The period between 1985 to 2009 has experienced an unprecedented change in all major
economics. These changes in the world have been well documented and embraced, the wide spread adoption of information technologies, deregulation of both product and labour market, decline of heavy manufacturing and ascendancy of service industries and growing global competition for provision of goods and services, and the present economic meltdown have led organizations to provide better ways of compensating employees as to enhance their productivity.
The continuous change in product life cycle and service markets combined with tightening quality demands require employers to seek more efficient and flexible means of production (Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 2005).
Partly, in response to these economic demands and partly as a result of other societal shifts, there have been uniform changes in the composition and activities of the work force. A further shift is that the labour force is becoming increasingly qualified, as older non-qualified staff pave way to growing rank of well-educated newcomers to the labour market (Wolf 2002).
Sequel to the above scenario organizations now resort to adoption of different types of employees participatory practices (job design), as a route to improve organization performance.
Research has shown that organizational performance may be improved through the following participatory methods besides financial participations.
§ Quality circle (QC)
§ Team-working (TW)
§ Self-Managed Team (SMT)
§ Quality of work life (QWL)
§ Total Quality Management (TQM)
Quality Circles: these are defined as a work group of 8 to 10 employees and supervisors who have a shared area of responsibility and who meet regularly-typically once a week, on company time and on company premises-to discuss their quality problems, investigate causes of problems, recommend solutions, and take corrective actions (Robbins and Judge 2007).
Mullins (2007) defined quality circle as: “ a group of people within an organization who meet on a regular basis to identify, analyze and solve problems relating to qualify, productivity, or other problems aspects of day-to-day working arrangements using problems-solving techniques”.
Although quality circle originated in America, they were exported to Japan where it thrives better. The brain behind quality circle is to encourage employees’ participation and to improve problem solving machinery of the organization.
One of the views in favour of quality circle is that it leads to acquisition of new skills and encourages team work. It is an attempt in the part of management to encourage people not only to identify with quality of their own work, but also with the managerial objectives of better quality and increased efficiency throughout the organization.
In agreement with the above view, Marchington (2001:235) revealed that:
The practices of QCs have several objectives, such
as to increase the stock of ideas within an organization
to encourage co-operative relations of work and to
legitimize change. These practices are predicated on
the assumption that employees are recognized as a
major source of competitive advantage for organizations,
a source whose ideas have been ignored in the past or
who have been told that “they are not paid to think”.
Quality circles therefore is not only a potential source of useful ideals for improving systems and saving costs, they also give people a welcome opportunity to contribute their thoughts and experience, in such a way that a general positive impact on employees attitude should thus result.
Apart from quality circle, another way to enhanced employees performance and also motivate them intrinsically, is through “team-working”, Kincki and Willaims (2003) defined a team as “a small group of people with complementary skill, who are committed to a common
purpose, performance goals, and approach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable”.
Team working creates room for greater employee participation, and has as such turned out to be a corner stone at the heart of many organization’ responses to competitive pressure (Geory, 1995).
However, if a team is not properly checkmated, it may lead to the production of inferior goods, and also lead some of the resourceful members of the group to become boisterous of their achievement(s).
Team working helps to reduce cost, to support this, a study by Lawler (1996) revealed that “Boeing used work to develop its latest commercial jetliner, the 777, at costs that were far less than would have been the case with its traditional management techniques”. Team work is a direct descendant of the concept of autonomous working groups. It may be characterized as a form of worker control, even though it operates within heavily prescribed limits.
§ Another method of improving employee productivity through intrinsic method or job design is through “self-managed teams”, a self-managed team is a group of workers who are given administrative oversight for their task domens. It involves delegated activities like planning, scheduling, monitoring and staffing.
§ The main goals of self-managed teams are to increase productivity and employee quality of work life. Self-managed team has narrowed the gap between the manager and the managed, as employees are delegated greater authority and granted increased autonomy. The team manages themselves without any formal supervision. A self-managed team requires both technical and organizational redesigned, to integrate the team into the organization
al structure.
According to Armstrong (1999:333):
The advocates of self-managed teams or autonomous work group claim that this
approach offers a more comprehensive view of organizations, than the rather
simplistic individual motivation theories that underpin job rotation, enlargement
and enrichment. Be that as it may, the strength of this system is that it does not
take account of the social or group factors and the technology as well as the individual motivation.
Companies that have been integrating self-managed team into their plan include Procter & Gamble Gummins Engine Company, General Motors, Westing House Electric Corporation, TRW Inc., GTE, Sherwin – Williams Company, AT & T, Boeing, Unisys, and IBM. These companies claim that the team can increase productivity by 30-50 percent (Cynthia et: al, 2007)
A study of self – managed teams by Cordery, (1996) revealed that “sometimes, but not always, autonomous work teams result in increased quality and productivity”.
However, for a self-managed team to succeed, the company must loosen control systems remove bureaucratic procedures, and provide a great deal of team training. It must also assure that near-continuous information is available on targets and relevant current performance i.e. output, quality, cost, waste etc.
Meanwhile, self –managed teams have their own flaw, one of which is that, if it is not properly managed or controlled, may lead to laissesez-faire leadership, this itself posses a major challenged for traditional managers, as they give up their “bossy” management style.
In order to make the self-managed team effective, the team members must be trained or developed to assume greater responsibilities in planning team work, and problem solving (Nickels et:al,1999).
Quality of Working Life (QWL): This is another way of which employee’s performance could be enhanced. The team refers to the extent to which employees’ personal need are met through their work. One’s quality of work life improves as one’s work meets more and more personal needs, such as security, responsibility and self-esteem. (Hackman & Sutle, 1977).
Making work more rewarding, reducing employee’s anxieties, encouraging more participation in decisions relating to work and employment and team-building are all examples of QWL approaches. There are strong indications that improvements in QWL favourably affect organizational performance, and enables companies to compete in global environment. The Japanese, for examples, are ordent supporters of QWL and designed work around teams
and a strong company culture. The result is not only higher productivity but lower absenteeism and labour turnover.
Quality of working life consciously and continually aiming to improve the quality of working life. This involves increasing the sense of satisfaction people obtain from their work, by so far as possible, reduces monotony, increasing variety, autonomy, responsibility, and avoiding placing people under too much stress (Armstrong, 2006).
Another fastest growing productivity improvement programme is the “total quality management” (TQM). This is an organization-wide approach that focuses on the quality of all the processes that lead to the final product or service.
If total quality management must succeed, it requires the support of the top management and the belief that quality is a key part of every employee’s job. Another facet of TQM is its customer focus in the process of defining and improving quality. It is part of employee’s empowerment, and emphasizes a team orientation.
Monday et:al;(1999) defined the concept as: “a top management philosophy that emphasis the continuous improvement of the process that result in goods or service”.
Total Quality Management ideas began to gain increasing acceptance in the United States in the mid-1980s. By 1993, 76 percent of Fortune 1000 firms had adopted the practice of TQM for at least part of their work force. By 1997, 57 percent of representative sample of establishments in the United States said they had adopted TQM for at least half of their work force. Total quality management first become popular in manufacturing organization, but it has also been widely adopted in service setting (Lawler III et:al, 1995 and Partlow 1996).
However, in Nigeria not many are practicing the Total Quality Management principles. In Japan, it is one of the major management practices that make Japanese companies what they are but one of the fears by management is that when employees know much of the organizational secrets, they usurp the powers of management. An integral part of a total quality approach is the Japanese concept of “Kaizen” which literally means improvement”.
The Chartered Management Institute of USA (2005:30) defined Total quality management thus;
TQM is a way of managing which gives everyone
in the organization responsibility for delivering
quality to the final customer, quality being described
as “fairness for purposes” or as “delighting the
customer”. TQM views each task in the organization
as fundamentally a process which is in a customer/
supplier relationship with the next process. The aim
at each stage is to define and meet the customer’s
requirements with the aim of maximizing the
satisfaction of the final customer at the lowest possible
costs.
Although the specific programmes may vary, they usually requires a careful analysis of customers’ need, an assessment of the degree to which these needs are carefully meet and plan to fulfill the possible gap between the current and the desired situation. (Heinz and Harold, 2005).
Be the first to comment