is involved. Be it passing on critical information to employees, or informing people of policy change and company announcements. The entire purpose is to be as vague and unresponsive as possible. The ultimate culmination and success of this management style can be found when people draw comparisons to management and a

black hole. Where resources and information go in and nothing comes out. Example of Mushroom Management: Employee1: So you talked to management on our companies re-bid for the contract? Employee2: Yea, but didn't get much. Management said there's nothing to report. Employee3: How can that be? Our fucking contract is up next month, how can they not know anything? Employee1: Don't ask me dude. Man I feel like I'm constantly in the dark and fed full of shit. Kind of like a mushroom.

Mushroom Management Restrict employee access to information and decisions (keep them in the dark). When information is conveyed, it is incomplete, inaccurate, or full of marketing hyperbole (throw shit on them). Large, hierarchical, process-bound organizations are frequently guilty of the most egregious forms of "mushroom management."

Organizational citizenship behavior

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search This article does not cite any references or sources.
Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (May 2008)

Extent to which an individual's voluntary support and behavior contributes to the organization's success.
Organizational Citizenship Behaviors (OCBs) are a special type of work behavior that are defined as individual behaviors that are beneficial to the organization and are discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system. These behaviors are rather a matter of personal choice, such that their omission are not generally understood as punishable. OCBs are thought to have an important impact on the

effectiveness and efficiency of work teams and organizations, therefore contributing to the overall productivity of the organization.

Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB): Evaluating Organizational Efficiency and Success through Employee Performan Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) is a unique aspect of individual activity at work, first mentioned in the early 1980s. According to Organ's (1988) definition, It represents "individual behavior that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and in the aggregate promotes the efficient and effective functioning of the organization" (p.4). This special behavior has become a lively research field investigated by organizational sociologists, psychologists, and management researchers. However, whereas most of the studies appear to deal with the phenomenon from a behavioral/functional perspective the natural orientation of citizenship to the political science arena is overlooked.

Two main facets of OCB are mentioned in previous studies: (1) OCB altruistic, and (2) OCB compliance. Whereas altruism appears to represent the help to specific persons, generalized compliance is a factor defined by a more impersonal sort of conscientiousness. It implies more of a "good soldier" or "good citizen" syndrome of doing things that are "right and proper", but doing them for the sake of the system rather than for specific persons. In the view of Smith et al. (1983), the two elements represent distinct classes of citizenship. This study tries to identify the main variables that can explain both dimensions of OCB from the two perspectives mentioned before. It uses studies mentioned in relevant management literature and also by studies dealing with citizenship from a political point of view. The political aspect of citizenship consists of three elements: (1) obedience; (2) loyalty, and; (3) participation. Only the last two will have a significant implication in this study because they represent the informal behavior of "good citizens." Furthermore, the integrative model attempts to explain OCB with the help of additional variables, which to our knowledge, have never been mentioned or examined empirically in previous studies. Thus, the integrative model puts together two aspects to explain OCBs: (1) the behavioral/functional aspect, and; (2) the political aspect. As mentioned before, this study proposes a new integrative model to explain citizenship behaviors in the organization by pointing out its characteristics and different aspects. The theoretical approach was based on four sub-models consisting of common meaning:

(1) the demographic model; (2) the environmental/political model; (3) the structural model, and; (4) the situational model. The direct relationships between the four models and OCBs were examined together with the analysis of formal behavior expected of employees in the organization. The study also tries to examine the relative correlations of the four models with each other, trying to asses the contribution of every sub-model to the explanation of OCBs. The basic argument of the study is that different relationships can be established between the four sub-models and the dimensions of OCB. The basic hypotheses of the study are: (1) Employees acting politically outside the organization will also tend to do so in the organization; (2) Employees taking part in the organizational decision-making process will tend to perform more OCBs as compared with those who do not feel involved in the decision-making process; (3) Job satisfaction is related positively to different dimensions of OCB; (4) Organizational commitment is positively related to different dimensions of OCB

Types of OCBs Type of organizational citizenship behaviors: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. [Altruism]][benevolence] (e.g., is always helpful) Conscientiousness (e.g., stays even overtime to complete a task) Ability to work under pressure (e.g., does not complain about the usual stress situations) Thoughtfulness (e.g., considers the effects of this actions to others) Commitment for the community(e.g., offers constructive suggestions for initiatives for change)

*Organizational commitment is the strength of the feeling of responsibility that an employee has towards the mission of the organization.