Organization-Worker Relationship

Abstract

Organizational success is largely dependent on the ability of the organization to create and maintain a diverse workforce that can recognize and respond to changes in the external environment. Two major components, hiring practices and workplace satisfaction, contribute greatly to organizational success. An effective leadership style is integral to building and maintaining a healthy organization. Transformational leadership is proposed as the leadership theory that is most capable of establishing a healthy organization that is receptive to changes in the external environment.

Overview

The success of an organization can be measured in its ability to get those things done that cannot be accomplished by one individual (Scott, 1987). Each organization is composed of groups of individuals who possess the ability to support the organization, to change the organization and its stated goals, and/or to leave the organization. Most people work in formal organizations but are also members of informal workgroup organizations that can affect how jobs get done within the workplace. How does an organization establish a culture for its employees that creates and maintains support for its own goals and aspirations? Two major components contribute greatly to organizational success. They are hiring practices and workplace satisfaction. Both of these components are largely driven by the leadership style adopted by management.

Hiring Practices. The first task at hand is always to hire the right people for the right job. This seems like an easy task; however, it is more complex than it seems. To keep an organization healthy, employers need to hire people who are homogeneous enough to support organizational goals and yet diverse enough to force people to continue to innovate and to critically analyze what everyone is doing and why. Critical analysis by employees is what aids an organization in remaining responsive to its environment and able to meet its customers' needs (Hanges, Aiken, & Chen, 2007). Employers recruiting new employees hire the candidates they view as the best fit for the position. Who is seen as the best fit? It is most often the candidate who looks, dresses, and speaks just like all of the other employees who are currently succeeding within the organization. And who is succeeding in the organization? The people who look, dress, and speak just like the boss! As long as the external organizational needs (i.e., what the customer wants and needs) remain stable, this strategy works well for the organization and its employees (Yukl, 2002).

However, the world is quickly changing and the needs of the organizational customers are following suit. For example, companies supporting the use of landline telephones needed to respond to a public that increasingly chooses to use cellular phones. Companies producing CD players needed to respond to a public that prefers to save and maintain its music as digital files, and newspaper agencies are currently losing their readership to a public that prefers to listen to the news or read it online. Without a diverse workforce, no one notices when change begins to occur and no one is ready to create ideas and products tailored to meet the changing needs of the customers. When the needs of the customers are no longer met, the company is doomed to fail.

Hiring and maintaining a diverse workforce is tricky. People who differ in their beliefs and values will experience a higher degree of conflict as the status quo is challenged and people compete for positions within the organizational structure. In hiring a diverse workforce, management must learn to identify the knowledge, skills, and abilities they are seeking in ways that differ from their current practice. They often have to learn to phrase questions differently, ask different questions, and really understand what skills they need for a particular position. Once the workforce has been diversified, management must learn to manage conflict while maintaining a respectful climate and to value and provide due consideration to the people who question current philosophies and practices. Again, a homogeneous group is easier to manage but may, in the long term, cause the demise of the organization if it fails to identify and adapt to changes to the external environment. Employers need to remember that a key factor in organizational success is grounded in the satisfaction of individual staff members.

Workplace Satisfaction & Turnover. Employees have individual needs that must be met if the organization is to keep them. These people share their knowledge, skills, and abilities with the organization for which they work. However, they expect to get something back for this effort (Graen & Cashman, 1975). It is difficult to know exactly what each person wants to attain from their work experience. Yet, individuals need to find satisfaction in the workplace if they are to be successfully retained as productive, long-term employees (Matier, 1990). Employees who do not find satisfaction will eventually leave or, if unable to relocate, may disassociate themselves from the workplace community and their productivity will suffer. While some amount of turnover is inevitable (and considered healthy), too much turnover becomes an expensive use of limited time and financial resources. New employees must be recruited, hired, socialized to the organizational norms, and encouraged to maintain the extant organizational culture (Bluedorn, 1982). When management tries to decrease turnover, they often assume they are not paying their employees enough money and give all of the employees a raise. However, they will seldom realize the hoped-for reduction in turnover as a result. Although it is important to pay employees adequately, there are other factors making contributions to workplace satisfaction and rates of turnover.

But it gets complicated. First, employees may experience workplace satisfaction simply because of the economy. When the economy is good, an employee may perceive better opportunities outside the organization, develop dissatisfaction with the current job, and leave the company to explore the perceived opportunities. However, when the economy is bad, an employee who is feeling job dissatisfaction may take note of the lack of available job opportunities, quickly shift perceptions to a higher level of satisfaction, and decide to stay (Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978). Second, different workers have different needs and it is difficult to consider and evaluate the weight of each need. For example, a student working in the bowling alley will have different needs and job expectations than a college professor.

Internal & External Workplace Factors. Researchers have spent decades trying to identify (and agree on) which satisfaction variables really matter and to whom they matter. They have generally agreed there are two types: internal workplace factors and external workplace factors. Internal factors are generally within the control of management, while external factors cannot be controlled by management but might be mitigated by increasing the internal workplace factors (Matier, 1990). For example, mail carriers are subjected to rain and biting dogs (i.e., negative external workplace factors) but have made friends along their mail routes (i.e., positive external workplace factors). Management cannot control the weather, dogs, or established friendships on an assigned route. However, they can manipulate internal workplace factors by providing a mail truck, good insurance, pepper spray, shorter routes, and other support to try to make the mail carriers' job more satisfying.

Some of the workplace factors are tangible, while others are intangible. In the above example, all of the internal and external workplace factors mentioned are tangible. What is present can be measured, touched, and seen. Intangible factors are more difficult to measure. They include friendships, high morale, a sense of belonging, and pride in one's work. When problems with satisfaction are noted, management often works to increase tangible benefits in an effort to keep employees happy. Surprisingly, research suggests that for most jobs the intangible factors are the ones most likely to increase workplace satisfaction. Although an exiting employee may cite more pay or better opportunities as the primary reason for leaving, deeper questions often reveal what the employee is reluctant to express. Researchers found that, when employees were probed regarding which types of dissatisfaction lead to their voluntarily leaving a job, the tangible factor of wages was listed lower than all of the intangible factors. However, the variable of wage inequities (e.g., people doing the same job but getting paid less than their peers) was high on the list of dissatisfaction variables (Matier, 1990; Morrell, Loan-Clark, & Wilkinson, 2001; Telly, French, & Scott, 1971).

Usually people leaving their jobs are experiencing a variety of pushes away from their current employment while feeling a simultaneous pull toward another organization (Herzberg, 1965). In most cases, employees who are satisfied with intangible benefits such as collegiality, sense of belonging, and equitable treatment are not feeling a push away from their current employer. Therefore, when a job offer of more money is made it is often not enough of a pull to change that employee's loyalty; the employee will likely stay with the original employer. However dissatisfaction arising from inequities, a sense of not belonging, a lack of autonomy, and a feeling that there are no opportunities for personal growth or promotion are often the very pushes that motivate an employee to seek new employment. Many of these intangible satisfaction factors are influenced by the leadership style adopted by management.

Further Insights

Leadership Theories. Every organization is composed of leaders and followers, and the lines are often blurred between the two. Leaders can be formal leaders: those appointed as the leader and appear on the organizational chart as such. Or they can be informal leaders: those who lead based on the social power they have attained (French & Raven, 1960). Both kinds of leaders have an impact on workplace satisfaction. Formal leadership has been studied extensively over the past few decades. Many theoretical bases have been formulated; however, researchers have not been able to verify the utility of most of these. The following is a brief review of the more prevalent theoretical bases for leadership:

• Great Man Theory - This early theory was based on early research that focused on the aristocracy and rested on the assumption that leaders are born and not made. The belief was that great men would arise to the occasion as necessary. Subsequent studies have failed to find any lineage that guarantees good leadership success (Yukl, 2002).
• Trait Theory (1930s and 1940s) - Later research led to studies on psychological traits that signified good leaders. Researchers studied good leaders and identified the signifier traits, theorizing that good leaders have the right (or sufficient) combination of traits. Hundreds of studies have failed to find specific traits that guarantee leadership success using this theory (Stogdill, 1974; Yukl, 2002).
• Behavioral Theory (1950s) - These theories were the first to assume leadership behaviors could be taught. They were predicated on theories of behaviorism from the school of psychology. These theorists studied the behaviors of both successful and unsuccessful leaders in an effort to identify describable actions that could then be taught to others. The actions were placed into two defined categories: initiating structures (i.e., concern with task objectives); and considerations (i.e., concern with interpersonal relationships) as researchers worked to show turnover decreases as consideration increases. Role theory and the managerial grid were both developed using this theoretical framework. The only consistent research finding was a positive correlation between consideration and employee satisfaction; otherwise there were no studies guaranteeing leadership success using this theory (Judge & Piccolo, 2004; Fleishman & Harris, 1962; Yukl, 2002).
• Participative Leadership - These theories were the first to acknowledge the social process of decision-making (e.g., leader-member exchange theory, management by objective, etc.). A participative leader would engage the employees, peers, superiors, and stakeholders in the decision process. This is where notions of employee empowerment and power sharing were introduced into leadership theory. There has been a lack of strong, consistent results in research on participative leadership (Coch & French, 1948; Tannenbaum & Schmitt, 1958; Yukl, 2002).
• Situational Leadership - These theories emphasize the importance of contextual factors influencing the leadership process. These variables include the characteristics of the follower, the nature of the work performed by the leader's unit, the type of organization, and the nature of the external environment. Some of the prevalent models are the least-preferred coworker theory, the path-goal theory of leadership, and the strategic contingencies theory. They all posit that a leadership style needed for a particular decision-making problem will depend on how the leader perceives the followers and the situation. Leaders focus on such factors as external relationships, acquisition of resources, managing demands on the group, and managing the structures and culture of the group. Most researchers have taken a narrow methodological approach and, while providing useful insights, have not been able to statistically validate these theories (Tannenbaum & Schmitt, 1958; Yukl, 2002)

Transformational Leadership. In short, it has been very difficult to statistically validate the success of any of the theoretical leadership bases discussed above. The only theory which has been statistically validated is the integrative theory of transformational leadership (Yukl, 2002). Transformational leadership introduces a holistic (and somewhat eclectic) approach to managing the workplace. Bernard Bass (1999) identifies four dimensions that can be used to determine whether one is acting as a transformational leader. It is the one leadership theory that has taken a large step away from situational ethics in an effort to incorporate a broader ethic into the workplace.

In considering the management and treatment of employees, transformational leadership theory applies a holistic approach. Leaders must consider the overall development and well-being of each employee, as well as aiding each employee in discovering personal strengths and how those strengths fit into the organizational setting. The assumption is that followers will be better motivated to capably accomplish organizational goals and objectives if their personal needs have been met, they are comfortably positioned in the organization, and the employee and organization are grounded in ethical values. When first formulating this theory, three distinct categories were used to describe transformational leadership characteristics. However, the groups were quickly expanded to include a very important fourth dimension. The four categories are:

• Idealized Influence -the leader must be socially charismatic (although the attribution of charisma is reduced as the followers are empowered);
• Inspirational Motivation -the leader utilizes classical ethical values, unity, and enthusiasm to inspire followers;
• Intellectual Stimulation -the followers are taught to think critically and reframe situations to solve problems; and
• Individual Consideration -each follower is personally developed (toward self-actualization), treated with dignity, and empowered in the workplace (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999; Yukl, 2002).

A more specific list of leader characteristics helps one to better visualize how a transformational leader can encourage and support workplace diversity and contribute to workplace satisfaction, thereby keeping and cultivating good employees for the organization while ensuring the organization remains dynamic and responsive to the needs of its customers.

Idealized Influence. Idealized influence is similar to positive social charisma. A good leader will:

• Create and effectively communicate a compelling and shared vision;
• Allow opportunities for questions from followers;
• Persuade others on the merits of issues (using no deception or coercion, although "timing" information disbursement appears to be okay in limited situations);
• Express confidence and conviction regarding potential success;
• Model personal virtue and moral wisdom; and
• Set high ethical standards for emulation. Bass quoted Socrates regarding this issue when stating the moral person does not "put money or anything else before virtue" (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999).

Inspirational Motivation. Inspirational motivation is where the heart of classical ethics beats in transformational leadership theory. A good leader will:

• Grant followers the same challenges and liberties kept for oneself;
• Uplift followers to a more mature moral foundation;
• Exhibit personal excitement, enthusiasm, and optimism regarding the organizational vision;
• Use stories and symbols liberally; and
• Emphasize shared goals in undertakings by eliminating any "us/them" dialogue.

Intellectual Stimulation. Intellectual stimulation is necessary to keep followers interested and to add value to the workplace by augmenting employee skills. A good leader will:

• Teach followers to question assumptions and reframe situations;
• Liberally share resources and information (including sensitive information); and
• Encourage and reward creative problem solving.

Individualized Consideration. Individualized consideration is necessary to promote the dignity and potential self-actualization of each follower. It is an integral ingredient in the success of transformational leadership. A good leader will:

• Ensure the dignity of and express confidence in each follower;
• Encourage high moral standing for each follower;
• Eliminate all unnecessary controls and barriers;
• Provide constructive feedback;
• Provide lots of growth opportunities for followers;
• Develop followers into leaders by delegating significant authority with appropriate supports;
• Make sufficient resources available to allow followers to meet goals;
• Build a strong culture of empowerment;
• Promote harmony, charity, and good work in the organization; and
• Help followers attain self-actualization (a la Maslow).

Conclusion

A leader does not need to possess all of the qualities in each of the dimensions at all times. However, the four-point infrastructure must be present for true transformational leadership. If any of the four are absent, the leader is branded a "pseudo-transformational" leader. First, the intent of the leader is extremely important. As soon as the leader changes focus to self-interest or self-promotion, transformational leadership cannot occur. Second, the individualized consideration dimension must be present. This is the single most important dimension. Without this point, one simply has created some form of charismatic or pseudo-transformational leadership. Third, universal core values (i.e., friendship, fairness in exchange, ownership, work, and love) must be satisfied in the workplace. The ordering and relative valuation of each core value must be determined by each organizational culture. Although the core values are set, how they are attained in the workplace is not. Fourth, transformational leadership must be grounded in a high moral foundation. Ethics must be considered in each of the four dimensions in order to attain and maintain this form of leadership. The leader must weave ethics and opportunities for self-actualization into the organizational culture. For a transformational leader to succeed, the ethical model to be emulated and encouraged must be that of a classical type, most usually attributed to Aristotelian ethics as opposed to situational ethics (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999).

Terms & Concepts

Autonomy: Independence or the ability to choose how to do one's own work even if the work goals are set by someone else.

Behaviorism: A psychological theory that believes all mental states, personal attributes, and traits can be reduced to statements of observable behaviors.

Culture: The shared perceptions of the values, goals, and beliefs of the organization.

Eclectic: Selecting what appears to be the best of various theories and ideas and combining them in a new way.

Employee Turnover: An employee's voluntary decision to leave an organization. It is measured in the percentage of workers who have to be replaced in a given period of time. To arrive at this percentage, divide the number of leavers into the number of total employees.

External Workplace Factors: Factors that create dissatisfaction or satisfaction that cannot be controlled by management. (Remember these factors can be either tangible or intangible).

Homogeneous: A group in which all members are the same or similar in values, views, and beliefs.

Internal Workplace Factors: Factors that create dissatisfaction or satisfaction within the work environment that are controlled by management. (Remember these factors can either be tangible or intangible).

Self-Actualization: The full attainment of one's potential.

Status Quo: The current situation; a preference for leaving things as they are and resisting change.

Bibliography

Bass, B. M., & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Ethics, character, and authentic transformational leadership. Leadership Quarterly , 10 , 181–218. Retrieved on July 18, 2003 from EBSCO online database, Business Source Premier: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=2406536&site=ehost-live

Bluedorn, A. C. (1982). The theories of turnover: Causes, effects, and meaning. Research In the Sociology of Organziations, 1, 75–128.

Coch, L., & French, J. R. (1948). Overcoming resistance to change. Human Relations, 1, 512–532.

Delegach, M., Kark, R., Katz-Navon, T., & Van Dijk, D. (2017). A focus on commitment: the roles of transformational and transactional leadership and self-regulatory focus in fostering organizational and safety commitment. European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology, 26(5), 724–740. Retrieved January 10, 2018 from EBSCO Online Database Sociology Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sxi&AN=124898794&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Fleishman, E. A., & Harris, E. F. (1962). Patterns of leadership behavior related to employee grievances and turnover. Personnel Psychology, 15, 43–56.

French, J. P., & Raven, B. (1960). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright, & A. Zander (Eds.), Group Dynamics (pp. 607–623). New York, NY: Harper & Row.

Furtner, M. R, Baldegger, U., & Rauthmann, J. F. (2013). Leading yourself and leading others: linking self-leadership to transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 22, 436–449. Retrieved November 1, 2013 from EBSCO online database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=89481136

Graen, G. B., & Cashman, J. F. (1975). A role making model of leadership in formal organizations: A developmental approach. In J. G. Hunt, & L. L. Larson (Eds.), Leadership Frontiers (pp. 143–165). Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.

Hanges, P. J., Aiken, J., & Chen, X. (2007). Diversity, organizational climate, and organizational culture: The role they play in influencing organizational effectiveness. Proceedings of the Library Assessment Conference, (pp. 359–368). Charlottesville, VA.

Herzberg, F. (1965). The new industrial psychology. Industrial and Labor Relations Review , 18 , 364–376. Retrieved on July 18, 2003 from EBSCO online database, SocINDEX with Full Text: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=4468837&site=ehost-live

Judge, T. A., & Piccolo, R. F. (2004). The forgotten ones? Validity of Consideration and Initiating Structure in leadership research. Journal of Applied Psychology , 89 , 36–51.

Matier, M. W. (1990). Retaining faculty: A tale of two campuses. Research in Higher Education, 31 , 39–60.

Morrell, K., Loan-Clark, J., & Wilkinson, A. (2001). Unweaving Leaving: The Use of Models in Management of Employee Turnover. Loughborough University.

Ruggieri, S., & Abbate, C. S. (2013). Leadership style, self-sacrifice and team identification. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 41. 1171–1178. Retrieved November 1, 2013 from EBSCO online database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=89673525

Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly , 23 , 224–253. Retrieved on July 18, 2003 from EBSCO online database, SocINDEX with Full Text: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=4021462&site=ehost-live

Scott, R. W. (1987). Organizations (2nd Edition ed.). Hempstead: Prentice Hall.

Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. New York, NY: Free Press.

Tannenbaum, A. S., & Schmitt, W. H. (1958). How to choose a leadership pattern. Harvard Business Review , 95–101.

Telly, C. S., French, W. L., & Scott, W. G. (1971). The relationship of inequity to turnover among hourly workers. Administrative Science Quarterly , 16 , 164–172. Retrieved on July 18, 2003 from EBSCO online database, SocINDEX with Full Text: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=4014343&site=ehost-live

Wang, P., Rode, J. C., Shi, K., Luo, Z., & Chen, W. (2013). A workgroup climate perspective on the relationships among transformational leadership, workgroup diversity, and employee creativity. Group and Organization Management, 38, 334–360. Retrieved November 1, 2013 from EBSCO online database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=88042186

Yukl, G. (2002). Leadership in organziations (5th Edition ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Suggested Reading

Bok, S. (1999). Lying. New York, NY: Vintage Books.

Hauser, C., Perkmann, U., Puntscher, S., Walde, J., & Tappeiner, G. (2016). Trust works! Sources and effects of social capital in the workplace. Social Indicators Research, 128(2), 589–608. Retrieved January 10, 2018 from EBSCO Online Database Sociology Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sxi&AN=117721857&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Hsin-Kuang Chi, Chun-Hsiung Lan, & Dorjgotov, B. (2012). The moderating effect of transformational leadership on knowledge management and organizational effectiveness. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 40, 1015–1024. Retrieved November 1, 2013 from EBSCO online database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=77927231

Jackson, D. (2008). Collegial trust: Crucial to safe and harmonious workplaces. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 17, 1541–1542. Retrieved on June 23, 2008 from EBSCO online database, Academic Search Premier: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=32000587&site=ehost-live.

Norton, D. (1988)."Character ethics" and organizational life. Papers on the Ethics of Administration, 47–65.

Posner, B. Z. & Kouzes, J. M. (2003). The Leadership Challenge (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, John & Sons.

Sias, P. M. (2005). Workplace relationship quality and employee information experiences. Communication Studies, 56, 375–395.

Stuart, J. M. (2005). Increasing the visibility, voice, and clout of medical laboratory scientists. Clinical Leadership Management Review, 19 , E3.