Pedroza, Rhoxette Nazi P. Gutierez, Lurina J.
Research Topic: Collection and Segregation of Wastes Research Problem: An analysis of the weak implementation of collection and segregation of wastes in Mandaue City Theoretical Framework Social Learning Theory
Bandura’s (1977) theory states that people influence one another. He also stated that as people are influenced, they learn something from it. He also stated that observational learning means to observe a model then possibly imitate them. The models may be anyone or anything that can be observed.
There are necessary components that affect the model’s effectivity to make the observer absorb new learnings (Bandura, 1977).According to him, these components are attention, retention, and motivation. He said that one would be how much attention the observer gave to the model. This attention given is affected by a lot of factors like the observer’s sensory capacities, arousal level, perceptual set, past reinforcement (Bandura, 1977). After the observer pays attention, next would be how much the observer had retained of what he observed (Bandura, 1977). This is referred to as retention. The knowledge retained would then be possibly reproduced and imitated thus
repeating what has been learned. Lastly he stated that the reproduction of what has been observed depends lastly upon the motivation to imitate.
The actions done by an individual mainly affects another person in a similar manner. This a cycle process that means that many people could get affected from the actions of a single person over and over again as that person was continuously influenced.
Theory of Reasoned Action
According to Azjen and Fishbein’s (1975) Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), the behavior of a person is determined by his or her intention to perform the action. They stated that such intention is determined by his or her attitude toward the behavior and his subjective norm concerning the behavior. This theory explains that there is a link existing between the attitudes and actions done of different individuals based on their beliefs, norms they learned upon and intentions of these individuals (Azjen & Fishbein, 1975).
Attitude is defined as the "… a psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favor or disfavor" (Eagly, & Chaiken, 1993, p. 1) Thus, if an individual is in favor of doing such action and believes that there’s a positive and good outcome upon doing such action then according to Azjen and Fishbein’s theory, such individual will more likely to perform such action. On the other hand, if he/she is not in favor of such action knowing of its negative outcome, then more
likely he/she would not perform it. Hence, the attitude of a person towards a behavior is determined by his beliefs on the cost and consequences of this behavior.
Commitment Theory Organizational commitment theory may be defined as the relative strength of an individual’s
identification
with,
and
involvement
in,
a
particular
organization
(Steers,1977). According to Salancik (1977), an individual will tend to adhere to the norms and conform to the values and expectations of those to whom he is committed. When one is committed to an organization or to an activity, one is expected to do his or her responsibility of being part of the organization or to the society. There two major theoretical approaches have been employed on organizational commitment: a) the exchange approach, and (b) the investment approach (Amernic and Aranya, 1983).
According to exchange theory, the individual’s organizational commitment depends on his or her perceived balance of reward utilities over input utilities (March and Simon, 1982) This approach emphasizes current exchange relation between individuals and organizations. The more favorable the exchange from the participant’s viewpoint, the greater his or her commitment to the organization (Hrebiniak and Alutto, 1972) Thus, in every participation of an individual always based on what he/she can get from it. On the other hand, the investment approach centers on the time element; the longer a person has been with an organization, the more the person wants to stay (Salancik, 1977). Thus, the more benefits that an individual has received from such organization leads him/her to commit himself/herself for continued participation.
Resource Dependence Theory
Pfeffer and Salancik’s (2003) Resource Dependence Theory (RDT) is concerned with how organizational behaviour is affected by external resources the organization utilizes. This theory means that resources are key to organisational success, and that access and control over resources is a basis of power.
The theory is important because an organisation’s ability to gather, alter and exploit resources faster than competitors can be fundamental to success (Pfeffer & Salancik, 2003).They added that the reasons why organization might fail includes failure to allocate resources, insufficient resources, or poor information. Thus, by keeping a high level of present resources and high level of influence with resource providers, an organization is able to survive.
Figure 1 illustrates that in achieving the goal of sustainability, it requires the individual to have a good influence, a motivation, a strong commitment and the availability of resources. An individual having a good influence from other people especially those surrounding him/her will most likely be motivated to achieve a goal. As the individual continuously accomplish his/her goals, the bigger the possibility that he/she will have a strong commitment. Consequently, the goals will not be achieved if there is discontinuity of the supply of resources.
Figure 1. Motivati on
Commitm ent
Availabili ty of Resource s
Good Influence
Individua l
Sustainabil ity
References:
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Retrieved from http://aizen.socialpsychology.org/
Amernic, J.H & Aranya, N. (1983). Organizational commitment: testing two theories. Industrial Relations. (38).2 DOI: /029355ar
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Retrieved from http://www.jku.at/org/content/e54521/e54528/e54529/e178059 /Bandura_SocialLearningThoery_ger.pdf
Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.
Hrebiniak, L.G. and Alutto, J. A (1972).Personal and Role-Related Factors in the Development of Organizational Commitment. Administrative Science Quarterly. (17). 563-573.
March, J. G. & Simon, H.A (1982). Organizations. John Wiley & Sons, Inc
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (2003). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. Stanford University Press.
Salancik, G.R (1977).Commitment and the Control of Organization Behavior and Belief. St. Clair Press. 1-54.
Steers. R.M (1977). Antécédents and Outcomes of Organizational Commitment. Administrative Science Quarterly.(22). 46-56.
