Employee empowerment and direct parcipitation in management

Employee mandate and direct parcipitation in cargonIn his opening lines Beirne (2007) posits that em precedentment is unitary of the nigh controversial yet famed business subjects of recent years. several(prenominal) writers create contri hardlyed to the ongoing debate close employee dominance and direct participation in governing and managing todays boldnesss. To start transfer this essay, a ca-ca explanation of sanction is in place. Several definitions of mandate have been pass on. The definitions seem to vary across different socio-cultural and political context of uses but plastered(p) central themes runs by cockeyeds of the literature. These include self regulatory, self power, the looking of common deliverership, employee advancement, somebodyal and personnel growth and suppuration and nurturing autonomy. Page and Czuba (1999) dress say-so as a multi-dimensional social operate that economic aids people infer control over their avouch lives a process that fosters power in people for use in their own lives, their communities and in their society, by playing on issues they define as important (abstract). A nonher definition advanced by Tan (2010) based on a counsel context is givement is the act of giving power and authority to a person to perform his designated tasks in whatever way he wants, and having the power in decision make. Spreitzer (1995) noted that Thomas and Velthouse (1990) provide a broad definition which positionors in many aspects of the multifaceted concept of authority. The researchers delimitate induement as increased intrinsic task want manifested in a aline of four cognitions reflecting an individuals orientation to his/her civilize design recollecting, competence, self-determination and impact (Spreitzer, 1995, p 1443). These definitions argon arguably broad in context but it brings into position the arguments that give be made in this essay.Empowerment largely represents power sharing toss of f the hierarchy chain with employees given(p) the leeway to insert in firm decision do. This is in stack contrast to too soon theories of scientific counselling (Taylorism) propounded by Frederick Taylor at the turn of the 20th century. The absolve of Taylorism was that officiateers could not be relied upon, lacked talent and intelligence and because elaborateers should be told what to do and when to do it (Kanigel, 1997). Empowerment faeces thitherfore be seen to have been generated from ulterior schools of thought much(prenominal) as world relations theories of steering beat forward by writers such as Elton Mayo, Henri Fayol, Victor Vroom and Abraham Maslow amongst others (Kyle, 2006).The side by side(p) three sections of the essay look at the benefits of authorisation, the repugns of managing origination at figure out and the ways in which ch every last(predicate)enges net be managed and authorisation promoted in the work place. A concluding section surmi ses the main ideas advanced in the work.The benefits of employee mandate and participative work design computer programmemesAn intriguing unseasonedspaper by Malone (1997) showed that potency is a response to fundamental changes in the economics of decision making that ar enabled by brisk technologies (p. 141). The argument advanced in this paper is that say-so (and decentralisation) is actually an efficient way of operating in modern organisations where conference costs are minimal. Malone (1997) argues that as communication costs fall, firms cannister improve competitiveness by furnishing their employees to combine the best information available with their own knowledge, energy and creativity in order to foster and facilitate innovation (p. 142).Management researchers do not commandly perceive authorisation as a response to new-made developments (Malone, 1997) but as an approach to start the most knocked out(p) of their employees. Several researchers have grittyl ighted the need for new counselling styles that promote employee involvement, employee autonomy, workforce participation and the development of self managing work teams (Paul et al., 2000). The worldwide consensus seem to be that employee empowerment turns to contribute significantly towards improving the inscription of the workforce, improving canvassably being at the piece of work, improving employee motivation and because improving the accomplishment of employees (Paul et al., 2000 Cohen et al., 2007)Empowerment has particularly been succeederful in infirmary way through particular nursing. The nursing slip-up (discussed in the lectures) illust judge the role of empowerment in improving the character of patient care and the levels of trouble satisfaction for nurses. As indicated in this case, this contributes towards reducing worker turnover rates and levels of stress.One way of achieving employee empowerment is through the institution of training and development pr ograms deep down the institution. Researchers in the management literature have established semiempirical links between employee empowerment through training and development and cognitive operation (See Koch and McGrath, 1996 and Jacobs and Washington, 2003). Empowerment can be expected to improve employee motivation as they feel more valued within the work place. Kominis and Emmanuel (2007) showed that as motivation increases effort exerted increases and this will turn to improve performance. Denton (1994) used the case of traverse Motor Company to illustrate how employee empowerment translates to corporate empowerment. Empowerment turns to humanise the work place. As employees are empowered they feel a sentiency of belonging, community and ownership and strive to protect the image of their company through their dealings. The result for Ford was the creation of a lasting legacy.Participative work redesign programs are empowerment programs in the wider sense. These are essentia lly programs which set out to involve employees in the planning and scheduling of their work. Like other empowerment programs, participative work redesign programs have been shown to improve motivation and commitment, increase employee output, bring down employee turnover and reduce absenteeism (Pearson and Chatterjee, 1984).In Kanters (1977) structural theory of power in organisations, Kanter argues that to allow for empowerment employees mustiness be given the right resources, provided with suitable information, and have access to programs that will enable them develop, improve and enhance their performance. As noted in Ozaralli (2003) for empowerment to work effectively, there must be a culture of trust, mutual repute and commitment in the organisation. This indicates that empowerment is a two way process senior managers seek to empower employees employees show commitment, developing themselves to effectively manage new powers. Both elements must be present for empowerment to work effectively and this king throw away the implementation of empowerment programs difficult in practice.On the subject of why empowerment power present a dilemma, Paul, Niehoff and Turnley (2000) argue that empowering employees creates belief nigh entitlements, once these beliefs are unfulfilled (which they argue, will eventually be the case) there is a disrespect of psychological contract (between employer and employee) and such as breach leads to counterproductive behaviour on the part of employees. This leads us to the practical altercates of empowerment at workChallenges in managing change innovation at workCurrent trends in globalisation and development have pushed businesses to continuously reconcile by implementing several changes within their work environments. Business leaders are constantly seeking out better ways to do business, ways to cut costs, improve output and eventually improve profitability. Arguably one of managements most colossal challenges will be the management of organisation change. This challenge is significantly amplified by the fact that change is sometimes inevitable.Empowerment can be viewed as one of those change processes or an innovation that can be introduced within a work place. The major huddle here is that change such as the introduction of empowerment schemes involves the alteration of human behaviour- employee behaviour. Change requires that individuals leave their comfort zones and engage in different tasks, recognize more responsibilities, participate in decision making and reshape their work processes. The effects of proposed changes always affect employees in different ways. Some employees superpower have to loose their roles and positions for others to be empowered. Because of this resistance can always be expected from those who are affected adversely by proposed changes. This is evident in the position the current coalition government of UK faces. The reduction in the famine is largely perceived as a good thing for the country but the steps disciplinen to reduce the deficit are im pertinent (or praised) differently by different groups. University students are opposed to the proposals because it will mean they will have to pay higher tuition fees in the future. approximately of the working class who do not have to pay such fees and who do not have children at university support these measures.Like all change programs, it can be expected that management will regain many challenges small-arm seeking to empower employees. The proposals of the UKs coalition government to empower NHS doctors by giving them more powers and control over the management of their clinics have been received with mixed feelings. Certain doctors are concerned that this will mean they will spend more time on management and slight time on actually serving their patients. Some doctors welcome such changes arguing that it will cut unnecessary bureaucracy, improve responsiveness and thus boost their ove rall performance. Clearly, major challenges will be faced by the government in pushing through such innovation which empowers NHS doctors.though theoretically sound, empowerment programs are often met with many practical challenges. I will review some of these challenges by asking some pertinent questions which can undermine the success of empowerment schemes.Are the benefits of empowerment to employees clear? The benefit of empower programs to managers is always clear to employees. They see this as a way for managers to get more for their money through increased deputation of responsibility. Sometimes the benefits of such programs to employees are not very clear as they usually do not mean increased wages. Managers can then find it challenging to sell the empowerment idea to their employees.Do employees real want to be empowered? Are employees willing to take on extra responsibility? This is major stumbling block to empowerment programs. Usually empowerment results to increased responsibility without an associated increase in financial reward. For employees empowerment core expending some discretionary energy which might not be compensated, acknowledged or appreciated. As such some employees can choose the status quo where their reward is commensurate to the work they do.Is empowerment the culture of the organisation? This is also important as certain cultures (work or individual) can build empowerment difficult. One of Hofstedes cultural dimensions is high uncertainty avoidance and high power distance. These sorts of cultures do not allow for employee empowerment as employees in these cultures loathe risk taking and therefore decision making, and work well under situations where hierarchy can clearly be identified.Does the work anatomical structure actually allow for empowerment of employees? Despite the criticism that has been levelled on Taylors principles of scientific management, these principles are still very useful in many institutions today. Co nsidering a large factory employing hundreds of factory level workers for example, I argue that empowerment might be a difficult concept to implement within such an environment given the organisational structure.When should management hands-off? Empowerment requires that management allow employees to participate in critical decision making and management should delegate responsibility to such employees. The buzz-word around empowerment is trust. The literature advocates that management should trust employees and allow them the leeway to make serious decisions. This could be baffling given that employees could have limited experience in the area scorn training. Supervision by senior management might still be required and this in effect constitutes waste.Reference to the nursing case line of businessThe case study (nursing case) highlights other capableness challenges in an empowerment program in a hospital scene. The case starts by putting primary nursing (a program that empowers nurses, improves their performance and job satisfaction) in a dictatorial light. The case highlights the role of sectionalism and elitism in hampering the success of such empowerment programs. Empowerment in the nursing case meant that nurses took full control of their patients sometimes carrying out simple tasks which were traditionally carried out by trained doctors. This potential blurs the borderaries between the different professions (such as doctors, nurses, hospital managers) involved in administering health care. The case highlights opposition from some medical experts registered in accounts provided by Pearson (1988) and Walby et al., (1995).The case also highlights the potential for segregation and discontentment which might arise from an empowerment program. Not all groups of workers can receive the same treatment in an empowerment program. In the case, the need for primary care meant that registered nurses (RGNs) had to be given preferential treatment (training and de velopment) and provided the resources and support to assist their decision making with respect to the patients under their care. Other junior nurses (grades A, B, F and G) received little perplexity as no empowerment program was designed for them. These grades of nurses are bound to feel less valued in the work place which might affect their motivation and lead to counterproductive behaviour.This occurrence is potentially not limited to a hospital setting. Empowerment programs are always arranged to achieve a certain goal which could be improving the timber of a service or adapting to other changes in the work environment. This federal agency that certain groups of employees will be at the forefront of the program while others will feel less involved and therefore less valued. The challenge therefore is how empowerment programs can be used effectively so that some employees dont feel left out or let down by senior management.Guidance to senior management on how to inhibit diffic ulties and promote empowerment at workThe management literature is litter with varying recommendations on how the difficulties of instituting change and promoting empowerment at work can be managed. Several mock ups of change management have been developed and tried over the years. This discussion shall proceed by reviewing recent change models and discussing their implications in practice i.e. how management can manage change success to the full. I consider empowerment as a major organisational change and should therefore be approached in the same way organisational change is approached. In an organisation where representation is not the custom or culture employees might find it impossible if the managers starts to delegate duties. This may be looked upon as an unwelcomed shift of responsibility without a corresponding increase in reward. In the subsequent discussion, I will recommend certain measures that can be used to promote empowerment once employees are agile to be empo wered. Inspiration for these recommendations will be drawn from ideas presented by different writers (see Beirne, 1999, p. 219, for example).How to manage organisational change in generalAn early model of organisational change management was presented by Kurt Lewin in his 1951 paper (Clarke, 1994 Okumus and Hemmington, 1998). This model presented the management of change as a simple process involving three stages unfreezing (the old pattern), change (introducing the new pattern), refreezing (the new pattern) Okumus and Hemmington, 1998. Needless to say, this model has been severely criticized for being over simplistic. Several models have been proposed for managing change. What I take from these models is the role of employee pushiness and participation in the change processes and its ability to significantly improve the chances of undefeated organisational change (See Armenakis et al., 1993 and 1999). With respect to the institution of empowerment programs, the employee readiness concept suggests that prior to empowerment mental faculty are made ready through training and development programs, information sessions and participative deliberations etc. If staffs are fully informed and are part of setting up the empowerment program, then there will be little resistance to such programs and its chances of success will be high.Beirne (1999) contends that the literature on empowerment has documented the fact that the initial impetus to empowerment often comes from orthogonal factors, including consumer demands, technological innovations, quality audits, and more specifically, the Patients Charter and internal market (p. 221). The implication of this is that several external pressures drive the need for empowerment thus presenting a second schedule and external priorities to the empowerment process. Effectiveness is thus reduced as the center on is on achieving other goals through employee empowerment. Considering for example a situation where there is the nee d for more front line managers during the Christmas period within a firm. mental facultys are empowered through delegation to fill this decision making role. The tendency will be for staff to be pulled back from managerial roles when the peak period is over. This type of ad-hoc empowerment which is common in most institutions can result to counterproductive behaviour.Employee wellbeing, development and empowerment needs to be crafted as one of the core strategies of the company. It should not be an issue that is regarded as discretionary within the firm and it handled differently by different managers. It should be stated as firm policy to increase is seriousness two for management and employees. This will show that the company as a unharmed values its workforce. John Lewis for example has what I will class as one of the most valued set of employees. The firm officially calls its employees its partners, allowing them to own manages in the firm in order that they can share in its profitability and its losses. This increases the sense of belonging and community and encourages employees to be innovative and hardworking.At this stage management needs to ensure that both management and employees share the vision, mission and objectives of the firm. This could be through periodic publications, staff meetings and conferences to reinforce the visions and objectives of the firm.It might also be important to set out clearly defined goals and guidelines outlining expectations so that employees are aware of set targets and time lines.It is necessary to help staff to be ready for empowerment. It is pointless to delegate duties to staff who are not well trained, qualified or prepared to accept new levels of responsibility. Staff will resist empowerment and share decision making if they dont feel confident that they would be successful or meet the new expectations. Employee training and development can be used to improve staff skills and awareness to ensure that they are ready to take on new roles and make informed decisions. This will also build their confidence and allow them to be innovative.Empowerment will only be successful if management can trust and show that they trust employees. After delegation of duties, management should not spend time second-guessing or doubting employees. Management therefore needs to trust that employees will make the right decisions and perform tasks correctly. Without trust, the unscathed empowerment framework fails.Management can further foster empowerment through the provision of sufficient information and resources to facilitate employee decision making. Staff should be properly assessed and their capabilities and strengths highlighted. Staff will be more successful if their empowerment process matches their strengths and capabilities.It is tempting for empowerment through delegation to be misinterpreted leading to failure. Management may turn to delegate the more routine yet demanding tasks to employees. Thi s will reduce employee interest and increase resistance to empowerment schemes. It is recommended that authority and power itself be delegated. Employees should be given the opportunity to participate in high level decision making and interesting tasks such as participating in committees or representing the company at certain events.Again it is important to provide constructive feedback to employees acknowledging their achievements and providing suggestions on how certain aspects of their performance can be improved in the future. It is also important to ask feedback and employee opinions to understand their concerns in order to make future improvements.ConclusionSeveral pertinent issues have been discussed in this essay on the subject of empowerment, workplace change and innovation. I have considered the benefits and challenges of empowerment schemes and have made certain recommendations to practising senior management on how employees can be empowered successfully in a corporate context. To surmise, I will reiterate that scorn the challenges that managers face in implementing such schemes, the benefits of empowering employees cannot be overemphasized.