Employee Theft as a Reaction to Underpayment Equity - Essay Example

Alternative intervention on employee theft in the workplace Name Unit Institution Tutor Date Introduction One method of building on the information that we already have is through reviewing the works of the other practitioners in our field of study. This can be attained through the application of systematic approaches to acquiring, confirming and developing on the information that is already contained. This allows the use of updated information when it comes to the actual field practice. This paper seeks to review the article written by Greenberg (1990) titled Employee theft as a reaction to underpayment equity: the hidden costs of pay cuts published in the Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 561-568. The paper will provide an alternative intervention to the one proposed by Greenberg on ways of detecting and averting theft in the workplace as result of pay cuts. Summary of general aim of intervention The general aim of the intervention was to find out whether the rate of theft among employees increased as a result of pay cuts, when compared with control groups, or pre or post-reduction pay periods. Dependent variable(s) The dependent variable changes as a result of the independent variable. This means that the dependent variables solely dependents on the independent variables. In an experiment, there may be more than one dependent variable. In our study, the dependent variable is employee theft, which was determined by the change in the independent variable (reduction in employees pay by 15 percent). This was measured by the use of the firm’s accounting department’s standard formula used for computing shrinkage. Through this formula, percentages of inventory including supplies and tools among others which were uncounted for was yielded. This was linked to sales, use in the operation of the firm, wastes and normal depreciation. Company representatives were assigned the duty of obtaining these measures during non-work hours every week during the period of the study. Individuals who were responsible for taking the inventory were cognizant of any justifiable factors which contributed to accounted-for modifications in the levels of inventory including supplies employed during various projects, and shipments received amongst others. However, these individuals were not conscious of the experimental hypothesis. The study also used other measures such as questionnaire measure, pay basis measure and pay equity measure. The questionnaire measures were necessitated in order to establish the soundness of the research and to aid in the interpretation of the data. Pay basis measure was employed to offer a check on the soundness of the payment-group variable, while the pay equity on the other hand, was used to measure the degree of employees satisfaction with their pay. Independent variable The independent variable is the variable which is controlled or changed by the researcher in order to carry out the study. Research has indicated that any valid experiment should have only one independent variable. In our study, the independent variable is the temporary reduction in pay by 15 percent for employees working in Plant A and plant B, whilst plant C functioned as a control condition as the pay cuts were not authorized. Theoretical rationale underlying the intervention Employee theft has received various explanations from scientists. Some theories put forth that employee theft is linked with endeavors to alleviate financial pressure, moral laxity, subsistence of norms that tolerate theft and expression of work dissatisfaction. Recent studies indicate that employee theft is linked with factors such as employee attitude; feeling of exploitation and such staffs try to correct the views of injustice and inequity. This intervention is based on equity theory. The theory states that employees who feel as if they are exploited by the company by being inequitably underpaid always tend to increase the level of rewards they are paid. The basis of this claim is that employee theft is a particular response to underpayment unfairness and comprises endeavors to bring results into line with existing principles of fair pay. However, research has indicated that where explanations and justifications are offered regarding inequitable states, there are high possibilities of reduction in perceptions of inequity. Furthermore, explanations for negative results assist in reducing individuals’ responses to those outcomes. However, these explanations must be accurate, complete and should be offered in a socially and sensitive way. In this study, it was assumed that, employee feeling of inequity could have been mitigated if adequate information regarding reduction in pay was adequately explained. Summary of design and method The study made use of nonunion staffs to act as participants. These employees, who were to work for a period of 30 consecutive weeks, were based in three manufacturing companies located in diverse sections of the Midwestern United States but owned by one parental firm. The average age of the staffs was m=28.5 years, education level, m=11.2 years, and tenure with the firm m=3.2 years all of which did not considerably vary amongst the three plants. The total number of staffs employed in all plants was 183. Plant A hired 64 workers in various job categories, who varied depending with sex and job type, whilst nearly identical proportions in terms of sex and job type subsisted in plant B which employed 53 workers and plant C which hired 66 employees. However, only 143 employees were able to complete their questionnaires, (55 from plant A, 30 from plant B and 58 from plant C, whilst the rest (40) either failed to complete the questionnaires, whereas others quitted their jobs. The study employed randomized experiment design which made it possible to apply experimental manipulations. The assessment from the three plants was carried out separately. The assignment of Plant A to one experimental condition and Plant B to another experimental condition was determined randomly. On the other hand, the assignment to the control group was determined by the parent firm’s decision that reduced pays were not required in Plant C. In plant A, adequate explanation regarding the pay cut was provided and the basis for reducing the employees pay was also thoroughly explained ad justified by the company’s president. Plant B on the other hand acted as the location for inadequate explanation condition, whereby the vice president told the workers that their pay was to be cut by 15percent without any explanation or justification. In plant C, no pay cuts were authorized; it acted as the studies control condition. The setting of the study was a workplace. Summary of main analysis procedures used The main analysis included employee theft rate, questionnaire responses and turnover. The analyses of the levels of staff theft were founded on a mixed-design ANOVA. In this, response period was the within-subject variable, payment group was the between-subjects variable, and the ten weekly levels of theft within every cell comprised the data. A considerable Payment Period X Response Period interface was found, F (4, 56) = 9.66, p < .001. Simple effects tests were carried out in every payment group to find out if the means varied considerably across response periods. Every major effect was pursued with the Tukey honestly significant difference (HSD) formula. Additionally, tests for quadratic trend components were carried out by the use of orthogonal polynomials. Similar to employee theft measure, response to pay equity and pay basis questionnaires were analyzed by the use of ANOVA designs. For these variables nevertheless, the data consisted of personal responses to the totaled items comprising every questionnaire within every cell. Summary of findings and conclusions Evidently, the information supports the assumption from equity theory which states that employees who experience underpayment inequity may attempt to remedy this by increasing their inputs- in the current study, by stealing from their employer. In this case, whilst the employees’ pay was cut by 15 percent, they felt underpaid and indeed, stole more than twice as compared to when they felt fairly paid. The study offers two different interpretations of the theft information obtained, both of which are reliable with the equity theory. First of all, there are possibilities that the pay cuts made workers to feel frustrated and angry, which in turn motivated the violent actions of theft. This likelihood is in line with current research findings which reveal that reducing employee pay is lined with negative effective responses to company’s authorities and that rise in vandalism associate with views of mistreatment from the management. This means that workers actions of deviance are motivated by their ideas that their bosses defaulted on their responsibilities to them by cutting their pay. Employee theft can also be interpreted as direct endeavors to make right underpayment inequities through the adjustment of balance of valued resources between the employees and the particular source of unfairness. The current data also indicates a vital moderator of the trend to steal in order to reinstate equity with the employers. This includes the application of sufficient explanation for the pay reduction. It is true from this that, the reductions in pay that were adequately explained in a caring and honest way were not perceived by the staffs as being inequitable compared to reduction in pays which were not carefully explained. Consequently, responses to carefully and adequately explained pay cuts were less severe, that is, the rates of theft were lower. These findings are in line with developing studies which indicate that the employment of sufficiently reasoned explanations provided with interpersonal sensitivity have a tendency of reducing the negative impacts linked with the data itself. In the current study, the explanations offered were evidently successful in mitigating costs both to the employers based on turnover and theft, and the employees based on inequity distress. From this we can conclude that, explaining to the employees adequately regarding the pay cuts can mitigate potentially costly responses to feelings of underpayment unfairness. However, to be effective, such explanations should be perceived as genuine, honest, and non-manipulative. Alternative intervention The alternative intervention procedure that will be used in this case to achieve a similar end is reduced productivity as a response to elimination in workplace learning. Evidently, workplace learning is deemed as one of the most important factors that can result to increased productivity (Lancaster, 2009). Studies have revealed that workplace learning is linked to various features including increased skills and competencies, employee motivation, ability to perform tasks in a smarter, better and faster manner, worker retention and attraction of highly caliber staff into the workplace, innovation and change, and building of organization’s image all of which results to increased performance and overall productivity of the company (Lancaster, 2009). Studies have indicated that, companies which offer workplace learning to their workers are more competitive and productive compared to others in which workplace learning is not encouraged. Independent variable In this case the variable that is being manipulated by the researcher is workplace learning. As a result, workplace learning will act as the independent variable. It is the elimination in workplace learning that will cause a change in the firm’s productivity in terms of output and profitability. Dependent variable In this case, the dependent variable is reduction in the company’s productivity. Evidently, elimination of workplace learning results to reduced skills and competencies required to perform a certain task and work productively, and most of all reduced motivation amongst employee. Obviously, more motivated personnel have a tendency of producing greater output compared to de-motivated ones. The levels of productivity will be measured based on output per week per worker (Saari, 2006). Company representatives will be assigned the duty of obtaining these measures during non-work hours every week during the period of the study. The employees under study will also be supposed to submit weekly performance checks to the company representative at the end of every week. In order to ensure efficiency of the study, the sales department will be given the responsibility of taking weekly stock. This means that the department will account for sales made every week plus the remaining stock in order to obtain total output that will be produced in such a particular week. Method The study will make use of the company employees who will act as the participants. The numbers of participant who will be employed are 150, of whom 120 will be males and the rest females. The average age of the workers was m=32.5 years, education level, m=10.1 years, and tenure with the firm m=4.1 years. The study will last for a period of 36 weeks as this will be deemed a sufficient time in which the employee can react to the elimination of workplace learning. The study will take place in a workplace environment. These employees will be randomly chosen from three manufacturing plants based in different locations but owned by one parent company. An equal number of 50 employees will be chosen from plant A, B and C. In plant A, adequate explanation regarding the elimination in training will be offered by the company’s president in a sound manner. Such reasons including high costs of training and increased work loads will be linked to this. Also the employees will be encouraged to use other means of learning including online learning during their free times. In plant B, no explanations regarding the elimination of workplace learning will be provided whilst plant C will act as a control condition as workplace learning will continue as before. The study will make use of the productivity theory. In this theory, the level of a firm’s productivity is dependent on many factors including employee motivation, training, use of efficient inputs, and work environment among others (Saari, 2006). Research has revealed that, companies which try to improve their employee morale by offering enough training to offer such employees with sufficient skills and knowledge always emerge successful (Saari, 2006). Evaluation In order to evaluate the effectiveness of this intervention procedure, the researcher will make use of study design and statistical analyses. Study design In this case, quasi-experiment design will be used. This is based on the fact that, random assignment is not used and also there are multiple measures or control group. The respondents will be chosen randomly from the three plants and assessments from the three plants will be carried out separately. Statistical analysis Statistical analysis will be employed in order to calculate the possibilities that variations bigger than those observed may be as a result of prospect. In case such a possibility is high, chance may then be used as the explanation, whereas, if it is low, the explanation may be based on a treatment effect. The main analysis will include the levels of reduction in the firm’s productivity and questionnaire responses. In this case, the data will be analyzed by the use of ANOVA (analysis of variance) (Rosenthal, and Rosnow, 1991). This is due to the fact that this is quantitative data and there are more than two groups being focused on (Rosenthal, and Rosnow, 1991). The findings from this study will be similar to those of the current experiment. It is true that the levels of productivity in Plant B in which adequate information regarding elimination in workplace learning will not be offered will decline moderately during the 36 week period. In plant A however, there will be not much reaction to the elimination in training as the employees will be able to understand the reasons behind cut in workplace learning, therefore, they will be able to initiate other measures to add up to their skills and knowledge. This means that the levels of productivity will be lowly affected. In general we can conclude that, explaining to the employees adequately and soundly regarding temporary elimination in workplace learning may reduce the possibilities of decline in a company’s productivity which will benefit both the employees themselves and the company in general. References Lancaster, D. (2009). ASEM Conference: Lifelong Learning: e-Learning and Workplace Learning. Bangkok, Thailand. Rosenthal, R., & Rosnow, R. L. (1991). Essentials of behavioral research: Methods and data analysis (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc. Saari, S. (2006). Productivity. Theory and Measurement in Business. Productivity Handbook (In Finnish). MIDO OY. pp. 272. Read More