The Principles of Job Design - Essay Example

?Though some principles of job design that are required to make jobs more motivating while leading to high employee performance were recognised sincethe mid 1970’s, it can be noted that some companies continue to design the job along the Tayloristic principles. As such, this essay seeks to critically analyse the significance of job design and how it impacts on human resources (HR) in a particular organisation. The paper also seeks to investigate the Tayloristic principles of job design and establish if they are still relevant today while drawing a comparison with the modern view of job design. The paper will also attempt to identify the constraints of adopting a new modern job design. It is important to begin by defining the concept of job design in order to get a clear understanding of its significance in the organisations today. “Job design refers to the way in which work is structured into different tasks and responsibilities required to execute a particular job and the methods used in carrying them out so as to make a productive unit of work.” (Kleynhans, 2007, p. 45). Job design also shows how the job relates to the other work in the organisation. Although the basis of job design is an analysis of what work needs to be done, the most important strategic consideration is how the work should be organised in order to obtain the necessary work performance from the employee (Grobler, P et al 2006). There are various reasons why job design is so important and some of them are discussed below. In practice, job design can influence how a person performs in certain jobs given that the motivation of the employees can make a big difference on how well or badly they do their job (Kleynhans, 2007). An employee will know what is expected of him if the job is designed in a clear structure. When employees are given the power to make decisions as well as find solutions to the problems they may encounter during their day to day operations, there will be likely chances that they will put maximum performance in their tasks. This has a positive impact on the human resources management since it will be easier for them to monitor performance of the employees within a particular organisation. If the employees are treated as important to the organisation, they will develop a sense of belonging to it which will go a long way in improving the overall performance of the organisation as a whole. A good job design will lead to lower staff or employee turnover as well as less absenteeism. Basically, staff turnover refers to the amount of time a worker spends within an organisation from the first day at that new job to the last (Rollinson et al 2008). When employees are satisfied with their jobs, they will be motivated to stay longer and this will positively contribute to the growth and development of the organisation. This means that there will be lower costs for the organisation and it will make life easier for the HRM. There will also be lower costs in recruiting new employees given that the efforts of the HRM will be specifically focused on training and developing the employees already working in the organisation in order for them to keep pace with the changes that may take place within the company. This will also enable the loyal employees to gain the much needed experience required for them to complete the tasks assigned to them. Job design can affect job satisfaction in many ways. People are more satisfied when certain things are present in a job so it is important for the HRM to identify these things (Rollinson et al 2008). Factors such as opportunity for promotion or the use of an employee’s particular talents or skills can contribute to job satisfaction which will entail lower staff turnover. This translates to mean improved profitability for the organisation as well as general worker satisfaction in the workplace. It can also be noted that job design can affect both physical and mental health of different employees within the workplace. There will be fewer chances of employees suffering from stress related illnesses which can lead to absenteeism. This is a plus for the HRM given that their efforts will be directed towards important issues to the organisation such as improved productivity rather than dealing with solving problems facing the workers. In principle, a good job design clearly spells the structure of work into different categories whereby different tasks as well as responsibilities required to execute the job are outlined. In this way, the employees are given the responsibility to perform different tasks in their job in a free environment. A good job design also puts emphasis on the treatment given to the employee. Thus, an employee who is treated as a valuable asset to the organisation is likely to be motivated and this will positively contribute to the productivity of the organisation. A job design is meant to motivate the employees to have a positive feeling towards their jobs. Basically, motivation is loosely defined as a state arising in processes that are internal and external to the individual, in which the person perceives that it is appropriate to pursue a certain course of action directed at achieving a specified outcome and in which the person chooses to pursue those outcomes with a degree of vigour and persistence (Rollinson, 2008). Arousal in this particular case is about energy that drives the individual’s behaviour towards achieving a particular goal and the willingness of that individual to persist in attempts to meet that goal. Thus, the motivational approach plays a big role in determining a good job design. The motivational approach focuses on those aspects of the job that affect the motivational potential of the person in the job. If one is motivated to reach a higher stage within the organisation, this motivation will act as a force that will push that particular person to certain things such as working hard to gain recognition which can lead to the attainment of that needed goal. The most important results of a good job design include attitudinal variables such as attitudes, or beliefs that a person can have towards work as well as behavioural variables which refer to the different ways a person reacts or behaves towards different things (Susan & Randal, 2000). Indeed, a good job design creates a positive feeling in the workers whereby they will know that the organisation sees their work as meaningful. A good job design ought to enable the worker to know that the organisation contributes towards reaching goals that are important to the individual. Decisions about job design have long been influenced by the principles of scientific management based on the mechanist approach. Basically, scientific management which is also referred to as mechanist approach is where the scientific management methods apply principles of mechanical engineering to design a job (Arab British Academy for Higher Education, 2011). This involves the use of time and motion studies to determine the most efficient method to perform and sequence job tasks. The key figure in this movement was Frederick Winslow Taylor who believed that mental and manual work ought to be separated. The Tayloristic principles of job design suggested that management should specialise in planning, organising and control of the work while the workers should do the actual work (Grobler, 2006). Taylor’s principles of job design suggested that complex jobs performed by individual workers should be broken down and divided into most simple component parts so as to make the workers become more efficient and productive in their performance of a limited range of simple, repetitive and routine tasks. In this case, Taylor’s principles of job design posit to the effect that specialisation in particular job tasks would greatly contribute to the productivity of the organisation since there will be no time lost especially in the production process. This form of work organisation can be contextualised in the rise of the era of mass production and so called Fordism (Grobler, 2006). In these mass production systems an important requirement is consistent, disciplined performance by the workers in the execution of their repetitive and simple tasks especially in the manufacturing industries. This principle is based on the notion that scientific management is beneficial to the employees in that work is made easier and the tasks are easy to perform since they would be specialised tasks not requiring much effort and knowledge. The tasks are split into sub categories such that it would be easier for the workers to pick and perform a task which does not require great skill. Thus, the work efforts and behaviour of the individual employees are closely monitored whereby the management clearly specifies the work performance requirements leaving little scope for workers to make decisions related to their work because the tasks are simple and repetitive whereby little skills will be required (Taylor, 2010). However, the Tayloristic principles of job design have come under criticism for various reasons. One major drawback of this management system is that the tasks are often repeatedly performed over and over again which may result in boredom on behalf of the workers for doing routine jobs which do not allow them to exercise their right to use their knowledge at workplace (Sigmund, 2008). This is dangerous as it may lead to dissatisfaction of the workers as a result of the poor treatment they will be receiving. The workers are not treated as valuable assets and they are not motivated to perform their job as they are expected to get orders from the responsible authorities. According to the Arab British Academy for Higher Education (ABAHE) (2011),this approach is mainly beneficial to the employer whereby the major advantage is that of increased productivity since efficiency would be improved by the introduction of modern technology as well introduction of job tasks. This would save the organisation in terms of cost since it would not employ too many people to perform the tasks that can be performed few people. This also entails that there is little training for manual workers since they will be performing routine work whereby they will be repeating the same task over and over again. The system would seek to make a distinction between back work from brain work which would make it relatively easier for the management to follow and monitor the tasks being performed by various groups within the organisation. Depending on the nature of the industry and tasks within a particular organisation, it can be noted that to a certain extent, Tayloristic principles are still relevant today. For instance, when large amounts of standardised products are manufactured, these principles are applicable. Manufacturing of standardised products such as bread, clothing, bricks or any other products that should meet the expected standards entails that there will be definite tasks for the employees given that the production process often follows a defined line. Work involved in this particular type of industry is repetitive and the generation of new ideas will be limited given that the products offered will be expected to meet certain standards. In this case, the mechanistic approach focuses on the simplest way to structure work so it can be done most quickly and effectively. For instance, in a bakery, one person mixes flour, then the other one puts that flour into the oven and the others pack the bread and so on. It can be seen that these tasks are fixed and there is no generation of any new knowledge required for performing them. Emphasis is on increased productivity in terms of the work performed and the Tayloristic principles can be applied in this model of production. Essentially, the purpose of any given business is to make profits and the Tayloristic approach to business is ideal in some instances and is relevant during the contemporary period to some businesses. However, the Tayloristic principles are only relevant in certain industries that are concerned with manufacturing of mass products that ought to be standardised. In knowledge organisations that are emerging during the current period, it can be noted that these principles are no longer relevant. Some job tasks require the employees to use their knowledge in doing them whereby they will be required to be innovative so as to be better positioned to keep pace with the ever changing environment in which the organisation will be operating. The modern view of job design was born out of human relations movement (Grobler, 2006). The major notable difference between the modern view of job design and the Tayloristic approach is that mass production techniques and associated efforts towards job division did not pay enough attention to socio-psychological needs of the workers. Scientific management was deemed to lack the human focus in that it mainly focused on the technicalities involved in the production systems with the aim of creating efficient ways of working. On the other hand, the modern view of job design suggests that focus should be shifted to human needs, employee behaviour as well as human relations in the organisation so as to improve the overall performance of the employees as well as the organisation as a whole. The other notable difference between the above mentioned approaches to job design is that the mechanist approach emphasised on the importance of money alone which may not be enough to motivate the employees to improve their performance in their tasks assigned to them (Sigmund, 2008). The modern approach to job design emphasizes on the need for those who designed work to pay particular attention to the individual worker’s social needs. This will enable the workers to experience a sense of belonging to the organisation, to be able to interact meaningfully with others and to engage in social processes of worthwhile information exchange. This approach is also concerned with showing that the management cares by listening to their personal problems. Employees are treated as valuable assets to the organisation and they can meaningfully contribute towards the decision making process of the organisation. In contrast, the mechanist approach is concerned with improved productivity with less care for the welfare of the employees. They cannot make any contribution in terms of generating ideas that can shape the decisions made within the organisation. Workers are expected to work under instructions and they are also expected to be productive which will improve the organisation’s profitability. The major constraint of adopting a new modern job design is that it may be expensive to the organisation given that a lot of resources would be needed to train the employees to meet the standard expectations of the organisation’s operations. Whilst it is a good idea to give due consideration to the needs of the employees, there is also need for the organisation to have a clearly defined line of authority which can make it easier for the responsible people to monitor and manage performance in the organisation. If everyone is given the power to make decisions in their operations, the organisation may not be able to pull the efforts of all the individuals towards the attainment of the set organisational goals since the individuals have different goals which may not be the same as the organisation’s. Over and above, it can be seen, that job design refers to the way in which work is structured into different tasks and responsibilities required to perform a particular job and the methods used in carrying them out so as to make a productive unit of work (Kleynhans, 2007). This concept mainly derives from the Tayloristic principles or mechanist approach to designing different jobs. Job design is very important in that it can influence how a person performs in certain jobs especially as the motivation of the employees can make a big difference on how well or badly they do their job. A good job design will lead to lower staff or employee turnover as well as less absenteeism and it improves the level of motivation of the employees. On the other hand Taylor’s principles of job design suggested that complex jobs performed by individual workers should be broken down and divided into most simple component parts so as to make the workers become more efficient and productive in their performance of a limited range of simple, repetitive and routine tasks. The main difference between the modern approach to job design and Tayloristic principles is that the modern job design puts more emphasis on the human needs while the while the mechanist approach is mainly concerned with productivity of the organisation. However, some of the Tayloristic principles are still relevant in today’s organisation depending on the nature of the industry concerned. The likely problem with implementing a modern job design is that it can be expensive for the organisation to train and develop all the workers such that they can be able to make decisions on their own. The other problem is that they may have different views about the organisational goals. References Arab British Academy for Higher Education, 2011, viewed 24 March, 2011, Grobler, P et al 2006, Human Resource Management, Thompson Learning, London. Jackson, SE & Schuler, R 2000, Managing Human Resources: A Partnership Perspective, South Western College Publishing, NY. Kleynhans, R et al 2007, Human Resource Management: fresh perspectives, Pearson Education. Rollinson, D et al 2008, Organisational behaviour and analysis: An integrated approach, 4th Edition, Pearson Education. London. Sigmund, WT 2008, ‘Scientific Management revisited: Did Taylorism fail because of a too positive image of human nature?’ Journal of Management History, Vol. 14 Iss: 4, pp.348 – 372, viewed 24 March, 2011,< http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1747271&show=abstract> Susan, EJ & Randal, S 2000, Managing Human Resources: A Partnership Perspective, South Western College Publishing, NY. Taylor, S 2010, Resourcing and Talent Management, 5th Edition, CIPD Taylorism and Fordism, ND, viewed 24 March, 2011, Read More