Leadership Issues: Empowerment of Employees - Coursework Example

Leadership Issues - Empowerment of Employees Table of Contents Introduction 3 ‘Empowered employees’ negates the need for managers- Critical Analysis3 Views from the middle management 7 Conclusion 8 Reference 10 Bibliography 11 Introduction Any kind of participative management, delegation or shared decision making can be considered as empowerment. The very basic meaning of empowerment is the passing of responsibility and decision making authority from managers to group members. Another dimension of true empowerment is to develop internal commitment among group members towards work goals and objectives. Internal commitment is developed when workers or employees remain committed towards a person, program or project for their own personal motives. Since the complete decision making authority and responsibilities of a work rests with the worker or employee empowered, the question arises as to whether in that case the position and role of a manager becomes irrelevant or not (Dubrin, 2008, p.204). Extensive research has been conducted on the subject and different researchers have brought forth different perspectives. It is important to discuss whether employee empowerment calls for the complete removal of position of managers in organizations or they still stand to have their position and responsibility in directing group activities towards the attainment of organizational goals and objectives. In this study, a critical analysis is provided on the subject with particular reference to the management and leadership literature. The various views of researchers on the subject are complied and brought to the fore to arrive at a comprehensive conclusion. ‘Empowered employees’ negates the need for managers- Critical Analysis The debate between employee empowerment and the role of managers can be most prominently viewed with regards to the hotel industry. Most employees in this sector are trained by managers to handle the guest incidents happening at the spot along with good judgement which includes being promptly, professional and courteous. This is aimed at improving services delivered to guests and consequently their satisfaction level, creating a better working environment for employees and creating time for managers to focus on other tasks and managerial activities. According to Brymer (2002) this is not only unusual and unnatural approach towards managing hotel activities but also surprising as the decision making authority accounts for the most important task that managers long for. At the first place the task for managing guests is quite a challenging task which could be difficult for workers or employees to manage. Researchers have regarded this as an indulgence in the way that employees would be inclined towards giving away too much without taking into consideration the costs or its impacts on the bottom line (Brymer, 2002, p.58). The argument has been countered by the fact that decentralization of decision making has been particularly successful in the quest services oriented organizations which includes hotels, restaurants and the like. This success has gradually created a step by step framework which has been used by the hospitality sector for the implementation of employee empowerment programs. These programs have been implemented for long in the hospitality sector and have achieved considerable success also (Brymer, 2002, p.58). Researchers have emphasized on the existence of trust on the part of the supervisors and managers on their subordinates to empower them which determines whether empowering employees would be successful or not. However, empowering employees to the desired organization responsibilities and decision making authority does not completely rule out the requirement or need for managers or the requirement of managerial activities though (Straiter, 2005, p.87). It is the managers’ responsibility to determine the competency, reliability and responsibility of the subordinates. Researchers like McAllister (1995), argues that this can be a complicated and uncertain process which is inherent in the managerial works and activities. It requires a great deal of trust from managers on their subordinates in order to attain coordinated actions (Straiter, 2005, p.87). Apart from the above fact a manager or a supervisor has a number of responsibilities other than overseeing the functions of subordinates on a continuous basis. In fact employee empowerment allows them to allocate more time on developmental activities instead of monitoring the performance of subordinates. According to Crockett, Gaetner, and Dufur (2001) has put forth the fact that trust plays the key role in establishing the position of both employees empowered as well as managers who empowers them (Straiter, 2005, p.87). This is because trust is the basis for effective delegation, a two-way communication process, the process of giving or receiving feedback and initiating team spirit in the system. The manager’s role is improved considerably through the delegation and relinquishing of different job responsibilities as it allows the manager to have greater visibility of operations. Thus employee empowerment further strengthens the position and requirement of managers or other organizational leaders. Without the role of organizational leaders or managers the works of employees would not be coordinated properly or directly correctly towards organizational effectiveness and efficiencies (Straiter, 2005, p.88). Apart from the impacts on the role of managers through employee empowerment, research has also focussed on the manager’s view on the subject. Research has been conducted to find the satisfaction level of managers due to the same. It is apprehended that the concept of employee empowerment could cause managers to think that they would eventually lose their powers (Light, 2004, p.55). However, research results show that it is not so. Researchers are of the opinion that power is a fundamentally relational concept for understanding and describing the perception of power as perceived by individuals. Researchers have explained the result using the social exchange theory. Blau (1964), have conceptualised the meaning of power as being the function of both the dependent as well as the interdependent nature of characteristics of participants existing within the system (Light, 2004, p.55). Thibault and Kelley (1959) have perceived power as that which directly depends on the performance of individuals or groups and their own activities and actions as well as the responses of others. Thus the satisfaction derived through power or control is not only dependant on an individual’s position and performance in the organization but rather the summation of the collaborative performance of the group members and their satisfaction in the process. This goes on to enlighten the fact that managers can be considered strong in their positions only of empowering employees generated motivation and satisfaction among group members or employees working under the manager. This would eventually reflect through the collective efforts of the employees empowered in their work performances and subsequently strengthen the role of managers who are directly responsible for the performance of his group. On the contrary, when employees are not given the power to take their own decisions with regards to their work activities, their performances are bound to suffer whose responsibilities eventually falls on the management or the managers. Thus it cannot be said that empowered employees negates the need for managers in the organization (Light, 2004, p.55). Corsun and Enz (1999) have explained the term structural empowerment which clearly demonstrates the importance of managers in the empowerment process. He has firstly made a distinction between structural empowerment and psychological empowerment. Under structural empowerment greater emphasis is provided to the management practices dealing with creating changes at the workplace (Light, 2004, p.82). On the other hand psychological empowerment means greater emphasis on the employee intrinsic motivation. Corsun and Enz (1999) have put forth that mere redesigning of jobs and restructuring management intensions are not enough for empowering employees. Structural empowerment includes influence of the management on employees in their regular work activities and tasks (Light, 2004, p.82). Taborda (2000) has clearly linked this kind of employee empowerment with hierarchical structure of the organization. Thus in this case the role of managers can in no way be ruled out or questioned. In fact Eylon and Bamberger (2000) have defined this kind of structural empowerment as a strategy which is used and implemented by the management and which works under the collaborative efforts of the management and executives on the whole. Under this kind of employee empowerment greater responsibility actually rests with the managers rather than the employees. Campbell (2000), have clearly stated that under this kind of structure the sole authority to organize, think and plan rests with the management and other organizational leaders. The role of employees is said to be much smaller even though they are empowered (Light, 2004, p.82). The employee is regarded as the representative of structural empowerment and required to carry out the tasks and activities which is commanded by the management. The extent or degree of empowerment that would be given to the employees also depends on the managers. This it cannot be said that employee empowerment negates the need for managers or diminishes their role in any extent. In fact employee empowerment enhances their responsibility even further because now he is additionally responsible for his own as well as his groups’ efforts in collaboration (Light, 2004, p.82). Views from the middle management The requirement and role of the middle management positions has also been the subject of extensive research lately. Several opinions have come forth as to the need for middle level management when empowering employees in organizations. Empirical evidence suggests that organizations undertaking employee empowerment have been the major cause of endangering the species known as ‘middle managers’. According to the results of a research conducted by the University of Phoenix in USA on middle managers and their views on empowerment, empowerment has been considered to be one of the most important environmental hazards faced by the middle management. People belonging to the middle management positions are often of the view that they are perceived by the subordinates and the top management as a communication blockage. However, the author Klagge (1998) is of the opinion that the entire process of empowering employees rests with the middle level management. This includes training and developing the skills of line employees, unifying the vision of the top management and the subordinates, directing the subordinate’s efforts towards the same. Most importantly, this middle level management serves as a two way communication process as well as coaching for the line employees as and when they are trained through the empowerment process. Klagge (1998) concludes by bringing the idea that this management can be truly used for bridging the gap existing between employees and top management for the implementation of empowering programs. All kinds of information arising from the top management can be efficiently communicated through the middle management and subsequently feedback from subordinates cam also be carried upwards via the same (Klagge, 1998). Conclusion A review of literature is conducted on the subject as to whether the concept of empowering employees negates the need for managers or other organizational leaders. Even though it is apprehended that empowering employees could diminish the manager’s roles and responsibilities substantially, researchers have viewed it differently. An example of the phenomenon in the hospitality sector reveals that empowering employees becomes inevitable and absolutely necessary as they are directly in contact with customers and must have the desired authority to take decisions when satisfying guests. However, this does not shake the position of managers in any way. This provides greater flexibility and time to managers to take care of other managerial activities. In fact the success of employee empowerment rests considerably on the existence of trust between the managers and subordinates. In the absence of mutual trust and admiration empowerment cannot be made successful or effective in the organization. In fact some researchers have even emphasised that managers play the key role of bridging the gap between top management and employees in the process of empowerment. Their responsibilities are greatly enhanced during the process. Empowering employees cannot be possible without the intervention and efforts of the managers. Some researchers have viewed the process of employee empowerment as a collaborative effort of both the management as well as subordinates. It is unified efforts of both parties which make the change process successful. However, despite the above views the some middle level management position holders believe that empowering employees can be a threat towards their position in the organization. They apprehend that their role might become redundant in the process. However researchers are still of the opinion that they can be used as the most important component of bridging the gap and enhancing communication processes between top management and employees in organizations. Reference Brymer, R. A. (2002). Employee Empowerment: A Guest-Driven Leadership Strategy. [Pdf]. Available at: http://www.unisanet.unisa.edu.au/Resources/lcb003/Supervision%20and%20Management/Course%20Resources/Employee%20EmpowermentBrymer.pdf. [Accessed on December 05, 2011]. Dubrin, A. J. (2008). Leadership Research Findings, Practice And Skills, 2008 Edition. Dreamtech Press. Klagge, J. (1998). The empowerment squeeze - views from the middle management position. Journal of Management Development, Vol. 17 Iss: 8, pp.548 – 558. [Pdf]. Available at: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=880329&show=abstract. [Accessed on December 05, 2011]. Light, J. N. (2004). The Relationships and effects of employee involvement, employee empowerment, and employee satisfaction by job-type in a large manufacturing environment. [Pdf]. Available at: http://www.drjohnlatham.com/Conceptual_Framework_files/Light_Joel_Dissertation.pdf. [Accessed on December 05, 2011]. Straiter, K. L. (2005). The Effects of Supervisors’ Trust of Subordinates and their Organization on Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment. International Journal of Leadership Studies, Vol. 1 Iss. 1, 2005, pp. 86-101. [Pdf]. Available at: http://www.regent.edu/acad/global/publications/ijls/new/vol1iss1/straiter/trust.pdf. [Accessed on December 05, 2011]. Bibliography Kleiman, L. A. (2004). Human resource management: a managerial tool for competitive advantage. Atomic Dog Pub. Potterfield, T. A. (1999). The business of employee empowerment: democracy and ideology in the workplace. Greenwood Publishing Group. Read More