Organization Development. Donald L. Anderson

Читать онлайн.
Название Organization Development
Автор произведения Donald L. Anderson
Жанр О бизнесе популярно
Серия
Издательство О бизнесе популярно
Год выпуска 0
isbn 9781544333007



Скачать книгу

       Recognition for achievement and feedback on performance

       Work itself and the client relationship

       Responsibility

       Advancement, growth, and learning

      At the same time, Herzberg, Mausner, and Snyderman (1959) point out that hygiene factors will not necessarily contribute to job satisfaction, but can cause job dissatisfaction. “When feelings of unhappiness were reported, they were not associated with the job itself but with conditions that surround the doing of the job” (p. 113), such as

       Supervision

       Interpersonal relationships

       Physical working conditions

       Salary

       Company policies and administrative practices

       Benefits

       Job security

      Herzberg, Mausner, and Snyderman explain that their research on motivation illustrates why contemporary managers had such a difficult time motivating employees. Then-popular management programs for supervisors and wage incentive programs addressed hygiene factors of supervision and monetary compensation, but did little to address the factors such as achievement and work itself that truly motivated employees.

      The work of MacGregor, Likert, Blake and Mouton, and Herzberg is illustrative of an era of research in which scholars and practitioners began to rethink commonly held assumptions about management and human behavior. In many ways it is remarkable how MacGregor’s optimistic views of human nature and motivation in Theory Y, in contrast to what he saw as the dominant view of managerial control articulated in Theory X, continue to be as relevant to conversations today as they were more than 40 years ago. At the time, OD had not yet made significant inroads into organizations. Managers strongly held negative assumptions about human behavior characteristic of MacGregor’s Theory X or Likert’s exploitative authoritative style, and while there was already evidence that alternative styles worked more effectively, executives continued to seek proof of OD’s effectiveness (Mirvis, 1988). Consequently, these writers sought to persuade the practitioner community that there was a more optimistic and humanistic alternative to management. Some of the assumptions inherent in these three research programs have become dominant values in OD. The foundational values inherent in the humanistic orientation articulated in Likert’s participative management style and Blake and Mouton’s 9,9 style strongly influenced the field of OD. These values remain as hallmarks of OD practice today, and they are discussed in greater detail in the next chapter.

      Quality and Employee Involvement

      A fourth historical tradition in the development of the field of OD evolved as organizations began to increasingly adopt some of the management styles described in the previous section, involving employees more in the management and operations of the organization, beginning particularly in manufacturing and industrial environments. This development appeared to be more strongly embraced in the late 1970s and 1980s, when industry firms realized a growing competitive threat to the U.S. manufacturing industry as a result of developments in Japan (G. S. Benson & Lawler, 2003). As firms realized that the quality of the product strongly impacted the profitability and competitiveness of the organization, they began to pay attention to management styles that would increase workers’ ability and motivation to improve quality. As a result, they began to involve employees in noticing defects and taking action to prevent them or to correct them.

      After World War II, Japan began to invest in increasing its manufacturing capabilities and quality programs (Cole, 1999). Two important authors who were instrumental in the development of quality practices in Japan (and subsequently the United States) were W. Edwards Deming and Joseph M. Juran.

      Deming had been invited to Japan in 1950 for a series of 12 lectures on process control. Deming’s quality control method (later called “total quality control” and then adapted to “total quality management,” according to Sato, 2012) emphasized statistical methods by which processes could be measured. Thus, a manufacturing system could measure and control processes to result in a narrow range of acceptable defects in the end product. Deming’s (1986) work Out of the Crisis brought many of his ideas to an American audience, famously condensed into his “14 points,” which he described as “the basis for transformation of American industry” (p. 23). Among his 14 points were such recommendations as “minimize total cost,” “institute training on the job,” “drive out fear, so that everyone may work effectively for the company,” “break down barriers between departments,” and “put everybody in the company to work to accomplish the transformation. The transformation is everybody’s job” (pp. 23–24).

      Like Deming, Juran also lectured on quality in Japan in the 1950s, where he was invited after the publication of his Quality Control Handbook (1951). Juran argued that quality had two main characteristics: fitness for use and freedom from defects. Juran popularized the Pareto Principle, the idea that explains 80 percent of quality defects by 20 percent of the causes. In addition, Juran developed a perspective on quality termed the Juran Trilogy, where quality is the result of quality planning, quality control, and quality improvement (Godfrey & Kenett, 2007).

      Partly inspired by the work of Deming and Juran, Japanese manufacturing firms created the quality circle in the 1950s and 1960s as a method to involve employees in improving quality in their organizations. Thompson (1982) explains:

      A quality circle is a small group of employees and their supervisor from the same work area, who voluntarily meet on a regular basis to study quality control and productivity improvement techniques, to apply these techniques to identify and solve work-related problems, to present their solutions to management for approval, and to monitor the implementation of these solutions to ensure that they work. (p. 3)

      The assumption is that typically employees understand the work in their immediate area best and have the most knowledge about how it can be improved. Quality circles involve employees in improving the work environment and the quality of the output by making suggestions to upper management for areas of improvement. Upper management then is free to accept or decline the suggestions. Employees participate of their own accord but are usually given additional compensation or incentives when they do contribute. Research on the effectiveness of quality circles shows mixed results in terms of productivity and improved output (Cotton, 1993), but it is clear that the use of quality circles in American companies reflected an interest in increasing quality, motivation, and participation through employee involvement (Manchus, 1983).

      Also taking a cue from Japan’s success, in 1981, after studying and observing Japanese management styles that appeared to result in higher productivity and greater quality, William Ouchi proposed Theory Z (a concept modeled after MacGregor’s Theories X and Y) in which he suggested that “involved workers are the key to increased productivity” (Ouchi, 1981, p. 4). Ouchi’s book described to Americans how the Japanese style of management worked, with long-term or even lifetime employment for workers, performance reviews and promotions or career movement after only a very lengthy observation period, and shared decision making and responsibility. These values were directly contrary to those held by American managers and made the American values more explicit by comparison. Thus, Ouchi’s argument is a follow-up to the management practices arguments made in earlier decades but also took advantage of American business’s interest in Japanese management styles and improved competitiveness through employee involvement practices.

      Quality circles are part of a family of approaches known as employee involvement practices. Employee involvement generally describes any attempt to include workers in order to develop greater commitment, productivity, and quality by granting them decision-making authority, giving them information about the organization (such as goals and finances), and providing incentives (Cotton, 1993).

      The quality tradition continued throughout the 1980s and 1990s, manifested in quality programs such as ISO 9000; Total