The first way that Harrison, et al. (2006) conceptualizes organizational commitment is by seeking to understand the relationship between contextual performance and labor turnover. In this approach, Harrison, et al. believes that the depth of the employees’ interpersonal relationships is the primary factor inhibiting labor turnover in an organization. As a result, the lack of interpersonal relationship built on the basis of contextual relationships may lead employees to quit their work positions.
Furthermore, he continues also to say that trying to suppress personality can result in frustrated and dissatisfied employees. When the manager comprehends the personality roles in the workplace, he or she can use it to grow the company and move it forward. The following are the role of personality in the workplaces; Creativity A person’s personality aids him or her in thinking creatively. In the cases where the employees are allowed to use their creativity in coming up with the solution on matters affecting the company, the company benefits from a wider variety of options and the ideas. It is the duty of the manager to keep in check creativity of his employees for it will also prevent personality of aggressiveness from dominating (Yesil & Sozbilir, 2013).
On the contrary, ‘HRA’ has its pros too. It emphasize on considering employee’s emotions and communication while delegating work to them. According to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs “lack of satisfaction causes a deficiency that motivates people to meet their needs” (Maslow, 2014). If employees are dissatisfy within the workplace, then the managers could not withdraw the full potential of a worker. By taking this theory into account while doing personnel management in an organization, it’s considered to be important to communicate
Or if there are any conflicts arise they perceived negatively; they are destructive for the organization, so this perspective disregards the usefulness of conflicts. If a union is recognized, its job is to improve the communication. Policies in a place like this are designed to unify the work force, organizational objectives are communicated, a clear reward system is in place and every employee has their own personal objectives. Everybody encouraged to make their own voice
An example of change to organisational culture may be changes to a reward system in place. If the existing reward system is successful in motivating employees within the organisation, changes to this system may revoke motivation and productivity as the employees feel unappreciated or deserved of. Change usually occurs by management, new or existing, for the benefit of the organisation as a whole and it is important that any changes made are acknowledged and accepted by the individuals of the organisation as they are the personalities who believed in the culture in the first place and may not believe in the changes being made. It is important that the organisation itself is adaptable to the environment around it in order to be responsive to changes being made. However it is also important to note that change within an organisation may not be by choice and that time as part of a natural process may be the main factor in organisational culture
A performance evaluation must be fair and objective whichare based on the employee’s job-related behaviour but not on their personal traits or other factors that not related to the job. It is also important to make sure the evaluation is submitted complete with all required signatures and supporting documents. As a manager or direct supervisor, it’s essential to be aware of the following common errors when rating your staff as part of their performance appraisal. The Halo Error This happens when one person rates another person on several different dimensions and gives a similar rating for each dimension. Staff often do this when they have a generally good relationship with the person they are rating and don’t want to be too strict.
In addition, the operational nature of supply chain expenditures decisions must be taken by the firm’s management (agents) on behalf of the company proprietors (principals) under the authority entrusted to them through employment. This theory therefore contends that, the goals of the principal and agents are not in conflict and that the principal and agent can reconcile different tolerances for risk (Lavassani & Movahedi, 2010). Both principals and agents seek to maximize their utility from the same organizations. The trouble faced by the principal is how to secure some service benefit from the agent while not knowing the true value of those benefits, or being forced to accept those benefits the agent wishes to supply (Zsidisin & Wagner, 2010; Fayezi, O’Loughlin & Zutshi,
Instead of viewing employees as ‘machines’, they would “treat employees as important assets to achieve goals” (Kadian-Baumeyer, no date). By doing so, it would give the workers a sense of purpose and a feeling that their place within the company matters, as opposed to the classical approach, where employees would be seen as expendable, simply used as tools to drive forward production with money as their only real motivation and incentive to work harder. This way of management, with the Human Relations approach would result in higher productivity through improved working conditions and employee satisfaction. A theorist named Elton Mayo undertook extensive research on employee productivity levels by observing the different working conditions that employees were exposed to in order to establish a relationship. This research took place around the beginning of the
The Classical approach is designed to solely focus on the jobs and the hierarchy structure within the company which implements it. It is thought, that to build and maintain an organisation specific goals would need to be put in place in order to foresee the targets and objectives. Employees were viewed as extra "machines" which would be replaced if needs be. In contrast to the Human Relations approach, which would argue that the employees are the foundation of an organisation. The organisation has to set social interaction for its employees so that relationships and social and emotional needs are all used as the motivating factors in order to drive on the employees working performance which in turn leads to greater productivity by
As a change executor, it is concerned with the way and regulation of the occupation relationship at the level of the working environment and more extensive society. The human resources management model underlines; • the need to explore for better working approaches ; • the vital responsibility of administration in promoting change; • the handling of workers as people instead of a piece of an aggregate workforce; and • the support of workers to consider management as "accomplices" as opposed to as adversaries. 2.1 Human Resources Management Theory The theoretical authority is built fundamentally with respect to the supposition that workers are people with changing objectives and needs, and thusly ought not to be considered as essential business resources like trucks and recording cupboards. It is a creative perspective of the workplace management which affirms that human systems when legitimately honed are expressive of the objectives and working practices of the company