Understanding Organisational Behaviour: Definitions and Key Concepts

Every organisation – whether a school, hospital, corporate firm, or government agency – runs on one thing above all: people. How those people think, feel, communicate, and behave at work determines whether the organisation succeeds or struggles. This is exactly what Organisational Behaviour (OB) is concerned with. It is a field of study that sits at the crossroads of management, psychology, and social science, and its relevance to effective leadership and workplace productivity cannot be overstated. Before diving into its applications, it helps to start at the very beginning – what exactly is Organisational Behaviour, and how have scholars defined it?

What is organisational behaviour? 🔗

At its core, Organisational Behaviour refers to the systematic study of how individuals and groups behave within organisations – and how that behaviour, in turn, shapes the organisation itself. According to Wikipedia’s overview of the field, OB is formally described as the study of human behaviour in organisational settings, the interface between human behaviour and the organisation, and the organisation itself. That three-part framing is significant: OB is not just about studying employees in isolation. It looks at the individual, the group, and the organisational structure all at once.

One of the primary goals of OB research, as noted in scholarly literature, is to revitalise organisational theory and build a sharper conceptual understanding of what actually happens inside organisations. In practical terms, this means helping managers understand why employees behave the way they do – and how to shape conditions that bring out the best in them.

How scholars have defined organisational behaviour 🔗

Several leading scholars have offered definitions of OB, each capturing a slightly different angle of this complex field. Together, these definitions give us a well-rounded picture of what OB encompasses.

Baron and Greenberg 🔗

Jerald Greenberg and Robert A. Baron, authors of the widely used textbook Behavior in Organizations, defined OB as the field that seeks knowledge of behaviour in organisational settings by systematically studying individual, group, and organisational processes. Two things stand out in this definition. First, the word “systematically” – OB is not guesswork or intuition; it is grounded in research and evidence. Second, the inclusion of all three levels (individual, group, and organisation) means OB avoids the trap of looking at only one piece of the puzzle. As CSR Education notes, this scientific and methodical approach is what sets OB apart from mere common sense about workplace behaviour.

Joe Kelly 🔗

Joe Kelly offered a definition that emphasises the role of the wider organisational environment. According to Kelly, as cited in the University of Pretoria’s academic resources, OB is an academic discipline concerned with understanding and describing human behaviour in an organisational environment – one that seeks to shed light on the whole complex human factor in organisations by identifying causes and effects of that behaviour. Kelly’s framing positions OB as a diagnostic tool. Rather than just observing what people do, it asks why they do it, and what conditions produce or inhibit desired behaviour. This cause-and-effect orientation makes OB particularly useful for managers who want to move beyond surface-level fixes.

Stephen Robbins 🔗

Perhaps the most widely cited definition in management education comes from Stephen P. Robbins, professor emeritus of management at San Diego State University and one of the world’s best-selling authors in the field. Robbins defined OB as the field of study that investigates the impact that individuals, groups, and structures have on behaviour within organisations, for the purpose of applying such knowledge towards improving an organisation’s effectiveness. The key phrase here is “for the purpose of applying.” Robbins reminds us that OB is not an academic exercise for its own sake – it has a clear, practical goal: improving how organisations function. When an organisation understands the behavioural patterns of its people, it is better positioned to boost productivity, reduce conflict, and retain talent.

Daniel Goleman’s contribution: the emotional dimension 🔗

While the definitions above focus on behaviour in a broad sense, psychologist and author Daniel Goleman brought attention to a dimension of human behaviour that earlier OB frameworks often underplayed – emotional intelligence (EI). Goleman’s 1995 book Emotional Intelligence challenged the assumption that cognitive ability (IQ) was the primary driver of workplace success. Instead, he argued that EI – the ability to understand, manage, and effectively express one’s emotions, as well as to recognise and influence the emotions of others – was a far more powerful predictor of performance.

In his subsequent work Working with Emotional Intelligence, Goleman identified five key emotional competencies: self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skills. He argued that for leaders in particular, these qualities account for the majority of what distinguishes outstanding performers from average ones. Research drawing on data from over 500 organisations supported the finding that emotional competence matters at least as much as technical skill, and often more so at senior levels.

For OB, Goleman’s work is significant because it extended the field’s focus beyond visible, measurable behaviours to include the internal emotional states that drive them. An employee may show up, complete tasks, and meet deadlines – but whether they are motivated, collaborative, or innovative depends heavily on their emotional experience of the workplace. As Big Think highlights, Goleman asserts that people who emerge as outstanding performers or the best leaders tend to have high emotional intelligence – and crucially, this is a skill that can be learned and developed at any stage of life.

The interdisciplinary nature of OB 🔗

One of the defining characteristics of Organisational Behaviour as a field is that it does not belong to any single academic discipline. As a study published on PubMed explains, OB draws on core disciplines including psychology, sociology, anthropology, economics, communication, and law to create and investigate multilevel explanations of why people engage in particular behaviours in organisations. This breadth is what makes OB both rich and complex.

Psychology 🔗

Psychology is the single largest contributor to OB. It provides the tools to understand individual behaviour – motivation, perception, learning, personality, and decision-making. Psychological theories such as Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and Herzberg’s two-factor theory are regularly applied in OB research to understand what drives employees and what leads to dissatisfaction. Industrial and organisational psychology, in particular, has shaped how we think about performance appraisal, leadership development, and employee well-being.

Sociology 🔗

While psychology zooms in on the individual, sociology zooms out to examine group behaviour, social structures, and organisational culture. As Your Article Library notes, sociology contributes to OB through its study of interpersonal dynamics such as leadership, group dynamics, and communication. Concepts like role theory and social identity theory – drawn from sociology – help explain how people navigate teams and power structures within organisations.

Anthropology 🔗

Anthropology brings a cultural lens to OB. It examines how shared beliefs, values, norms, and practices shape employee behaviour and organisational identity. When two companies merge and experience internal friction, or when a multinational struggles with managing culturally diverse teams, the insights of organisational anthropology become directly relevant. Understanding cultural differences – rather than dismissing them – allows organisations to build more inclusive environments and more adaptable practices.

Other disciplines 🔗

OB also draws from economics (to understand incentives, productivity, and compensation structures), political science (to analyse power dynamics, coalition formation, and decision-making), and engineering (to study the design of work and efficiency). This broad, interdisciplinary foundation gives OB its scope – it can address micro-level questions (why does this employee disengage?) and macro-level ones (why do some organisational cultures outperform others?) with equal rigour.

Why the definition of OB matters in practice 🔗

Understanding how OB is defined is not merely an academic exercise. The way we frame a field shapes how we study it – and how we apply it. If OB is simply about “managing employees,” we risk reducing people to resources to be controlled. But if we adopt Robbins’ framing – that OB investigates behaviour at the individual, group, and structural levels with the goal of improving effectiveness – we open the door to a much more nuanced and humane approach to management.

Goleman’s emotional intelligence framework reinforces this point further. According to TSW Training, low emotional intelligence in the workplace manifests in argumentative, blame-heavy cultures where people feel unheard. High EI, by contrast, enables leaders to empathise, communicate effectively, and manage conflict – qualities that are foundational to a healthy organisational climate. When OB is understood in its full breadth – drawing on psychology, sociology, anthropology, and emotional intelligence research – it becomes a genuinely powerful framework for building organisations where people thrive.

It is also worth noting that OB, as academic course materials from SMTA College point out, is best understood not as a discipline in the traditional sense (based on a single theoretical foundation) but as a separate, applied field of study – one that integrates knowledge from multiple disciplines and applies it directly to real organisational challenges. This makes it both a science and an art: rooted in research, but requiring judgment, empathy, and contextual sensitivity in its application.

Key takeaways from the definitions 🔗

Looking across the definitions offered by Baron and Greenberg, Joe Kelly, Stephen Robbins, and Daniel Goleman, several common themes emerge. First, OB is concerned with understanding behaviour – not judging it, but explaining it through systematic study. Second, it operates across multiple levels: individual, group, and organisational. Third, it is inherently applied – the point is not just to describe behaviour but to use that understanding to improve how organisations function. And fourth, OB is interdisciplinary – no single academic tradition owns it, which is precisely what gives it its explanatory power.

These threads, taken together, explain why OB has become a central pillar of management education worldwide. Whether a manager is trying to motivate a disengaged team, resolve a conflict between departments, or build a culture of innovation, the concepts and frameworks of OB provide a structured, research-backed foundation for doing so.

What do you think? Given that scholars like Robbins and Goleman emphasise both structure and emotion as drivers of workplace behaviour, which do you think has a greater influence on employee performance – the systems and policies an organisation puts in place, or the emotional intelligence of its leaders? And how might a better understanding of OB change the way schools and educational institutions are managed?

References

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizational_behavior
2. https://books.google.com/books/about/Behavior_in_Organizations.html?id=L6FXAAAAYAAJ
3. https://csr.education/organisational-behaviour/organisational-behaviour-key-concepts-levels/
4. https://repository.up.ac.za/bitstream/handle/2263/23673/03chapter4.pdf?sequence=4&isAllowed=y
5. https://www.amazon.com/Behavior-Organizations-9th-Jerald-Greenberg/dp/0131542842
6. https://www.danielgoleman.info/
7. https://www.mindtools.com/aqfnaod/daniel-goleman-and-eq-in-the-workplace/
8. https://bigthink.com/plus/daniel-goleman-why-emotional-intelligence-may-be-the-number-one-indicator-of-organizational-success/
9. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26597558/
10. https://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/organization/organizational-behaviour/organizational-behavior-and-other-fields-of-study/63745
11. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/computer-science/organizational-behavior
12. https://www.tsw.co.uk/blog/leadership-and-management/daniel-goleman-emotional-intelligence/
13. https://www.smtasmc.org/images/Study_Material/OB_1.pdf