Managing People in the Modern Workplace - Research Paper Example

?Introduction Managing people in the modern workplace is one of the most important strategies that can be employed by organizations in order to achieve the best results or to make the organizations have a competitive advantage (Belcourt, Bohlander and Snell 2008, p.58). Notwithstanding what activities or department of an organization it might be, the objectives can only be obtained through the efforts of the human resource personnel, as they are the people who are usually in contact with each other on a daily basis either at every level of employment. The modern work place has changed significantly as most employees are now increasingly involved in decision-making in addition to other tasks and they work as a team. Therefore, today, people work as a team in any organization and the employers expect the employees to work as a team in managing the work place. People normally want to do good work in any organization and therefore proper management makes them feel that they matter and are actively involved in making a difference in the organization. Employees normally prefer working in places that magnify or increase their strengths and not focus on their weaknesses. In order to achieve this, they need some level of autonomy and structure, and therefore the organization must always be honest, coherent and open in managing the human resource at its disposal. However, achieving this may at times be tricky or difficult due to the competing needs of the organization as compared to that of individual employees. This is because managers are faced with numerous challenges at the workplace and must continually work extra hard to forge ahead in pushing the objectives of companies. As managers strive to make the organizations authentic in one way or the other, they should realize the potential of their human resource in achieving their core values. Managing People Creating the best work place is important in making the organization work at its best as the employees are allowed to realize their optimum potential (Goffee and Jones 2013, p.3). This involves nurturing the differences of each employee and the value of each employee is appreciated. Thus, all information available should be utilized towards improving the welfare of the company while at the same time making the work place more rewarding (Goffee and Jones 2013, p. 4). Research has shown that employees who are highly engaged by their employers are likely to exceed the workplace expectations by 50% than those workers that are less engaged. This same result also shows that firms that actively engaged their employees in the work place had a higher percentage of customer satisfaction by 89% and a chance of retaining their employees by 54% as compared to other firms (Goffee and Jones 2013, p.4). Similarly, research in other nations has revealed that employees who have the free will to express their real selves had higher levels of commitment to their organizations performance at the individual level and the propensity to help fellow employees in their assigned tasks. An important strategy of managing people in the modern workplace is to let the employees be themselves in whatever task they are doing or undertaking (Atif 2009, p.60). This encompasses having thoughtfulness of the differences in perspectives, important assumptions and habits of the mind. Therefore, the ideal organization should be aware of the dominant factors in its culture, habits at the place of work, dressing codes of its employees, traditions and other assumptions important in governance. This is beneficial as it helps in the tapping of the full range of the people’s talents and knowledge that is beneficial to the running of the organization. An organization can easily achieve success by unleashing the flow of information by allowing the employees to tell them the truth before they get it from somewhere else (Leibold, Probst and Gibbert 2002, p.332). It therefore respects the employees’ right to know what is taking place at the organization, especially in unpredictable environments so that they can accomplish the assigned tasks strategically. Effective communication must therefore be clear, complete, candid and timely (Goffee and Jones 2013, p.5). Organizations must strive to magnify the strength of its employees whereby the best employees are made better and those who feel they are not better are made to improve on their potential. It has been proven that developing the potential of the existing staff is economically less costly as compared to recruitment of new staff (Goffee and Jones 2013, p.6). For example, highly valued companies like Google and Apple regularly provide their employees with important networks, creative interactions with peers in the same employment field, training and other strategies that are aimed at retaining the employees that they already have while at the same time magnifying their potential (Goffee and Jones 2013, p.7). Rapparprt (1998) says that it is important for organizations to stand for more than just the shareholder value. This can be achieved through the forging and maintenance of connections between the values held by persons and those of an individual that has the effect of fostering individuality and strong cultures. This implies that the company should have it in mind that profit is merely the outcome of the pursuit of other important goals of the company (Goffee and Jones 2013, p.8). Companies should also strive to derive meaning from their daily activities if they are to survive and manage people properly at the workplace. This requires that there is a proper evaluation and a consideration of the tasks that people perform in his daily activities at the workplace and whether they make sense. Making the work more rewarding for employees may involve rethinking on the leadership of the company and fostering the personal growth of employees in the company (Lussier 2000, p.6), which in effect makes employees more valuable to the employer and their competitors. Organizations should have rules that their employees can live in without any arbitrary restrictions. To this end, the organizations will need the requisite structures while the markets and enterprises must put in place rules. The people in an organization will therefore be required to exercise moral authority in whatever tasks they are doing, derived not from the efficiency of the means they employ in their duties but on the importance of the ends they come up with (Goffee and Jones 2013, p.10). Employee Wellness Programs Workplace wellness can be described as a program organized by the employer in order to support the employee and occasionally their families in their quest to adopt and sustain behaviours that reduce risks associated with health, enhancing personal effectiveness and contribute to the benefit of the organization. Research has shown that wellness programs can be viewed as strategic imperatives that may help companies incur little health care costs in the long run. This proves that healthy employees cost the employers less as demonstrated by a research carried out by Doctor Milani and Lavie which proved that interventions by organizations whose employees may be at risk of suffering heart ailments saved the companies US $ 6 in healthcare savings. Similarly, a study by Towers Watson and the National Business Group on Health showed that organizations with effective and efficient wellness programs had higher levels of employee retention as most employees are unwilling to leave voluntarily the organization (Berry, Mirabito and Baun 2010, p.106). The same research revealed that at software organization SAS Institute, voluntary attrition is just 45 while at Biltmore tourism enterprise the figure stood at 9% in 2009 down from 19% in the year 2005 (Berry, Mirabito and Baun 2010, p.106). The wellness program employed by organizations should involve six important strategies that are employed simultaneously for the well-being of the employee. There must be a multi-level leadership that creates a healthy, passionate and persistent at all levels while also aligning the wellness program in the sense that it should be a natural extension of the identity of the organization and its aspirations. The wellness program must be excellent, engaging and comprehensive in order to ensure the participation of all employees in it. The program must be accessible in terms of costs and there should be partnerships through collaboration with internal and external partners to enhance the program. An effective wellness program must integrate communication through proper messaging to the employees in the organization (Berry, Mirabito and Baun 2010, p.108-109). In summary, benefits of the wellness at the workplace far outweigh the costs incurred, as demonstrated by SAS Institute, which found that for every dollar it spent to operate its onsite healthcare facilities in 2009, it had savings of US $ 6.6 million and there were other benefits to employees such as time saved in seeking medical attention outside the firm. There was also greater productivity as there were few cases of absenteeism among the workers. Employees also showed higher morale in their duties as the wellness programs strengthened the culture of the organization that eventually built pride, trust and commitment by the organization (Berry, Mirabito and Baun 2010, p.112). In the current era, most employers are faced with challenges in managing the emerging generation of workers who have completely reshaped the workplace. Larger organizations that depend on the experience of the client cannot therefore put all the management decisions of the company on the hands of old or conservative executives with little grasp of current trends. According to Vineet Nayar, the vice chairman of HCL Technologies, organizations must be managed such that young employees who have the most interactions with customers become committed to the company’s missions and can be trusted to make decisions and directions that are beneficial to the company (Nayar 2013, p.2). He argues that the advantage with the younger generation is their ability to get lots of information and they also possess special skills that are important in solving problems coupled with the ability to network easily. An important way of building engagement amongst the younger employees at the work place is through appealing to their sense of connection to the world and the belief in them as the required agents of change. At HCL Technologies, this has been achieved through the Power of One program that enabled employees to contribute time and energy to social causes (Nayar 2013, p.2). The younger employees are therefore empowered to initiate and implement innovative ideas at the workplace that increases its competitive edge. Managers are therefore implored to provide greater access to knowledge and collaborative networks for the younger employees in order to tap diverse talents. Employees must be allowed to step outside their normal lines of management in response to the opportunities presented in the market (Nayar 2013, p.2). Diversity at the Workplace Diversity can be defined as the norm or set of practices that are consciously undertaken by incorporating, appreciating and understanding the relationship between cultures, humanity and the natural setting. Diversity in an organization or the work place can only be practiced or appreciated by recognizing the fact that discrimination can create a serious disadvantage to a particular group of employees or workers while at the same time bestowing privilege on others. Managing diversity in a place of work or organization increases the productivity of the employees in that particular organization (Hamdani and Buckley 2011, p.34). Cox and Blake (1991) have argued that having an organization with a diverse work force results into decisions that are better, creative and innovative while at the same time resulting into a flexible organization that appreciates divergent thinking. It may also make the organization attract and retain the best talents thus ensuring a greater capability in marketing. These can only be realized through organizational strategies and policies or interventions that are aimed at improving the management of human resource in the organization while considering their diversity. The performance of the organization or the workforce is therefore affected by how the individual employees interact with the factors put in place by the organization. A worker who feels that the organization values his input will in this instance perform better in his duties as opposed to a worker in a less diverse setting (Cummings and Worley 2005, p.160). Managers can make good use of the effects of diversity to achieve business efficacy by acknowledging that diversity is difficult and poses challenges in terms of relations (Klarsfed 2010, p.293). It is therefore important to identify the people in an organization who can help in mitigating the challenges stemming from diversity. The managers in the organization must also understand what challenges come up with bringing people of different backgrounds together in a similar work environment. Therefore, human resource professionals should strive to ensure that effective management of diversity through the definition and implementation of programs and policies aimed at reducing negative effects of diversity (Hamdani and Buckley 2011, p.39). Workforce diversity strategies can also be implemented to have a positive effect on the outcomes of the groups as a diverse group most of the time has got better-quality solutions for assigned tasks as compared to homogeneous groups as they instilled a norm of cooperation in the accomplishment of tasks (Cox, Lobel and McLeod 1991, p.827-847). Similarly, research has suggested that there is a relationship between the gender of employees and their performance and this varies according to the industry being surveyed. He states that the increase in the representation of a particular gender especially the women is closely related to productivity and the performance in terms of profits up to the point when both women and men hold an equal proportion of the job (Frink et al 2003, p.127-147). Organizations may also employ strategies that address the culture aimed at creating a work environment that emphasizes employees working as a team through collective participation through the instilling of characters aimed at cohesion of both the individual and the organizational culture (Dwyer, Richard and Chadwick, 2003, p.1009-1019). Rebuilding Companies as Communities The work place must strive to make itself into places of engagement where the human resource is committed to one another and the firm. This is in response to the worrying trend whereby a belief has come up whereby people in the workplace believe that leadership is superior and separate from management that has got the effect of isolating the people in leadership positions thus undermining the sense of community in an organization (Mintzberg 2009, p. 140). Communities mean that we should care for our work, colleagues and the place of work. For example, Pixar, which is a studio, attributes its success to a vibrant community that promotes loyalty among the talented people who are loyal to collective work (Mintzberg 2009, p. 141). There is also what we call communityship whereby the leadership at the workplace is required to be engaged and distributed in terms of management. Communities in the workplace can first be built by beginning with a small group of committed managers those results in strong communities. Some companies such as electronic giant LG and airliner Lufthansa enroll their managers to programs such as the International Masters Program in Practicing Management that help them in attaining community at the workplace (Mintzberg 2009, p. 142). When managers reflect their experiences and put them down into practice they may generate small initiatives that are in turn turned into bigger strategies. The organization will later be able to know that it has established communityship when all the workers at the workplace can reach out to one another in a socially active and responsible way for the benefit of the organization. Reference List Atif, D. 2009. Managing the unthinkable: the role of management in challenging times. New York, NY, iUniverse. Belcourt, M., Bohlander, G. W., & Snell, S. 2008. Managing human resources. Toronto, Thomson Nelson. Berry, Leonard, L., Mirabito Ann, M & Baun, William, B. 2010.What’s the Hard Return on Employee Wellness Programs? The ROI data will surprise you and the softer evidence may inspire you. Harvard Business Review. December 2010. 9, 104-112. Cox, T., & Blake, S. 1991. Managing cultural diversity: Implications for organizational competitiveness. Academy of Management Executive, 5(3), 45–56. Cox, T., Lobel, S., & McLeod, P. 1991. Effects of ethnic group cultural differences on cooperative and competitive behavior on a group task. Academy of Management Journal, 34(4), 827–47. Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. 2005. Organization development and change. Mason, Ohio, Thomson/South-Western. Dwyer, S., Richard, O. C., & Chadwick, K. 2003. Gender diversity in management and firm performance: the influence of growth orientation and organizational culture. Journal of Business Research. 56, 1009-1019. Frink, D., Robinson, R., Reithel, B., Arthur, M., Ammeter, A., Ferris, G., Kaplan, D., & Morisete, H.2003. Gender demography and organizational performance: A two-study investigation with convergence. Group & Organization Management, 28, 127–47. Goffee, R., & Jones, G. 2013. Creating the Best Workplace on Earth. Harvard Business Review. May 2013. 9, 1-10. Reprint R1305H Hamdani, M., & Buckley, M. 2011. Diversity goals: Reframing the debate and enabling a fair evaluation. Business Horizons. 54, 33-40. Klarsfed, A. 2010. International handbook on diversity management at work country perspectives on diversity and equal treatment. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar. http://site.ebrary.com/id/10404040. Leibold, M., Probst, G., & Gibbert, M. 2002. Strategic management in the knowledge economy: new approaches and business applications. Erlangen, Publicis. Lussier, R. N. 2000. Management fundamentals: concepts, applications, skill development. [Cincinnati, Ohio], South Western College Mintzberg, Henry. 2009. Rebuilding Companies as Communities. The Last Word. Harvard Business Review. July-August 2009 Nayar, Vineet. 2013. Handing the Keys to Gen Y. Harvard Business Review. May 2013. 9, 1-2. Reprint F1305E. Rapparport, A. 1998. Creating shareholder value: a guide for managers and investors. New York, Free Press. . Read More