Theories of job design, the motivation to work and organizational commitment - Essay Example

Using Theories of Job Design, the Motivation to Work and Organizational Commitment in the Workplace People at top management have gone a long way and have done a great deal to reach their positions. They have studied hard, completed their degrees, gained their credentials and laboured long and hard to be able to relish being on top. In advanced schooling, professionals are prepared to enter the workforce armed with the knowledge they get from their schools. More often than not, this knowledge is applied in their own classrooms. Theories of Job Design have led a lot of organizations in the management of their personnel. The dominant perspective in the Job Design theory is the Job characteristics model offered by Hackman and Oldham (1976) which identifies five job characteristics that influence the motivation of the job-holder which has an effect on his or her job performance and well being. These characteristics are: skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy and feedback. In sum, the Job Characteristics Model identifies the three psychological states of employees affected by the job characteristics namely: knowledge of results, meaningfulness of work and personal feelings of responsibility for results. Increases in these psychological states result in increased motivation, performance and job satisfaction (Hackman and Oldham, 1976). The Job design theory has its applications in the workplace in various forms. One is job rotation, characterized by periodic shifting of a worker from one task to another. Being exposed to a variety of tasks leads to an increase in skill variety. One example is the practice implemented by Pepsi-Cola Company, and known as the best leadership-development program. The company regularly assessed future leaders with its standardized “Pepsi Success Factors”. Contenders were people with high potentials who were rotated through a series of two-year assignments. Pepsi assessed their competency in making immediate and positive impact on others by exhibiting a combination of self-confidence, communication and presentation skills. They were thrown high visibility projects where they made a number of executive presentations. They were exposed to senior management and received much personal feedback, coaching and criticism (Stringer and Cheloha, 2003). Another application of job design is job enlargement which is the horizontal expansion of jobs. The growing scope of one’s responsibility in a job leads to task identity. Citigroup develops its leaders they call “corporate property” and designed their jobs with increased responsibility and complexity. They stationed young high-potential managers to be stationed outside their country of origin for four years and in two separate assignments. This strategy develops aggressive future leaders that run major financial institutions around the world (Stringer and Cheloha, 2003). Still another application is job enrichment or the vertical expansion of jobs. Traversing various levels of tasks increases one’s autonomy (Hackman & Oldham, 1976). Clegg and Spenser (2006) offer another model of job design which is circular and dynamic. A good job performance of a job-holder may be viewed by his supervisors and peers as evidence of competence. Such interpretation may encourage trust in the job-holder. In turn, the job-holder may interpret his own good performance as evidence of his competence, developing his trust in his own capabilities. This trust from others and from oneself helps the job-holder in taking in more responsibility through various job design applications. Role adjustments may be initiated by the supervisor or by peers and this result in increases in job content which in turn lead to increased job knowledge, motivation and opportunity. Gaining such knowledge and motivation leads to improvements in job performance. Again, this is perceived to be an indicator of competence. Burr and Cordery (2001) suggest that one’s beliefs about his ability to exercise self-regulatory responsibilities influence his motivation to perform within a job entailing increased responsibilities for decision making. This is called Self-Management Efficacy. Tsui and Ashford (1994) proposed three steps in this process. First is setting of standards followed by deciding what to do and how much of it to do, and lastly taking action on discrepancies. “Accordingly, self-management efficacy may be defined as an individual’s confidence in his or her ability to decide what is to be accomplished each day, the order in which to do things, how to go about getting the job done, and when to do particular work activities” (Burr and Cordery, 2001, p. 29). Motivation is the driving force that account for an individual’s intensity, direction, and persistence of effort toward attaining a goal. It is characterized by a person’s intensity, or how hard a person exerts effort in a certain task that motivates him; direction, or to which particular goal the motivation is headed; and persistence, or how long a person tries to stay within that motivated path. Since motivation is such a powerful force in human interactions, several theories have been conceptualized to understand it better and to be able to use it to one’s advantage. Maslow’s (1970) celebrated model of the hierarchy of needs is one theory that dissects a person’s progression in his motivations to survive. As one’s more basic need is fulfilled, he moves on to a higher one. Chronologically, the hierarchy of needs is as follows: physiological needs; safety needs; belongingness and love needs; esteem needs and need for self-actualization. People in a group have their own level of need to fulfill and this is manifested in their motivations. The needs that are externally satisfied are the physiological and safety needs, while needs that are internally satisfied are the social, esteem and self-actualization needs. Maslow theorizes that everyone aspires to reach the level of self-actualization, where all other needs have been met. On the issue of needs, another theorist, Clayton Alderfer (1969) authored the ERG Theory, as an acronym to three groups of core needs namely existence, relatedness and growth. Existence represents material needs necessary to survive, relatedness is the need to establish relationships and growth is the desire for personal improvement. Alderfer believes that such needs may be operative at the same time, however, if a higher need cannot be fulfilled, the individual intensifies the desire to satisfy lower-level needs. David McClellan(1961) has another theory regarding motivational needs. His framework is a tripartite model premised on the need for affliation, parallel to Alderfer’s relatedness needs, the need for achievement or the drive to succeed, and the need for power, or a position where others will behave with respect towards that individual who has it. Douglas McGregor (1960) came up with an opposing theory known as Theory X and Theory Y. Theory X assumes that employees dislike work, lack ambition, avoid responsibility, and must be directed and coerced to perform, while on the other hand, Theory Y assumes that employees like work, seek responsibility, are capable of making decisions, and exercise self-direction and self-control when committed to a goal. This is reflective of how people view employee attitude, depending on their personal perspectives. Frederick Herzberg (1959) theorized that job satisfaction is depended on worker motivation. His Motivation-Hygiene theory explains that intrinsic factors are related to job satisfaction, while extrinsic factors are associated with dissatisfaction. So this means that a worker must be internally fulfilled in order to be motivated to work better. Also, he theorizes that workers are always after good working conditions conducive to work. He termed factors—such as company policy and administration, supervision, and salary as hygienic factors, and when these are just adequate in a job, it makes workers happy. When factors are adequate, people will not be dissatisfied. The many theories of motivation offer various alternatives suited to different people. These theories offer implications in the workplace that management and the human resources team may find worthy to consider. One way to motivate employees is to match the rewards with the needs of the employees. In every employment, employees consciously or unconsciously expect a kind of “psychological contract” apart from the expectations the job usually presents – benefits and compensation for a particular job description. This psychological contract usually includes open and honest communication, managerial support and challenging and interesting work. Employees are becoming increasingly aware of the non-monetary rewards that companies can provide them. It is generally important that the job not only fulfills their economical needs, but their socio-emotional needs as well. “This implies that recruiters need to go beyond a discussion of compensation and benefits and highlight aspects of their organization that job candidates will find intrinsically satisfying.” (Lester, Clair & Kickul, 2001, n.p.) Employers must be cognizant of and responsive to their employees’ perception of their psychological contracts with the company. Things such as meaningful work, recognition, creative freedom and opportunities for personal growth are desired by all employees. Management must maintain open and honest communication with employees, bearing in mind their socio-emotional needs and concerns, and being encouraging enough to boost their self-esteem. Lack of communication is ultimately problematic because it suggests to employees that management may be susceptible to perceived psychological contract breaches across a variety of areas because the basic issue of communication is not met. Employers must be able to invest more time developing and strengthening healthy relationships with their employees in various districts so they are kept abreast of their progress in both personal and professional areas. Adjusting to the needs of employees is one major role of managers. Colgate-Palmolive, a New York-based company which operates in 170 countries grappled with the challenge of standardizing their US based agenda to the international arena, since cultural considerations are to be seriously dealt with. The company developed a training program called “Valuing Colgate People” wherein all managers participated worldwide. Instead of pressing the US approach, the company examined what kind of training was needed in each country and attempted to blend two cultures in teaching the managers how to collaborate across cultural boundaries. This respect for the employees’ culture gained Colgate-Palmolive a reputation for banning discrimination and sexual harassment in all their offices worldwide (Mor Barak, 2000) Offering employees a choice of rewards is likewise very motivating. People have different needs at different times, and the rewards that are appropriately suited to a particular need will be very much appreciated. For instance, in a diverse set up, people from different backgrounds could have special holidays in their culture or faith. Management may opt to respect these and offer to celebrate it with a day off or simple commemoration of the holiday at work. Another example is the Flexible benefit scheme wherein employees tailor their benefit program to meet their personal need by picking and choosing from a menu of benefit options. Keeping in mind that for some employees, rewards do not necessarily come in form of money, benefits such as more flexible work schedule, scholarships for further studies, promotions, child care support, work-life balance may be enough to motivate them to maintain their good work. Job sharing is an efficient way to conserve energy. It is now commonly implemented in the corporate world and in the fields of education, medicine, and many others. In schools, teachers share the work by splitting their work week to oversee one classroom. One teacher may report Mondays to Wednesdays and another works Wednesdays to Fridays, with Wednesday as an overlapping day for meetings and swapping feedbacks and evaluative plans. This “fosters a collaborative atmosphere, enhances accountability and reduces burnout. Students likewise benefit from it by having two energized teachers invested in their education” (Blair, 2003: para.5) Even in the medical fields, nurses and doctors are taking advantage of job sharing opportunities. Health practitioners may still provide comprehensive patient care without having to sacrifice their personal lives and being on-call all the time. Sharing positions with others in academic and private practice settings has helped one health institution to develop a job-share model that provides patients with an unbroken “circle of care” (Worzniak & Chadwell, 2002). For example at the Oakwood Hospital in Dearborn, Michigan, the administrators have come up with 3 models of job sharing schedules. Model I is for arrangements with two part-time physicians. One physician provides out-of office services such as hospital rounds and nursing home visits while the other physician covers the office. Each works five half-days a week, trading responsibilities on alternate weeks. Model 2 is for arrangements with three part time physicians. Each week, two physicians work in the office while the other physician provides out of office services and alternate roles every week or so. Model 3 is for arrangements with two part-time physicians and two full-time physicians. Usually, this becomes necessary especially when patients grow in number. Each week, two physicians work full time in the office while one physician works five half-days in the office and another physician works seven half-days performing outside services. It is possible that in a practice this size or larger, another part time physician will need to rotate out to do rounds and perform other services. These models ensure that patients continually receive the care and treatments they need, and the doctors get to practice their skills in many aspects of medical and administrative functions (Worzniak & Chadwell, 2002). . Financial rewards come with the job, however, experts advise managers to limit the use of financial rewards as a source of motivation. Alfie Kohn (1999) theorized that rewarding people with money and other status symbols such as titles, promotions, larger offices, etc. actually reduces motivation. This seems counter-intuitive, however, Kohn explains that every time people are rewarded for doing something, they are motivated externally. In doing so, it inevitably reduces people’s inner motivation – and it is this motivation that eventually guarantees quality and performance (Kjerulf, n.d.). To address the human need to belong, employees become motivated to work when they are called to be involved in some of the organizational projects. An Employee Involvement Program is a participative process that uses the entire capacity of employees and is designed to encourage increased commitment to the organization’s success. Examples are being part of a quality circle, and being part of an employee stock ownership plan (ESOP). Participation in the decision-making process has been linked to job satisfaction, especially if the diverse, nontraditional members are asked of their opinions. Not only does this increase their self-esteem and sense of belonging, but it can potentially affect their retention and effectiveness on the job (Mor Barak, 2000). Being acknowledged for one’s creative contributions to the company motivates an employee to think up of more. An employer may be instrumental in awaking that creative spark by advocating for dynamic ideas from the employees, who, coming from diverse backgrounds, may be the best people to rely on. Another application of the motivational theories is appropriate job matching with individual needs of the employees. Inclusive environments allow people to have the freedom to keep their uniqueness to bring in different ideas to either enrich what is existing or challenge what is entrenched. When they become too assimilated in a homogeneous culture, they lose their uniqueness and true value to themselves and the organisation which made them attractive candidates to the organization in the first place (Young, 2007). Part of effective communication within a diverse organisation is the sharing of knowledge and ideas that will ultimately redound to the benefit of the organisation. However, there is usually a breakdown in the transfer. “Motivational barriers to knowledge transfer included a lack of extrinsic rewards, stronger levels of group versus organizational identification, reciprocity norms, and the view of knowledge as a means of achieving upward organizational mobility.” (Burgess, 2005). Workers will be more encouraged to transfer knowledge to another member however different that individual is if this sort of behaviour is rewarded by management either by external means such as merit or salary increases or internal means to boost their self-esteem such as praise or simply appreciation. In line with understanding employees’ needs and concerns, employers should be ready to invest in their professional and personal development. Full-fledged diversity management, as opposed to a mere sensitivity training class, requires a radical upending of basic assumptions, patterns, and structures (Carnevale & Stone, 1995). Also, regular trainings and participation in seminars or enrollment in courses shouldered by the company (whether partial or full) may be perceived as part of the job, but it should be communicated to the employees that although application of their learnings will highly profit the company, ultimately it will redound to their own benefit. This knowledge from trainings is bound to increase their market value. At IKEA, the worlds largest supplier and manufacturer of Scandanavian-designed, low-cost furniture, HR leader Albert Marten says, “Our CEO and founder says there is nothing more important than people development because people are our connection with our customers.” (Whitehead, 2006, n.p.) Spending 50 to 100 percent more on training and getting co-workers more motivated to serve customers is acceptable, as there is no limit in spending just to help their employees to inspire customers to return for all their home furnishing needs. Martens claim that developing people is a long term investment. If their competitors spend on investor relations or some other capital market efforts, IKEA would rather spend on their people, as it allows them to be more focused. If an employee is dissatisfied, it will show up in his customer interaction, and that is unacceptable. IKEA is in the belief that they have invested on employee motivation and loyalty and are in a better position to attract and retain customers. Being aware of diverse employees’ gripes and complaints as well as constructive suggestions may be brought up to the proper authorities and dealt with seriously. Regular evaluation of company performance should include the assessment and feedback of employees of their employers and employment. Managers should not be remiss in this duty of bridging communication or else employees may perceive management to be incompetent. “This negative perception could also lead to widespread problems satisfying other psychological contract obligations. This may be particularly troubling because it may often be the responsibility of an employees manager (acting as the organizations agent) to see that the individuals psychological contract is fulfilled.” (Lester, Clair & Kickul, 2001, n.p.) Finally, employees appreciate some down time from work and team-building events. Leisurely activities such as sportsfests, family trips, etc. relax employees from the demands of work and enable them to relate to one another as simple human beings. When people have a clear idea of where they are heading and how they fit in to serve the company’s goals, they become motivated to perform well. Trust is essential as well as a very open climate and a lot of freedom. (Kling & Goteman, 2003) Coming up with a final business decision depends on situational factors such as organizational goals, organizational codes of ethics, the legal environment and the perception of the other party. National culture influences these factors. Organizational goals may be set but people from different cultures may have different approaches in reaching them. “The organizational goals of an Asian company may be more long-term and relationship oriented compared to the goals of a Western company which may be focused on short-term profits and not care as much about the relationship with the buyer.” (Brisbane Institute, 2005). The approach that the Asian company may be to establish a positive relationship with the customer before cutting into the business aspect, whereas a Western company may focus on making profits as soon as possible even if it uses cunning and even unethical tactics that may damage the relationship with the customer. The organizational code of ethics plays an essential role in the way a business is handled. Negotiators who are advised that the culture of the business they are interested in adheres to a code of ethics which is deeply ingrained in the workers and is expected to be practiced by everyone would think twice in using ethically ambiguous strategies to get ahead. “There will also be cross-cultural differences in how code of ethics are understood depending on the familiarity with, and tradition or longevity of, codes of ethics within individual business organizations.” (Brisbane Institute, 2005). Leaders of organisations or managers of corporate establishments should keep in mind that careful and efficient management of their organisations and people is central in the well-being of their employees as well as their contribution to the company and the maintenance of harmony among all members of the organisation. They should know how to uplift the morale of their people, thereby making them perform better in their jobs and instill loyalty to the organization. It is truly a huge responsibility for leaders, and the fulfillment of their several goals and tasks for the organization may determine the success or failure of a whole establishment. Leaders or managers must exert effort to help their staff feel and believe that their job is not only a job or a source of livelihood. More importantly, it is their commitment and contribution to serve society. References Alderfer, C.P. 1969. An Empirical Test of a New Theory of Human Need., Psychological Review. Blair, J., 2003. Job Sharing: Appealing for Teachers, Education Week, 22 (20) Brisbane Institute, Business Ethics, 2005 Burgess, D. 2005. What motivates employees to transfer knowledge outside their work unit?. The Journal of Business Communication. 42 (4) Burr, R. & Cordery, J.L. 2001. Self-Management Efficacy as a Mediator of the Relation Between Job Design and Employee Motivation. Human Performance, 14 (1), pp. 27-44 Carnevale, A. P., & Stone, S. C.1995. The American mosaic: An in-depth report on the future of diversity at work. New York: McGraw-Hill Clegg, C. & Spencer, C. 2007. A Circular and Dynamic Model of the Process of Job Design. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 80, pp. 321–339 Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. 1976. Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, pp. 250–279. Herzberg, F. 1959. The Motivation to Work. New York: John Wiley and Sons Lester, S. Clair, E, Kickul, J. 2001. Psychological Contracts in the 21st Century: What Employees Value Most and How Well Organizations Are Responding to These Expectations. Human Resource Planning. 24 (1). Kjerulf, A. (n.d.), Happy Hour is 9 to 5: Learn How To Love Your Job, Love Your Life and Kick Butt at Work. Available at: http://positivesharing.com/happyhouris9to5/bookhtml/happyhouris9to56. Html [Accessed:Feb.25, 2009] Kling, K. & Goteman, I. 2003 IKEA CEO Anders Dahlvig On International Growth And IKEAs Unique Corporate Culture And Brand Identity Academy o/ Management, Executive.17 (1) Kohn, A. 1999. Punished by Rewards. Houghton Mifflin Maslow, A.H. 1970. Motivation and Personality, 2nd ed,, Reprinted by permission of Prentice Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. McClelland, D.C. 1961. The Achieving Society McGregor, D. 1960. The Human Side of Enterprise Mor Barak, M. E. 2000. The Inclusive Workplace: An Ecosystems Approach to Diversity Management, Social Work, 45(4) Stringer, R.A. & Cheloha, R.S. 2003. The Power of a Development Plan, Human Resource Planning, 26 (4), pp.10-17. Tsui, A. S.,&Ashford, S. 1994. Adaptive self-regulation:Aprocess view of managerial effectiveness. Journal of Management, 19,pp. 93–121. Whitehead, J. 2006. Furnishing IKEA with HRO, HRO Europe: December 2006/ January 2007. Available at http://www.hroeurope.com/Magazine.asp?artID=1571 [Accessed February 24, 2009] Worzniak, M.J., and Chadwell, M., 2002. A Job-Share Model for the New Millenium, Family Practice Management, September, 2002 Young, C. 2007. Organization Culture Change: The Bottom Line of Diversity. The Diversity Factor, The Changing Currency of Diversity 15 (1) Read More