Job Design and Motivation

1.0 Introduction

Job design is broadly defined as level and breadth of job content, over-time variability in task assignment, specific mix of assigned tasks, use of teams, and the level of autonomy granted to individual workers or teams (Baron and David, 2000: p 334).

TodayÐ'ÐŽÐ'Їs business environment, correct job design can help a company to become successful and competitive in the market. The job design is more emphasized and focuses. Since jobs have to be designed using processes that model new types of job design. These theories are that design processes and the resulting job designs must recognize that nature of knowledge work is different from administrative and operational work and that the people who perform it resist structured approaches and need other things in their work.

This assignment is aimed to a variety of issues related to job design; it will be discussing the philosophy that resulted in their initial development and some broad principles that suggest a shift away from a constricted set of job responsibilities to a more broadened approach to the division of work.

In this assignment, I will describe the theories of HerzbergÐ'ÐŽÐ'Їs Two-Factors Model and the Job Characteristics Model of Hackman and Oldham and knowledge work. Second, I will to identify the reasons why General Electric is so successful, while the Bank of XingYe is not that successful in the real world. Finally is the conclusion of my finds.

2.0 The theories of Job Design

2.1 Theories of Herzberg applied in job design

In HertzbergÐ'ÐŽÐ'Їs Two-factor Model, which is also known as Motivation-Hygiene Model, Herzberg proposes a list of factors that lead to satisfaction (Motivators) and an additional list of factors that lead to dissatisfaction (Hygiene factors). The motivators are typically related to intrinsic factors such as recognition, achievement, responsibility, and the content of work itself. Hygiene factors are related to extrinsic factors such as the environment of the job, salaries, company policies, the quality of supervision, and the interpersonal relations.

The summarized in Figure 1 below:

Design Theory Model Element Implication Design Response

Herzberg

(motivation is found in job content, not extrinsic Factors) Motivators Build motivators into job Job enrichment

Job Rotation

Empowerment self Directed Teams

Hackman & Oldham

(psychological characteristics of the job itself determine motivation and commitment to high levels of output) Skill Variety

Task Identity

Task Significance

Autonomy

Feedback Redesign jobs so that they maximize the combination of all five of the core psychological design elements of quality jobs Job enlargement

Job rotation

(for variety)

Job Enrichment

Task significance

Empowerment self-directed

teams

(for Identity, significance, and autonomy)

360 Feedback

(Re: e-book: HRM, module 9: Job design)

2.2 Theories of Hackman and Oldham applied in job design

Hackman and Oldham propose another model of job enrichment that is called Job Characteristics Model. In this model, the degree to which jobs are motivation can be assessed through five core job characteristics: skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, and job feedback. The higher a job scores on each characteristic, the more it is considered to be enriched. The Hackman/Oldham model is summarized in Figure 2 below:( Re: e-book: module9: job design)

3.0 Knowledge work

According to above, We can found impact of job design in the modern world of knowledge workers that many of our cutting edge organization, especially those smaller firms who have to compete with the larger more established companies.

Nowadays, knowledge work is a significant role in the company. The companies often choose and intermediate approach that reflects the type of knowledgeable work, the organizational culture, and the business requirement of the projects. They must recognize that the nature of knowledge work is different from administrative and operational work and that the people who perform it resist structured approaches.

In the Ð'ÐŽÐ'oImproving knowledge work processesÐ'ÐŽÐ'± written by Tom Davenport, the author found that the methods use to improve knowledge work processes in the companies we fell on a continuum. One extreme of the continuum might be characterized as Ð'ÐŽÐ'oreengineering.Ð'ÐŽÐ'± At the other extreme of the continuum we would place the traditional Ð'ÐŽÐ'olaissez-faireÐ'ÐŽÐ'± view of knowledge work, in which knowledge workers are viewed as fully responsible for designing and executing their own work. These extremes of the continuum are summarized in Figure 3, and described in some detail below:

Laissez faire Reengineering

Strategy Hire good people and leave them alone Get people to do work differently

Focus Inputs/ outcomes Activities

Detail Marco Micro

Evaluation Multi-yearly Hourly/daily

Level Individual Large group

Participation Broad Narrow

Commitment Persuasion Mandate

Analytic Emphasis Understanding existing

environment Design new environment

Work Done By Insiders Outsiders

Primary Barrier Loyalty to discipline Fear of change

Two Approaches to knowledge work Improvement

4.0 Comparative Job Design

4.1 The applied of Successful -----General ElectricÐ'ÐŽÐ'Їs

General Electric (GE)