It’s estimated that white collar personnel in most organizations – particularly knowledge workers, including managers – are only 40 to 60 percent productive. The opportunity within a very well managed organization may be ten to twenty percent. With payrolls in the neighborhood of eight times earnings, even a five percent productivity improvement would energize an organization.
Leaders maximize productivity by channeling and promoting individual motivation and ability to best meet the goals of the organization. Organizational studies describe productivity as a function of employee job performance, materials, and available techniques. Job performance is the outcome of motivation and ability. In the end, motivation depends on leadership, the organization, and individual satisfaction.
Motivation
We studied motivation to see how leaders could help. Eight employees participated and their job satisfaction was calculated and correlated with priorities, self assessment, work history, and demographics. It was a good study, it pointed out what worked well and the opportunity for development.
Leadership Influence
Staff were in agreement; most needs of the work place were being met for most of them. They also rated their productivity above average, both a self-assessment and how their supervisor would evaluate them. They felt they were in a well-managed, friendly, supportive workplace.
Opportunity: Job challenge was rated the most important factor in a job. However, it was just above average in staff satisfaction. Alternative: Link individual responsibilities and control to organizational goals through methodologies, teamwork, and goal setting.
Organization Influence
There was a perfect correlation between how staff assessed their productivity and their rating of “organizational fit”. That is striking; an important leverage point in this organization.
Opportunity: Salary was the second-most important job factor. But, in general, staff felt they could make more money elsewhere. Alternative: Reduce hidden benefits, such as employee subsidies, profit share, or intangibles, to increase more visible benefits, such as pay raises or stock options. Alternative: Market benefits, subsidies, awards, and intangibles to demonstrate individual value and alignment with the organization.
Opportunity: Training availability was only of middle importance, however training availability had the lowest satisfaction. Alternative: Use a strategy of communication, direction, and training to prepare the organization to meet corporate expectations.
Individual Satisfaction Influence
Productivity goes down in a new or challenging job. Productivity improves as staff learn and integrate. Job security and promotion opportunities go up with productivity. Staff productivity and self-assessment change as they move within the cycle.
Opportunity: It could not be shown that staff were satisfied with their top personal job factors. And neither the self or ‘supervisor’ productivity assessment correlated with their top factors. Alternative: Write a workgroup strategy and facilitate regular workgroup member goal setting. Agree on roles that integrate individual objectives into leadership and corporate goals.
Summary
Motivation impacts productivity. Leadership, organization, and resource policy can influence motivation and increase productivity. An organization can make small, thoughtful moves to maximize productivity.
The best predictor of productivity was organizational fit. For the most impact, align workgroup strategy with corporate strategy; align leadership, individual, and workgroup goals with organization goals.
Organizations have different strengths and resources. This article was written to show how that can be captured and where it might lead.
Organizational effectiveness is influenced and refined by other factors and each can be divided further.
See http://www.obweb.org/publications for the Organizational Behavior Division of the Academy of Management
or find other references and information at http://op-dev.com/articles/index.shtml..
|