Organizational dissent is the "expression of disagreement or contradictory

opinions about organizational practices and policies".[1] Since dissent involves

disagreement it can lead to conflict, which if not resolved, can lead to violence
and struggle. As a result, many organizations send the message verbally or
nonverbally that dissent is discouraged. However, recent studies have shown
that dissent serves as an important monitoring force within organizations.
Dissent can be a warning sign for employee dissatisfaction or organizational
decline. Redding (1985) found that receptiveness to dissent allows for corrective
feedback to monitor unethical and immoral behavior, impractical and ineffectual
organizational practices and polices, poor and unfavorable decision making, and
insensitivity to employees' workplace needs and desires. Furthermore,
Eilerman[2] argues that the hidden costs of silencing dissent include: wasted and
lost time, reduced decision quality, emotional and relationship costs, and
decreased job motivation. Perlow (2003) found that employee resentment can
lead to a decrease in productivity and creativity which can result in the
organization losing money, time, and resources.
There are three types of dissent: articulated, latent, and displaced
Articulate
Involves expressing dissent openly and clearly in a constructive fashion to
members of an organization that can effectively influence organization
adjustment. This may include supervisors, management, and corporate officers.
Latent
Employees resort to expressing dissent to either their coworkers or other
ineffectual audiences within the organization. Employees employ this route when
they desire to voice their opinions but lack sufficient avenues to effectively
express themselves.
Displaced
Involves expressing dissent to external audiences, such as family and friends,
rather than media or political sources sought out by whistle-blowers.

Factor analysis is a statistical method used to describe variability among observed,

correlated variables in terms of a potentially lower number of unobserved variables
calledfactors. For example, it is possible that variations in four observed variables
mainly reflect the variations in two unobserved variables. Factor analysis searches for
such joint variations in response to unobserved latent variables. The observed variables
are modelled as linear combinations of the potential factors, plus "error" terms. The
information gained about the interdependencies between observed variables can be
used later to reduce the set of variables in a dataset. Computationally this technique is
equivalent to low-rank approximation of the matrix of observed variables. Factor analysis
originated in psychometrics and is used in behavioral sciences, social

sciences, marketing, product management, operations research, and other fields that
deal with data sets where there are large numbers of observed variables that are are
thought to reflect a small number of latent variables.
Factor analysis is related to principal component analysis (PCA), but the two are not
identical. Latent variable models, including factor analysis, use regression modelling
techniques to test hypotheses producing error terms, while PCA is a descriptive
statistical technique.[1] There has been significant controversy in the field over the
equivalence or otherwise of the two techniques (see exploratory factor analysis versus
principal components analysis) Factor analysis was invented nearly 100 years ago
by psychologist Charles Spearman, The Goal: Understanding of Causes

Many statistical methods are used to study the relation between independent and
dependent variables. Factor analysis is different; it is used to study the patterns of
relationship among many dependent variables, with the goal of discovering
something about the nature of the independent variables that affect them, even
though those independent variables were not measured directly. Thus answers
obtained by factor analysis are necessarily more hypothetical and tentative than is
true when independent variables are observed directly. The inferred independent
variables are called factors. A typical factor analysis suggests answers to four
major questions:
1. How many different factors are needed to explain the pattern of
relationships among these variables?
2. What is the nature of those factors?
3. How well do the hypothesized factors explain the observed data?
4. How much purely random or unique variance does each observed variable
include?

Eigenvalues are a special set of scalars associated with a linear system of

equations (i.e., a matrix equation) that are sometimes also known as
characteristic roots, characteristic values (Hoffman and Kunze 1971),
proper values, or latent roots
HUMANISTIC _ The theory of organizational humanism emphasizes
the use of intrinsic motivation to grow personnel qualifications,
thereby increasing the economic efficiency of an organization.
This theory stresses the need to formulate management goals,
which incorporate humanistic values. For instance, worker's

personal growth and well-being are taken into account to achieve

the organization's optimal productivity. In addition, the work
routines developed by organizations should provide workers with
an opportunity to participate in decision making. Several human
relation theorists contributed to development of the theory by
laying down its values, impacts and limitations. The first is a respect for
the basic dignity and humanity of employees, customers and anyone else affected by the
company's actions. The second is that all business decisions must include thoughtful ethical
analysis. The third is that business decisions should be made in dialogue with all those who
will be affected by them.
FORMALIZATION_