Cycles of Failure, Mediocrity and Success and the Role of Staff Empowerment on Breaking the Cycle - Essay Example

? Cycles of Failure, Mediocrity and Success and the Role of Employee Empowerment in Breaking the Cycle inserts his/her InsertsInstitution’s name Abstract This paper explores the concept of cycle of failure, mediocrity and success in the light of existing literature from various journals and books. Furthermore, it attempts to explore the notion of employee empowerment as defined by researchers. The articles, however, differ in their explanation of the concept of empowerment. From the various explanations a broad definition of empowerment comes to the delegation of information, resources and decision-making power to employees in an organization. This paper examines the concept of employee empowerment in critical depth by examining the various managerial and organizational forces that can throttle the existence of an empowered workforce. The effect of empowerment on the three cycles is thoroughly examined in this process followed by conclusion and recommendations. Keywords: cycle of failure, cycle of mediocrity, cycle of success, empowerment Cycles of Failure, Mediocrity and Success and the Role of Employee Empowerment in Breaking the Cycle Literature Review and Discussion The role of employee motivation in generating customer satisfaction has been traditionally studied in the context of employees within the service sector. This is because from the company’s perspective frontline interactions with customers are a significant way of attaining competitive advantage and differentiating oneself (Lovelock, Wirtz, & Chatterjee, 2007). Hence, employees dealing in frontline work are expected to anticipate the needs of customers, deliver the service based on customized needs and build long term, personalized relationships with the customers. Thus, staff empowerment is a crucial aspect of maintaining employee motivation and customer loyalty. From the above it follows that poor working environment can translate into poor customer service with employees dealing with their customers the way their managers treat them. Furthermore, employee turnover is attributed to what is known as the “cycle of failure” (Lovelock, Wirtz, & Chatterjee, 2007). In other cases, some degree of job security is present but there is little room for practicing one’s own initiatives. This situation arises from the lack of empowerment and is termed as the “cycle of mediocrity” (Lovelock, Wirtz, & Chatterjee, 2007). However, by employing the right tools of empowerment, the management of any company can develop a positive attitude in service employees which is known as “cycle of success” (Lovelock, Wirtz, & Chatterjee, 2007). The “cycle of failure” is attributed to the delegation of monotonous, mundane tasks to cheaply hired and untrained employees by employing the division of labor philosophy. This cycle is split into two cycles that work simultaneously. The first one involves failure with workers and the second one involves failure with customers. The cycle of failure pertaining to employees involves working on tasks requiring little or no skills and little scope for personal control. The output is strictly controlled by technology and emphasis is on following the rules as opposed to focusing on the quality of customer service. It is a commonplace to hear management attributing this failure to shortage of skilled labor, dearth of motivated employees in the labor market and the fact that high costs of skilled labor would have to be borne by customers in the form of high prices (Lovelock, Wirtz, & Chatterjee, 2007). Mostly companies consider training as a cost (and not an investment) and fear that it will result in wastage of funds if the employee walks away after acquiring the training (Lovelock, Wirtz, & Chatterjee, 2007). Failure with customers is associated with the lack of a consistent and clear image of the company to the customers which occurs because of changing faces due to high employee turnover. Also companies focus too much on the attraction of new customers as opposed to the retention of existing ones which results in disgruntled customers and a loss of loyal customer base (Lovelock, Wirtz, & Chatterjee, 2007). The cycle of mediocrity arises out of little scope for employees’ performance improvement. Service is often standardized (as opposed to being customized) and strict rules indicate the focus on efficiency. Seniority is often rewarded and work tasks are often linked with the grade of the employee. Flexibility is looked down upon and customized service based on employees’ personal initiative is not appreciated (Lovelock, Wirtz, & Chatterjee, 2007). This directly gives birth to frustrated employees who may refuse to accommodate customers simply because they do not have sufficient authority to do so. As customers become offended, employees too feel pressurized as they have little control over the situation. As a result, they often become indifferent to such frustrated customers or resort to treating them with impoliteness (Lovelock, Wirtz, & Chatterjee, 2007). The cycle becomes a vicious one as customer complaints about poor employee service perpetuate an empathic and defensive staff (Lovelock, Wirtz, & Chatterjee, 2007). Thus, co operation between the company and customers reaches its lowest levels as frustration reaches its peak. The ideal model for any company is to maintain a cycle of success. In this cycle employees are trained and given meaningful, enriched tasks along with sufficient authority to execute personal initiative during customer interactions (Lovelock, Wirtz, & Chatterjee, 2007). This produces happier, satisfied workers who enjoy personal freedom along with competitive salaries to sustain their motivation. Customers who repeatedly interact with the same workers are also inclined to be loyal towards the company (Lovelock, Wirtz, & Chatterjee, 2007). This results in greater margins since the cost of retaining existing customers is far less than that of attracting new ones. In order to maintain the cycle of success the notion of empowerment is stressed. The concept of empowerment is difficult to define simply because it differs with people and context. Nevertheless, it is broadly attributed to the delegation of authority to subordinates in an organization. However, recent studies indicate that empowerment encompasses much more than mere delegation of decision making power. The perspectives of both Block and Caudron point to the fact that employees feel empowered when the organizational goals are explicitly defined, performance evaluation and system of rewards is fair and viewed as fair and employees feel they have control over the tasks they are doing and are committed to do the job (Block, 1987). Bowen defines empowerment as a situation where information, power and rewards are disseminated across the organization (Bowen & Lawler, 1992). Employee empowerment is of crucial importance to organizations because by sharing power organizations build it. Empowered employees also rank high on various performance indicators including work-life balance. Research indicates that organizations that enable empowerment gain from improvements in service, quality, productivity and financial performance (Ongori, 2009). Service organizations particularly benefit from empowerment as empowered employees are more responsive to customers’ queries and complaints and treat customers in a warm and friendly manner. Furthermore, the increased trust and information about current performance also leads to the setting of more challenging goals by employees. Empowered employees also generate creative ideas that enable companies to progress faster than their competitors. Organizations may achieve an empowered workforce by adopting a culture that values change, flexibility and tolerance for failure. According to Malone (1997), managers should become mentors and guide employees about solving their problems (Malone, 1997). Responsibilities must also be delegated by managers to subordinates. Such assistance breeds satisfaction amongst employees who are more motivated to come up to their supervisors’ expectations. Another way to boost empowerment is to enable a participative culture whereby employees see their ideas contributing to the organization in some way. According to Parker and Slaughter, empowered employees are a product of management-by-stress policy whereby people and systems are always encouraged and stressed to do more (Parker & Slaughter, 1995). However, this may be criticized as leading to too much stress which defeats the very purpose of empowerment (that is satisfied employees). A significant tool of achieving employee empowerment is to enable enriched, involving jobs that nurture employees’ interest and uphold their motivation to work. To this end, both intrinsic and extrinsic rewards are crucial to sustaining employee empowerment. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs best explains the varying physiological, social, esteem and psychological needs of employees as they progress in their careers. Managers must be careful not to neglect the higher order needs that pertain to employees’ sense of belonging and self-actualization. Social interactions (both on and the off the job) are crucial to maintaining healthy working relationships with employees. Employees must never feel that they are being treated as a cost to be minimized (which is the traditional managerial mindset). They must always be treated as assets. Intrinsic rewards, therefore, derive from the meaningfulness of the job and the contribution that the employee is able to make to the organization (Ongori, 2009). Therefore, it is not surprising that the notions of job rotation, enlargement and enrichment stress upon the completion of “whole” jobs from start to end rather than fragmented tasks. Furthermore, the role of effective leadership has also been stressed as being crucial to the sustenance of employee empowerment. Effective leaders are able to capitalize on the creative ideas of employees for the benefit of the organization, voice their unexpressed concerns and inspire employees by setting a role model for them. Hence, continuous investment in training and development is quintessential to the personal and professional development of employees which makes them feel an important part of the organization. It is very easy for managers to set high targets and bring in innovative ideas to work upon but what is more important is to get employees to follow these with commitment and dedication (Ongori, 2009). Leaders who merely set targets and coerce employees to fulfill them throttle the sustenance of employee empowerment. According to researchers, an employee empowerment program must possess several key ingredients to ensure its success. Most importantly, managers must possess the mindset to support the program (Ongori, 2009). However, this is not an easy task. Too often managers feel insecure from the fact that empowered employees may perform better than them and steal the show. Thus, these managers may remain reluctant in delegating decision making authority to their subordinates and insist on maintaining tight controls. Therefore, managers often do lip service when they talk about employee empowerment (Ongori, 2009). Organizational systems and procedures may conflict with the philosophy of employee empowerment making it self-defeating. Many organizations vow to pursue employee empowerment; however, they fail to provide employees the access to information, training and opportunities for learning that enhances employees’ potential (Ongori, 2009). They often expect employees to make good decisions in the first instance without realizing that employees have been denied of the opportunities that could enhance their decision making potential. Mostly, this initiative fails to flourish beyond the paper for these reasons. Also, even if managers are serious about this initiative, the notion of empowerment remains vague to the organizational members and the decision making areas are not explicitly defined. According to researchers, empowerment encompasses the accomplishment of tasks that need to be executed by employees as opposed to what they are merely told to do (Ongori, 2009). Often managers also lack trust in their subordinates that is complementary to the achievement of employee empowerment. They categorize workers as Theory X ones by labeling them as immature, inexperienced or inaptly trained for decision making. Furthermore, management may indicate a lack of confidence in employees by its inclination to blame employees for all failures and bad results. This gives birth to a blame game whereby management fails to take responsibility for its failures and puts the blame on employees. This gives birth to a battlefield and throttles the basic idea of employee empowerment. Most employee empowerment programs fail due to deep-rooted and rigid employee attitudes. Although employees complain about lack of decision making power or participation, they may become resistant when empowerment mechanisms are put in place simply because they are used to the status quo (of being dictated and controlled). Therefore, revamping the organizational structure and management philosophy is no easy task. Employee attitudes have been established over the years and may not be easily altered. Another issue that hampers employee empowerment is that of poor communication between the management and employees. Unless the management informs its subordinates that they have access to additional resources such an attempt is futile (Ongori, 2009). It is more important for management to communicate the additional responsibilities and powers of employees than merely altering the systems and resources. It is important to stress on the fact that empowerment has a crucial role to play in the development and sustenance of a positive mindset amongst the workforce. Simply put, empowerment enables organizations to break the negative cycles of failure and mediocrity and accomplish the positive cycle of success. According to Bowen and Lawler, employees who are empowered develop positive feelings about their work and are keener to offer service to customers (Bowen & Lawler, 1992). Since they enthusiastically respond to customer needs they mostly end up getting a positive feedback from customers which reinforces their satisfaction with the job. Hence, the cycle of failure is broken since empowerment gives precedence to quality of service rather than written rules and procedures. Since employees are free to make their own decisions they can cater to customer needs quickly which leaves customers satisfied as well. The company, therefore, benefits from an empowered workforce which results in fewer turnovers, absences and leaves as well as higher productivity of employees. This leads to lower costs of hiring, training and recruitment (Lovelock, Wirtz, & Chatterjee, 2007). Furthermore, as employees stay loyal to the company their productivity increases through on-the-job learning and experience. This results in higher productivity than would be possible with new and inexperienced personnel (Lovelock, Wirtz, & Chatterjee, 2007). The company also benefits from customers who spread positive word about the company through word of mouth which reduces the promotional and marketing costs of the company greatly. Furthermore, as customers remain loyal to the company, the organization is saved from the loss of sales that would result if customers went elsewhere. In light of the above analysis it is important to note that the performance of frontline staff is crucial in service management. The performance of staff incorporates both the ability and inclination to do the job. In order to enhance the level of customer service it is imperative that the organization embarks on a comprehensive recruitment process that focuses on the hiring and empowerment of the right people who have a strategic fit with the organization (Lovelock, Wirtz, & Chatterjee, 2007). This is often referred to as the “wheel of successful HR” (Lovelock, Wirtz, & Chatterjee, 2007). The process involves becoming the market leader and the preferred employer for highly talented people, empowering them with the necessary information and decision making authority and evaluating their performance through performance management systems (Lovelock, Wirtz, & Chatterjee, 2007). Conclusion and Recommendations To conclude, management must actively believe in the philosophy of empowerment before implementing it. As discussed, most attempts at promoting employee empowerment fail due to half-hearted attempts by management. Mere lip service defeats the purpose of empowerment. Considering that the notion of empowerment is difficult to define, the problem compounds when management fails to strictly define the boundaries of empowerment. Finally, empowerment should not be considered as an instant, quick fix to breaking the negative cycles of failure and mediocrity. Clearly, the benefits of empowerment may take a long time to realize and may not be clearly evident. It is the management’s responsibility to constantly monitor employee and company performance in order to observe the effects of empowerment on employee turnover, customer satisfaction, profitability and so on. References Block, P. (1987). The empowerment manager: Positive political skills at work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Bowen, D. E., & Lawler, E. E. (1992). Empowerment of service workers: What, why, how and when. Sloan Management Review , 31-39. Lovelock, C., Wirtz, J., & Chatterjee, J. (2007). Services Marketing. New Delhi: Dorling Kindersley Pvt. Ltd. Malone, T. (1997). Is "empowerment" just a fad? Control, decision making and IT. Sloan Management Review , 23-35. Ongori, H. (2009). Managing behind the scenes: A view point on employee empowerment. African Journal of Business Management , 9-15. Parker, M., & Slaughter, P. (1995). Unions & management by stress. In S. Babson, Lean Work: Empowerment and Exploitation in theGlobal Auto Industry (pp. 41-53). Detroit: Wayne State University Press. Read More