Cambridge A Level Psychology 9990: Organisational Psychology — Revision Notes

These notes condense Specialist Option 4, Organisational Psychology, of Cambridge International A Level Psychology 9990 (syllabus for 2024 to 2026). The option has five topics: motivation to work, leadership and management, group behaviour, work conditions, and satisfaction at work. Much of the marks come from naming the parts of a model accurately and applying them to a workplace in the question.

For full explanations read the Organisational Psychology study guide, then try the Organisational Psychology practice questions.

What is on the Organisational Psychology syllabus?

Topic	Sub-topics	Key study
4.1 Motivation to work	Need theories; cognitive theories; motivators at work	Landry et al. (2019), study 1
4.2 Leadership and management	Theories of leadership; leadership style; leaders and followers	Cuadrado et al. (2008)
4.3 Group behaviour	Development and decisions; individual and group performance; conflict	Claypoole and Szalma (2019), experiment 1
4.4 Work conditions	Physical; temporal; health and safety	Swat (1997)
4.5 Satisfaction at work	Theories; measuring; attitudes to work	Giacalone and Rosenfeld (1987)

Model checklists: learn the parts

Model	Parts
Maslow	Physiological, safety, love/belonging, esteem, self-actualisation
McClelland	Achievement, affiliation, power
SMART goals	Specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, time-bound
Vroom VIE	Valence, instrumentality, expectancy
Self-determination theory	Competence, autonomy, relatedness
Ohio studies	Initiating structure, consideration
Michigan studies	Employee-centred, production-centred
Heifetz (six principles)	Get on the balcony; identify the adaptive challenge; regulate distress; maintain disciplined attention; give the work back to the people; protect voices of leadership from below
Muczyk and Reimann	Directive autocrat, permissive autocrat, directive democrat, permissive democrat
Scouller	Public, private, personal
Kouzes and Posner	Model the way, inspire a shared vision, challenge the process, enable others to act, encourage the heart
Kelley’s followers	Exemplary, alienated, conformist, passive, pragmatist (dimensions: independent critical thinking, active engagement)
Tuckman	Forming, storming, norming, performing, adjourning
Belbin	Plant, resource investigator, co-ordinator, shaper, monitor evaluator, teamworker, implementer, completer finisher, specialist
Conflict levels	Intra-individual, inter-individual, intra-group, inter-group
Thomas–Kilmann	Competing, collaborating, compromising, avoiding, accommodating
Human errors	Omission, commission, sequencing, timing
Herzberg	Hygiene factors vs motivators
Hackman and Oldham	Skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, feedback; meaningfulness, responsibility, knowledge of results
JDI facets	Work itself, pay, promotion, supervision, co-workers
Walton’s QWL (eight)	Fair pay; safe conditions; use and develop capacities; growth and security; social integration; constitutionalism; work and total life space; social relevance
Blau and Boal	Institutionalised stars, lone wolves, corporate citizens, apathetic employees

Key terms

Term	Definition
Extrinsic motivator	A reward from outside the task, e.g. pay, bonus, profit-sharing
Intrinsic motivator	A reward from the work or social recognition, e.g. praise, empowerment
Transformational leader	Inspires followers to put group goals above self-interest
Adaptive challenge	A problem with no technical fix that requires people to change
Followership	Actively supporting a leader and the group’s goals
Groupthink	Cohesive group puts agreement above critical evaluation
Social facilitation	Better performance on simple tasks when others are present
Social loafing	Less individual effort when working in a group
Evaluation apprehension	Arousal caused by fear of being judged
Hawthorne effect	Behaviour changes because people know they are studied
Rapid / slow rotation	Shifts change every few days / every few weeks
Flexitime	Choosing start and finish times around core hours
Token economy	Tokens for desired behaviour exchanged for rewards
Job enrichment	Adding responsibility and control (vertical)
Job enlargement	Adding more tasks at the same level (horizontal)
Sabotage	Deliberate damage to an organisation’s property, output or reputation

Key studies at a glance

Study	Focus	Core idea	Evaluate with
Landry et al. (2019)	Study 1: 123 Canadian students; same $10 gift card framed as appreciation (autonomy-supportive) or as reinforcing standards (controlling); anagram task	Autonomy-supportive framing raised need satisfaction, intrinsic motivation and performance	Controlled; small lab rewards differ from salaries
Cuadrado et al. (2008)	2 x 2 experiment: 136 Spanish students rated a male or female leader using a masculine (autocratic, task) or feminine (democratic, relationship) style	Feminine styles rated more competent and effective for both sexes; no penalty for women using masculine styles	Controlled; written descriptions are artificial
Claypoole and Szalma (2019)	Vigilance task under monitoring (experiment 1)	Electronic monitoring can produce social facilitation effects	Lab control; short task
Swat (1997)	83 accidents in four plants (2,964 workers) analysed by frequency, severity and cause	At least 45.8% involved poor housekeeping; most minor incidents went unreported	Objective records over time; one context
Giacalone and Rosenfeld (1987)	Unionised factory workers rated reasons for sabotage and four methods	Those accepting more reasons justified all sabotage except dishonesty	Self-report attitudes, not actual behaviour

Supporting studies to name

• Saeednia (2011) – a scale measuring Maslow’s needs.
• Earley (1993) – collectivists loafed with out-groups, performed best with in-groups; individualists best alone.
• Einarsen (1999) – bullying: predatory vs dispute-related; phases and causes.
• Kompier (2006) – the Hawthorne story as a myth.
• Oldham and Brass (1979) – satisfaction and motivation fell after a move to open-plan.
• Gold et al. (1992) – rotating-shift nurses reported more sleep problems and sleepiness-related accidents.
• Fox et al. (1987) – token economy in open-pit mines cut lost days.

Mini essay plan: “Evaluate theories of job satisfaction” [10]

1. Herzberg: useful split of hygiene vs motivators; but based on critical-incident interviews, where people may credit themselves for good events and blame the job for bad (self-serving bias).
2. Hackman and Oldham: specific, measurable characteristics that guide job design; reductionist to five features.
3. Individual differences: not everyone wants enrichment; some prefer simple, stable jobs.
4. Cultural differences: what counts as a motivator may differ across cultures.
5. Application: both lead to job design techniques (enrichment, rotation, enlargement).
6. Conclusion: complementary; Hackman and Oldham is more testable.

Common mistakes and exam traps

• Swapping instrumentality and expectancy in Vroom: expectancy is effort to performance; instrumentality is performance to reward.
• Calling all extrinsic rewards bad; self-determination theory says it depends on whether they feel controlling.
• Mixing Muczyk and Reimann’s two dimensions: decision participation (autocratic/democratic) vs execution (directive/permissive).
• Writing “Ohio University” theory content as Michigan, and vice versa.
• Confusing enlargement (more tasks) with enrichment (more responsibility).
• Describing Swat (1997) without the idea of near misses or risk events.

Quick self-test

1. What three beliefs make up Vroom’s VIE theory?
2. Name Scouller’s three levels of leadership.
3. Which Kelley follower style is low on both dimensions?
4. What does social impact theory say affects the impact of others?
5. What are the four types of human error?
6. Which job characteristic produces knowledge of results?
7. Give the five facets of the JDI.
8. In Blau and Boal’s model, what is a “lone wolf”?

Answers: (1) expectancy, instrumentality, valence; (2) public, private, personal; (3) passive; (4) strength, immediacy and number of sources; (5) omission, commission, sequencing, timing; (6) feedback; (7) work itself, pay, promotion, supervision, co-workers; (8) an employee high in job involvement but low in organisational commitment.

Frequently asked questions

How many leadership models does the 9990 syllabus name? Several: universalist theories (great person, charismatic, transformational), Ohio and Michigan behavioural explanations, Heifetz, Muczyk and Reimann, Scouller and Kouzes and Posner, plus Kelley’s followership.

Do I need dates for the theorists? Dates are useful but marks come from describing the model accurately and applying it. Learn the dates the syllabus prints for its named studies.

Official syllabus

Cambridge International AS & A Level Psychology 9990 syllabus for 2024, 2025 and 2026, Specialist Option 4: Organisational Psychology — cambridgeinternational.org.

Related resources

• Organisational Psychology study guide
• Organisational Psychology practice questions
• Specialist Options revision notes