研究員工激勵(lì)與放權(quán)的HRMessay
12-08, 2014
不同于生物科學(xué)在法律中所說(shuō)的治理現(xiàn)象，在管理組織中人類行為仍然是模糊的、在調(diào)查研究領(lǐng)域不精確、和工作中復(fù)雜的人工交互（雅格,1982）。激勵(lì)已經(jīng)成為一種流行的管理修飾名詞，而且在伴隨國(guó)內(nèi)、國(guó)外日益激烈的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)，導(dǎo)致在一般企業(yè)中也對(duì)員工激勵(lì)有了興趣，管理者也在員工的參與實(shí)踐上大做文章。員工激勵(lì)可以作為提供了解決辦法，即員工不滿工作沒(méi)有自主性、對(duì)于自己工作的創(chuàng)造力被壓制（威爾金森，1998）。
相應(yīng)的，為了理解績(jī)效對(duì)員工激勵(lì)的影響，那么去分析“激勵(lì)”這個(gè)詞就變得十分重要。這篇dissertation首先是源于對(duì)激勵(lì)意義的討論和對(duì)各種定義的過(guò)程描述。本文闡述了作者對(duì)于激勵(lì)的觀點(diǎn)以及如何激勵(lì)。從該dissertation中可以推測(cè)出，激勵(lì)是一個(gè)多維的過(guò)程，也有助于幫助績(jī)效，它也為各種因素轉(zhuǎn)化成為激勵(lì)這一性能屬性，提供了前因和先例。
Unlike biological sciences where laws are said to govern phenomena, the human behaviour in organizations remain a vague, imprecise investigation exploring the working of complex human interactions (Jago, 1982). Empowerment has emerged as a popular managerial rhetoric (Chebat & Kollias, 2000) and the increasing competition both nationally and internationally, leads to an increasing interest amongst organizations in general and managers in particular to include various employee involvement practices (Vandenberg, Richardson & Eastman, 1999). Empowerment could be labelled as a solution to the problem of Taylorised workplaces (bureaucratic in nature) where workers were said to report discontent due to no autonomy and their creativity being subdued (Wilkinson, 1998).
Correspondingly in order to understand the impact of empowerment on performance it becomes important to analyse the term ‘empowerment’ first. This paper begins with the discussion on the meaning of empowerment and the various definitions describing the process. It goes on to elaborate on the perspectives on empowerment and how performance is related to each one of them. One gathers from the papers how empowerment is a multi-dimensional process which facilitates performance and various factors which act as antecedents and precedents for turning empowerment into a performance delivering attribute.
含義 Meaning
While the word ‘empowerment’ is considered relatively new, the basic notions behind the word; granting of decision making power to the employee are considered to be pre-existing in management literature (Menon, 2001). Prior to 1990, empowerment could be only accessed through articles discussing strategic planning, individual development and quality control (Sullivan, 1994) or found in socio-technical approaches, ideas such as job enrichment (Herzberg, 1968) and job autonomy (Hackman & Oldman, 1976). Conger and Kanungo(1988) are said to have laid a concrete step in defining the term as a motivational process for workers and proposing that empowerment could be termed ‘as increases in workers' effort-performance expectancies’(Conger & Kanungo, 1988, p.457) or the feeling of self efficacy.#p#分頁(yè)標(biāo)題#e#
Though having understood the roots of the concept, it becomes difficult to assign a specific definition as it varies from the prospects it is evaluated from (Honold, 1997). Thomas and Velthouse (1990) further defined it as multifaceted with intrinsic task motivation evident in a group of four cognitions unlike just the self efficacy factor stated by Conger and Kanungo. These factors were meaning, competence (which is identical to self efficacy), self determination and impact (Honald, 1997). One finds that this was not the only way of defining the concept or explaining it, where some would define it as sharing power others would associate it with terms such as authority, control, practices helping in achievement of goals and some mention it to be a learning process.
績(jī)效關(guān)系的遠(yuǎn)景 Perspectives in relation with performance
As Wall, Wood and Leach (2004) mention four variant perceptions on empowerments which are apparent. As stated by Conger and Kanungo (1988), and Thomas and Velthouse (1990) was the idea of ‘Psychological Empowerment’ dealing with subjects such as meaning, competence and self determination which are considered individual perspectives in relation to the experience of empowered employees. Further Wall et al. (2004) state how the other three are said to be associated:
“In contrast, the remaining three perspectives on empowerment are more directly rooted in the autonomy or influence afforded by the environment within which people work, and collectively are sometimes described as ‘situational’ or ‘structural’ forms of empowerment” (p.2).
The second perspective is known as ‘Role Empowerment’, it is derived from the core belief that responsibility should be delegated to the concerned employee or the group so that the primary task that they are managing can be easily executed such as job enrichment. London (1993) terms it as ‘ensuring the employee has the authority to do his or her job’ (p.57). The third perspective covering the representation or participation in decision making within the broader organisation is ‘Organizational Empowerment’. Representative bodies such as unions are called mediums for assisting such actions. The fourth perspective is ‘Embedded Empowerment’ in which organizational empowerment is of primary importance within a wider framework.
The relevance of understanding the above perspectives on empowerment helps in realizing that they are foundations for improving performance. Where in role and psychological empowerment performance is centred on individual job or the team efforts, in organizational and embedded empowerment, the performance of the organization is of central importance and matters of productivity and profits would be given more importance. The different perspectives are said to inform each other and giving a wider angle to the relationship between empowerment and performance (Wall et al. 2004).#p#分頁(yè)標(biāo)題#e#
放權(quán)的多維性 Multi-dimensional Nature of Empowerment
The establishment of empowerment as a distinct and independent construct is important. The multi-dimensional nature of empowerment makes it different from delegation, self efficacy and intrinsic task motivation. Alongside organizational factors, managerial attitude and behaviour were considered important aspects influencing empowerment in an organization. The performance in organizations depended upon empowerment and its antecedents, leading to job involvement and job satisfaction which helped in improving performance.
Empowerment has often been equated as a single set of contingency. It has been equated by Kanter(1983) as a function of ‘power tools’, though he suggests (Kanter 1977)reduction in veto power, widening the communication, imparting knowledge, training and developing and cutting across the hierarchy but one realizes information (which maybe expertise or data), resources(including monetary and material), support (approving and legitimacy) are basically his ‘power tools’. Another supporter of classification of power is Astley and Sachdeva(1984).
Others views included looking at empowerment as Leadership. Bennis and Nanus(1985) described leadership as empowering others in order to translate intention into reality. Through the idea of leadership they are trying to motivate employees and entail that empowerment is transforming the attitudes of the subordinates. They state significance alongside community, fun and competence as critical dimensions. This idea also finds many supporters.
A similar idea is when empowerment is considered equivalent to delegation, as Dachler and Wilpert (1978) state how delegation is represented as decision making. Similarly high-involvement management (Lawler, 1986) also has been equated with the construct of empowerment.
Empowerment runs into the risk of being stated a fad, if it is merely seen as a single faced construct. The establishment of empowerment as a distinct and independent construct is important. The multi-dimensional nature of empowerment makes it different from delegation, self efficacy and intrinsic task motivation. Alongside organizational factors managerial attitude and behaviour were considered important factors influencing empowerment in an organization. The performance in organizations depends upon empowerment and its antecedents, leading to job involvement and job satisfaction which helps in improving performance.
個(gè)人放權(quán)和組織績(jī)效 Individual Empowerment and Organizational Performance
Heller (1987) mentions empowerment and the link between socio-technical systems principles such as focus on employee involvement and freedom. It is also learned that empowerment helps in the learning process as well in the organization. When communication is widened, solving problems becomes easier leading to improved performance. Claydon and Doyle (1996) mentions how with empowerment the motivation and commitment are increased and this in turn reduces the problem of control. Self effectiveness and determination along with group dynamics make employees more trust worthy agents and the impact is visible on their performance. Menon (1995) conducted a survey in an organization in order to understand the impact of empowerment and found out that until and unless there is proper communication in the organization, the environment is free from conflicting roles, the employees can never be motivated enough in the corporation. Empowerment is essential for motivating employees and greater job satisfaction, which in turn is related to organizational commitment thus leading to improving the performance of the work force. Spreitzer (1996) also after conducting a survey mentions that employees who were empowered show low uncertainty regarding the role played by them. More autonomy and control are experienced by such employees in their work climate and greater access to resources and information makes them feel that the organization is providing them with socio-political support.#p#分頁(yè)標(biāo)題#e#
Claydon and Doyle (1996) mention how empowerment, a multidimensional concept promoting delegation, autonomy and leadership actually runs the risk of being the exact opposite of these concepts. The responsibilities given to the employee makes him accountable emphasizing on the loss of autonomy. His powers of discretion are actually being limited. Empowerment is often associated with restructuring the organization which can lead to job cuts thus an unstable relationship between the employee and the employer. In such situations one realizes that instead of development of an employee, the training provided and new principles at the work place become a mere basis for their retention in the organization than the growth of an employee (Holbeche, 1995).
It has been claimed that leadership and empowerment are not interrelated concepts, infact empowering is considered to be incompetent method of controlling employees in an organization (Honold, 1997). It becomes important to understand the culture, empowerment efforts depend on the type of organization culture which persists. Trust and risk taking are major factors in empowerment and only an organization which can deal with these situations is in the position to empower the employees. It is often noticed that instead of improving performance, empowerment is said to be a stressful approach as additional responsibility is added forcing them to work more (Honald, 1997). It is also noticed that the perception in the mind of employees of the term empowerment is often described as self-empowerment. Such an approach makes one forget importance of essential elements such as teamwork and cooperation (Landes, 1994). Though one notices that empowerment in the organization has gained criticism but the advantages outweigh the disadvantages which in some cases can be taken care of.
結(jié)語(yǔ) Conclusion
With increasing competition globally, employee innovations and initiatives become essential elements causing extensive attention towards empowerment (Drucker, 1988). The paper discussed how in so many ways empowerment could be described and four variant perceptions on empowerment being Psychological, Role, Organizational and Embedded empowerment: where the first two are centred on individual or team and the latter on the performance of the organization. Empowerment is at times discussed as a single contingent factor whereas it should be realized that it is actually a multifaceted concept facilitating improvement in performance of an employee as well as the organization as a whole. Various perceptions claim that empowerment does not improve performance of individuals but counter arguments and research shows that empowerment along with other antecedents and precedents can improve the performance of the workers in an organization. Thereby from the above discussions, proper implementation of empowerment practices can lead to improved worker performance. (Nykodym, Simonetti, Nielsen & Welling, 1994) research shows that empowerment of an employee leads not job satisfaction but also improved productivity and performance.#p#分頁(yè)標(biāo)題#e#
相應(yīng)的，為了理解績(jī)效對(duì)員工激勵(lì)的影響，那么去分析“激勵(lì)”這個(gè)詞就變得十分重要。這篇dissertation首先是源于對(duì)激勵(lì)意義的討論和對(duì)各種定義的過(guò)程描述。本文闡述了作者對(duì)于激勵(lì)的觀點(diǎn)以及如何激勵(lì)。從該dissertation中可以推測(cè)出，激勵(lì)是一個(gè)多維的過(guò)程，也有助于幫助績(jī)效，它也為各種因素轉(zhuǎn)化成為激勵(lì)這一性能屬性，提供了前因和先例。
Unlike biological sciences where laws are said to govern phenomena, the human behaviour in organizations remain a vague, imprecise investigation exploring the working of complex human interactions (Jago, 1982). Empowerment has emerged as a popular managerial rhetoric (Chebat & Kollias, 2000) and the increasing competition both nationally and internationally, leads to an increasing interest amongst organizations in general and managers in particular to include various employee involvement practices (Vandenberg, Richardson & Eastman, 1999). Empowerment could be labelled as a solution to the problem of Taylorised workplaces (bureaucratic in nature) where workers were said to report discontent due to no autonomy and their creativity being subdued (Wilkinson, 1998).
Correspondingly in order to understand the impact of empowerment on performance it becomes important to analyse the term ‘empowerment’ first. This paper begins with the discussion on the meaning of empowerment and the various definitions describing the process. It goes on to elaborate on the perspectives on empowerment and how performance is related to each one of them. One gathers from the papers how empowerment is a multi-dimensional process which facilitates performance and various factors which act as antecedents and precedents for turning empowerment into a performance delivering attribute.
含義 Meaning
While the word ‘empowerment’ is considered relatively new, the basic notions behind the word; granting of decision making power to the employee are considered to be pre-existing in management literature (Menon, 2001). Prior to 1990, empowerment could be only accessed through articles discussing strategic planning, individual development and quality control (Sullivan, 1994) or found in socio-technical approaches, ideas such as job enrichment (Herzberg, 1968) and job autonomy (Hackman & Oldman, 1976). Conger and Kanungo(1988) are said to have laid a concrete step in defining the term as a motivational process for workers and proposing that empowerment could be termed ‘as increases in workers' effort-performance expectancies’(Conger & Kanungo, 1988, p.457) or the feeling of self efficacy.#p#分頁(yè)標(biāo)題#e#
Though having understood the roots of the concept, it becomes difficult to assign a specific definition as it varies from the prospects it is evaluated from (Honold, 1997). Thomas and Velthouse (1990) further defined it as multifaceted with intrinsic task motivation evident in a group of four cognitions unlike just the self efficacy factor stated by Conger and Kanungo. These factors were meaning, competence (which is identical to self efficacy), self determination and impact (Honald, 1997). One finds that this was not the only way of defining the concept or explaining it, where some would define it as sharing power others would associate it with terms such as authority, control, practices helping in achievement of goals and some mention it to be a learning process.
績(jī)效關(guān)系的遠(yuǎn)景 Perspectives in relation with performance
As Wall, Wood and Leach (2004) mention four variant perceptions on empowerments which are apparent. As stated by Conger and Kanungo (1988), and Thomas and Velthouse (1990) was the idea of ‘Psychological Empowerment’ dealing with subjects such as meaning, competence and self determination which are considered individual perspectives in relation to the experience of empowered employees. Further Wall et al. (2004) state how the other three are said to be associated:
“In contrast, the remaining three perspectives on empowerment are more directly rooted in the autonomy or influence afforded by the environment within which people work, and collectively are sometimes described as ‘situational’ or ‘structural’ forms of empowerment” (p.2).
The second perspective is known as ‘Role Empowerment’, it is derived from the core belief that responsibility should be delegated to the concerned employee or the group so that the primary task that they are managing can be easily executed such as job enrichment. London (1993) terms it as ‘ensuring the employee has the authority to do his or her job’ (p.57). The third perspective covering the representation or participation in decision making within the broader organisation is ‘Organizational Empowerment’. Representative bodies such as unions are called mediums for assisting such actions. The fourth perspective is ‘Embedded Empowerment’ in which organizational empowerment is of primary importance within a wider framework.
The relevance of understanding the above perspectives on empowerment helps in realizing that they are foundations for improving performance. Where in role and psychological empowerment performance is centred on individual job or the team efforts, in organizational and embedded empowerment, the performance of the organization is of central importance and matters of productivity and profits would be given more importance. The different perspectives are said to inform each other and giving a wider angle to the relationship between empowerment and performance (Wall et al. 2004).#p#分頁(yè)標(biāo)題#e#
放權(quán)的多維性 Multi-dimensional Nature of Empowerment
The establishment of empowerment as a distinct and independent construct is important. The multi-dimensional nature of empowerment makes it different from delegation, self efficacy and intrinsic task motivation. Alongside organizational factors, managerial attitude and behaviour were considered important aspects influencing empowerment in an organization. The performance in organizations depended upon empowerment and its antecedents, leading to job involvement and job satisfaction which helped in improving performance.
Empowerment has often been equated as a single set of contingency. It has been equated by Kanter(1983) as a function of ‘power tools’, though he suggests (Kanter 1977)reduction in veto power, widening the communication, imparting knowledge, training and developing and cutting across the hierarchy but one realizes information (which maybe expertise or data), resources(including monetary and material), support (approving and legitimacy) are basically his ‘power tools’. Another supporter of classification of power is Astley and Sachdeva(1984).
Others views included looking at empowerment as Leadership. Bennis and Nanus(1985) described leadership as empowering others in order to translate intention into reality. Through the idea of leadership they are trying to motivate employees and entail that empowerment is transforming the attitudes of the subordinates. They state significance alongside community, fun and competence as critical dimensions. This idea also finds many supporters.
A similar idea is when empowerment is considered equivalent to delegation, as Dachler and Wilpert (1978) state how delegation is represented as decision making. Similarly high-involvement management (Lawler, 1986) also has been equated with the construct of empowerment.
Empowerment runs into the risk of being stated a fad, if it is merely seen as a single faced construct. The establishment of empowerment as a distinct and independent construct is important. The multi-dimensional nature of empowerment makes it different from delegation, self efficacy and intrinsic task motivation. Alongside organizational factors managerial attitude and behaviour were considered important factors influencing empowerment in an organization. The performance in organizations depends upon empowerment and its antecedents, leading to job involvement and job satisfaction which helps in improving performance.
個(gè)人放權(quán)和組織績(jī)效 Individual Empowerment and Organizational Performance
Heller (1987) mentions empowerment and the link between socio-technical systems principles such as focus on employee involvement and freedom. It is also learned that empowerment helps in the learning process as well in the organization. When communication is widened, solving problems becomes easier leading to improved performance. Claydon and Doyle (1996) mentions how with empowerment the motivation and commitment are increased and this in turn reduces the problem of control. Self effectiveness and determination along with group dynamics make employees more trust worthy agents and the impact is visible on their performance. Menon (1995) conducted a survey in an organization in order to understand the impact of empowerment and found out that until and unless there is proper communication in the organization, the environment is free from conflicting roles, the employees can never be motivated enough in the corporation. Empowerment is essential for motivating employees and greater job satisfaction, which in turn is related to organizational commitment thus leading to improving the performance of the work force. Spreitzer (1996) also after conducting a survey mentions that employees who were empowered show low uncertainty regarding the role played by them. More autonomy and control are experienced by such employees in their work climate and greater access to resources and information makes them feel that the organization is providing them with socio-political support.#p#分頁(yè)標(biāo)題#e#
Claydon and Doyle (1996) mention how empowerment, a multidimensional concept promoting delegation, autonomy and leadership actually runs the risk of being the exact opposite of these concepts. The responsibilities given to the employee makes him accountable emphasizing on the loss of autonomy. His powers of discretion are actually being limited. Empowerment is often associated with restructuring the organization which can lead to job cuts thus an unstable relationship between the employee and the employer. In such situations one realizes that instead of development of an employee, the training provided and new principles at the work place become a mere basis for their retention in the organization than the growth of an employee (Holbeche, 1995).
It has been claimed that leadership and empowerment are not interrelated concepts, infact empowering is considered to be incompetent method of controlling employees in an organization (Honold, 1997). It becomes important to understand the culture, empowerment efforts depend on the type of organization culture which persists. Trust and risk taking are major factors in empowerment and only an organization which can deal with these situations is in the position to empower the employees. It is often noticed that instead of improving performance, empowerment is said to be a stressful approach as additional responsibility is added forcing them to work more (Honald, 1997). It is also noticed that the perception in the mind of employees of the term empowerment is often described as self-empowerment. Such an approach makes one forget importance of essential elements such as teamwork and cooperation (Landes, 1994). Though one notices that empowerment in the organization has gained criticism but the advantages outweigh the disadvantages which in some cases can be taken care of.
結(jié)語(yǔ) Conclusion
With increasing competition globally, employee innovations and initiatives become essential elements causing extensive attention towards empowerment (Drucker, 1988). The paper discussed how in so many ways empowerment could be described and four variant perceptions on empowerment being Psychological, Role, Organizational and Embedded empowerment: where the first two are centred on individual or team and the latter on the performance of the organization. Empowerment is at times discussed as a single contingent factor whereas it should be realized that it is actually a multifaceted concept facilitating improvement in performance of an employee as well as the organization as a whole. Various perceptions claim that empowerment does not improve performance of individuals but counter arguments and research shows that empowerment along with other antecedents and precedents can improve the performance of the workers in an organization. Thereby from the above discussions, proper implementation of empowerment practices can lead to improved worker performance. (Nykodym, Simonetti, Nielsen & Welling, 1994) research shows that empowerment of an employee leads not job satisfaction but also improved productivity and performance.#p#分頁(yè)標(biāo)題#e#
如果您有論文代寫(xiě)需求，可以通過(guò)下面的方式聯(lián)系我們
點(diǎn)擊聯(lián)系客服