Friday, July 28, 2006
Einde van fase 1;
Met die kondig ek die einde aan van Module een; Op 'n kol het ek gedog ek sien nie die einde maar tog het dit gekom.
Participative Management, Motivation, Job Design
Introduction:
In the last century a plethora of management, leadership and motivation theories have emanated. Managing the relationship between employer and employee has been the subject of a significant amount of research.
The typology of the management theories practises and thought that dominated the first half of the previous century could be classified into two schools of thought. Theories and thoughts that have an enduring influence on management till today namely; The Scientific management movement (Taylorism: 1911) approach and the subsequent Human Relationship school (Elton Mayo’s Hawthorne studies: 1932) approach.
Participative management has been around a long time with some of its foundation elements going back to the 1920’sand 1930’s. In later years the themes were formalized and popularized by behavioural scientists such as Blake and Mouton’s managerial Grid, Macgregor’s Theory X and Theory Y, Lickert’s four-model leadership systems and Peter Drucker Management by Objectives. The central idea of participative management is that empowered employees will feel better about their jobs and be more productive.
Management of the employee relationship has been subjected to constant and significant changes, the last forty years. Technology, globalisation, and the speed at which information is available, the intellectual maturity of the employee and the endless restructuring of organisations, created an organisational environment in constant change. The evolutionary paradigmatic shift in the organisational social power towards a more nonlinear and more participative nature causes the re-evaluation of the manager’s role, the manager’s job description, the employee description, the employee job description, the employment contract and the employee psychological contract. This re-evaluation necessitates an understanding of the principles of participative management, motivation and the re-design of jobs.
Definition of Participative management:
In the absence of a single universal definition of Participative Management the common practice is to apply an analysis of the general semantics involved in an attempt to define the notion. To define participative management one must firstly look at the definition of management.
Mary Parker Follet (1925) described management as an art most probably because Management’s historic origin is from the old French word m?nagement meaning “the art of conducting, directing.” (Wikkipedia, 2006) John Adair describes management from the basis of the Latin word manu agere “to lead by the hand”. (Adair, 1990: 60)
Secondly one has to analyse the word “participative“ in the management context which means to participate, share or to co-operate. The word participative emphasise a bi lateral contribution to the goal or objective.
The principle object of management should be to secure the maximum prosperity for the employer, coupled with the maximum prosperity for each employ?. (Taylor, 1911: 1)
When you put the two words together i.e. Participative and Management you get a management style based on participation which involves the employees, it involves a process of sharing information and sharing in decision making and it involves a combined effort to attain organisational goals.
An acceptable definition for participative management could then be: “An art of management and technique whereby the goals, actions, direction and control of the organisation are shared between management and the employees for the purpose of maximum prosperity for all. “
Evolution of Participative Management
Participative management is the prodigy of a synthesis of several management, leadership and motivational theories. Participative management is focused around the attaining of organisational goals, sustainability and competitiveness.
Fredrick Taylor’s 1911 Principles of Scientific Management suggested that a worker was only motivated by money. Taylor was the founder of time in motion study and suggested that tasks should be made as simple as possible for the worker. This would have the effect of increased production and increased earning capacity for the workers through the introduction of piece working. The major elements of this style of management were, control, command and compliance. But this approach had obvious side effects. Principles of scientific management equate the employee’s role to the same role as the machine. The workers did not have to think and the manager just had to control. Critics saw these principles as the dehumanising of the worker. This criticism evolved into enlightened approach to management after the findings of research, referred to as the Hawthorne Studies by Elton Mayo from 1924 to 1932 was published. This study concluded that employees are not motivated solely by money and employee behaviour is linked to their attitudes. (McNamara, C: 1999)
The Hawthorne Studies conducted during the 1920 and early 1930’s by Elton Mayo discovered and began the Human relations approach to management, whereby the needs and the motivation of employees become the primary focus of managers. Mayo took six women from the assembly line, segregated them from the rest of the factory, place them under the supervision of a non authoritarian type of supervisor. Mayo changed their working conditions constantly studying the effect of these changes on productivity. In the process he stumbled upon a principle of human motivation that would revolutionise the theory and practise of management. This shift in focus lead to a more participative type of management styles, the redesigning of jobs as management attempt to acknowledge this needs and start experiencing the positive effect of motivation on productivity. (Robertson: 1987)
The Participative Management Environment
Instead of imposing on the employee the manager would rather be responsible to create an environment for employees to achieve their own goals in line with the goals of the organisation. This is very difficult because the traditional security manager is an authoritarian with some militaristic background and they find it extremely difficult to let go of authoritarian management traits. The key to this environment would be the presence of factors conducive for participative management.
Characteristics of a motivating environment are:
1. The employees have a realistic understanding of the links between effort and performance, i.e. they know how hard they need to work to reach various levels of performance.
2. Employees have the competence and confidence to translate effort into performance. Control systems are introduced only when necessary.
3. Performance requirements are expressed in terms of hard, but attainable, specific goals. Employees participate in setting goals.
4. Feedback to employees is regular, informative and easy to interpret.
5. Employees are praised for good performance.
6. Rewards including pay are seen as equitable.
7. Rewards are tailored to individual requirements and preferences.
8. Employee psychological and physical well-being is recognized as important.
9. Productivity is recognized as important.
10. Jobs are designed, where possible, to maximize: Skill variety of work, Task identity,
Task significance, Autonomy, and feedback. (Robertson: 1987)
Manifestation of Participative Management
At the individual level participative management means an employee participates in the decisions that need to be made about the work he or she does. This seems quite simple and basic, but it is not because the nature and depth of participation can vary along several dimensions and differs from organisation to organisation.
The normative for participative management programs in organisations can loosely be described as from fully integrated participation programs, sectorial participation programs, pseudo participation programs to the total absence of any participative programs. Fully integrated participative programs function on the basis that all relevant actions, discussions and decisions are shared. There exist fully integrated two way communication channels.
Rensis Liekert published The Human Organisation in 1961, in which he classified management styles into four categories: authoritarian, benevolent, consultative or participative. The benefits of the participative style for Liekert represent the ideal.
There is a large array of positive participative management techniques available for the manager. Theories like Douglas McGregor Theory X and Theory Y, or managerial programs like Quality Circles, Self Managing Teams, Total Quality Management and Management by Objectives, Virtual Teams are just a few examples.
Douglas McGregor Theory X and Theory Y:
McGregor’s X-Y theory has an element of uniqueness in that it is commonly referred to in both the fields of management and motivation. It is this cross over ability which makes it a valid basic principle from which to develop positive management styles and techniques that could lead to fully integrated participative management programs.
Douglas McGregor was an American Psychologist. Building on Abraham Maslow’s motivation theory of hierarchy of needs, McGregor formulate two opposing assumptions about human nature and motivation. These assumptions he articulated as Theory X and Theory Y. Theory X assumes the average person dislikes work and will avoid it he/she can.
Therefore most people must be forced with the threat of punishment to work towards organisational objectives. The average person prefers to be directed; to avoid responsibility; is relatively un-ambitious, and wants security above all else. Theory Y assumes effort in work is as natural as work and play. People will apply self-control and self-direction in the pursuit of organisational objectives, without external control or the threat of punishment. Commitment to objectives is a function of rewards associated with their achievement. People usually accept and often seek responsibility. The capacity to use a high degree of imagination, ingenuity and creativity in solving organisational problems is widely, not narrowly, distributed in the population. In industry the intellectual potential of the average person is only partly utilised. (Chapman: 2006.)
To categorize the two theories by their key characteristics one can say. Theory X is an oppressive, repressive type of style with very tight controls, no development and no creativity and that would make it an authoritarian type of management style. This style is very prevalent in the security industry. Theory Y being an enlightened view, empowering people, developing people, giving responsibility to people would be classified as a participative type of management style.
Mark Davies (Honda UK) in answering the question; what is the job of a leader he explains. “In Honda everyone is expected to be a leader and to take responsibility for their part of the business, bringing forward ideas and suggestions on how to improve. That is a great system and makes for forward –thinking. Creative environment just what Mr Honda advocated.” (Leary – Joyce. 2005)
It is clear when analysing Davies words, everybody takes responsibility, everybody brings ideas forward and that there is a thriving participative and creative environment in Honda as been envisage by its founder Mr Honda. Honda is achieving a top ranking year after year in The Sunday Times list of one hundred best companies to work for. This status quo can be attributed to the participative nature of the management style that exists in Honda. Managers and employees in Honda could be classified as Theory Y type of personalities in their attitude which ensure Honda’s, competitiveness growth and sustainability.
Quality Circles.
One of the most publicised aspects of the Japanese approach to quality management is the idea of Quality Circles or Kaizen teams. Quality circles are a communication channel through which the lowest level of employee in the organisation can participate in the improvement of product quality or service, by providing a creative input or suggestions. Quality Circles or Kaizen can very easily and with great success be introduced in any security management plan.
Kaizen is a Japanese word meaning “improvement.” The quality circle or kaizen team constantly seek to achieve this objective. The car manufacturer Toyota in its Kaizen program claims to get more than one million ideas a year from their workers. The Japanese have not invented one element in the process of photography, yet they dominate the market. This is because thousands of little innovations through kaizen have steadily improved the camera. (Macdonald, 1993: 10).
Self Managing Teams or Autonomous Work Groups
Self managing teams or autonomous working groups carry participative management to its logical conclusion. Not only is the job enlarged to include a wider range of operative skills but it is also enlarge by giving employees responsibility for basic management activities, such as deciding upon methods of work and the scheduling and planning of work.
A prime example of autonomous work groups is at the General Electrical Durham plant that assembles engines for the Boeing 777 there are 170 employees and only one manager. There are nine teams, each with only one directive: the day the next engine must be loaded. Teams decide who does which work; they schedule training, vacations and overtime; and they deal with teamate’s issues of productivity or lack of work ethic. But this is seldom a problem. Although there are no incentives other than promotion on the basis of skill, technicians are motivated by the work it self, the drive for perfection and pride for supplying one of the highest trust engines in the industry. Teams also send members to a work council that deals with issues such as supplier problems, computer systems and human resource issues. What is the manager’s job? Listening, informing, focusing the teams on costs and representing the factory to the customer and within General Electrical. (Maccoby, 2000:1)
Total Quality Management
TQM was the brainchild of an American the late W. Edwards Deming. (1900 - 1993) He helped Japan with its post-war economic recovery in the 1950’s teaching TQM principles to Japanese top management. Total Quality is a description of the culture, attitude and organization of a company that aims to provide, and continue to provide, its customers with products and services that satisfy their needs. The culture requires quality in all aspects of the company's operations, with things being done right first time, and defects and waste eradicated from operations. A successful TQM environment requires a committed and well-trained work force that participates fully in quality improvement activities. Such participation is reinforced by reward and recognition systems which emphasize the achievement of quality objectives. On-going education and training of all employees supports the drive for quality. Employees are encouraged to take more responsibility, communicate more effectively, act creatively, and innovate. As people behave the way they are measured and remunerated, TQM links remuneration to customer satisfaction metrics. (Macdonald, 1993)
Management by Objectives (MBO)
Management by Objectives (MBO) is a process between mangers and employees of agreeing upon objectives within an organization. MBO term was first popularized by Peter Drucker in 1954 in his book 'The Practice of Management'. The process requires that the manager and the employee agree through a participative process to what the employee will attempt to achieve in a set period ahead, and that the employee accept and agree to the set objectives. By in doing so the employee ensures commitment and productivity because the employee is part of the process. An illustrations of MBO in security management could be to allow sub ordinates to participate by quantifying Service Level Agreement targets in a security contract and let the sub ordinates participate in setting the objectives to achieve these targets: These targets could be for example: Contractual hours provide over a period of time. How many patrols must be done, how many car searches must be done, how many body searches must be done, customer related services, health and safety, value added services.
It is imperative that in applying the basic principles of MBO one have to stick to the prescribed SMART method. Objectives are demoralising if they are too difficult and it have no purpose if it is too easy. There for MBO introduced the SMART method for checking the validity and attainability of objectives and goals. Objectives should be Specific. Secondly goals and objectives should be Measurable. Thirdly they must be Achievable, too easy or too difficult objectives have no effect. Objectives must be Realistic. Realistic goals are potentially challenging but not so challenging that the chance of success is small. The final factor for a good goal or objective is that it is Time-based. There is a time based period attached to the objective, which have a beginning and an end.
According to McCormick and Ilgen (1981) goals and objectives have two major functions; they provide a basis for motivation, and they guide workplace behaviours. Goals guide behaviour in conjunction with feedback. Holistically viewed MBO would consist of Goal setting, Participatory decision making, Incentive systems and Job design. Management by objectives fail if it is solely used for the purpose of staff appraisals.
The primary objective of all of the mentioned participative management techniques is to increase productivity through employee motivation. This necessitates a basic understanding of motivation.
Motivation
Motivation’s history start with a concept of avoidance of pain and a search for pleasure to date with the acceptance that there are two types of motivation theories namely: Content theories which are need based theories and Process theories which are processed based. Content theories assume that all individuals’ posses the same set of needs and therefore prescribe the characteristics that ought to be present in jobs. Process theories stress the difference in people’s needs and focus on the cognitive processes that create these differences.
Examples of need theories are, Maslow need hierarchy, Douglass McGregor’s X and Y theory, Aldderfer’s ERG theory, Hertzberg’s two factor theory and McClelland’s need theory, and examples of process theories are J. Stacy Adams, Equity theory and Victor Vroom’s, Expectancy theory.
Definition of Motivation
The concept of motivation is so complex that theorists compiled more than 140 definitions but Buchanan and Huczynski (2004) definition describing, motivation as the cognitive, decision making process through which goal directed behaviour is initiated, energized, and directed and maintained, encompasses the wide range of key elements sufficiently. The key elements are distinct but related:
Goals: This determines the main motives for the behaviour.
Decisions: Subjective, cognitive reasons to pursue goals.
Energise: Effort and how hard the person try to obtain the goals.
Maintain: The determination and persistence for how long a person try.
Maslow Hierarchy Theory of Needs
One of the most influential motivation theories developed is the need hierarchy model developed by Abraham Maslow. Maslow’s theory of motivation claims that human motives develop sequentially and according to a hierarchy of given levels of need.
The needs been:-
1. Physiological needs - air, food, drink, shelter, warmth, sex, sleep, etc.
2. Safety needs - protection from elements, security, order, law, limits, stability,
3. Belongingness and Love needs - work group, family, affection, relationships,
4. Esteem needs - self-esteem, achievement, mastery, independence, status, dominance, prestige, managerial responsibility, etc.
5. Self-Actualization needs - realising personal potential, self-fulfilment, seeking personal growth and peak experiences. For continued self development.
The hierarchical approach of the theoretical model has two related aspects. Firstly it assumes that the needs are activated in a sequential manner with a need at a higher level only activated when the next lower need has been satisfied. Secondly when a need is satisfied it decline in strength and cease to be the dominant need. The declining in strength of as satisfied need asserts Maslow’s believe that a satisfied need is not motivational. (Robertson:1987)
The one primarily flaw in the theory is that people not necessary satisfy their higher order needs through their jobs. The preset sequential form of the theory and the inability to test the theory in research lead to serious criticism of the theory.
Clayton Alderfer ERG Theory
In an attempt to over come these criticisms Clayton Alderfer expanded and refined Maslow’s theory by creating his ERG theory of needs. He reduced the level of needs to three needs Existence, Relatedness, Growth.
1) Existence needs—desires for physiological and material well-being.
2) Relatedness needs—desires for satisfying interpersonal relationships.
3) Growth needs—desires for continued psychological growth and development
The basic differences between the Maslow’s and Alderfer theories are; Alderfer took the sequential hierarchy prescription of Maslow theory away and saw his theory not as hierarchy but more as a continuum and he noted that there can be more than one need at a given time. Alderfer also introduced a regression element when one need does not get fully satisfied the person regress back to the previous satisfied need, this regression element is absent in Maslow’s theory. Alders theory did offer an improvement on Maslow’s theory but it was not the breakthrough it intended to be and suffered the same criticisms as Maslow.
(Moorhead, G: 2004)
Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory:
One motivation theory that can be of huge benefit to the security manger is Herzberg’s Two Factor theory. Herzberg interviewed a number of people in different professions at different levels and the results of these interviews lead to the establishing of his two factor theory of motivation. He identified factors that motivate the interviewed people in the workplace and factors that cause job dissatisfaction: Achievement, recognition, responsibility and advancement were identified as the factors that gave employees an incentive to work resulting in job satisfaction. Hertzberg referred to them as 'motivators'. These motivators increased the job satisfaction of the employee and further increased their efficiency and productivity.
Factors like pay, work conditions, supervision, management and how the business is run, were identified as factors that prevented job dissatisfaction. These did not make the employees happy or have job satisfaction; it just removed the unhappiness out of working. They are also referred to as 'hygiene' factors. Such hygiene factors, if not satisfied, had an effect of reduced employee efficiency.
Herzberg believed that all factors fell into one of these categories and therefore had separate consequences. His research concluded that some factors fell into both categories although they held a stronger position in one of them. (Herzberg, F: 1968)
To understand Herzberg theory is actually very simple and the whole theory can be summed up in two questions:-
Which factors make us work? Answer the hygiene factors
Which factors make us work well? Answer the Motivators.
Or one can state. Our employment contract makes us work (Hygienic factors) but fulfilment of our psychological contract make us work well. (Motivators)
The following statement encapsulates the relationship between Motivation and Participative Management. “Employees are more committed and experience more job satisfaction when they are allowed to participate in decision making. Organizations have reported that productivity improved significantly when managers used a participative style.” (DuFrene, 2006:4)
Participative management, however, involves more than allowing employees to take part in making decisions. It necessitates the re-design of jobs where this participative management concept can function.
Job Design.
If high productivity is the cake then participative management is the recipe, motivation the ingredients and job design the oven in where this cake gets baked. Yet it does not matter how good and prescriptive the recipe is or how good the quality is of the ingredients, if the oven is not set at the correct temperature the cake will be a flop. This analogy illustrated the crucial importance of job design to harness participative management and its role to maximize productivity.
Job Design History
Early management styles and in particular Taylorism and Fordism had in mind to structure jobs in such a manner to create maximum organisational efficiency but it lead to monotonous jobs. These jobs were described in the traditional job description which contained the do’s and don’ts of the job. The job description simply spelled out for the employee what tasks the employer expects him/her to fulfil.
As management evolved and a better understanding of motivation was gained this understanding then had inevitable consequences for the traditional job description. The redesign of jobs arises from the idea that many people have a psychological need to extent their skills and to develop their competence. By designing jobs in such a way that employees can fulfil these needs an organisation can encourage employees to become more satisfied and motivated.
One of the most influential theorists in this regard was Herzberg. He promoted his theory on the basis it is inextricably link to the redesign of jobs to create job satisfaction. He strongly propagated job enrichment programs. Herzberg argued that job enrichment is required for intrinsic motivation and that this is a continuous management process.
Hackman and Oldman (1975) as quoted by Buchanan and Huczynski (2004) suggest job characteristics that motivate are: Skill variety of work, Task identity, Task significance, Autonomy, and feedback. Jobs should be designed where possible to include these characteristics.
The main types of job enrichment are job to fit, job rotation, job enlargement, Self mange teams or autonomous working groups.
Job to Fit
Job to fit starts at recruiting and screening and is aimed to recruit the “right” person for the job. You will not appoint an engineer if the position needs a medical practitioner. There are many managerial aids that can assist in this process. Psychometric test batteries developed to analyse particularly characteristic traits for specific jobs is available and can be used to appoint the correct person.
Job Rotation
Job rotation is the most rudimentary type of job redesign. The concept entails putting together three or four monotonous, usually unskilled jobs. For instance a security contract entails the covering of four different posts. The concept of job rotation would then mean the security officer will rotate during the course of a shift and do duty at each post. The criticism against job rotation is it is just the replacement of one monotonous job for another one.
Job Enlargement
Job enlargement involves widening the job prospects and to develop additional skills
Nearly all job enlargement projects entails costs and in that lays the criticism. Job enlargement could be adding only one skill or the redesign of the whole organisational environment.
For example Volvo auto manufacturer in Sweden in its efforts to reduce the instances of employee turnover and absenteeism in its manufacturing facilities, Volvo introduced innovative job enrichment programs including job rotation, management employee councils, small work groups, change implementation and employee oriented facilities.
Probably the best known examples come from Volvo’s plants at Kalmar and Uddevalla in Sweden. The Kalmar plant was a new factory employing 600 people in the south of Sweden. The Volvo management took a deliberate decision to attempt to design jobs in this factory that would be better from the workers point of view and as well as being efficient. The redesign entailed moving away from the standardized conveyor belt factory to a factory that involves more flexible working methods. The production process was then redesigned and based on groups of workers and not on the individual worker and these working groups had the following characteristics: They worked in quieter surroundings. They had individual meeting and rest areas. The group had responsibility for identifiable portions of the car. Manual controls were put in to override the computer controlling the production flow. Groups were given control of the work pace. Groups are responsible for their own inspections and quality control. Groups gave feedback on persistent or recurring problems and participate in solving it.
(Robertson: 1987)
Volvo closed the Kalmar and Uddevalla plants for debateable reasons. At the height of production cars in these plants were produced at an average of 32 hours per unit where as the industry norm was 43 hours per unit underpinning the relationship between participative management, motivation and productivity.
Conclusion
Participation in management is a highly complex topic. Participative management has it’s origins in the 1920’s and till to date evolving where it reach the ultimate in self manage teams or where workers have full ownership of the organisation. The simple fact is that participative management arranges an acceptable relationship between management and employee. This arrangement has a profound effect on employee job satisfaction which leads to increased motivation, efficiency and productivity. The validation for this is found in countless empirical researches and anecdotal case studies, like the Hawthorne studies and McGregor’s theory X and theory Y.
The motivation theories presented all has their weaknesses and their strengths. There is no easy answer to the question. “What motivates people to work? When thinking about motivation it is important to take a long-term view. What is needed is a sustainable approach to maintain enthusiasm and commitment from the employees. This is not easy; but it is essential for effectiveness. Several factors, such as salary levels, working conditions and company policy, which de-motivated by being poor rather that motivated by being good is beyond the control and influence of a low level security manger or supervisor. The point is that security managers can not enhance their sub ordinates performance through these factors.
What the security manager can influence is the local work environment and particularly the way in which he interact with the employees through his leadership and management style in particular executing a participative management style. He can create a just and fair work environment fulfilling the employee’s psychological contract by applying the principles of the equity theory. Even the partial application of Herzberg two factor theory by security managers and supervisors can be successful because the positive motivator’s, achievement, recognition, the importance of the work itself, responsibility, and advancement of employees cost nothing and it is in every security mangers scope to promote it.
Absent in all motivation theories is the semantically notion human dignity only one aspect of dignity namely esteem get addressed. It would be beneficial for the future to apply this notion in conjunction with motivational concepts when you manage with the goal of improving motivation and participation. Human dignity eliminates all bad discriminatory practises like, sexism, racism, and ageism and that in it self could have a positive effect on motivation.
When designing jobs for security it is in particular problematic because in many cases especially in guarding the requirement is presence and not intellect or ability. This resulted that virtually all management systems in guarding even in the large global organisations are authoritarian applications geared to ensure presence and very little else. With sound academic knowledge the security manager can go along way in making a difference in creating a work environment conducive for jobs satisfaction and the golden threat creating this environment is acknowledging the employees dignity and let him participate in the decision making process in what he is doing.
Participative management is not an instant panacea for bad, low productive or non functional organisations and it fails in many organisations for precisely this reason. Participative Management is a complex fully integrated management method that needs constant improvement, innovation and participation from all. Participative Management is the key to successful security management.
Met die kondig ek die einde aan van Module een; Op 'n kol het ek gedog ek sien nie die einde maar tog het dit gekom.
Participative Management, Motivation, Job Design
Introduction:
In the last century a plethora of management, leadership and motivation theories have emanated. Managing the relationship between employer and employee has been the subject of a significant amount of research.
The typology of the management theories practises and thought that dominated the first half of the previous century could be classified into two schools of thought. Theories and thoughts that have an enduring influence on management till today namely; The Scientific management movement (Taylorism: 1911) approach and the subsequent Human Relationship school (Elton Mayo’s Hawthorne studies: 1932) approach.
Participative management has been around a long time with some of its foundation elements going back to the 1920’sand 1930’s. In later years the themes were formalized and popularized by behavioural scientists such as Blake and Mouton’s managerial Grid, Macgregor’s Theory X and Theory Y, Lickert’s four-model leadership systems and Peter Drucker Management by Objectives. The central idea of participative management is that empowered employees will feel better about their jobs and be more productive.
Management of the employee relationship has been subjected to constant and significant changes, the last forty years. Technology, globalisation, and the speed at which information is available, the intellectual maturity of the employee and the endless restructuring of organisations, created an organisational environment in constant change. The evolutionary paradigmatic shift in the organisational social power towards a more nonlinear and more participative nature causes the re-evaluation of the manager’s role, the manager’s job description, the employee description, the employee job description, the employment contract and the employee psychological contract. This re-evaluation necessitates an understanding of the principles of participative management, motivation and the re-design of jobs.
Definition of Participative management:
In the absence of a single universal definition of Participative Management the common practice is to apply an analysis of the general semantics involved in an attempt to define the notion. To define participative management one must firstly look at the definition of management.
Mary Parker Follet (1925) described management as an art most probably because Management’s historic origin is from the old French word m?nagement meaning “the art of conducting, directing.” (Wikkipedia, 2006) John Adair describes management from the basis of the Latin word manu agere “to lead by the hand”. (Adair, 1990: 60)
Secondly one has to analyse the word “participative“ in the management context which means to participate, share or to co-operate. The word participative emphasise a bi lateral contribution to the goal or objective.
The principle object of management should be to secure the maximum prosperity for the employer, coupled with the maximum prosperity for each employ?. (Taylor, 1911: 1)
When you put the two words together i.e. Participative and Management you get a management style based on participation which involves the employees, it involves a process of sharing information and sharing in decision making and it involves a combined effort to attain organisational goals.
An acceptable definition for participative management could then be: “An art of management and technique whereby the goals, actions, direction and control of the organisation are shared between management and the employees for the purpose of maximum prosperity for all. “
Evolution of Participative Management
Participative management is the prodigy of a synthesis of several management, leadership and motivational theories. Participative management is focused around the attaining of organisational goals, sustainability and competitiveness.
Fredrick Taylor’s 1911 Principles of Scientific Management suggested that a worker was only motivated by money. Taylor was the founder of time in motion study and suggested that tasks should be made as simple as possible for the worker. This would have the effect of increased production and increased earning capacity for the workers through the introduction of piece working. The major elements of this style of management were, control, command and compliance. But this approach had obvious side effects. Principles of scientific management equate the employee’s role to the same role as the machine. The workers did not have to think and the manager just had to control. Critics saw these principles as the dehumanising of the worker. This criticism evolved into enlightened approach to management after the findings of research, referred to as the Hawthorne Studies by Elton Mayo from 1924 to 1932 was published. This study concluded that employees are not motivated solely by money and employee behaviour is linked to their attitudes. (McNamara, C: 1999)
The Hawthorne Studies conducted during the 1920 and early 1930’s by Elton Mayo discovered and began the Human relations approach to management, whereby the needs and the motivation of employees become the primary focus of managers. Mayo took six women from the assembly line, segregated them from the rest of the factory, place them under the supervision of a non authoritarian type of supervisor. Mayo changed their working conditions constantly studying the effect of these changes on productivity. In the process he stumbled upon a principle of human motivation that would revolutionise the theory and practise of management. This shift in focus lead to a more participative type of management styles, the redesigning of jobs as management attempt to acknowledge this needs and start experiencing the positive effect of motivation on productivity. (Robertson: 1987)
The Participative Management Environment
Instead of imposing on the employee the manager would rather be responsible to create an environment for employees to achieve their own goals in line with the goals of the organisation. This is very difficult because the traditional security manager is an authoritarian with some militaristic background and they find it extremely difficult to let go of authoritarian management traits. The key to this environment would be the presence of factors conducive for participative management.
Characteristics of a motivating environment are:
1. The employees have a realistic understanding of the links between effort and performance, i.e. they know how hard they need to work to reach various levels of performance.
2. Employees have the competence and confidence to translate effort into performance. Control systems are introduced only when necessary.
3. Performance requirements are expressed in terms of hard, but attainable, specific goals. Employees participate in setting goals.
4. Feedback to employees is regular, informative and easy to interpret.
5. Employees are praised for good performance.
6. Rewards including pay are seen as equitable.
7. Rewards are tailored to individual requirements and preferences.
8. Employee psychological and physical well-being is recognized as important.
9. Productivity is recognized as important.
10. Jobs are designed, where possible, to maximize: Skill variety of work, Task identity,
Task significance, Autonomy, and feedback. (Robertson: 1987)
Manifestation of Participative Management
At the individual level participative management means an employee participates in the decisions that need to be made about the work he or she does. This seems quite simple and basic, but it is not because the nature and depth of participation can vary along several dimensions and differs from organisation to organisation.
The normative for participative management programs in organisations can loosely be described as from fully integrated participation programs, sectorial participation programs, pseudo participation programs to the total absence of any participative programs. Fully integrated participative programs function on the basis that all relevant actions, discussions and decisions are shared. There exist fully integrated two way communication channels.
Rensis Liekert published The Human Organisation in 1961, in which he classified management styles into four categories: authoritarian, benevolent, consultative or participative. The benefits of the participative style for Liekert represent the ideal.
There is a large array of positive participative management techniques available for the manager. Theories like Douglas McGregor Theory X and Theory Y, or managerial programs like Quality Circles, Self Managing Teams, Total Quality Management and Management by Objectives, Virtual Teams are just a few examples.
Douglas McGregor Theory X and Theory Y:
McGregor’s X-Y theory has an element of uniqueness in that it is commonly referred to in both the fields of management and motivation. It is this cross over ability which makes it a valid basic principle from which to develop positive management styles and techniques that could lead to fully integrated participative management programs.
Douglas McGregor was an American Psychologist. Building on Abraham Maslow’s motivation theory of hierarchy of needs, McGregor formulate two opposing assumptions about human nature and motivation. These assumptions he articulated as Theory X and Theory Y. Theory X assumes the average person dislikes work and will avoid it he/she can.
Therefore most people must be forced with the threat of punishment to work towards organisational objectives. The average person prefers to be directed; to avoid responsibility; is relatively un-ambitious, and wants security above all else. Theory Y assumes effort in work is as natural as work and play. People will apply self-control and self-direction in the pursuit of organisational objectives, without external control or the threat of punishment. Commitment to objectives is a function of rewards associated with their achievement. People usually accept and often seek responsibility. The capacity to use a high degree of imagination, ingenuity and creativity in solving organisational problems is widely, not narrowly, distributed in the population. In industry the intellectual potential of the average person is only partly utilised. (Chapman: 2006.)
To categorize the two theories by their key characteristics one can say. Theory X is an oppressive, repressive type of style with very tight controls, no development and no creativity and that would make it an authoritarian type of management style. This style is very prevalent in the security industry. Theory Y being an enlightened view, empowering people, developing people, giving responsibility to people would be classified as a participative type of management style.
Mark Davies (Honda UK) in answering the question; what is the job of a leader he explains. “In Honda everyone is expected to be a leader and to take responsibility for their part of the business, bringing forward ideas and suggestions on how to improve. That is a great system and makes for forward –thinking. Creative environment just what Mr Honda advocated.” (Leary – Joyce. 2005)
It is clear when analysing Davies words, everybody takes responsibility, everybody brings ideas forward and that there is a thriving participative and creative environment in Honda as been envisage by its founder Mr Honda. Honda is achieving a top ranking year after year in The Sunday Times list of one hundred best companies to work for. This status quo can be attributed to the participative nature of the management style that exists in Honda. Managers and employees in Honda could be classified as Theory Y type of personalities in their attitude which ensure Honda’s, competitiveness growth and sustainability.
Quality Circles.
One of the most publicised aspects of the Japanese approach to quality management is the idea of Quality Circles or Kaizen teams. Quality circles are a communication channel through which the lowest level of employee in the organisation can participate in the improvement of product quality or service, by providing a creative input or suggestions. Quality Circles or Kaizen can very easily and with great success be introduced in any security management plan.
Kaizen is a Japanese word meaning “improvement.” The quality circle or kaizen team constantly seek to achieve this objective. The car manufacturer Toyota in its Kaizen program claims to get more than one million ideas a year from their workers. The Japanese have not invented one element in the process of photography, yet they dominate the market. This is because thousands of little innovations through kaizen have steadily improved the camera. (Macdonald, 1993: 10).
Self Managing Teams or Autonomous Work Groups
Self managing teams or autonomous working groups carry participative management to its logical conclusion. Not only is the job enlarged to include a wider range of operative skills but it is also enlarge by giving employees responsibility for basic management activities, such as deciding upon methods of work and the scheduling and planning of work.
A prime example of autonomous work groups is at the General Electrical Durham plant that assembles engines for the Boeing 777 there are 170 employees and only one manager. There are nine teams, each with only one directive: the day the next engine must be loaded. Teams decide who does which work; they schedule training, vacations and overtime; and they deal with teamate’s issues of productivity or lack of work ethic. But this is seldom a problem. Although there are no incentives other than promotion on the basis of skill, technicians are motivated by the work it self, the drive for perfection and pride for supplying one of the highest trust engines in the industry. Teams also send members to a work council that deals with issues such as supplier problems, computer systems and human resource issues. What is the manager’s job? Listening, informing, focusing the teams on costs and representing the factory to the customer and within General Electrical. (Maccoby, 2000:1)
Total Quality Management
TQM was the brainchild of an American the late W. Edwards Deming. (1900 - 1993) He helped Japan with its post-war economic recovery in the 1950’s teaching TQM principles to Japanese top management. Total Quality is a description of the culture, attitude and organization of a company that aims to provide, and continue to provide, its customers with products and services that satisfy their needs. The culture requires quality in all aspects of the company's operations, with things being done right first time, and defects and waste eradicated from operations. A successful TQM environment requires a committed and well-trained work force that participates fully in quality improvement activities. Such participation is reinforced by reward and recognition systems which emphasize the achievement of quality objectives. On-going education and training of all employees supports the drive for quality. Employees are encouraged to take more responsibility, communicate more effectively, act creatively, and innovate. As people behave the way they are measured and remunerated, TQM links remuneration to customer satisfaction metrics. (Macdonald, 1993)
Management by Objectives (MBO)
Management by Objectives (MBO) is a process between mangers and employees of agreeing upon objectives within an organization. MBO term was first popularized by Peter Drucker in 1954 in his book 'The Practice of Management'. The process requires that the manager and the employee agree through a participative process to what the employee will attempt to achieve in a set period ahead, and that the employee accept and agree to the set objectives. By in doing so the employee ensures commitment and productivity because the employee is part of the process. An illustrations of MBO in security management could be to allow sub ordinates to participate by quantifying Service Level Agreement targets in a security contract and let the sub ordinates participate in setting the objectives to achieve these targets: These targets could be for example: Contractual hours provide over a period of time. How many patrols must be done, how many car searches must be done, how many body searches must be done, customer related services, health and safety, value added services.
It is imperative that in applying the basic principles of MBO one have to stick to the prescribed SMART method. Objectives are demoralising if they are too difficult and it have no purpose if it is too easy. There for MBO introduced the SMART method for checking the validity and attainability of objectives and goals. Objectives should be Specific. Secondly goals and objectives should be Measurable. Thirdly they must be Achievable, too easy or too difficult objectives have no effect. Objectives must be Realistic. Realistic goals are potentially challenging but not so challenging that the chance of success is small. The final factor for a good goal or objective is that it is Time-based. There is a time based period attached to the objective, which have a beginning and an end.
According to McCormick and Ilgen (1981) goals and objectives have two major functions; they provide a basis for motivation, and they guide workplace behaviours. Goals guide behaviour in conjunction with feedback. Holistically viewed MBO would consist of Goal setting, Participatory decision making, Incentive systems and Job design. Management by objectives fail if it is solely used for the purpose of staff appraisals.
The primary objective of all of the mentioned participative management techniques is to increase productivity through employee motivation. This necessitates a basic understanding of motivation.
Motivation
Motivation’s history start with a concept of avoidance of pain and a search for pleasure to date with the acceptance that there are two types of motivation theories namely: Content theories which are need based theories and Process theories which are processed based. Content theories assume that all individuals’ posses the same set of needs and therefore prescribe the characteristics that ought to be present in jobs. Process theories stress the difference in people’s needs and focus on the cognitive processes that create these differences.
Examples of need theories are, Maslow need hierarchy, Douglass McGregor’s X and Y theory, Aldderfer’s ERG theory, Hertzberg’s two factor theory and McClelland’s need theory, and examples of process theories are J. Stacy Adams, Equity theory and Victor Vroom’s, Expectancy theory.
Definition of Motivation
The concept of motivation is so complex that theorists compiled more than 140 definitions but Buchanan and Huczynski (2004) definition describing, motivation as the cognitive, decision making process through which goal directed behaviour is initiated, energized, and directed and maintained, encompasses the wide range of key elements sufficiently. The key elements are distinct but related:
Goals: This determines the main motives for the behaviour.
Decisions: Subjective, cognitive reasons to pursue goals.
Energise: Effort and how hard the person try to obtain the goals.
Maintain: The determination and persistence for how long a person try.
Maslow Hierarchy Theory of Needs
One of the most influential motivation theories developed is the need hierarchy model developed by Abraham Maslow. Maslow’s theory of motivation claims that human motives develop sequentially and according to a hierarchy of given levels of need.
The needs been:-
1. Physiological needs - air, food, drink, shelter, warmth, sex, sleep, etc.
2. Safety needs - protection from elements, security, order, law, limits, stability,
3. Belongingness and Love needs - work group, family, affection, relationships,
4. Esteem needs - self-esteem, achievement, mastery, independence, status, dominance, prestige, managerial responsibility, etc.
5. Self-Actualization needs - realising personal potential, self-fulfilment, seeking personal growth and peak experiences. For continued self development.
The hierarchical approach of the theoretical model has two related aspects. Firstly it assumes that the needs are activated in a sequential manner with a need at a higher level only activated when the next lower need has been satisfied. Secondly when a need is satisfied it decline in strength and cease to be the dominant need. The declining in strength of as satisfied need asserts Maslow’s believe that a satisfied need is not motivational. (Robertson:1987)
The one primarily flaw in the theory is that people not necessary satisfy their higher order needs through their jobs. The preset sequential form of the theory and the inability to test the theory in research lead to serious criticism of the theory.
Clayton Alderfer ERG Theory
In an attempt to over come these criticisms Clayton Alderfer expanded and refined Maslow’s theory by creating his ERG theory of needs. He reduced the level of needs to three needs Existence, Relatedness, Growth.
1) Existence needs—desires for physiological and material well-being.
2) Relatedness needs—desires for satisfying interpersonal relationships.
3) Growth needs—desires for continued psychological growth and development
The basic differences between the Maslow’s and Alderfer theories are; Alderfer took the sequential hierarchy prescription of Maslow theory away and saw his theory not as hierarchy but more as a continuum and he noted that there can be more than one need at a given time. Alderfer also introduced a regression element when one need does not get fully satisfied the person regress back to the previous satisfied need, this regression element is absent in Maslow’s theory. Alders theory did offer an improvement on Maslow’s theory but it was not the breakthrough it intended to be and suffered the same criticisms as Maslow.
(Moorhead, G: 2004)
Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory:
One motivation theory that can be of huge benefit to the security manger is Herzberg’s Two Factor theory. Herzberg interviewed a number of people in different professions at different levels and the results of these interviews lead to the establishing of his two factor theory of motivation. He identified factors that motivate the interviewed people in the workplace and factors that cause job dissatisfaction: Achievement, recognition, responsibility and advancement were identified as the factors that gave employees an incentive to work resulting in job satisfaction. Hertzberg referred to them as 'motivators'. These motivators increased the job satisfaction of the employee and further increased their efficiency and productivity.
Factors like pay, work conditions, supervision, management and how the business is run, were identified as factors that prevented job dissatisfaction. These did not make the employees happy or have job satisfaction; it just removed the unhappiness out of working. They are also referred to as 'hygiene' factors. Such hygiene factors, if not satisfied, had an effect of reduced employee efficiency.
Herzberg believed that all factors fell into one of these categories and therefore had separate consequences. His research concluded that some factors fell into both categories although they held a stronger position in one of them. (Herzberg, F: 1968)
To understand Herzberg theory is actually very simple and the whole theory can be summed up in two questions:-
Which factors make us work? Answer the hygiene factors
Which factors make us work well? Answer the Motivators.
Or one can state. Our employment contract makes us work (Hygienic factors) but fulfilment of our psychological contract make us work well. (Motivators)
The following statement encapsulates the relationship between Motivation and Participative Management. “Employees are more committed and experience more job satisfaction when they are allowed to participate in decision making. Organizations have reported that productivity improved significantly when managers used a participative style.” (DuFrene, 2006:4)
Participative management, however, involves more than allowing employees to take part in making decisions. It necessitates the re-design of jobs where this participative management concept can function.
Job Design.
If high productivity is the cake then participative management is the recipe, motivation the ingredients and job design the oven in where this cake gets baked. Yet it does not matter how good and prescriptive the recipe is or how good the quality is of the ingredients, if the oven is not set at the correct temperature the cake will be a flop. This analogy illustrated the crucial importance of job design to harness participative management and its role to maximize productivity.
Job Design History
Early management styles and in particular Taylorism and Fordism had in mind to structure jobs in such a manner to create maximum organisational efficiency but it lead to monotonous jobs. These jobs were described in the traditional job description which contained the do’s and don’ts of the job. The job description simply spelled out for the employee what tasks the employer expects him/her to fulfil.
As management evolved and a better understanding of motivation was gained this understanding then had inevitable consequences for the traditional job description. The redesign of jobs arises from the idea that many people have a psychological need to extent their skills and to develop their competence. By designing jobs in such a way that employees can fulfil these needs an organisation can encourage employees to become more satisfied and motivated.
One of the most influential theorists in this regard was Herzberg. He promoted his theory on the basis it is inextricably link to the redesign of jobs to create job satisfaction. He strongly propagated job enrichment programs. Herzberg argued that job enrichment is required for intrinsic motivation and that this is a continuous management process.
Hackman and Oldman (1975) as quoted by Buchanan and Huczynski (2004) suggest job characteristics that motivate are: Skill variety of work, Task identity, Task significance, Autonomy, and feedback. Jobs should be designed where possible to include these characteristics.
The main types of job enrichment are job to fit, job rotation, job enlargement, Self mange teams or autonomous working groups.
Job to Fit
Job to fit starts at recruiting and screening and is aimed to recruit the “right” person for the job. You will not appoint an engineer if the position needs a medical practitioner. There are many managerial aids that can assist in this process. Psychometric test batteries developed to analyse particularly characteristic traits for specific jobs is available and can be used to appoint the correct person.
Job Rotation
Job rotation is the most rudimentary type of job redesign. The concept entails putting together three or four monotonous, usually unskilled jobs. For instance a security contract entails the covering of four different posts. The concept of job rotation would then mean the security officer will rotate during the course of a shift and do duty at each post. The criticism against job rotation is it is just the replacement of one monotonous job for another one.
Job Enlargement
Job enlargement involves widening the job prospects and to develop additional skills
Nearly all job enlargement projects entails costs and in that lays the criticism. Job enlargement could be adding only one skill or the redesign of the whole organisational environment.
For example Volvo auto manufacturer in Sweden in its efforts to reduce the instances of employee turnover and absenteeism in its manufacturing facilities, Volvo introduced innovative job enrichment programs including job rotation, management employee councils, small work groups, change implementation and employee oriented facilities.
Probably the best known examples come from Volvo’s plants at Kalmar and Uddevalla in Sweden. The Kalmar plant was a new factory employing 600 people in the south of Sweden. The Volvo management took a deliberate decision to attempt to design jobs in this factory that would be better from the workers point of view and as well as being efficient. The redesign entailed moving away from the standardized conveyor belt factory to a factory that involves more flexible working methods. The production process was then redesigned and based on groups of workers and not on the individual worker and these working groups had the following characteristics: They worked in quieter surroundings. They had individual meeting and rest areas. The group had responsibility for identifiable portions of the car. Manual controls were put in to override the computer controlling the production flow. Groups were given control of the work pace. Groups are responsible for their own inspections and quality control. Groups gave feedback on persistent or recurring problems and participate in solving it.
(Robertson: 1987)
Volvo closed the Kalmar and Uddevalla plants for debateable reasons. At the height of production cars in these plants were produced at an average of 32 hours per unit where as the industry norm was 43 hours per unit underpinning the relationship between participative management, motivation and productivity.
Conclusion
Participation in management is a highly complex topic. Participative management has it’s origins in the 1920’s and till to date evolving where it reach the ultimate in self manage teams or where workers have full ownership of the organisation. The simple fact is that participative management arranges an acceptable relationship between management and employee. This arrangement has a profound effect on employee job satisfaction which leads to increased motivation, efficiency and productivity. The validation for this is found in countless empirical researches and anecdotal case studies, like the Hawthorne studies and McGregor’s theory X and theory Y.
The motivation theories presented all has their weaknesses and their strengths. There is no easy answer to the question. “What motivates people to work? When thinking about motivation it is important to take a long-term view. What is needed is a sustainable approach to maintain enthusiasm and commitment from the employees. This is not easy; but it is essential for effectiveness. Several factors, such as salary levels, working conditions and company policy, which de-motivated by being poor rather that motivated by being good is beyond the control and influence of a low level security manger or supervisor. The point is that security managers can not enhance their sub ordinates performance through these factors.
What the security manager can influence is the local work environment and particularly the way in which he interact with the employees through his leadership and management style in particular executing a participative management style. He can create a just and fair work environment fulfilling the employee’s psychological contract by applying the principles of the equity theory. Even the partial application of Herzberg two factor theory by security managers and supervisors can be successful because the positive motivator’s, achievement, recognition, the importance of the work itself, responsibility, and advancement of employees cost nothing and it is in every security mangers scope to promote it.
Absent in all motivation theories is the semantically notion human dignity only one aspect of dignity namely esteem get addressed. It would be beneficial for the future to apply this notion in conjunction with motivational concepts when you manage with the goal of improving motivation and participation. Human dignity eliminates all bad discriminatory practises like, sexism, racism, and ageism and that in it self could have a positive effect on motivation.
When designing jobs for security it is in particular problematic because in many cases especially in guarding the requirement is presence and not intellect or ability. This resulted that virtually all management systems in guarding even in the large global organisations are authoritarian applications geared to ensure presence and very little else. With sound academic knowledge the security manager can go along way in making a difference in creating a work environment conducive for jobs satisfaction and the golden threat creating this environment is acknowledging the employees dignity and let him participate in the decision making process in what he is doing.
Participative management is not an instant panacea for bad, low productive or non functional organisations and it fails in many organisations for precisely this reason. Participative Management is a complex fully integrated management method that needs constant improvement, innovation and participation from all. Participative Management is the key to successful security management.
