More handpicked essays just for you.
Relationship between job satisfaction and job performance
Research proposal on job satisfaction and employee performance
The role of job satisfaction on performance
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
There are various organizational theories that attempt to evaluate the behavior of people in organizations, whether as a group or individually. The neo classical theory focuses on the needs of the workers and puts a premium on empowering employees in an effort to maximize their production (Colorado State University-Global Campus, 2010). Research by Sultana and Manivannan (2009) concludes that workers with institutional knowledge are a company’s most important company assets. A company needs to do what it can to retain these valuable assets, and neo classical thinking helped to spawn a new emphasis on job satisfaction and the social aspect of the workplace.
History of Neo Classical Theory
The neo classical theory became prevalent in the early to mid 20th Century, and was a shift in how management and organizational behavior was viewed. The previous prevailing thought was that a tough, authoritarian structure was best for productivity (Regina, 2012). Neo classical thinking theorized that this was not the case, but rather, productivity was best achieved through worker satisfaction and empowerment.
One important early contributor to the neo classical theory was Elton Mayo. Mayo’s group conducted a study known as the Hawthorne study at an electric company plant. They studied working conditions at the plant and investigated the role that social elements played in worker satisfaction and productivity (Mayo, 1933). The study concluded that employees are more productive when motivated by recognition and praise than by financial reward, and that management needs to be cognizant of the role that social elements play in affecting productivity (Almusaileem, 2012).
Others who made important contributions to this movement were Chester Bernard and Herbert Simon. Bernard attempted to create a comprehensive theory of behavior in organizations based on the need for cooperation. Simon theorized that previous held classical beliefs were not applicable to most management situations. The neo classical theory helped to usher in a new way of thinking about productivity and the importance of worker satisfaction (Regina, 2012). This led to other theories that continued to emphasize the correlation between worker satisfaction and productivity.
Applications of Neo Classical Theory
Elements of the neo classical theory, namely the importance placed on worker satisfaction, are applied to many areas of management. It influences hiring, evaluation, motivation, rewarding and disciplining practices. It is also one of the reasons why many managers and leaders put such an emphasis on creating and cultivating a culture that encourages employee creativity and innovation.
“Building Human and social capital, the informed workers that add value by working smarter rather than harder are more important in today 's workforce. Strategic importance and dimensions. Having a dependable, trusting team and cooperative relationships. Continuing to build organizational learning has been the key to their success”. (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2013, p. 14). So many organizations are willing to pay the expense for college for their employees with terms an agreements must be made the employee must maintain a passing grade in each class and the classes must be beneficial to the organization in order for the classes to get paid. Organizations today would rather have employees Knowledgeable about matters that concern the job, the information that you possess is more important to the economy along with who you know that will enpower growth. “Similar to culture, the implementation of strategy requires employee buy-in and is subject to the influence of the organizational social network. Any leader, from a CEO implementing companywide changes to a line manager making adjustments to the work schedule, needs the changes to be accepted by his or her subordinates”.(Hollenbeck, J....
This study will also identify the theories that will help answer these and other questions. In addition, this research will determine methods in which these theories can motivate the employees.
Organizational theory emerged from examining the changing landscape and role of industrial organizations and the desire to enhance productivity during the industrial age of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries (Hatch & Cunliffe, 2013). These theories became valued frameworks in producing solutions and guidelines for leaders in combatting common organizational problems (Hatch & Cunliffe, 2013). Therefore, organizational success may be viewed as deeply connected to an organization’s ability to understand and embrace its fundamental purpose, and be guided by leadership that is most effective in promoting that purpose. Furthermore, the way in which leaders view and value their workers ultimately impacts organizational design, leadership style, and culture, which are critical to organizational success (Bowman & Deal, 2008). This paper will explore the impact of change and challenges in leadership in The University of Texas at Austin’s Office of
As the theme of my essay I have chosen to find out what our contemporary society must not forget in order to be able to make organizational theory evolve well into the 21st century. For this task I have decided to take a look back to Aldous Huxley’s modern dystopia “Brave new world”, that warned against totalitarian regimes that intended to suppress individuality in order to advance the interest of the state in its time. Even as those regimes might not be a direct threat nowadays we can eerily conclude that some aspects of it are quite accurate for the times we live in. According to Phillip Yancey who suggested that “there is a much more subtle enemy inchoate within each of us - a natural tendency for people to trade autonomy for comfort, safety and amusement.” This for the most people does not set off alarms but I will argue that it is the most basic requirement that has to be met in our day and age in order to tackle the wide range of issues that we face at the crossroads leading to the future, whether we talk about humanity or organizational theory itself. I think the novel gives us the perfect opportunity to draw parallels with our contemporary society, and see what must be corrected within post modernity based on how things evolved over the course of history and from prophetical books like Huxley’s even as at his time it was only intended to be satire. In the World State people are controlled by technologies like genetic engineering, sleep-learning and drugs like soma to satisfy needs and gently induce masses to enjoy their servitude. If one were to describe postmodernism in just a word or two, "skepticism" and "relativism" would probably best capture the overall ethos of its adherents. Deep skepticism about...
In his work Application of the Maslow’s hierarchy of need theory, Dr. Nyameh Jerome states that it may be definitely linked to the complex organization of the contemporary workplace. He highlights a theory’s importance for organizational culture, human resource management, and employee’s performance and thoroughly examines its impact on them. From his perspective, every organization passes through lower stages of satisfying basic physiological and safety needs to the higher levels of social needs, self-esteem and self-actualization. He reveals the interconnection between individual needs and organizational goals, “at the third level of the Maslow’s hierarchy, social needs would correspond to the formation of organized roles within the organization into distinct units. The positive interaction of organizational culture and human resource management would result in self-esteem and self-actualization. It also implies that the organization through its employees has excelled and met their objectives, mission and vision statement, i.e. a stage that can be considered parallel to self-actualization. “(2013, p.
Levy, Paul E. Industrial Organizational Psychology. New York: Worth, 2013. Print. The. Laird, Dugan, Sharon S. Naquin, and Elwood F. Holton.
There are several theories that examine an organization and it’s approach to managing work in an effort to develop efficiency and increase production. Two classical approaches to management are Taylor’s scientific management theory and Weber's bureaucratic management theory. Both men are considered pioneers of in the study of management.
this theory can be valuable when we apply it in workplaces in several ways , from how employees interact together, clients and customers to how they work to make the company more successful.
The period between the 1920 and 1930 saw the introduction of the Hawthorne Studies and brought about radical changes in organisational behaviour. The once popular belief that increasing output of an organisation was directly related to increasing workers' wages was disproved. Experiments conducted by Elton Mayo proved that there were more than economic factors that improved efficiency. During the tests, behavioural science which is also known as human relations was a key component to improve organisational output.
There are various challenges faced and even more opportunities for organizational behavior to assist workers in improving the workplace as a whole, people skills, productivity, and customer service. Understanding and taking time to learn and educate one’s self is how attitudes develop and affect behavior is a key component to organizational Behavior. The bottom line is that the more tuned into the needs of its employees, the more successful a company is likely to become. A company will absolutely benefit a great deal so long as employees and management alike are able to control and monitor their attitudes for the appropriate
...n highly repetitive tasks which could lead to boredom and employees feeling like machinery. Third, Taylor and Weber’s systems ignored employee relationships and group dynamics which play some role in employee happiness. Both Taylor and Weber’s systems reduced worker discretion, flexibility, and motivation. Neither believed that specific employees were essential to efficiency and effectiveness and dehumanized the workers.
...s in the corporate world by setting new standards to promote and better satisfy their employees. We chose four leading companies in four different industries. The above analysis definitely reveals that perhaps one of the reasons why these companies are the leaders in their industry is because they are well aware of the importance of the work force. They mention in their mission statements as well that yes in deed customers are important but in order to make the customer happy they first need to motivate and satisfy the employee as well. According to Citibank, the general belief is that a happy worker is a motivated and loyal one. So keeping employees' spirits high is a sure-fire way of maintaining a productive workforce. A productive work force would ultimately lead to a healthy organization which would not only promote the society its working for but also itself.
There are three well-established theories of classical management: Taylor?s Theory of Scientific Management, Fayol?s Administrative Theory, Weber?s Theory of Bureaucracy. Although these schools, or theories, developed historical sequence, later ideas have not replaced earlier ones. Instead, each new school has tended to complement or coexist with previous ones.
Since the end of the 19th century, when factory manufacturing became widespread and the size of organisations increased, people have been looking for ways to motivate employees and improve productivity. A need for management ideas arise which lead to classical contributors such as Frederick Taylor and Henri Fayol generating management theories such as Taylor’ Scientific Management and Fayol’s Administrative Management. In the late 1920’s and early 1930’s the Hawthorne studies were conducted where Elton Mayo was the predominate figure and contributed to the Behavioural viewpoint. This brought about a Human Relations Movement which included Douglas McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y approach. Similarities and differences can be found between the theories due to the relevant time period they were implemented, the motives or goal of the theory and how they view organisations. However the use of contingency theory can help negate the dissimilarities which occur as it allows the relevant elements from each theory to be applied to specific situations.
To start with, the Human Relations Movement firstly emphasises the importance of the working environment for employees as a socialised natural group in which social aspects for both employees and managers take precedence over functional organisational structures. Elton Mayo, who was called “the founder of both the Human Relations Movement and of industrial sociology” (Pugh & Hickson, 1989, P.152), had the basic idea that “workers had strong social needs which they tried to satisfy through membership of informal social groups at work place” (Nicholson, 1998, p.215). Opposing the classical perspectives of management principles of the Scientific Management and Bureaucracy, Mayo claimed that scientifically clarified rules, strict work procedure and incentive money payments were not the only stimulus to inspire workers and that they were “less factors in determining output than were group standards, sentiments and security” (Robbins, Millett & Waters-Marsh, 2004, p.815-816) after he proceeded an experiment, called the ‘Hawthorne Experiment’. According to the Hawthorne Studies, employees were motivated to work harder and efficiently when managers provided a more comfortable and informal working environment taking into account individual satisfaction and their personal needs rather than manipulating employees by way of higher remuneration. Mayo demonstrated that an organisation could not generate much beneficial output if managers “treat workers simply as economic individuals wanting to maximise pay and minimise effort” (cited Nicholson, 1998, p.215). As a result, “managers would no longer consider the issue of organisation design without including the effects on work groups and employee attitudes” (Robbins & Barnwell, 2006, p.47). They now see their jobs as dealing with human beings rather than simply with work.