Could Work Be Made More Satisfying and Participatory - Essay Example

Could work be made more satisfying and participatory? al Affiliation) Making work more participatory and satisfying hasbeen a major challenge for most employers. Due to globalization, the world is slowly changing into one large boundary less market. Organizations have therefore to struggle to maintain a competitive edge over their rivals; this has however resulted in increased difficulty to make work more satisfying and participatory to the employee (Woodcock, 1944). The situation in many workplaces today requires that an employee should strive to the best performance on the job. However, most of the employees often feel as if they are being excessively being hassled. The employees thus develop stress and begin to find work less satisfying (Smith & Bullock, 2007). This results in a negative attitude towards participating in work related activities. The employee’s contribution towards any form of work then slowly begins to diminish and finally they fade away completely. A case in point is when the employees develop some form of organizational culture that contravenes the formal regulations that guide the workplace. This will result in a serious conflict with the management (Krahn et al .2010, P. 247-263). The employees then subconsciously withdraw all their input from the organization; they find the organization unworthy of their dedication and energy. The employees now remain in employment just to fulfill their obligations but no longer feel any attachment to the organization. At this stage, the employer begins to panic, but refuses to acknowledge responsibility for making the work place unfulfilling to work in. The boss then resorts to sterner measures and makes regulations at the work place stricter. This discourages the employees even more from taking part in activities at the work place (Smith & Bullock, 2007). The employer and employees within an organization have varied goals within a firm. Though the roles are varied, both are very significant to the organization. The employer main aim is to generate maximum profit from the venture (Chmiel, 2009).The workers task, however, is to try to make as much moneys as possible while making a positive contribution to the work place. This results in a tag of war as participants struggle to meet their objectives. At times when the employees develop their own organizational culture, their goals may vary significantly from those of the employer (Krahn et al .2010, P. 223-246). Management will view this as a form of resistance and will want to regulate the activities of the employees. Here the management is not able to make employees conform to the set culture of the organization, thus a conflict will result. The management however, fails due to the inability to identify that some sort of informal organization is coming up within the organization so that they are able to deal with the problem by making employees understand and appreciate their roles more (Krahn et al .2010, P. 223-246). The critical issue though is can both parties achieve their main desires in a mutually advantageous manner. Because of this varied ambitions both parties have different motivations behind the quest for work reform. The employer seeks to fully exploit and combine all the factors of production to make maximum profit. The worker aim is to have a favorable working environment that allows for innovation and personal growth. Employee’s skills should then be fully utilized as they get maximum reward for their efforts. A major cause of lack of job satisfaction occurs when the employer in an effort to maximize profits make the working conditions fail to meet the workers expectations. This will include employing techniques like use of assembly lines where the employee does the same task time after time, this results in employee failure to make maximum contribution as talents and abilities are not fully exploited(Smith & Bullock, 2007 ).They worker is also not given the opportunity to give any valuable input to the project. This is what causes the employee to begin begrudging the work and will choose to work partially towards attainment of the organizations goal (Bellamy, 1998). Work can be made to be more satisfying and participatory. This will require that the employees work in a favorable environment. The employer on the other had obtains maximum returns from the investment. For employees to develop a feeling that their work is being fully appreciated would require a variety of measures. For assembly line and industrial workers the management can adopt employee rotation (Krahn et al .2010, P. 317-328). A worker is posted somewhere for a particular period before, then they are moved to another section (Chmiel, 2009). This will give all employee room to determine the work location where their skills are most utilized. Once an employee indentifies this position, the employee will feel more satisfied. The worker then has a choice of whether to maintain the position or continue the rotation (Krahn et al, 2010). The satisfied employee will be able to feel that his skills are properly being utilized and the money being paid is the reward of this skill. The work thus becomes more satisfying and participatory. This will increase the employees’ productivity without any additional incentive. Increased productivity at no cost to the employer will also be quite beneficial to the employ. They employer may thus increase the company’s earnings with no additional investment. The employer could also boost satisfaction and level of participation through the inclusion of employee’s views on matters production (Krahn et al .2010, P. 317-328). In the production, process if an employee would feel that they have a good idea that would increase either the quality or quantity of output; they would have an opportunity to present it to the management for consideration. If the managers find the idea to be good enough, the idea will be implemented (Sennet, 1998). The employee will then be given some form of reward as compensation for the effort. The worker would feel that they are part of something big and that someone has been able to identify and reward them for their talents. This will breed a culture within the firm and all employees would forever want to be associated with the organization (Bellamy, 1998). . The single most important factor that causes establishment of a business is the motivation to generate profits. This quest for profit has often overshadowed all other factors within the business. To generate profits would mean that massive cost cutting is done so that profit margin is high. Organizations resort to many different measures to achieve profitability. These measures include the inhumane treatment of employees. Some industrial workers are made to work for extremely long hours with minimal pay. They are also exposed to harmful working conditions where they work without protective clothing. This leaves some exposed to poisonous industrial chemicals that cause ill health. Statistics from the Canadian Human Resources shows that over 4.65 billion Canadian dollars have been paid to workers over the years as compensation for industrial accidents (Krahn et al .2010, P. 317-328). The employees and their unions have had some level of success though in a bid to fight for better working conditions. Unions have demanded that productivity and massive profitability can still be achieved if workers are provided with a good working environment (Hartley, 1995). This will include provision of protective clothing to employees, payment of employee’s dues at the appropriate time, provision of insurance cover to employees in case of accidents, employees training on safety, fair remuneration and a flexible work schedule. If workforce is provided with all the above the work force will be healthy and strong. A strong and healthy workforce is bound to be more productive (Hartley, 1995). When each employee has an increased productivity level, the organization is the main beneficiary. The increased productivity will result in increased profits. The employees will no longer be concerned with issues of security, health or remuneration. Their full concentration will be directed to production activities (Bellamy, 1998). . Numerous theoretical aspects are, however responsible for the absence of work reform. The bureaucratic model suggested by Max Webber, he argued that since the economy was driven by capitalism, failure to apply bureaucracy within an organization would result in collapse of capitalism. The bureaucratic model proposes that workers are put in a large factory layout and made to carryout highly specialized tasks. This means that there is no room given to employees to achieve personal growth (Krahn et al .2010, P. 223-246). Another theory is that of division of labor and specialization (Woodcock, 1944). This theory stand for the ideals that for productivity to be increased within an organization the work should be divided into portions (Krahn et al .2010, P. 223-246). Each part of the work is allocated to a team that does the work and hands it over to another lot. This increases productivity as all workers are working in some form of assembly line, which greatly reduces the time production takes and increases output. Though it achieves profitability, it limits work reform. It does not provide a platform for the worker to show where they posses immense talent or where they are best suited. Talent and skill are sacrificed for the sake of profitability (Woodcock, 1944). The third theory involves the case wherein working conditions are made suitable for a few members of an organization, while majority are left to work under deplorable conditions. The management comprises the few who are assumed the decision makers and thus responsible for business success while all other employees who essentially just implement managerial directives are thought to deserve less. The management is thus given all the privileges and all other employees are given second-class treatment. This also greatly limits the attainment of work reform (Krahn et al .2010, P. 223-246). Work has over the year’s generated immense debate in relation to satisfaction and the participation of the employees. Employees have mostly felt like they are not part of the organization, this occurs due to poor working conditions and poor remuneration (Hartley, 1995). There is also a failure to exploit and utilize each employee’s skill and ability. All employees are often put in a production facility with each doing task they may have little regard for. This is often aimed at the maximization of output to generate more profits. However, some scholars think that reforming the work place to provide employees with the best working conditions will have a better effect on productivity. This is because a worker who feels safe, healthy and satisfied will be more productive. The productivity will then cause an increase in productivity (Woodcock, 1944). References Bellamy, J. (1998). The Degradation of work in the twentieth Century. Introduction to New Edition of Labour and Monopoly, 1(1), 1-18. Chmiel, N. (2009). An introduction to work and organizational psychology: A European perspective. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub. Hartley, D. (1995). Food for Thought. McDonaldization of Higher Education, 21(4), 409-423. Krahn, H., Lowe, G., & Hughes, K. (2010). Work industry and the Canadian Society (6 Ed.). Toronto: Nelson Education Ltd, 247-263. Krahn, H., Lowe, G., & Hughes, K. (2010). Work industry and the Canadian Society (6 Ed.). Toronto: Nelson Education Ltd, 317-328. Krahn, H., Lowe, G., & Hughes, K. (2010). Work industry and the Canadian Society (6 Ed.). Toronto: Nelson Education Ltd, 223-246. Sennet, R. (1998). The Corrosion of Character. The Personal consequences of Work in the New Capitalism, 1(1), 1-18. Smith, A., & Bullock, C. J. (2007). Wealth of nations. New York: Cosimo Classics. Woodcock, G. (1944). The Tyranny of the Clock. George woodcock, 1(1), 1-6. Read More