This research article examines peer-reviewed studies in the field of Organizational Behavior and Workplace Psychology. Its goal is to extract insights from academic research that can inform the design of effective work teams for construction companies. Unlike previous articles posted on EngiMBA, this article is in the format of academic research referencing the most widely accepted studies. For this reason, the Key Take-Aways have been presented up front to simplify the findings of the research. However, the article goes into more detail on each of these findings. Finally, a full reference list is made available for anyone interested in learning further into any particular framework or model.

Key Take-Aways:

1.      Delegate authority throughout the organisation to allow greater job satisfaction and motivation through ownership of one’s work, and visible incremental opportunities for career advancement.

2.      Set goals as a team in order to create buy-in from all team members to increase ownership, satisfaction and motivation.

3.      Promote Leaders with the traits you wish to promote. Promotion is viewed as an incentive, and your choices incentivise their behaviours.

4.      Live your Values. Core values that are sincerely held and reflected by senior management can positively commit employees to their companies and create pride and satisfaction.

The Research

As organisations are comprised of humans, there has always been a keen interest in understanding the nature of human psychology as it relates to the behaviour of humans within organisations. This is a vast field of study comprising of multiple subdisciplines and areas of research. There is very little universal consensus, which is expected due to the complexity of the field of study and of humans in general.  There has been a tremendous amount of learnings with regards to self-understanding, human relations, and well-being, and more specifically their impact to job performance. Whilst it is admirable to have the interests of employees in mind, the deeper motivation into this vast field research, as will be presented, is how this information translates to improved organisational outcomes, such as higher productivity, reduced absenteeism and lower turnover (aka the bottom line).

This article will discuss the link between job satisfaction and positive organisational outcomes. It will be argued that organisations should focus on designing the work environment to increase job satisfaction of employees by understanding the factors that contribute to it. To establish these factors, a look of the research to date and the congruence between various theories and models will be highlighted. Recommendations will be produced to help achieve these outcomes, including;

• decentralising decision making to empower employees through a delegation of authority,

• increased opportunities for advancement albeit incremental, and

• implementing participatory goal setting with feedback and achievement recognition.  

There will also be recommendations to increase the rigor in selecting leaders and developing leadership qualities. Furthermore, recommendation aimed to increase organisational commitment by sincerely appealing to higher values and ethics to cultivate meaningfulness in the work.

The considerable volume of studies into the various theories and concepts of organisational behaviour reveal there are numerous positive impacts of increased job satisfaction on the organisation. These positive impacts include a link between increased job performance and Organisational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB)) (Harter et al., 2002; Ostroff, 1992; Ryan et al., 1996). A further positive impact includes reduced absenteeism and turnover of staff which is supported by Griffeth et al. (2000) and Hausknect et al. (2008).  These theories and studies have led to further research into how to better design the work environment to maximise job satisfaction with the goal of realising these outcomes.

Herzberg (2008) argues that factors influencing job satisfaction are separate and distinct from factors that influence job dissatisfaction. More specifically, while a certain factor may be able to reduce dissatisfaction, the same factor cannot in-turn increase satisfaction. Herzberg (2003) refers to factors that increase satisfaction as motivators or satisfiers, and those that increase dissatisfaction as hygiene factors. Some of the motivators are achievement, recognition, the work itself, responsibility, advancement and growth (Herzberg, 2008). Hygiene factors include policy and administration, supervision, relationship with supervisor, work conditions, salary, and relationship with peers (Herzberg, 2008). These findings are critical to the implementation of changes in workplace design with the aim to improve job satisfaction.

Historically, and as a default, renumeration has been seen as the primary motivator for job performance and thus linked to job satisfaction. The two-factor theory (Herzberg, 2008) challenges this primary motivator stating that salary is a hygiene factor that can only act to reduce dissatisfaction, rather than increase satisfaction. Helliwell (2002) research shows diminishing returns to well-being from higher incomes, further supporting the two-factor theory.  This follows that beyond an income sufficient to meet basic needs, further increments do not have a lasting impact on satisfaction and well-being. Therefore, salary shouldn’t be looked at as a factor to increase job satisfaction in the workplace design.

The factors that increase job satisfaction in Herzberg’s theory (2008) including achievement, recognition, responsibility, advancement and growth; are derived from the work itself and are intrinsically fulfilling to the employee. These factors can be subdivided in separate actionable categories.

1. Responsibility

2. Achievement & Recognition

3. Advancement & Growth.

These factors are similar and further reinforced by the learnings from Hackman and Oldham (1976) Job Characteristic Model (JCM). This model classifies a job based on five fundamental variables; skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, and feedback (Hackman & Oldham, 1976). Job satisfaction can be derived by the variety, identity, significance, autonomy, and feedback of the job itself, and therefore, the work should be designed to achieve these outcomes as best as practical. This is congruent with the higher orders of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs (McLeod, 2007), namely ‘esteem’ & ‘self-actualisation’.

The cross over of the JCM and Two-Factor theory is evident when considering the practical and actionable recommendations that serve to satisfy both models. An example of this is by decreasing micromanagement and delegating authority to workers; employee responsibility, task significance and autonomy are all increased. Based on these findings it is strongly recommended that organisations decentralise the decision making to allow more employee control at all levels of the organisation. It is important however, to maintain the organisational support for the employee to empower them to take on the additional responsibility. A   benefit of delegating authority throughout the organisational structure is that it provides a clear pathway of advancement with incremental steps of responsibility. This will increase the actual and perceived opportunities for employee advancement, further motivating employees and increasing job satisfaction.

A further cross over between the JCM and Two-Factor theory is the employee’s desire for achievement and recognition of achievement obtained through task feedback. There is extensive and conclusive research into the value of goal setting with regards to performance, motivation and satisfaction (Tubbs, 1986).

Goals are more effective as motivators when they are;

• difficult,

• specific,

• set with participation of the employee, and

• feedback is provided (Tubbs, 1986).

Using these theories, it is recommended that clear and measurable goals are set for and with all individuals and teams and that achievement of said goals are recognised and celebrated either informally (through direct communication from a supervisor) or formally (through an employee rewards program). An added benefit of setting goals as a team, is the harmony that is inevitable induced from having individuals aligned with a common goal.

An organisation’s ability to implement the above recommendations relies largely on the leadership abilities of the employees in the organisations at all levels of management. Delegation of authority with sufficient organisational support, goal setting, provision of feedback and achievement recognition are all delivered through the various levels of management in the organisation and requires individuals with leadership qualities to deliver them. It is incredibly important for the organisation to identify, select and train leaders within the organisation. The Cornerstone OnDemand (2013) U.S Employee Survey Report has shown that the top two reasons for job engagement (closely linked to job satisfaction) is;

1. having a good manager that they enjoy working with, and

2. feeling appreciated by their supervisor.

Promoting the right individuals to leadership positions can have a tremendously positive impact on job satisfaction and performance within the organisation. Equally, promoting the wrong individuals to leadership positions can have a negative and corrosive impact to job satisfaction and performance within the organisation. This is highlighted in the Equity Theory, where an employee evaluates the ratio of what they put in versus what they get out of their job and compare this to relevant others (Robbins et al., 2017). If an employee feels as though they are under rewarded when compared to a colleague that has been promoted, they will create equity tension, leading to dissatisfaction.  Promoting individuals with what Paulhus et al. (2002) described as the ‘dark triad traits’, particularly, Machiavellianism and Psychopathy, can be perceived as an endorsement and reward of those characteristics, leading to an inharmonious culture shift within the organisation toward counter productive work behaviours. Furthermore, a study has shown that Machiavellianism and Psychopathy traits in leaders are negatively correlated to subordinate’s career satisfaction (Volmer et al, 2016). Using the above theory is it recommended that the organisation invests sufficient time in identifying and developing the leadership qualities of its employees.

“Organisational commitment is the degree to which an employee identifies with a particular organisation and its goals and wishes to maintain membership in the organisation” (Robbins et al. 2017, p. 59). Studies have shown that organisational commitment is positively correlated to productivity and negatively to absenteeism and turnover (Bentein et al., 2005). It can also reasoned that employees that are committed to the organisation are more likely to work  harmoniously with other employees due to their alignment of values.

Developing organisational commitment with employees can be enhanced through the aligning of the organisation’s values with that of the employee. Organisations with a single purpose of maximising shareholder value offer very little to employees looking to find more meaning and fulfillment from their work. It is becoming increasingly common for organisations’ mission statements to include some overarching values of how they will conduct their business. Organisations with commitments to sustainability, promotion of diversity and inclusivity are creating a concise statement of their values and their vision, appealing to the higher order needs in Maslow’s Hierarchy. These statements act to motivate employees by creating more meaning for their work, as well as enhancing organisational commitment through the aligning of values. This is supported by research focused on emotional attachment to an organisation and belief in its values as the ‘gold standard’ for employee commitment (Solinger et.al, 2008).

It is also imperative that organisations act in accordance with their stated values to maintain their perceived integrity and sincerity. If the organisation is perceived to be acting insincerely, it can erode trust from all stakeholders including the employees. This is supported by research into what has been termed Psychological Contract Breaches (PCBs), and the impact these breaches have on organisational commitment of the employee (Ng, 2015). It is recommended that the organisation makes a clear, concise, and sincere statement of its values and vision, and acts in accordance with these values to foster the commitment, engagement, and harmony of its workforce as supported by Ng (2015).

Conclusion

From the large field of research conducted, the models and theories that are generally accepted and used to explain organisational behaviour, at best, are accepted as ‘mostly true’. This is an important note when applying the knowledge from these models and theories in the real world, as with human psychology, there is often an exception to the rule. However, this should not be construed to mean that there is nothing to gain from these models, theories and vast research. To the contrary, the deeper understanding on what, in general, ‘makes us tick’ is enormously useful in organizations, where the success of the organisations goals is utterly dependent on the actions of the humans that make up the organization.

The research provided implies a positive correlation between job satisfaction and positive organizational outcomes including an increase in job performance and productivity and lower absenteeism and turnover of employees. These finding align with the largely profit driven motivations of the organization with the ethical objective of positively influencing employee well-being and job satisfaction.

The various models and theories of satisfaction, motivation and psychological needs, largely reinforce each other as was highlighted with regards to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory, and Hackman & Oldham’s Job Characteristic Model. These learnings as well as those from organisational commitment were used as the basis of several recommendations to changes to the design of the work environment to increase productivity and harmony.

The recommendations put forward include; decentralising decision making to empower employees through a delegation of authority, and increase to opportunities for advancement albeit incremental; implementing participatory goal setting with feedback and achievement recognition; increase the rigor in selecting leaders and developing leadership qualities in prospective leaders; increasing organisational commitment by sincerely appealing to higher values and ethics to cultivate meaningfulness in the work.

These recommendations are based on the models and theories that as previously mentioned are general in nature. So too are the recommendations, and any implementation would need to be accompanied by observance and feedback to measure the effectiveness and impact to the required goals.

References

Ostroff, C. (1992). The relationship between satisfaction, attitudes, and performance: An organizational level analysis. Journal of applied psychology, 77(6), 963.

Ryan, A. M., Schmit, M. J., & Johnson, R. (1996). Attitudes and effectiveness: Examining relations at an organizational level. Personnel psychology, 49(4), 853-882.

Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hayes, T. L. (2002). Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: a meta-analysis. Journal of applied psychology, 87(2), 268.

Hausknecht, J. P., Hiller, N. J., & Vance, R. J. (2008). Work-unit absenteeism: Effects of satisfaction, commitment, labor market conditions, and time. Academy of management journal, 51(6), 1223-1245.

Griffeth, R. W., Hom, P. W., & Gaertner, S. (2000). A meta-analysis of antecedents and correlates of employee turnover: Update, moderator tests, and research implications for the next millennium. Journal of management, 26(3), 463-488.

Herzberg, F. (2008). One more time: How do you motivate employees?. Harvard Business Review Press.

Helliwell, J. F. (2003). How's life? Combining individual and national variables to explain subjective well-being. Economic modelling, 20(2), 331-360.

Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational behavior and human performance, 16(2), 250-279.

McLeod, S. (2007). Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Simply psychology, 1, 1-8.

Tubbs, M. E. (1986). Goal setting: A meta-analytic examination of the empirical evidence. Journal of applied psychology, 71(3), 474.

Robbins, S. P., Judge, T. A., Millett, B., & Boyle, M. (2017). Organisational Behaviour (8th Edition) (8th ed.). Pearson, 173.

Paulhus, D. L., & Williams, K. M. (2002). The dark triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of research in personality, 36(6), 556-563.

Volmer, J., Koch, I. K., & Göritz, A. S. (2016). The bright and dark sides of leaders' dark triad traits: Effects on subordinates' career success and well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 101, 413-418. Bentein, K., Vandenberghe, C., Vandenberg, R., & Stinglhamber, F. (2005). The role of change in the relationship between commitment and turnover: a latent growth modeling approach. Journal of applied psychology, 90(3), 468.

Solinger, O. N., Van Olffen, W., & Roe, R. A. (2008). Beyond the three-component model of organizational commitment. Journal of applied psychology, 93(1), 70.Ng, T. W. (2015). The incremental validity of organizational commitment, organizational trust, and organizational identification. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 88,

The Cornerstone OnDemand 2013 U.S. Employee Survey Report. (2013). Https://Www.Cornerstoneondemand.Com. https://www.cornerstoneondemand.com/sites/default/files/research/csod-rs-cornerstone-kelton-2013-employee-survey-results.pdf