In his starting lines Beirne (2007) posits that empowerment is one of the very most controversial yet famous business topics of modern times. Several authors have added to the ongoing debate about employee empowerment and direct participation in governing and controlling today's organisations. To begin this essay, a clear meaning of empowerment is set up. Several definitions of empowerment have been advanced. The definitions seem to alter across different socio-cultural and political contexts but certain central themes works through the books. These include; 'do it yourself regulatory', 'self applied vitality', 'the feeling of common ownership', 'employee growth', 'personal and staff development and development' and 'nurturing autonomy'. Site and Czuba (1999) define empowerment as 'a multi-dimensional cultural process that helps people gain control over their own lives an activity that fosters vitality in people for use in their own lives, their areas and in their culture, by functioning on issues they identify as important' (abstract). Another description advanced by Tan (2010) predicated on a management context is 'empowerment is the work of giving power and specialist to a person to execute his designated duties in whatever way he would like, and having the ability in decision making'. Spreitzer (1995) observed that Thomas and Velthouse (1990) provide a broad description which factors in many areas of the multifaceted idea of empowerment. The experts identified empowerment as 'increased intrinsic job determination manifested in a set of four cognitions reflecting an individual's orientation to his/her work role; interpretation, competence, self-determination and impact' (Spreitzer, 1995, p 1443). These meanings are arguably broad in context but it brings into point of view the arguments which will be made in this essay.
Empowerment largely signifies power showing down the hierarchy string with employees given the leeway to participate in solid decision making. That is in stack comparison to early theories of clinical management (Taylorism) propounded by Frederick Taylor at the switch of the 20th century. The remit of Taylorism was that 'personnel cannot be relied upon', 'lacked ability and brains' and therefore 'individuals should find out how to proceed so when to do it' (Kanigel, 1997). Empowerment can therefore be seen to possess been made from subsequent universities of thought such as human relations theories of management submit by authors such as Elton Mayo, Henri Fayol, Victor Vroom and Abraham Maslow amongst others (Kyle, 2006).
The next three sections of the essay go through the great things about empowerment, the challenges of managing creativity at the job and the ways in which obstacles can be handled and empowerment promoted in the task place. A concluding section surmises the key ideas advanced in the task.
The benefits associated with worker empowerment and participative work redesign programmes
An intriguing newspaper by Malone (1997) proved that empowerment is 'a reaction to important changes in the economics of decision making that are empowered by new technologies' (p. 141). The debate advanced in this paper is the fact that empowerment (and decentralisation) is actually a competent way of operating in modern organisations where communication costs are nominal. Malone (1997) argues that as communication costs fall season, firms can improve competitiveness by allowing their workers to 'incorporate the best information available with their own knowledge, energy and creativeness' to be able to foster and aid technology (p. 142).
Management research workers do not generally understand empowerment as a 'response to new developments' (Malone, 1997) but as a procedure for get the most out of their employees. Several analysts have highlighted the necessity for new management styles that promote worker involvement, staff autonomy, workforce participation and the development of personal managing work groups (Paul et al. , 2000). The general consensus appear to be that worker empowerment converts to contribute significantly towards increasing the determination of the workforce, improving well coming to the workplace, bettering employee motivation and therefore bettering the performance of employees (Paul et al. , 2000; Cohen et al. , 2007)
Empowerment has particularly prevailed in clinic management through key nursing. The medical case (reviewed in the lectures) illustrates the role of empowerment in bettering the grade of patient attention and the degrees of job satisfaction for nurses. As suggested in this case, this contributes towards lowering staff member turnover rates and degrees of stress.
One way of achieving staff empowerment is through the organization of training and development programs within the establishment. Research workers in the management books established empirical links between staff empowerment through training and development and performance (See Koch and McGrath, 1996 and Jacobs and Washington, 2003). Empowerment should be expected to improve staff determination as they feel more appreciated within the work place. Kominis and Emmanuel (2007) confirmed that as determination increases work exerted increases which will turn to improve performance. Denton (1994) used the case of Ford Electric motor Company to illustrate how employee empowerment means commercial empowerment. Empowerment transforms to humanize the task place. As employees are empowered they feel a sense of owed, community and ownership and strive to protect the image of their company through their dealings. The effect for Ford was the creation of your long lasting legacy.
Participative work redesign programs are empowerment programs in the wider sense. These are essentially programs which attempt to require employees in the planning and scheduling with their work. Like other empowerment programs, participative work redesign programs have been proven to improve inspiration and dedication, increase employee end result, reduce worker turnover and reduce absenteeism (Pearson and Chatterjee, 1984).
In Kanter's (1977) structural theory of electricity in organisations, Kanter argues that to allow for empowerment employees must be given the right resources, given sufficient information, and also have access to programs that will permit them develop, improve and enhance their performance. As known in Ozaralli (2003) for empowerment to work effectively, there should be a culture of trust, mutual respect and determination in the organisation. This indicates that empowerment is a two way process; senior managers seek to empower employees - employees show determination, developing themselves to effectively take care of new powers. Both elements must be there for empowerment to work well and this might create the implementation of empowerment programs difficult in practice.
On the subject of why empowerment might present a dilemma, Paul, Niehoff and Turnley (2000) claim that empowering employees creates notion about entitlements, once these values are unfulfilled (which they claim, will eventually be the case) there's a breach of subconscious contract (between employer and staff) and such as breach leads to counterproductive behaviour for employees. This leads us to the functional obstacles of empowerment at work
Current developments in globalisation and development have pushed businesses to continuously adapt by putting into action several changes within their work surroundings. Business leaders are constantly searching for better ways to do business, ways to cut costs, improve output and eventually improve profitability. Probably one of management's most colossal troubles would be the management of organisation change. This concern is significantly amplified by the actual fact that change may also be inevitable.
Empowerment can be viewed as one of those 'change procedures' or an development that may be introduced inside a workplace. The major huddle here is that change like the release of empowerment schemes involves the alteration of individuals behaviour- employee behavior. Change requires that individuals leave their comfort areas and engage in several tasks, take more duties, participate in decision making and reshape their work processes. The consequences of proposed changes always have an impact on employees in different ways. Some employees may need to loose their jobs and positions for others to be empowered. As a result of this resistance can always be expected from those who are affected adversely by proposed changes. That is evident in the positioning the existing coalition authorities of UK faces. The decrease in the deficit is basically perceived as a good thing for the united states however the steps taken up to decrease the deficit are compared (or praised) in different ways by different categories. University or college students are opposed to the proposals because it will mean they will have to pay higher tuition fees in the foreseeable future. Most of the working course who don't need to pay such fees and who do not have children at university support these steps.
Like all change programs, it could be expected that management will face many challenges while wanting to empower employees. The proposals of the UK's coalition government to enable NHS doctors by giving them more capabilities and control over the management of their treatment centers have been received with mixed feelings. Certain doctors are worried that this will mean they will spend more time on management and less time on actually serving their patients. Some doctors welcome such changes arguing that it'll cut pointless bureaucracy, improve responsiveness and therefore boost their overall performance. Clearly, major difficulties will be confronted by the government in pressing through such innovation which empowers NHS doctors.
Though theoretically audio, empowerment programs are often met with many practical challenges. I will review some of these challenges by requesting some pertinent questions which can undermine the success of empowerment plans.
Are the benefits associated with empowerment to employees clear? The benefit for empower programs to professionals is obviously clear to employees. They see this for professionals to 'get more because of their money' through increased delegation of responsibility. Sometimes the advantages of such programs to employees aren't clear as they usually do not suggest increased wages. Professionals can therefore find it challenging to market the 'empowerment idea' with their employees.
Do employees actually 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 upsurge in financial reward. For employees empowerment means expending some discretionary energy which might not be paid out, acknowledged or liked. As a result some employees can prefer the status quo where their incentive is commensurate to the task they certainly.
Is empowerment the culture of the company? This is also important as certain ethnicities (work or specific) can make empowerment difficult. Among Hofstede's cultural sizes is high doubt avoidance and high ability distance. These kinds of cultures don't allow for staff empowerment as employees in these civilizations loathe risk taking and therefore decision making, and work very well under situations where hierarchy can clearly be diagnosed.
Does the work structure actually enable empowerment of employees? Regardless of the criticism that is levelled on Taylors rules of clinical management, these concepts are still very useful in many corporations today. Considering a big factory employing a huge selection of factory level employees for example, I argue that 'empowerment' might be a difficult concept to implement within this 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 books advocates that management should trust employees and allow them the leeway to make serious decisions. This may be problematic given that employees might well have limited experience in the area despite training. Guidance by senior management might still be required and this in place constitutes misuse.
Reference to the nursing case study
The research study (nursing case) features other potential troubles in an empowerment program in a hospital scene. The truth starts by putting primary medical (a program that empowers nurses, increases their performance and job satisfaction) in a confident light. The case highlights the role of 'sectionalism and elitism' in hampering the success of such empowerment programs. Empowerment in the medical case supposed that nurses required full control of their patients sometimes carrying out simple tasks that have been traditionally completed by trained doctors. This potential blurs the restrictions between the several professions (such as doctors, nurses, clinic managers) involved in administering healthcare. The case shows opposition from some doctors recorded in accounts provided by Pearson (1988) and Walby et al. , (1995).
The circumstance also illustrates the prospect of segregation and discontentment which might happen from an empowerment program. Not all groups of personnel can have the same treatment in an empowerment program. In the case, the necessity for primary health care meant that signed up nurses (RGNs) needed to be given preferential treatment (training and development) and provided the resources and support to aid their decision making with regards to the patients under their health care. Other junior nurses (grades A, B, F and G) received little attention as no empowerment program was created for them. These grades of nurses are destined to feel less valued in the task place which might affect their determination and lead to counterproductive behavior.
This incident is potentially not limited to a hospital setting. Empowerment programs are always staged to accomplish a certain goal which could be improving the grade of something or adapting to other changes in the task environment. This means that certain groups of employees will be at the forefront of the program while some will feel less engaged and therefore less valued. The task therefore is how empowerment programs can be utilized effectively so that some employees don't feel left out or let down by senior management.
Guidance to older management how to overcome troubles and promote empowerment at work
The management books is full of varying recommendations on how the down sides of instituting change and promoting empowerment at work can be maintained. Several models of change management have been developed and examined over the years. This discourse shall continue by researching recent change models and discussing their implications used i. e. how management can manage change effectively. I consider empowerment as a significant organisational change and really should therefore be contacted just as organisational change is approached. In an company where delegation is not the custom or culture employees will dsicover it undesirable if the managers starts off to delegate responsibilities. This may be looked upon as an unwelcomed shift of responsibility with out a corresponding increase in reward. In the subsequent discussion, I am going to recommend certain measures that can be used to market empowerment once employees are ready to be empowered. Motivation for these advice will be attracted from ideas shown by different authors (see Beirne, 1999, p. 219, for example).
How to control organisational change in general
An early model of organisational change management was provided by Kurt Lewin in his 1951 newspaper (Clarke, 1994; Okumus and Hemmington, 1998). This model presented the management of change as a simple process involving three levels; unfreezing (the old routine), change (presenting the new style), refreezing (. . . the new style) [Okumus and Hemmington, 1998]. Needless to say, this model has been significantly criticized for being over simplistic. Several models have been suggested for controlling change. What I take from these models is the role of worker readiness and involvement in the change techniques and its potential to significantly enhance the chances of successful organisational change (See Armenakis et al. , 1993 and 1999). With respect to the establishment of empowerment programs, the 'worker readiness' concept shows that prior to 'empowerment' staff are made ready through training and development programs, information periods and participative deliberations etc. If staffs are fully prepared and are part of establishing the empowerment program, then you will see little resistance to such programs and its likelihood of success will be high.
Beirne (1999) contends that the books on empowerment has noted the actual fact that 'the original impetus to empowerment often comes from exterior factors, including consumer requirements, technologies, quality audits, plus more specifically, the Patients' Charter and 'internal' market' (p. 221). The implication of the is that several external pressures drive the need for empowerment thus delivering a second plan and exterior priorities to the empowerment process. Effectiveness is thus reduced as the concentration is on achieving other goals through staff empowerment. Considering for example a predicament where there is the need for more prominent line managers through the Holiday period within a firm. Staffs are empowered through delegation to fill up this decision making role. The propensity will be for personnel to be taken back from managerial functions when the peak period has ended. This sort of ad-hoc empowerment which is common in most institutions can result to counterproductive behaviour.
Employee wellbeing, development and empowerment needs to be crafted among the primary strategies of the business. It should not be a concern that is undoubtedly discretionary within the company and it managed diversely by different managers. It ought to be stated as solid coverage to increase is seriousness both for management and employees. This can show that the business as a whole values its workforce. John Lewis for example has what I am going to class as one of the most valued group of employees. The firm officially phone calls its employees 'its lovers', allowing them to own shares in the company in order that they can share in its success and its losses. This escalates the sense of belonging and community and induces employees to be innovative and hardworking.
At this level management must ensure that both management and employees promote the vision, objective and targets of the company. This could be through periodic publications, staff meetings and conferences to reinforce the visions and objectives of the organization.
It may also be important to create out clearly defined goals and guidelines outlining objectives so that employees are aware of set goals and time lines.
It is necessary to help staff to be equipped for empowerment. It is pointless to delegate tasks to personnel who aren't well trained, experienced or ready to accept new levels of responsibility. Personnel will withstand empowerment and talk about decision making if indeed they don't feel self-confident that they might achieve success or meet the new expectations. Worker training and development may be used to improve staff skills and consciousness to ensure they are ready to take on new tasks and make enlightened decisions. This will likely also build their self confidence and allow those to be progressive.
Empowerment will only be successful if management can trust and show that they trust employees. After delegation of obligations, management should not spend some time second-guessing or doubting employees. Management therefore must trust that employees will make the right decisions and perform responsibilities appropriately. Without trust, the whole empowerment framework fails.
Management can further foster empowerment through the provision of sufficient information and resources to help in staff decision making. Staff should be properly evaluated and their capacities and strengths outlined. Staff will be more successful if their empowerment process fits their advantages and capabilities.
It is tempting for empowerment through delegation to be misinterpreted leading to failure. Management may turn to delegate the more mundane yet challenging responsibilities to employees. This will reduce employee interest and increase resistance to empowerment techniques. It is strongly recommended that specialist and electricity itself be delegated. Employees should get the possibility to participating in higher level decision making and interesting duties such as participating in committees or representing the company at certain incidents.
Again it's important to provide constructive reviews to employees acknowledging their accomplishments and providing ideas on how certain aspects of their performance can be improved in the future. Additionally it is important to solicit feedback and employee opinions to understand their concerns in order to make future improvements.
Conclusion
Several important issues have been talked about in this article about empowerment, work area change and innovation. I've considered the huge benefits and problems of empowerment plans and have made certain suggestions to practising senior management how employees can be empowered effectively in a corporate and business framework. To surmise, I am going to reiterate that despite the challenges that managers face in utilizing such schemes, the great things about empowering employees can't be overemphasized.
