Preview Extract
CHAPTER3 Attitudes and Job Satisfaction LEARNING OBJECTIVES After studying this chapter, students should be able to: Contrast the three components of an attitude. Summarize the relationship between attitudes and behavior. Compare the major job attitudes. Define job satisfaction. Summarize the main causes of job satisfaction. Identify three outcomes of job satisfaction. Identify four employee responses to job dissatisfaction. INSTRUCTOR RESOURCES Instructors may wish to use the following resources when presenting this chapter. Text Exercises An Ethical Choice: Office Talk Personal Inventory Assessment: Core Self Evaluation (CSE) Scale Career Objectives: How Can I Make My Job Better? Myth or Science?: “Happy Workers Means Happy Profits” Point/Counterpoint: Employer-Employee Loyalty Is an Outdated Concept Questions for Review Experiential Exercise: What Satisfies You About Your Dream Job? Ethical Dilemma: Tell-All Websites Text Cases Case Incident 1: The Pursuit of Happiness: Flexibility Case Incident 2: Job Crafting Instructor’s Choice This section presents an exercise that is NOT found in the student's textbook. Instructor's Choice reinforces the text's emphasis through various activities. Some Instructor's Choice activities are centered on debates, group exercises, Internet research, and student experiences. Some can be used in class in their entirety, while others require some additional work on the student's part. The course instructor may choose to use these at anytime throughout the class—some may be more effective as icebreakers, while some may be used to pull together various concepts covered in the chapter. Web Exercises At the end of each chapter of this Instructor’s Manual, you will find suggested exercises and ideas for researching OB topics on the Internet. The exercises “Exploring OB Topics on the Web” are set up so that you can simply photocopy the pages, distribute them to your class, and make assignments accordingly. You may want to assign the exercises as an out-of-class activity or as lab activities with your class. Summary and Implications for Managers Managers should be interested in their employees’ attitudes because attitudes give warnings of potential problems and influence behavior. Creating a satisfied workforce is hardly a guarantee of successful organizational performance, but evidence strongly suggests that whatever managers can do to improve employee attitudes will likely result in heightened organizational effectiveness. Some take-away lessons from the study of attitudes include the following: Of the major job attitudes – job satisfaction, job involvement, organizational commitment, perceived organizational support (POS), and employee engagement – remember that an employee’s job satisfaction level is the best single predictor of behavior. Pay attention to your employees’ job satisfaction levels as determinants of their performance, turnover, absenteeism, and withdrawal behaviors. Measure employee job attitudes objectively and at regular intervals in order to determine how employees are reacting to their work. To raise employee satisfaction, evaluate the fit between the employee’s work interests and on the intrinsic parts of his/her job to create work that is challenging and interesting to the individual. Consider the fact that high pay alone is unlikely to create a satisfying work environment. The chapter opens by profiling a new type of worker – the contingent worker. It’s almost a truism to say that a job that fits you is one that satisfies you. As the vignette shows, however, what makes for a satisfying job is a bit more complex. What factors besides work schedule compatibility and job security affect job attitudes? Does having a satisfying job really matter? Before we tackle these important questions, it’s important to define what we mean by attitudes generally, and job attitudes in particular. BRIEF CHAPTER OUTLINE Attitudes Introduction Attitudes are evaluative statements that are either favorable or unfavorable concerning objects, people, or events. They reflect how we feel about something. What Are the Main Components of Attitudes? Three components of an attitude: (Exhibit 3-1) Cognitive component Affective component Behavioral component Does Behavior Always Follow from Attitudes? Introduction The attitudes people hold determine what they do. Festinger proposed that cases of attitude following behavior illustrate the effects of cognitive dissonance, any incompatibility an individual might perceive between two or more attitudes or between behavior and attitudes. Research has generally concluded that people seek consistency among their attitudes and between their attitudes and their behavior. Moderating Variables Importance of the attitude Its correspondence to behavior Its accessibility The presence of social pressure Whether or not a person has had direct experience with the behavior The attitude–behavior relationship is likely to be much stronger if an attitude refers to something with which we have direct personal experience. What Are the Major Job Attitudes? Introduction OB focuses our attention on a very limited number of job-related attitudes. Most of the research in OB has been concerned with three attitudes: job satisfaction, job involvement, and organizational commitment. Job Satisfaction Definition: refers to a collection of feelings that an individual holds toward his or her job. A high level of job satisfaction equals positive attitudes toward the job and vice versa. Job Involvement Definition: the degree to which a person identifies psychologically with his/her job and considers his/her perceived performance level important to self-worth. Psychological empowerment: employees’ beliefs in the degree to which they influence their work environment, their competence, the meaningfulness of their job, and their perceived autonomy. Organizational Commitment Definition: a state in which an employee identifies with a particular organization and its goals. Emotional attachment to an organization and belief in its values is the ‘gold standard’ for employee commitment. Employees who are committed will be less likely to engage in work withdrawal even if they are dissatisfied, because they have a sense of organizational loyalty. Perceived organizational support (POS) Perceived organizational support (POS) refers to the degree to which employees believe the organization values their contribution and cares about their well-being. Research shows that people perceive their organization as supportive when rewards are deemed fair, when employees have a voice in decisions, and when they see their supervisors as supportive. POS is important in countries where the power distance is lower. Employee engagement Employee engagement refers to an individual’s involvement with, satisfaction with, and enthusiasm for the work he or she does. Highly engaged employees have a passion for their work and feel a deep connection to their company; disengaged employees have essentially checked out, putting time but not energy or attention into their work. Are These Job Attitudes Really All That Distinct? If you as a manager know someone’s level of job satisfaction, you know most of what you need to know about how that person sees the organization. Job Satisfaction (Exhibit 3-2) Measuring Job Satisfaction The definition of job satisfaction—a positive feeling about a job resulting from an evaluation of its characteristics—is broad. Two approaches for measuring job satisfaction are popular: The single global rating The summation of job facets How Satisfied Are People in Their Jobs? Most people are satisfied with their jobs in the developed countries surveyed. Research shows that over the past 30 years, the majority of U.S. workers have been satisfied with their jobs, but recent data show a dramatic drop-off in average job satisfaction levels during the economic contraction that started in late 2007, so much so that only about half of workers report being satisfied with their jobs now. People have typically been more satisfied with their jobs overall, with the work itself, and with their supervisors and coworkers than they have been with their pay and with promotion opportunities. (Exhibit 3-3) Evidence suggests employees in Western cultures have higher levels of job satisfaction than those in Eastern cultures. (Exhibit 3-4) What Causes Job Satisfaction? Job Conditions Interesting jobs that provide training, variety, independence, and control satisfy most employees. Managers also play a role in employees’ job satisfaction. There is also a strong correspondence between how well people enjoy the social context of their workplace and how satisfied they are overall. Personality Research has shown that people who have positive core self-evaluations(CSEs)are more satisfied with their jobs than those with negative core self-evaluations. Those with negative core self-evaluations set less ambitious goals and are more likely to give up when confronting difficulties. Pay Pay does correlate with job satisfaction and overall happiness for many people, but the effect can be smaller once an individual reaches a standard level of comfortable living. (Exhibit 3-5) Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) An organization’s commitment to corporate social responsibility (CSR),or its self-regulated actions to benefit society or the environment beyond what is required by law, increasingly affects employee job satisfaction. Organizations practice CR in a number of ways, including environmental sustainability initiatives, nonprofit work, and charitable giving. The relationship between CSR and job satisfaction is particularly strong for Millennials. Although the link between CSR and job satisfaction is strengthening, not all employees find value in CSR. Therefore, organizations need to address a few issues in order to be most effective. First, not all projects are equally meaningful for every person’s job satisfaction, yet participation for all employees is sometimes expected. Second, some organizations require employees to contribute in a prescribed manner. Third, CSR measures can seem disconnected from the employee’s actual work, providing no increase to job satisfaction. Outcomes of Job Satisfaction Job Performance Happy workers are more likely to be productive workers—the evidence suggests that productivity is likely to lead to satisfaction. Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) It seems logical to assume job satisfaction should be a major determinant of an employee’s organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). Finally, research shows that when people are more satisfied with their jobs, they are more likely to engage in OCBs. Customer Satisfaction Evidence indicates that satisfied employees increase customer satisfaction and loyalty. Life Satisfaction Research in Europe indicated that job satisfaction is positively correlated with life satisfaction, and your attitudes and experiences in life spill over in to your job approaches and experiences. Furthermore, life satisfaction decreases when people become unemployed. The Impact of Job Dissatisfaction What happens when employees dislike their jobs? One theoretical model—the exit–voice–loyalty–neglect framework—is helpful for understanding the consequences of dissatisfaction. Exhibit 3-6 illustrates employees’ four responses to job dissatisfaction, which differ along two dimensions: constructive/destructive and active/passive. The responses are as follows: Exit. The exit response directs behavior toward leaving the organization, including looking for a new position or resigning. Voice. The voice response includes actively and constructively attempting to improve conditions, including suggesting improvements, discussing problems with superiors, and undertaking union activity. Loyalty. The loyalty response means passively but optimistically waiting for conditions to improve, including speaking up for the organization in the face of external criticism and trusting the organization and its management to “do the right thing.” Neglect. The neglect response passively allows conditions to worsen and includes chronic absenteeism or lateness, reduced effort, and increased error rate. Counterproductive Work Behavior (CWB) Substance abuse, stealing at work, undue socializing, gossiping, absenteeism, and tardiness are examples of behaviors that are destructive to organizations. They are indicators of a broader syndrome called counterproductive work behavior (CWB), also termed deviant behavior in the workplace, or simply employee withdrawal (see Chapter 1). Like other behaviors we have discussed, CWB doesn’t just happen – the behaviors often follow negative and sometimes longstanding attitudes. Therefore, if we can identify the predictors of CWB, we may lessen the probability of its effects. Generally, job dissatisfaction predicts CWB. People who are not satisfied with their work become frustrated, which lowers their performance and makes them more likely to commit CWB. Other research suggests that, in addition to vocational misfit (being in the wrong line of work), lack of fit with the organization (working in the wrong kind of organizational culture) also predicts CWBs. According to U.K. research, sometimes CWB is an emotional reaction to perceived unfairness, a way to try to restore an employee’s sense of equity exchange. As a manager, you can take steps to mitigate CWB. You can poll employee attitudes, for instance, and identify areas for workplace improvement. If there is no vocational fit, the employee will not be fulfilled, so you can screen for that. Tailoring tasks so a person’s abilities and values can be exercised should increase job satisfaction and reduce CWB. Furthermore, creating strong teams, integrating supervisors with them, providing formalized team policies , and introducing team-based incentives may help lower the CWB “contagion” that lowers the standards of the group. Absenteeism We find a consistent negative relationship between satisfaction and absenteeism. The more satisfied you are, the less likely you are to miss work. Turnover Satisfaction is also negatively related to turnover, but the correlation is stronger than what we found for absenteeism. Workplace Deviance Job dissatisfaction predicts unionization, stealing, undue socializing, and tardiness. If employees don’t like their work environment, they will respond somehow. Managers Often “Don’t Get It” Given the evidence we’ve just reviewed, it should come as no surprise that job satisfaction can affect the bottom line. Regular surveys can reduce gaps between what managers think employees feel and what they really feel. Summary and Implications for Managers Managers should be interested in their employees’ attitudes because attitudes give warnings of potential problems and influence behavior. Creating a satisfied workforce is hardly a guarantee of successful organizational performance, but evidence strongly suggests that whatever managers can do to improve employee attitudes will likely result in heightened organizational effectiveness. Some take-away lessons from the study of attitudes include the following: Of the major job attitudes—job satisfaction, job involvement, organizational commitment, perceived organizational support (POS), and employee engagement—remember that an employee’s job satisfaction level is the best single predictor of behavior. Pay attention to your employees’ job satisfaction levels as determinants of their performance, turnover, absenteeism, and withdrawal behaviors. Measure employee job attitudes objectively and at regular intervals in order to determine how employees are reacting to their work. To raise employee satisfaction, evaluate the fit between the employee’s work interests and on the intrinsic parts of his/her job to create work that is challenging and interesting to the individual. Consider the fact that high pay alone is unlikely to create a satisfying work environment. EXPANDED CHAPTER OUTLINE Attitudes Introduction Attitudes are evaluative statements that are either favorable or unfavorable concerning objects, people, or events. They reflect how you feel about something. What Are the Main Components of Attitudes? Three components of an attitude (Exhibit 3-1) Cognitive component The employee thought he deserved the promotion (cognitive) Affective component The employee strongly dislikes his supervisor (affective) Behavioral component The employee is looking for another job (behavioral) In organizations, attitudes are important because of the behavioral component Does Behavior Always Follow from Attitudes? Introduction The attitudes people hold determine what they do. Festinger proposed that cases of attitude following behavior illustrate the effects of cognitive dissonance – any incompatibility an individual might perceive between two or more attitudes or between behavior and attitudes. Research has generally concluded that people seek consistency among their attitudes and between their attitudes and their behavior. They either alter the attitudes or the behavior, or they develop a rationalization for the discrepancy. Festinger proposed that the desire to reduce dissonance depends on moderating factors, including the importance of the elements creating it and the degree of influence we believe we have over them. Individuals will be more motivated to reduce dissonance when the attitudes or behavior are important or when they believe the dissonance is due to something they can control. A third factor is the rewards of dissonance; high rewards accompanying high dissonance tend to reduce the tension inherent in the dissonance. Moderating Variables The most powerful moderators of the attitudes relationship are the importance of the attitude, its correspondence to behavior, its accessibility, the presence of social pressures, and whether a person has direct experience with the attitude. Important attitudes reflect our fundamental values, self-interest, or identification with individuals or groups we value. Specific attitudes tend to predict specific behaviors, whereas general attitudes tend to best predict general behaviors. Attitudes that our memories can easily access are more likely to predict our behavior. The attitude–behavior relationship is likely to be much stronger if an attitude refers to something with which we have direct personal experience. What Are the Major Job Attitudes? Introduction OB focuses our attention on a very limited number of job-related attitudes. Most of the research in OB has been concerned with three attitudes: job satisfaction, job involvement, and organizational commitment. Job Satisfaction Job satisfaction describes a positive feeling about a job, resulting from an evaluation of its characteristics. A high level of job satisfaction equals positive attitudes toward the job and vice versa. Job Involvement Job involvement refers to the measure of the degree to which a person identifies psychologically with his/her job and considers his/her perceived performance level important to self-worth. Employees with a high level of job involvement strongly identify with and really care about the kind of work they do. Psychological empowerment – employees’ beliefs in the degree to which they impact their work. High levels of both job involvement and psychological empowerment are positively related to organizational citizenship and job performance. Organizational Commitment Organizational commitment refers to a state in which an employee identifies with a particular organization and its goals. Emotional attachment to an organization and belief in its values is the ‘gold standard’ for employee commitment. As with job involvement, the research evidence demonstrates negative relationships between organizational commitment and both absenteeism and turnover. Employees who are committed will be less likely to engage in work withdrawal even if they are dissatisfied, because they have a sense of organizational loyalty. Perceived organizational support (POS) Perceived organizational support is the degree to which employees believe the organization values their contribution and cares about their well-being. Research shows that people perceive their organization as supportive when rewards are deemed fair, when employees have a voice in decisions, and when they see their supervisors as supportive. POS is important in countries where the power distance—the degree to which people in a country accept that power in institutions and organizations is distributed equally—is lower. Employee engagement – individual’s involvement with, satisfaction with, and enthusiasm for the work he or she does. Highly engaged employees have a passion for their work and feel a deep connection to their company. Disengaged employees have essentially checked out, putting time but not energy or attention into their work. Engagement becomes a real concern for most organizations because surveys indicate that few employees—between 17 percent and 29 percent—are highly engaged by their work. This concept is relatively new and still generates active debate about its usefulness. Are These Job Attitudes Really All That Distinct? Attitudes are highly related. If you as a manager know someone’s level of job satisfaction, you know most of what you need to know about how that person sees the organization. Job Satisfaction (Exhibit 3-2) Measuring Job Satisfaction Our definition of job satisfaction—a positive feeling about a job resulting from an evaluation of its characteristics—is clearly broad. Jobs require interacting with coworkers and bosses, following organizational rules and policies, meeting performance standards, living with less than ideal working conditions, and the like. Two approaches for measuring job satisfaction are popular: The single global rating is a response to one question, such as “All things considered, how satisfied are you with your job?” Respondents circle a number between 1 and 5 on a scale from “highly satisfied” to “highly dissatisfied.” The second method, the summation of job facets, is more sophisticated. It identifies key elements in a job such as the nature of the work, supervision, present pay, promotion opportunities, and relations with coworkers. How Satisfied Are People in Their Jobs? Most people are satisfied with their jobs in the developed countries surveyed. Research shows that over the past 30 years, the majority of U.S. workers have been satisfied with their jobs. As shown in Exhibit 3-3, people have typically been more satisfied with their jobs overall, with the work itself, and with their supervisors and coworkers than they have been with their pay and promotion opportunities. Although job satisfaction appears relevant across cultures, that doesn’t mean there are no cultural differences in job satisfaction. Evidence suggests employees in Western cultures have higher levels of job satisfaction than those in Eastern cultures. Exhibit 3-4 provides the results of a global study of job satisfaction levels of workers in 15 countries. What Causes Job Satisfaction? Interesting jobs that provide training, variety, independence, and control satisfy most employees. There is also a strong correspondence between how well people enjoy the social context of their workplace and how satisfied they are overall. Interdependence, feedback, social support, and interaction with coworkers outside the workplace are strongly related to job satisfaction even after accounting for characteristics of the work itself. Personality Research shows that people who have positive core self-evaluations(CSEs)—who believe in their inner worth and basic competence—are more satisfied with their jobs than those with negative core self-evaluations. Pay Pay does correlate with job satisfaction and overall happiness for many people, but the effect can be smaller once an individual reaches a standard level of comfortable living. (Exhibit 3-5) Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) An organization’s commitment to corporate social responsibility (CSR)—its self-regulated actions to benefit society or the environment beyond what is required by law—increasingly affects employee job satisfaction. Organizations practice CR in a number of ways, including environmental sustainability initiatives, nonprofit work, and charitable giving. The relationship between CSR and job satisfaction is particularly strong for Millennials. Although the link between CSR and job satisfaction is strengthening, not all employees find value in CSR. Therefore, organizations need to address a few issues in order to be most effective. First, not all projects are equally meaningful for every person’s job satisfaction, yet participation for all employees is sometimes expected. Second, some organizations require employees to contribute in a prescribed manner. Third, CSR measures can seem disconnected from the employee’s actual work, providing no increase to job satisfaction. Outcomes of job Satisfaction Job Performance Happy workers are more likely to be productive workers. At the organization level, there is renewed support for the original satisfaction-performance relationship. It seems organizations with more satisfied workers as a whole are more productive organizations. Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) It seems logical to assume job satisfaction should be a major determinant of an employee’s organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). Satisfied employees would seem more likely to talk positively about the organization, help others, and go beyond the normal expectations in their job, perhaps because they want to reciprocate their positive experiences. Evidence suggests job satisfaction is moderately correlated with OCBs; people who are more satisfied with their jobs are more likely to engage in OCBs. Fairness perceptions help explain the relationship. Those who believe their coworkers support them are more likely to engage in helpful behaviors, whereas those who have antagonistic relationships with coworkers are less likely to do so. Individuals with certain personality traits are also more satisfied with their work, which in turns leads them to engage in more OCBs. Finally, research shows that when people are in a good mood, they are more likely to engage in OCBs. Customer Satisfaction Evidence indicates that satisfied employees increase customer satisfaction and loyalty. Some firms encourage employees to “create fun and a little weirdness” and they give them unusual discretion in making customers satisfied. Life Satisfaction Research in Europe indicated that job satisfaction is positively correlated with life satisfaction, and your attitudes and experiences in life spill over in to your job approaches and experiences. Furthermore, life satisfaction decreases when people become unemployed. The Impact of Job Dissatisfaction Introduction There are a number of ways employees can express dissatisfaction. (Exhibit 3-6) Exit: behavior directed toward leaving the organization, including looking for a new position as well as resigning. Voice: actively and constructively attempting to improve conditions, including suggesting improvements, discussing problems with superiors, and some forms of union activity. Loyalty: passively but optimistically waiting for conditions to improve, including speaking up for the organization in the face of external criticism, and trusting the organization and its management to “do the right thing.” Neglect: passively allowing conditions to worsen, including chronic absenteeism or lateness, reduced effort, and increased error rate. Exit and neglect behaviors encompass our performance variables – productivity, absenteeism, and turnover. Voice and loyalty are constructive behaviors that allow individuals to tolerate unpleasant situations or to revive satisfactory working conditions. It helps us to understand situations, such as those sometimes found among unionized workers, where low job satisfaction is coupled with low turnover. Counterproductive Work Behavior (CWB) Substance abuse, stealing at work, undue socializing, gossiping, absenteeism, and tardiness are examples of behaviors that are destructive to organizations. They are indicators of a broader syndrome called counterproductive work behavior (CWB), also termed deviant behavior in the workplace, or simply employee withdrawal (see Chapter 1). Like other behaviors we have discussed, CWB doesn’t just happen – the behaviors often follow negative and sometimes longstanding attitudes. Therefore, if we can identify the predictors of CWB, we may lessen the probability of its effects. Generally, job dissatisfaction predicts CWB. People who are not satisfied with their work become frustrated, which lowers their performance and makes them more likely to commit CWB. Other research suggests that, in addition to vocational misfit (being in the wrong line of work), lack of fit with the organization (working in the wrong kind of organizational culture) also predicts CWBs. According to U.K. research, sometimes CWB is an emotional reaction to perceived unfairness, a way to try to restore an employee’s sense of equity exchange. As a manager, you can take steps to mitigate CWB. You can poll employee attitudes, for instance, and identify areas for workplace improvement. If there is no vocational fit, the employee will not be fulfilled, so you can screen for that. Tailoring tasks so a person’s abilities and values can be exercised should increase job satisfaction and reduce CWB. Furthermore, creating strong teams, integrating supervisors with them, providing formalized team policies, and introducing team-based incentives may help lower the CWB “contagion” that lowers the standards of the group. Absenteeism We find a consistent negative relationship between satisfaction and absenteeism. The more satisfied you are, the less likely you are to miss work. Generally, when numerous alternative jobs are available, dissatisfied employees have high absence rates, but when there are few alternatives, dissatisfied employees have the same rate of absence as satisfied employees. Turnover Satisfaction is also negatively related to turnover, but the correlation is stronger than what we found for absenteeism. The satisfaction–turnover relationship also is affected by alternative job prospects. If an employee is presented with an unsolicited job offer, job dissatisfaction is less predictive of turnover because the employee is more likely to leave in response to “pull” (the lure of the other job) than “push” (the unattractiveness of the current job). Job dissatisfaction is more likely to translate into turnover when employment opportunities are plentiful because employees perceive that it is easy to move. When employees have high “human capital” (high education, high ability), job dissatisfaction is more likely to translate into turnover because they have, or perceive they have, many available alternatives. Managers Often “Don’t Get It” Given the evidence we’ve just reviewed, it should come as no surprise that job satisfaction can affect the bottom line. Stock prices of companies in the high morale group grew 19.4 percent, compared with 10 percent for the medium or low morale group. Regular surveys can reduce gaps between what managers think employees feel and what they really feel. Summary and Implications for Managers Managers should be interested in their employees’ attitudes because attitudes give warnings of potential problems and influence behavior. Creating a satisfied workforce is hardly a guarantee of successful organizational performance, but evidence strongly suggests that whatever managers can do to improve employee attitudes will likely result in heightened organizational effectiveness all the way to high customer satisfaction and profits. Some take-away lessons from the study of attitudes include the following: Of the major attitudes—job satisfaction, job involvement, organizational commitment, perceived organizational support (POS), and employee engagement—remember that an employee’s job satisfaction level is the best single predictor of behavior. Pay attention to your employees’ job satisfaction levels as determinants of their performance, turnover, absenteeism, and withdrawal behaviors. Measure employee job attitudes objectively and at regular intervals in order to determine how employees are reacting to their work. To raise employee satisfaction, evaluate the fit between the employee’s work interests and on the intrinsic parts of his/her job to create work that is challenging and interesting to the individual. Consider the fact that high pay alone is unlikely to create a satisfying work environment. An Ethical Choice Office Talk You are peacefully at work in your cubicle when your coworker invades your space, sitting on your desk and nearly overturning your coffee. As she talks about the morning meeting, do you: a) stop what you’re doing and listen; orb) explain that you’re in the middle of a project and ask to talk some other time? Your answer may reflect your attitude toward office talk, but it should be guided by whether your participation is ethical. Sometimes, office conversations can help employees to process information and find solutions to problems. Other times, office talk can be damaging to everyone. Consider the scenario from two perspectives: oversharing and venting. More than 60 percent of 514 professional employees recently surveyed indicated they encounter individuals who frequently share too much about themselves. Some are self-centered, narcissistic, and “think you want to know all the details of their lives,” according to psychologist Alan Hilfer. Despite the drawbacks, over sharers can be strong contributors. Billy Bauer, director of marketing for manufacturer Royce Leather, is an over sharer who boasts about his latest sales – which may push other employees to work harder. Over sharers can also contribute to teamwork when they share personal stories related to organizational goals, according to a Harvard Business Review article. Now let’s look at this another way. According to Yale Professor Amy Wrzesniewski, organization-lovers are often“ the first people to become offended” when they think the organization is making wrong decisions. They can become emotional, challenging, and outspoken about their views. If they are not heard, they can increase their venting or withdraw. Yet organization-lovers can be top performing employees: they are often highly engaged, inspiring, and strong team players who are more likely to work harder than others. Venting their frustrations helps restore a positive attitude to keep them high performing. Research indicates that venting to co workers can also build camaraderie. Since guidelines for acceptable office conversation are almost non exist entin the contemporary age of openness, personalization, and transparency, you must decide what kinds of office talk are ethical and productive .Knowing who is approaching you for conversation, why they are approaching you, what they may talk about, and how you may keep the discussion productive and ethical can help you choose whether to engage or excuse yourself. Sources: S. Shellenbarger, “Office Over sharers: Don’t Tell Us about Last Night,” The Wall Street Journal, June 25, 2014, D2; A. S. McCance, C. D. Nye, L. Wang, K. S. Jones, and C. Chiu, “Alleviating the Burden of Emotional Labor: The Role of Social Sharing,” Journal of Management (February 2013): 392–415; and S. Shellenbarger, “When It Comes to Work, Can You Care too Much?” The Wall Street Journal, April 30, 2014, D3. Class Exercise Form groups of three to five students. Have each group discuss whether anyone has observed similar situations develop in a work situation or in school. Evaluate how students indicate such situations manifested themselves and how they were treated in the social setting. Did these situations result in better or poorer work performance? Did they make the environment a difficult place to be or improve it? Teaching Notes This exercise is applicable to face-to-face classes or synchronous online classes such as Black Board 9.1, WIMBA, and Second Life Virtual Classrooms. See http://www.baclass.panam.edu/imob/SecondLife for more information. Personal Inventory Assessments Core Self Evaluation (CSE) Scale In this chapter, you were introduced to the concept of core self-evaluation (CSE). You probably have a general awareness of your CSE, or how you candidly view your capabilities. This PIA can provide you with further insights. Career Objectives How can I make my job better? Honestly, I hate my job. But there are reasons I should stay: this is my first job out of college, it pays pretty well, and it will establish my career. Is there any hope, or am I doomed until I quit?— Taylor Dear Taylor: You’re not doomed! You can work on your attitude to either improve your experience or find a positive perspective .In other words, if you can turn “I hate my job” into “this is what I’m doing to make my situation better,” your job satisfaction is likely to improve. Try this: • Write down everything you hate about your job, but wait until you have a few days off so you can get amore objective viewpoint. Be specific. Keep asking yourself why, as in,“ Why do I dislike my office mate?” Also, consider your history: was the job always a problem, or perhaps circumstance shave changed? • Now write down everything you like about the job. Again, be specific. Think about the environment, the people, and the work separately. Find something positive, even if it’s just the coffee in the break room. • Compare your lists for clues about your attitude and job satisfaction. Look for mentions of the work or the people. Job satisfaction is generally more strongly related to how interesting your work is than it is to other factors. People, especially your supervisor, are important to your attitude toward work as well. • Read your lists aloud to a few trusted friends (you don’t want to rant about your boss with your coworker).Ask them to help process your grievances. Are there deal-breakers like harassment? • Decide whether you can talk with your manager about this. According to Roy L. Cohen, author of The Wall Street Professional’s Survival Guide,“ consider whether how you’re being treated is unique to you or shared by your colleagues.” If everyone has the same problem, especially if the problem is the boss, you probably shouldn’t approach your manager. But changes can be made in most situations. Based on the sources of your grievances and your ability to make changes in the workplace, you may choose to address the issues, or develop skills for your next job. Meanwhile, don’t sabotage yourself with sloppy performance and complaints. Instead, look for positive reinforcement, join a professional organization, or volunteer. Happy employees are healthier. You deserve to be one of them. Sources: “Employee Engagement,” Workforce Management (February 2013): 19; A. Hurst, “Being ‘Good’ Isn’t the Only Way to Go,” The New York Times, April 20, 2014, 4; R. E. Silverman, “Work as Labor or Love?” The Wall Street Journal, October 18, 2012, D3; H. J. Smith, T. F. Pettigrew, G. M. Pippin, and S. Bialosiewicz, “Relative Deprivation: A Theoretical and Meta-Analytic Review,” Personality and Social Psychology Review 16 (2012): 203–32; and A. Tugend, “Survival Skills for a Job You Detest,” The Wall Street Journal, April 7, 2012, B5. Class Exercise Divide students into groups of three to five each. Ask each group to prepare a short paper to define how organizational commitment and perceived organizational support contribute to job satisfaction. Ask groups to brainstorm ways employers can better meet the needs of their employees. Have the groups present their findings to the class. Teaching Notes This exercise is applicable to face-to-face classes or synchronous online classes such as Black Board 9.1, WIMBA, and Second Life Virtual Classrooms. See http://www.baclass.panam.edu/imob/SecondLife for more information. Myth or Science? “Happy Workers Means Happy Profits” There are exceptions, of course, but this is basically true. A glance at the top 25 of Fortune’s Best Companies to Work For reveals a list of recognizable profit leaders: Google, SAS, Edward Jones, and REI, to name a few. However, all happiness is not created equal. An employee who is happy because his dog just had puppies isn’t necessarily going to work harder that day, for instance. In the same way, some employer happiness-inducers seem unrelated to profit increases, such as Google’s bowling alley and Irish pub, Facebook’s free chocolate lunches, and Salesforce.com’ s off-the-charts parties. Profit is not about the established benefits, either, though they’re important. Employees can appreciate Marriott’s hotel discounts, for example, and research indicates employees highly value paid time off, a defined-contribution retirement plan such as a 401(k), and lower health premiums. But many companies offer their employees these benefits and are nowhere near the Fortune 500 companies. It turns out that the value of happiness in the profit equation is in the level of employee engagement. As Julie Gebauer, a managing director for Towers Watson, says, “It’s not just about making them happy – that’s not a business issue. Engagement is.” Job engagement “represents employees’ commitment… and the level of discretionary effort they are willing to put forth at work,” writes Jack in the Box’s Senior VP Mark Blankenship. Happy employees with higher job engagement are willing to work hard, make customers happy, and stay with the company – three factors that affect the bottom line in a big way with productivity gains and reduced turnover costs. And many of the Best Companies to Work For report great stock performance. A recent review of 300 studies even revealed that turnover rates resulting from poor attitudes or low engagement lead to poorer organizational performance. So the moral of the story seems to be, treat others as we want to be treated. Pass the chocolate. Sources: M. H. Blankenship, “Happier Employees + Happier Customers = More Profit,” HR Magazine (July 2012), pp. 36–-38;; A. Edmans, “The Link Between Job Satisfaction and Firm Value, with Implications for Corporate Social Responsibility,” Academy of Management Perspectives (November 2012), pp. 1–-19; “Getting Them to Stay,” Workforce Management (February 2013), p. 19; J. K. Harter et al., “Causal Impact of Employee Work Perceptions on the Bottom Line of Organizations,” Perspectives on Psychological Science (July 2010), pp. 378–-389; T.-Y. Park and J. D. Shaw, “Turnover Rates and Organizational Performance: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Applied Psychology (March 2013), pp. 268–-309; and J. Waggoner, “Do Happy Workers Mean Higher Profit?” USA Today(February 20, 2013), pp. B1–-B2. Class Exercise Brainstorm with students about situations in which they knew workers/employees were happy with their company and engaged with their jobs. What is the difference between an organization that offers perks to employees and an organization where employees have high job engagement? Discuss why employee engagement is essential to a satisfied workforce. Students should come to realize that companies that emphasize high job engagement will have a more productive workforce, happier customers, and lower employee turnover and absenteeism. Teaching Notes This exercise is applicable to face-to-face classes or synchronous online classes such as Black Board 9.1, WIMBA, and Second Life Virtual Classrooms. See http://www.baclass.panam.edu/imob/SecondLife for more information. Point/Counterpoint Employer-Employee Loyalty Is an Outdated Concept The word loyalty is so outdated it is practically laughable. Long gone are the days when an employer would keep an employee for life, as are the days when an employee would work for a single company for his or her entire career. Professor Linda Gratton says, “Loyalty is dead – killed off through shortening contracts, outsourcing, automation, and multiple careers. Faced with what could be 50 years of work, who honestly wants to spend that much time with one company? Serial monogamy is the order of the day.” The loyalty on each side of the equation is weak. For the most part, this is warranted – why retain employees who are subpar performers? It’s only a matter of the employer handling the loyalty of employees with respect. Admittedly, some breaches happen. For example, Renault ended the 31-year career of employee Michel Balthazard (and two others) on false charges of espionage. When the wrongness of the charges became public, Renault halfheartedly offered the employees their jobs back and a lame apology: “Renault thanks them for the quality of their work at the group and wishes them every success in the future.” As for employees’ loyalty to their employers, that is worth little nowadays. One manager with Deloitte says the current employee attitude is, “I’m leaving, I had a great experience, and I’m taking that with me.” There just isn’t an expectation of loyalty. In fact, only 9 percent of recent college graduates would stay with an employer for more than a year if they didn’t like the job, research indicated. But there is nothing wrong with this. A “loyal” employee who stays with the organization but isn’t satisfied with the job can do a lot of damage. At best, this person will be less productive. At worst, he or she can engage in years worth of damaging CWB. For the worker, staying with an organization forever—no matter what—can limit career and income prospects. The sooner we see the employment experience for what it is (mostly transactional, mostly short- to medium-term), the better off we’ll be. The workplace is no place for fantasies of loyalty. Counterpoint Agreed: the word loyalty is outdated when it refers to employers and employees. But the basic concept is valid in the workplace. We now just measure loyalty with finer measurements, such as organizational trust and organizational commitment. There certainly are employers and employees who show little loyalty to each other, but that isn’t the norm. Says management guru Tom Peters, “Bottom line: loyalty matters. A lot. Yesterday. Today. Tomorrow.” University of Michigan’s Dave Ulrich says, “Leaders who encourage loyalty want employees who are not only committed to and engaged in their work but who also find meaning from it.” Commitment. Engagement. Trust. These are some of the building blocks of loyalty. It is true that the employer–employee relationship has changed. For example, (largely) gone are the days when employers provided guaranteed payout pensions to which employees contribute nothing. But is that such a bad thing? Many employers have helped employee stake charge of their own retirement plans. Moreover, it’s not that loyalty is dead, but rather that employers are loyal to a different kind of employee. True, employers no longer refuse to fire a long-tenured but incompetent employee, which is a good thing. These employees can bring down everyone’s productivity and morale. Furthermore, in a globalized world where customer options are plentiful, organizations with “deadwood”—people who don’t contribute—will not be competitive enough to survive. Companies are instead loyal to employees who do their jobs well, and that is as it should be. In short, employees become loyal—trusting, engaged, and committed—when organizations and their people act decently. Employers with superior managers who empower their employees obtain high levels of this kind of loyalty. A true reciprocal relationship is a stronger business model than employees staying with an organization for years in exchange for an organization’s caretaking. Bonds of trust and loyalty rest on the relationships of individuals. Workplace psychologist Binna Kandola observes, “Workplaces may have changed but loyalty is not dead – the bonds between people are too strong.” Sources: “If You Started a Job and You Didn’t Like It, How Long Would You Stay?” USA Today, June 11, 2012, 1B; O. Gough and S. Arkani, “The Impact of the Shifting Pensions Landscape on the Psychological Contract,” Personnel Review 40, no. 2 (2011): 173–84; “Loyalty Gap Widens,” USA Today, May 16, 2012, 1B; P. Korkki, “The Shifting Definition of Worker Loyalty,” The New York Times, April 24, 2011, BU8; I. Macsinga, C. Sulea, P. Sarbescu, and C. Dumitru, “Engaged, Committed and Helpful Employees: The Role of Psychological Empowerment,” Journal of Psychology 19, no. 3, 263–76; M. Top, M. Akdere, and M. Tarcan, “Examining Transformational Leadership, Job Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment and Organizational Trust in Turkish Hospitals: Public Servants versus Private Sector Employees,” International Journal of Human Resource Management 26, no. 9 (2015): 1259–82; and “Is Workplace Loyalty an Outmoded Concept?” Financial Times, March 8, 2011, www. ft.com/, accessed July 29, 2015. Class Exercise Complete this exercise before having the students read Point/Counterpoint. Have students think about two to three jobs they have had, outside of family chores. (Working for a family business is okay.) Ask them to list the jobs at the top of a sheet of paper. Next, have them list what they really liked about the jobs and what they disliked about the jobs. Ask five-to-ten volunteers to write their job titles on the board and list 3 to 5 things they really liked/disliked about each job. With the class, look for commonalties across jobs and consolidate them into a list of things people like and do not like about work. Have students then discuss what managers or supervisors could do to increase the likes and decrease the dislikes. Ask if these changes would cause them or others to work harder. Have them explain why it would or would not. Lead the students to draw conclusions about how much their supervisors or managers control things that would increase their likes or dislikes, and motivation or demotivation for the job. Teaching Notes This exercise is applicable to face-to-face classes or synchronous online classes such as Black Board 9.1, WIMBA, and Second Life Virtual Classrooms. See http://www.baclass.panam.edu/imob/SecondLife for more information. Instructor Manual for Organizational Behavior Timothy A. Judge Stephen P. Robbins 9781292146300, 9780133507645, 9780136124016
