Many employers set the goal for making employees happy on the assumption that this will lead to high productivity.
Job-Satisfaction and Productivity
Many employers set the goal for
making employees happy on the assumption that this will lead to high
productivity. This is possibly a misdirected assumption. Managers who follow
this strategy could end up with a very happy but poorly performing group of
employees. While unhappy workers might become unproductive, happy workers are
not always productive workers. If feeling of satisfaction does have a positive
effect on productivity, it has been found to be fairly small and negligible.
Peak performance in an individual depends upon a myriad of variables like
visualization, positive self-concept, intense focus and concentration while
facing demanding situations.
Factors affecting productivity
would also differ according to the nature of the job. An employee’s
productivity level on machine-paced jobs is going to be more influenced by the
speed of the tools and mechanical devices than by his or her level of
satisfaction. However, the satisfaction-performance correlations are found to
be stronger for higher-level employees. Thus, one might expect the relationship
to be more relevant for individuals in professional, supervisory, executive and
managerial positions rather than for manual workers. In front office jobs that
involve direct face-to-face interaction with customers and other visitors,
satisfaction could influence the subtle forms of behavior of employees
including their postures and gestures, which could alter their personal
effectiveness.
The more valid conclusion
emerging amidst management scientists is that productivity would lead to
satisfaction than the other way round. Managers would get better results by
directing their attention primarily to the question of what will help employees
to become more productive. Successful job performance should then logically
lead to feelings of accomplishment. The secondary outcomes would be in the
forms of increased pay, perquisites, promotions and other automatic rewards
which are desirable outcomes of working hard and smart, from a job-holder’s point of view. These feelings would
then contribute towards satisfaction with the job.
Based on continuous field
experience and experimentation, Edward Deming presented his fourteen principles
for achieving quality and reliability. Some of the principles have a bearing on
productivity as well. For example, Deming has urged managers to reduce fear
throughout the organization by encouraging open, two-way, non-punitive
communication. This was because the economic loss resulting from fear to ask
questions or reporting trouble was appalling. Deming also appealed to
manufacturers to help reduce waste by encouraging design, research, and sales
people to learn more about the problems of production. Two sources of waste
were identified by Deming namely system and local faults. He urged the
managements to use statistical techniques to identify them and strive to
constantly reduce wastes.
Deming called for the elimination
of the use of goals and slogans to encourage productivity, unless training and
management support is also provided. Close examination of the impact of work
standards was recommended to ensure if they considered quality or helped anyone
do a better job as they often act as an impediment to productivity improvement.
Institution of rudimentary statistical training on a broad scale, institution
of a vigorous program for retraining people in new skills, to keep up with
changes in materials, methods, product designs and machinery were the other
principles advocated by Edward Deming.
Tags : Human Resources Management - Compensation And Productivity
Last 30 days 219 views