Hawthorne Findings Concerning the Formation of Informal Groups and Their Relevance in the Modern Era - Coursework Example

HAWTHORNE STUDIES By Location In 1924, certain experiments at the Hawthorne Company served to bring about multiple changes in the perspectives defining organizational behaviour. Notably, prior to the experiments, there existed a limited understanding of issues dealing with the workplace. The objective of the experiments sought to identify the pertinent relationship between the working conditions and the performance of the employees. However, due to the realization that employee productivity depended on multiple factors, the experiments extended for several years. Evidently, the experiments established certain aspects concerning some of the factors that determined employee productivity. The Hawthorne findings prompted the salient need for advanced research. However, these findings received a level of criticism from people who refuted the highlighted findings. Despite such criticism, the Hawthorne findings cannot receive any form of underestimation because they have exerted salient impacts of management, organizational behaviour, and motivation theories. This paper will consider Hawthorne findings concerning the formation of informal groups and their relevance in the modern era. Hawthorne studies emerged during a time when only few scholars had endeavoured to understand the factors that affected employee productivity. Prior to these experiments, scientific management had offered a minimal understanding of the effect of employee productivity. Although the initial objective of the studies was to establish the existing relationship between the salient working conditions and productivity, the studies prompted further research of different aspects. The set of six studies served to reveal that a non-significant relationship existed between the workplace conditions and the employee productivity. However, the experiments yielded intriguing findings concerning the formation of informal groups (Eriksson-Zetterquist, Müllern, & Styhre 2011, p. 78). According to the Hawthorne studies, informal organizations that emerge within the workplace have a greater potential of affecting the productivity level that the formal organization. The informal organization results from the existing relationships between the supervisors and their subordinates. The informal groups that emanate from the interactions of the employees with their coworkers, managers, and supervisors serve to define the informal organization. Such informal groups usually define certain norms in a bid to establish a bridging front between individual needs and the institutional goals. These norms have an indomitable potential to affect the level of productivity. This served to highlight that attitudes exhibited by an individual may offer a misguided insinuation. This is because social factors, defined by the norms of the informal groups, are more critical when making job predictions. Informal work group norms consist of a range of rules that define the group attitude, and behavioural standards, although they are not recognized by the formal organization. However, these informal rules are fundamental aspects in determining the level of productivity in the workplace. These norms exhibit a level of stability, and are the reasons why some employees may resist formal change. Many of the members in the group conform to the standards defined by the informal norms. New employees adjust to the informal organization, and begin to conform to the unwritten rules defining the group. Notably, managers and supervisors who choose to overlook such norms face challenges in their position (Schermerhorn 2010, p. 87). The development of the informal norms may be platform targeted to remedy some of the setbacks evident in the formal organization. During times when the formal organization undertakes radical measures, the informal norms may be preserved by the employees, but may serve to hinder the acceptance of necessary formal changes. The ‘majority effect’ concept is a definitive aspect of the informal organization, and overrides personal opinion or individual capacities. Employees belonging to an informal group adopt the perspectives that conform to the group norms, and they rarely exhibit a personal evaluation and consideration of issues. Evidently, inform, al group norms are of critical consideration as the Hawthorne studies revealed. These norms affect the level of productivity because they minimize the significance of individual capabilities. Therefore, supervisors and managers have to understand the perception of the employees in a bid to decipher the norms. This is critical because compulsion to adhere to any formal rule that contravenes the group norms only results to conflict. Conflicts emerge because of the contradicting interests of the informal and formal organization. The strength and resilience of group norms may dissuade employees from exhibiting commitment to the formal organizational goals. This has potential of affecting production adversely. In addition, viewing employees as machinery appendages without the relevant consideration of their sentiments and perceptions is a precondition to low productivity. Hawthorne studies served to place emphasis on the need to adopt a different view of employees. Previously, the view had considered employees as appendages, a factor that that presented negative effects. From the human approach theories developed from this finding, it became evident that employees deserved a dignified view (Schermerhorn 2010, p. 87). Moreover, Hawthorne studies revealed that the existence of informal group norms and their significance in productivity serve to qualify the workplace as a social system. Similar to other social systems where social factors and theories apply, the quality of relationships in the workplace determines the level of productivity (King & Lawley 2012, p. 32). As the experiment highlighted, social factors defining the workplace were of a higher significance than improved working conditions. This placed emphasis on the need for a shift in focus to establishing healthy relationships within the workplace, and ensuring that social factors affect productivity positively. Moreover, the Hawthorne studies revealed that both prestige and power within the workplace are critical factors in maintaining the structure of the pertinent social system. Since findings suggested that the workplace is a social system, it became evident that communication was a critical aspect that determined productivity. Evidently, the level of communication determined the motivation with which employees worked. For example, offering employees an opportunity of self-expression and seeking feedback from them served to dignify them. The dignified feeling served to increase productivity as the employees felt appreciated. The effect of attention on employers has been described as ‘Hawthorne effect’. This effect served as a drive for the Hawthorne researchers to extend their research beyond the premeditated period. Notably, the findings altered the expectations of effective supervision (Jex & Britt 2008, p. 54). Supervisors who understood the need for effective communication were likely to foster increased productivity. The Hawthorne findings illuminated aspects that previous research had not addressed. The finding triggered the development of research in a diverse range of aspects. Hawthorne studies gave rise to the development of organizational theory, client-centred therapy, research methodologies, and theories surrounding employee motivation and empowerment. Notably, prior to these studies, research methodologies were new concepts (Schermerhorn 2010, p. 53). The researchers carrying out the experiments ventured into interviewing the employees, a data collection method that had not been in use previously. Evidently, the years that followed were marked by rigorous research into management and leadership styles as well as on the urgency to understand employee motivation and empowerment. Although the experiments had highlighted the efficiency of introducing an incentive system as one of the intrinsic job factors that served to increase productivity, there was a salient need for establishing a concrete explanation of how motivation worked. Relevance of Hawthorne studies in the modern era Although the Hawthorne studies faced a level of criticism, the esteem accorded to the findings was remarkable. Without doubt, many of the findings defined aspects that constituted the complex factors that defined employee productivity. In any case, these findings gave rise to the research that yielded the modern theories defining organizational behaviour. Although advanced criticism of limited efficiency of the methodology used as well as the perceptions adopted, have been pinpointed as a factor that affected the credibility of the findings, they still are relevant (Khan 2009, p. 76). Despite the radical changes in the theoretical frameworks defining the workplaces, informal organizations still exist. Evidently, research has revealed that workplace informal groups still exist, with the salient potential of affecting productivity. This explains why many organizations have adopted various strategies of ensuring that employees participate in decision-making. Moreover, the development of employee motivation theories and modern organizational theories had their basis of the Hawthorne studies. These theories have only served to underpin the finding described from the Hawthorne experiment. The use of incentives has remained a common concept in motivating employees. The need for employees to bridge the gap between the organizational goals and personal needs as described in the Hawthorne findings form the basis for employee empowerment and motivation towards self-actualization. The same need has altered the perception of management (Gaspar 2006, p. 65). Therefore, new management styles have been developed that target to address the social needs of employees. These factors only ascertain the evident relevance of Hawthorne findings in the modern workplace. Although research has served to explain many of the complex factors affecting the level of productivity, it is evident that informal group norms are critical determinants of productivity. Conclusion Evidently, the Hawthorne studies of the 1924 revealed important findings about the workplace. The six studies carried out served to highlight the fact that complex factors affected the level of productivity in the workplace. The existence of the informal organization defined by group norms became evident. After these findings were released, it prompted research into different fields. Apparently, the findings exhibit a level of relevance in the modern day, with the emphasis placed on the role of motivation, effective communication, and effective management styles. Bibliography Eriksson-zetterquist, U Müllern, T. & Styhre, A 2011, Organization theory: a practice-based approach. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Gaspar, JE 2006, Introduction to business, Boston, MA, Houghton Mifflin Co. Jex, M. & Britt, TW 2008, Organizational psychology a scientist-practitioner approach, Hoboken, N.J., John Wiley & Sons. http://site.ebrary.com/id/10296293. Khan, H 2009, Organisational Behavior. King, D. & Lawley, S 2012,  Organizational behaviour. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Schermerhorn, JR 2010, Management, Hoboken, N.J., John Wiley. http://www.contentreserve.com/TitleInfo.asp?ID={F857C528-0E8C-40A5-AE41-6A13BDBA9C25}&Format=410. Read More