An Analysis of "Taking Responsibility" Model Based on the Verse of Trust and Its Scientific and Functional Aspects

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

faculty of management

Abstract

This study presented a "taking responsibility" model in the form of a specific and standard behavioral model that it is very useful in the fields of management, psychology, and social sciences; because theorists believe that it is difficult to model human's behavior due to the complexity of his/her inner dimensions and environmental conditions. According to the model, everyone has the bias to take responsibility under two conditions: first, the person thinks he/she can do the responsibility; and second, he/she can obtain necessary knowledge along the way, that is, he/she can't be confused. Therefore, delegating responsibility, itself, is motivational for everyone. This study discussed the nature of taking responsibility in detail, and the model was presented in the form of the components of ideal type of behavioral models. The model was based on the analysis of Quranic verses using the qualitative content analysis. Moreover, it has a justification and an appropriate compatibility with some scientific theories on job enrichment and motivation. One of its functional results is that delegating responsibility (at the group, organizational or society level) is motivational, and for instance, it isn't necessary to make use of other incentives such as salary increase and material benefits.

Keywords

References

 
* قرآن کریم.
1. آلوسی، سید محمود (1415ق)، روح المعانى فى تفسیر القرآن العظیم و السبع المثانى، بیروت: دارالکتب العلمیه.
2. انصاریان، حسین (۱۳۸۳)، ترجمه قرآن، قم: انتشارات اسوه.
3. رضائیان، علی؛ علی عبدالهی نیسیانی (1397)، «مدل رفتار انسان در مواجهه با دو ساحت مطلوبیت−نامطلوب؛ تحلیلی قرآنی، رویکردی مدیریتی»، اندیشه مدیریت راهبردی، س12، ش2 (پیاپی 24)، پاییز و زمستان، ص18−55.
4. شومیکر، پاملا. جی (1387)، نظریه‌سازی در علوم اجتماعی، ترجمه محمد عبداللهی، تهران: انتشارات جامعه‌شناسان.
5. طباطبایى، سید محمدحسین (1374ش)، ترجمه تفسیر المیزان، ترجمه سیدمحمدباقر موسوى همدانى، قم‏: دفتر انتشارات اسلامى جامعه‏ مدرسین حوزه علمیه قم‏.
6. طباطبایى‏، سید محمدحسین (1417ق)، المیزان فى تفسیر القرآن‏، قم‏: دفتر انتشارات اسلامى جامعه‏ مدرسین حوزه علمیه قم‏.
7. عبدالهی نیسیانی، علی (1397)، «روش تحلیل محتوای کیفی تطبیق یافته به منظور تحقیق در متن قرآن کریم»، آموزه‌های قرآنی، دانشگاه علوم اسلامی رضوی؛ شماره 28.
8. لسانی فشارکی، محمدعلی و حسین مرادی زنجانی (1391)، روش تحقیق موضوعی در قرآن کریم، قم: بوستان کتاب.
9. مصطفوی، حسن (1430ق)، التحقیق فى کلمات القرآن الکریم‏ (نسخه 4)، بیروت، لبنان: دارالکتب العلمیة−مرکز نشر آثار علامه مصطفوی‏.
10. مهدیان فر، رضا و سیدمحمود طیب حسینی (1399)، «"ظلوم" و "جهول" مدح انسان یا مذمت انسان؟ (تحلیلی از آیۀ 72 سورۀ احزاب)»، پژوهش‌های قرآن و حدیث، 53(1)، 161-176.
11. نیومن، لاورنس (1389)، شیوه‌های پژوهش اجتماعی: رویکردهای کمّی ‌و کیفی، ترجمه حسن دانایی‌فرد و سیدحسین کاظمی، تهران: نشر مهربان.
12. Abdollahi Neisiani, A. & Rezaeian, A. (2020), Ideal type of behavioral models in management researches; a theory building approach, Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 3(S3), pp. 1143−1156. 
13. Adams, J. S. (1965), Inequity in social exchange, In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, New York: Academic Press, 2, 267−299.
14. Adams, J. S. & Freedman, S. (1976), Equity theory revisited: Comments and annotated bibliography, In E. Walster (Ed.) Advances in experimental social psychology, New York: Academic Press, Vol.9, pp. 43−90.
15. Alshmemri, Mohammed, Shahwan−Akl, Lina and Maude, Phillip (2017), Herzberg’s Two−Factor Theory, Life Science Journal, 14(5):12−16. doi:10.7537/marslsj140517.03.
16. Baran, S. J. & Davis, D. K. (1995), Mass communication theory; foundations, ferment and future (4th ed.), Wadsworth Pub, Co.
17. Carlile, P. R. & Christensen, C. M. (2005), The Cycles of Theory Building in Management Research, Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 05−057.
18. Chandan, J. (2005), Organizational Behaviour (3rd ed.), Delhi: Vikas Publishing House Pvt, Ltd.
19. Eldred, Tigran W. (2016), Insights from Psychology: Teaching Behavioral Legal Ethics as a Core Element of Professional Responsibility, Michigan State Law Review, 757−815, doi.org/10.17613 /9kpj−dc96.
20. Fayol, Henri (1949), General and Industrial Management, Translated by Constance Storrs, London: Pitman Publishing, Ltd, (Original Work Published 1916).
21. Fried, Y. & Slowik, L. (2004), Enriching Goal−Setting Theory with Time: An Integrated Approach, The Academy Of Management Review, 29 (3), 404. doi:10. 2307/20159051.
22. Griffin, R. W. & Moorhead, G. (1986), Organizational behavior, Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.
23. Hamilton, V. L. (1978), Who is Responsible? Toward a Social Psychology of Responsibility Attribution, Social Psychology, 41(4), 316−328. doi.org/10.2307/3033584.
24. Hersey, P. & Blanchard, K. H. (1977), Management of organizational behavior: Utilizing Human Resources (third ed.), Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice−Hall, Inc.
25. Herzberg, F. (2003), One more time: How do you motivate employees? Harvard Business Review, 81(1), 86.
26. Kaplan, A. (1964), The conduct of inquiry: Methodology for behavioral sciences. San Francisco: Chandler.
27. Latham, G. & Baldes, J. (1975), The "practical significance" of Locke's theory of goal setting, Journal Of Applied Psychology, 60 (1), 122−124. doi: 10. 1037/h0076354.
28. McGregor, Douglas (1960), The Human Side of Interprise, New York: McGraw−Hill.
29. Locke, E. (1968), Toward a theory of task motivation and incentives, Organizational Behavior And Human Performance, 3 (2) , 157−189. doi:10. 1016/0030−5073 (68) 90004−4.
30. Nadler, D. & Tushman, M. (1980), A model for diagnosing organizational behavior, Organizational Dynamics, 9 (2), 35−51. doi:10. 1016/0090−2616 (80) 90039−x.
31. Olguín, D. O., Gloor, P. A. & Pentland, A. (2009), Capturing Individual and Group Behavior with Wearable Sensors, AAAI Spring Symposium: Human Behavior Modeling, 68−74.
32. Pedersen, L. H., Andersen, L. B. & Thomsen, N. (2020), Motivated to act and take responsibility−integrating insights from community psychology in PSM research, Public Management Review, 22(7), 999−1023.
33. Robbins, S. & Judge, T. (2013), Organizational behavior (15th ed.), Boston: Pearson.
34. Robbins, S. & Judge, T. (2009), Organizational behavior (13th ed.), Boston: Pearson.
35. Severin, W. J. & Tankard, J. W. (1997), Communication theories: Origins, Methods, and uses in the mass media (4th ed.), New York: Longman.
36. Sherman, S. J. & Percy, E. J. (2011), The psychology of collective responsibility: When and why collective entities are likely to be held responsible for the misdeeds of individual members, Journal of Law and Policy, 19, 137−170.
37. Zhang, Y. & Wildemuth, B. M. (2009), Qualitative analysis of content. In B. Wildemuth (Ed.), Applications of Social Research Methods to Questions in Information and Library Science (pp. 308−319), Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
Studies in Islam and Psychology
Volume 17, Issue 32
April 2023
Pages 55-77

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics