Relationship of employee reported work limitations to productivity

Relationship of employee-reported work limitations to work productivity.

relationship of employee reported work limitations to productivity

An economy can grow when the number of workers increases (i.e. employment increases) or when each worker produces more. Labour. Employee productivity is an assessment of the efficiency of a worker or group of workers. will be assessed relative to an average for employees doing similar work. Employee productivity is one element of IT productivity, the relationship. Health and Work Performance Questionnaire (HPQ), and Work Productivity and Activity .. Relationship of employee-reported work limitations to work.

Productivity analysis, particularly the examination of trends, helps identify problems before they become crises and permits early adjustment and corrective action. Like any other indicator, productivity measurements do not necessarily identify the source of the problem, only that one exists. Facilitate planning and control: Productivity measurement provides information on costs, time, output rate, and resource usage to allow decision making with respect to pricing, production scheduling, purchasing, contracting, delivery scheduling, and many other activities in the industrial cycle.

Productivity analysis, together with other elements of a competitive strategy, may determine which products or processes should be expanded and which should be phased out. Productivity analysis, combined with cost data, aids in the evaluation of proposed changes to existing products or processes and the introduction of new ones.

It is one of the primary foundations for the continuous improvement efforts that are both popular and necessary for survival in business firms today.

The purpose of the measurement system is critically important in determining the specific measures to be used. For example, if the measures are to be used only for planning and control purposes, the inputs into the measures and the outputs may be imprecise aggregate figures that provide guidance for setting schedules and future capacity requirements. If, however, the measures will be used as a basis for an employee evaluation system leading to bonuses, pay raises, layoffs, and disciplinary actions, inputs and outputs of the measures must be more precise and accurate for shorter time periods, and they must exclude factors outside the control of the worker.

Questions of equity and interaction among individual jobs become evident. The functions of monitoring performance and providing feedback, diagnosing problems, facilitating planning and control, and supporting innovation are common to many types of measures, and productivity is no exception.

The function of defining productivity and directing behavior, however, warrants more explanation because it is important to Page Share Cite Suggested Citation: A simple example of a waiter in a restaurant can be used to explain how measures of productivity can direct behavior.

If the measure of productivity is customers served per hour, the emphasis is on speed and throughput, and the waiter will try to complete each transaction as quickly as possible. On the other hand, a measure of dollars of food served per customer would lead to totally different behaviors; the waiter would suggest more expensive items and would encourage the customer to have appetizers, wine, and dessert, regardless of the time taken.

In this case, time is not a factor; the quick turnover of customers would be a disadvantage. Other possible measures could each lead to a different set of behaviors. One way to view individual productivity is to consider how the efforts of an individual contribute to the productivity or success of the organization.

Whether the actions of the waiter in each of the examples above would be productive or counterproductive depends on the type of restaurant and, specifically, its goals and objectives. A downtown delicatessen would have one set of goals and circumstances; speed in serving customers would be a distinct advantage.

A fine restaurant in the suburbs would operate in a different milieu; speed in this case could be a detriment. The fundamental question is not, what productivity measures should be used?

The fundamental question is, what are the organizational objectives? The secondary question is, what set of individual productivity measures will direct the behavior of employees to meet those objectives as they work toward their own personal goals?

The aim of the organization is to align work behavior with organizational goals. It is the responsibility of management, therefore, to develop measures that will elicit organizationally desirable behaviors. These relationships are illustrated in the model shown as Figure Werther et al. The law of effect, the cornerstone of operant psychology, says that behavior is a function of its consequences; positive outcomes reinforce behaviors, which leads to their being repeated and expanded.

Simply establishing a measure and feeding back the results to the employee can be regarded as a form of reinforcement; employees tend to work on the basis of the measure in any circumstances. If there is a net incentive for high performance, the link between behavior and the measure will be stronger.

The greater the incentive, the stronger the relationship between the two. The term net incentive indicates that many incentives and disincentives may operate in a given set of circumstances. Worker motivation is a complex issue; in taking all of that complexity into consideration, the model suggests that the net incentive should be positive and tied to performance.

Unfortunately, many organizational incentive systems are based on productivity or other performance measures that are not in line with organizational goals. Programmers, for example, may be measured and rewarded for lines of code written per hour. Accountants may be evaluated on the number of reports produced, and maintenance personnel on the number of routine equipment overhauls performed. In each instance and many moremaximization of the measured criterion would likely be counterproductive to the organization.

Following the same logic, the productivity measurement system at each level of analysis should be developed to direct behaviors and performance at one level of the organization to the goals at the next higher level. These relationships are depicted in their ideal state in my Goal Alignment model, Figure Across the top of the model, the organization attempts to make business unit goals at all intermediate levels congruent with organizational goals.

Since the organization has no control over the individual's goals or the non-work-related goals of the group, it must accept them as given and design the organization to be compatible with them. Productivity measures at the individual or group level direct behaviors to the business unit goals, if properly aligned.

That is, the individuals or groups will work to the measures; it is the responsibility of the organization to ensure that the measures are in line with the goals. Reading horizontally across the bottom of Figurethe model indicates that the productivity performance of a business unit is a direct function of the productive behavior of each of the individuals and groups within the unit. In turn, organizational productivity is a function of the productivity of each of the units.

The degree to which this is true depends on the definition of productivity at each level and the interactions among the elements. Also, in this ideal model, the individual or group productivity results would sum to the productivity of the next higher business unit and ultimately to the productivity of the organization.

At the business unit level, managers will direct activities, allocate resources, and make other decisions to maximize performance as specified in the measurement system especially if rewards are tied to performance. At each intermediate level of analysis, therefore, productivity measures should be selected and positioned such that the performance of the unit directly contributes to the goals at the next higher level.

relationship of employee reported work limitations to productivity

The Goal Alignment model suggests that individuals, groups, and business units are not goal driven, but measurement driven. The old saying that ''you get what is inspected, not what is expected" is rel- Page Share Cite Suggested Citation: It is one thing for a firm to establish and communicate goals.

Relationship of employee-reported work limitations to work productivity.

It is quite another to devise and implement measurement systems that can be maximized only by behavior and performance that lead directly to goal accomplishment.

Organizations are real, not ideal. The Goal Alignment model, as well as many of the other models and concepts in this chapter, represent targets toward which organizations should strive. The degree to which they can achieve these targets, resolve the related issues, and design perfect productivity measurement systems determines their probability of survival and success.

  • Looking for other ways to read this?

Researchers can help in this effort by empirically testing the relationships suggested in the Goal Alignment model. Attempts to amalgamate all of that knowledge into a comprehensive, unified theory of individual productivity would likely prove fruitless. What is needed is a framework that will provide guidance for theory development, model building, empirical studies, and other forms of research.

One such framework is the separation of the factors affecting individual productivity into five distinct, but interacting, sets of variables: Each of these sets of variables involves one or more disciplines; together they approach the boundaries of the body of knowledge of work.

relationship of employee reported work limitations to productivity

Obviously, they overlap and interact. But somewhere within the complex interactions of all of these variables lie the determinants of individual productivity. Development of a comprehensive theory of individual productivity is too much to ask, but perhaps it can be approached as would building a cathedral—one stone at a time.

To develop a theory or build a cathedral, one needs plans and models. In this section, I discuss two models of individual productivity that encompass a wide range of variables. Adapted from Ruch and Hershauer They categorized the variables as primary factors, secondary factors, individual factors, organizational controllables, individual and organizational demographics, and bodies of knowledge or files of information.

If you believe as most should that the combined efforts of the human resource function should positively influence the performance capability of the workforce instead of hindering it, you should understand the factors that influence performance. Foundations of Productivity High-performing and innovative employees are the foundation of productivity — by far the most impactful factor in workforce and team productivity is hiring and retaining employees with exceptional capabilities and self-motivation.

Working together, managers and HR can attract, hire, develop, and retain individual employees who are agile, high-performing continuous learners and innovators. Unfortunately, even the best employees cannot perform without great managers, proper direction, support, tools, and resources.

Leaders and managers play a critical role in defining the direction, purpose, priorities, goals, and roles of the workforce.

relationship of employee reported work limitations to productivity

The capability of the manager with the support of HR to develop plans, hire effectively, coach, motivate, and develop employees is crucial to success. Direction and Guidance Factors A corporate strategy and plan that builds commitment — a competitive business strategy and strategic plan increases the chances that an organization will be successful and success builds commitment.

In addition, if the plan and the strategy are clear and well communicated, not only will your employees be more motivated, but knowing the strategic direction will help them remain focused. Corporate values that are measured and rewarded can also align behavior and build commitment. A defined purpose for teams make roles clear — every business unit and team needs to understand its role.

Managers and leaders need to develop a clear and communicated purpose that is both compelling and that makes members feel important.

Relationship of employee-reported work limitations to work productivity. - Semantic Scholar

Understand that employees are more likely to be committed to the purpose of the unit or team if they are involved in creating it. Team and individual goals — having clear operational goals lets everyone know what is expected. If these goals are communicated and measurable, employees will understand precisely what is important and what is not. If stretch but reachable goals are set, employees are less likely to become complacent. Prioritization for impactful resource allocation — setting clear priorities helps to ensure that time and resources are allocated to the most important and impactful tasks.

Employees must be made aware of both high- and low-priority goals, tasks, processes, and customers. Processes must be developed to ensure that resources are allocated disproportionately to high priority tasks. Performance metrics for continuous improvement — having effective metrics and reporting processes reinforces both team and individual goals. Because whatever is measured and reported gets done, metrics provide focus, feedback and result in continuous improvement.

Effective rewards drive performance — when monetary rewards are tied directly to performance and the metrics for each goal, you doubly reinforce the message about what is important. Individual and team monetary rewards, coupled with nonmonetary excitement factors, can play a major role in ensuring focus and consistent performance. Support Factors Team member support increases individual performance — few tasks in this modern age can be completed by an individual employee working without support.

Unless your employees are provided with complementary teammates, as well as the support of managers and employees outside the team, productivity is bound to suffer. Best-practice sharing and collaboration improve productivity — learning by trial and error slows progress and leads to mass duplication of effort and higher error rates.

Productivity improves dramatically when others who are outside the team freely collaborate and proactively share best practices and ideas. Support for innovation can dramatically increase productivity — in most industries, the yearly increase in the level of productivity that is required to maintain a dominant position in the industry has increased dramatically.

What is needed is a continuous level of innovation both in products and in business processes.