Dilemma between Autonomy and Direct Control within Mangerial Control in Current Organisation
Summary:
Corporate culture control often tends to inflexibly shaping employees into a particular value of the organization, it is considered as a disadvantage to limit the potentials of employees. Overall, we can never separate the various management strategies fads with their perpetual aim- controlling employees to achieve the best result.
Introduction
Management control strategy is not a one dimensional formulae of labour controlling, other than controlling employees, it is also about exploiting employees' discretionary effort and creativity as a prime interest. In the Webboys article, Barrett (2004: 787) demonstrated how different strategies have been manipulated separately and simultaneously to control the labour process of developing primary software. This essay is going to investigate various directions of management strategies, which incorporate with radical approaches of control in response to the dilemma between offset the notions between "direct control" and "responsible autonomy dichotomy" (Friedman in Barrett 2004: 38). Based on the argument that there is "no best way" (Hyman in Barrett 2004: 38) of management strategies, which Barret contend in the Webboyz case study. This essay is concerned that autonomy can never be fully implemented without direct control. Furthermore, we can never separate the various management strategies fads with their perpetual aim- controlling employees to achieve the best result. I will examine the particular approaches of classical scientific management has been applied to the fast food industry, in terms of controlling by financial incentives, rigid task design. Therefore, team is sought to be a "substitute for a more indirect forms of integration and supervision."(Fulop and Linstead1999:220)
I will discuss different perspective of team in regards of providing autonomy to employees which "empowers" them in order to achieve the most effective outcome. Moreover, further discussions of general problems of teamwork in the call centre industry, and various managerial concerns in regards to normative approach would be examined. Correspondently, corporate culture is control is introduced as a modern management strategy, which encourages employees to accept the values of the enterprise, while also promote a sense of belongingness in all participants. (Ray, 1986: 289). Some critics have begun to question the extent which the behaviors of employees in respond to the change of corporate culture in the organization. In addition, commitment and trust cultivate between employees and management in the interrelating control notions as a whole.
According to Taylor's theory(Taylor F.W. 1903 in Fulop and Linstead1999:220), (Fulop and Linstead1999:220) noted that, "under previous form of management...managers did very little genuine work at all; simply checking to see when a particular set of general instructions had completely had been completely."
However, management must take over the responsibility to determine how and who needs to be done down the most minute level, leaving the worker to execute a series of predetermined tasks been laid out. This notion has been adopted by the fast food industry globally; the level of detail in specifying work routine is remarkably systematic, for instance, workers are required to behave as if they do not understand the basic rule of interaction, by suggesting an additional product when it is obviously not necessary or even when it becomes ridiculous. Workers are required to apologise to the customers instead of defending themselves if the customer is responded with exasperation or derision. (Leidner 2002:153-163)
In addition, the standardization of job routine is considered as beneficial for employers in managerial control since it save cost by eliminating the need to hire skilled workers. The management strategies of fast food industry could be further related to the scientific management whereby "work activities are standardized and then formalized to optimize the execution of repetitive task." (Fulop and Linstead1999:210) In terms of the labour control strategy, the scheduling of workers' hours is also functioned as a part of discipline system to motive and punish workers. However, it is imaginable that staffing problems exists in the fast food industry, for instance, high turnovers and difficulties of attracting new employees.
It is interesting to think if the notion of scientific management or bureauticratic control would be successful if it applies into organization such as Webboyz?
Firstly, it is noticeable that the shop-floor level workers are mainly unskilled in the fast food industry, who are considered as "disposable" employees that undertake rigid tasks which been standardized. In other words, they are functioned as "robots" that perform routines without much brain work indeed. In the case of software industry is different, the employees with updated technical qualifications, energetic in extending their skills.
Consequently, employees in Webboyz take less consideration in regards to the salaries since technical autonomy is provided for them to set their own research agenda, in order to extend their skills. Thus autonomy is perceived as a kind of redemption of low salaries in Webboyz for some employees. It is worthwhile to be argued whether financial incentive is the main motivation behind work. Although Employee Share Ownership Plan (ESOP) introduced as a cover for low wages at Webboyz, in hopes that employees of would be more involved in some strategic decision making. However, Barrett (2004:38) noted, employees trade their pay against the type of work they do and the environment in which they work. It is considered to be a desirable working condition for most of the employees, since autonomy enables workers with high level of technical knowledge to possess some degree of control and discretion over software development process, in regards to research agenda and time allocation within the timeframe. Skill shortage at the time meant money was just likely to entice employees away, which means employees would leave Webboyz if there is a lack of challenge or self-development.
Ray (1986: 292) noted, it "focuses upon individualistic inclined, future orientated workers, people who are motivated by the possibility that they may participate beneficially in the reward system." This notion is further extended by Gupta (1998:30), who expresses financial incentives are important to be exposed, in effect to inform employees to work hard for it. It is not only a good way measure performance accurately, but also reinforces rewarded behaviors as what companies' valued and desired.
The notion of financial incentives are the main motivation behind employees is argued by Kohn (1998:30), he contends that financial incentives does not necessarily improve performance quality, even if it does, its usually a reflection of short terms, or of simple tasks, which are less quality demanding. He suggests the good feature of management should be able to understand that employees have a basic need of autonomy, which is to make them feel related and belonging. In this way, it creates a democratic workplace environment that everyone has the opportunities to participate in important decision making. One of the employees noticed this and said" I think I could be getting paid more but there's a lot of trade-offs as well. I feel like there's a team and if we can work together we can do a lot of cool stuffs."(Barrett 2004: 787)
Other than bureaucratic control, we are going to examine team work as a function of humanistic control, which "attempted to offset the future-orientated individualistic feature of bureaucratic control into cooperative people who devote themselves towards the goal of management." ((Ray 1986: 292). Fulop (1999:245) also appeals the message that managers are no longer encumbered by the need to exercise close control and the control strategy should be liberated into another stage. Therefore, teams introduced as a form of control that offsets the notion between direct control and responsible autonomy, since it increases empowerment amongst knowledge workers who less likely accept authoritarian management while peer surveillance remains as a control strategy.
It is worthwhile for us to think whether teams empower employees to be more involved by taking greater responsibilities, or does it simply operate as a form of direct control with a better title? How does direct control take place to ensure employees are doing the right when autonomy is granted based on the context of teamwork? Geary (2001:11) suggested some optimists argued that the motives of management was mainly an intention to empower employees, in order to make work more rewarding and to create better and more challenging work environment. In opposition, Fulop (1999:221) argues" Taylor's fear of soldiering meant that his controlling instincts won out over any inclination to allow workers the autonomy and discretion to exercise this knowledge."
Let us now investigate how control strategies operate between direct control and responsible autonomy. First of all, surveillance is introduced as a combination of responsible autonomy and direct control in the call centre industry as a way to reward and discipline employees. (Thompson and McHugh 2002:8) Some argues employees may accept the legitimacy of routine surveillance as an inevitable aspect of the wage-effort bargain, as long as this does not encroach upon their perceived private sphere of life. (Mason and Lankshear in Thompson and McHugh 2002:8). It is arguable that a lack of trust between management and employees is considered as the main reason in which autonomy could not be fully granted. Trust is not only functioned as a form of control in exchange of commitments from employees, it is also referred to a relationship of reciprocal moral obligation in which reward and productivity were exchanged without investigation. (Managerial control of employees working at home) finally, trust was concluded as individualistic and psychological, that is, not all of the members could be trusted, especially the ones lacking in personal attributes of self-discipline, self-motivation, diligence and reliability. Furthermore, the article suggested that target-setting is also perceived as one of the control strategies which mainly focus on output rather than input. In spite of all that, limitation of the approach can be found in some industries that output target could be readily measured and compared.
In terms of the self-organization skills of employees, on the other hand, (Kirkman and Shapiro in Fulop and Linstead, 1999: 244) suggest that "resistance to teamwork is resistance to the interdependence that is necessary for highly effective self-managing work teams. They addressed that members might accept the great responsibility for task (which is self management aspect), but may not want to share that responsibility (which is a team aspect) in self-managing work teams." (Fulop and Linstead1999:244)
Throughout all the case studies discussed, it is noticeable that there is no absolute autonomy given in any of the management perspectives. Some argues."..Distinguishing it (teamwork) from 1970s predecessors by a much more instrumental, pragmatic orientation, with little concern for job enrichment and industrial democracy" (Womack, Jenkins, Appelbaum, Procter and Mueller in van den Broek, Callaghan and Thompson, 2004:246). This perspective is also supported by Fulop and Linstead (1999:244), they noted democracy is removed far from the highly normative and instrumental approach to teamwork, and team is somewhat associated as management fads.
Van De Broek (2004:25) stated there is "very little evidence of increases in group autonomy or discretion and decentralized decision-making", hence, team was merely functioned as span of control as a focus of performance management.
On the other hand, Guest (2003:44) argues that responsible autonomy can be given to workers who committed to their jobs, he adds, on the other hand, discretion can be found in workers who are motivated and well-trained. Workforce of both satisfaction and commitment often contribute in more positive attitudes and behaviors of employees which often result in superior performance.
Overall he draws importance on HRM as a business approach which perceives worker as assets of the organizations, and they should be treated carefully in effect to exploit the performance enhancement.
In the case study of "Team without teamwork", Van De Broek (2004:25) argues there is very little team element involved in the call centre industry, despite the fact the peer pressure was engendered as a form of control. The notion of teamwork was dysfunctionally operated in At Tellcorp, for instances, incentives were largely individual, and individual increment were determined by manager's assessments against specifically defined work objectives. He also contends that pressures such as handling cost, place additional constraint at the development of sentiments and emotions in teams. Further discussion of normative approach and culture control would be revealed in the later of the essay.
In the process of changing cultures within an organization, workers are expected to comply with the change of values, for instance, the certain change of behavior; otherwise, there will be possibilities of punishments such as redundancies, relocation and demotion. Ogbonna (1998:9) argues a proportion of behavioral change be classified are signed compliance rather than authentic willingness to change, in the other words, employees "adapted" their values instead of change them completely. If the culture is not genuinely been accepted by employees, there will be a tendency where employees only act "appropriately" in front of the managers. Academic opinion shows that culture is manageable and possible to be manipulated under certain conditions; however it is more important for management to be more concerned about the consequences of the changes. Furthermore, when modification to values is attributed to compliance rather than genuine belief, how should we demand workers to be committed to the organization as the distinctive feature of culture control suggested?
Scholars place tremendous importance on generating and sustaining normative objectives, management, in another word, team players are required to adapt or change attitudes and behaviors in accordance to the community. Teamwork is considered as "a package combining work intensification, enhanced surveillance and cultural control."(Thompson & Wallace in Findlay, McKinlay, Marks and Thompson vol 53, no. 12, 2000) This notion draws importance on the shaping employees into the certain standards, in terms of managerial objectives and employee's behaviors. Thompson regarded the approach of normative is purely a strategies of "brainwashing", or the search for the "perfect" (Findlay, McKinlay, Marks and Thompson vol 53, no. 12, 2000)
(Natalie Allen and John Meyer in Fulop and Linstead 1999:256) propose a distinction between normative approaches to commitment. Although it is a less common approach, it acknowledges the strong sense of responsibility some people feel towards their organizations. These people have ."totally internalized normative pressures' and therefore behave in certain ways that meet organization goals or interest that they believe constitute the 'right' and 'moral' thing to do. These people would probably be less described as extremely loyal employees. (Davis, Schooram and Donaldson in Fulop and Linstead 1999:256) label this as a value commitment which defines those people who have a strong identification with the organization and are therefore more life to be cooperative and engage in unrewarded spontaneous citizenship behavior.
In conclusion, Problems of management strategies are exists with all of the responses discussed, which further reinforces the argument that there is "no best way" ((Hyman in Barrett 2004: 38)) of management strategies. However, this essay displays different perspectives on management strategies in relate to offset two notions of "direct control" and "responsible autonomy dichotomy" (Friedman in Barrett 2004: 38). In the perspective of bureaucratic control, some argue that the rigid inflexible work tasks and incentive control have a potentially disadvantage that workers may take less consideration of the final product. Moreover, standardized procedures are applied in situation where it is considered as inappropriate. Team was presumably contending itself as a control strategy that promotes team working by increase in autonomy and empowerment significantly to contribute to a greater quality of work life. In despite, It is noticeable that this autonomy is often neglect as one of the aspect of teamwork, even if it has, notion of self-surveillance might be considered as difficult to actualized in the workplace. Correspondently, corporate culture control often tends to inflexibly shaping employees into a particular value of the organization, it is considered as a disadvantage to limit the potentials of employees. Overall, we can never separate the various management strategies fads with their perpetual aim- controlling employees to achieve the best result, therefore autonomy can never be fully implemented without direct control in any management strategies.
Reference
D. Guest, 'Human Resource Management, Corporate Performance and Employee
Wellbeing: Building the Worker into HRM', Journal of Industrial Relations, vol. 44,
no. 3, 2002.
N. Gupta and J. Shaw, 'Let the Evidence Speak: Financial Incentives Are Effective!!" Compensation and Benefits Review, vol. 30, no. 2, 1998.
A. Kohn, 'Challenging Behaviorist Dogma: Myths about Money and Motivation',
Compensation and Benefits Review, vol. 30, no. 2, 1998.
R. Barrett, 'Working at Webboyz: An Analysis of Control over the Software
Development Labour Process', Sociology, vol. 38, no. 4, 2004.
R. Leidner, 'Fast-food work in the United States' in T. Royle and B. Towers (eds),
Labour Relations in the Global Fast-Food Industry, Routledge, London, 2002 p153-163.
J.F. Geary and A. Dobbins, 'Teamworking: a new dynamic in the pursuit of
P. Findlay, A. McKinlay, A. Marks and P. Thompson, 'In search of perfect people:
Teamwork and team players in the Scottish spirits industry', Human Relations, vol.
53, no. 12, 2000.
E. Ogbonna and L. Harris, 'Managing Organizational Culture: Compliance or Genuine Change', British Journal of Management, vol. 9, 1998.
D. van den Broek, 'Human Resource Management, Cultural Control and Union
Avoidance: an Australian case study', Journal of Industrial Relations, vol. 39, no. 3,
1997.
L. Fulop and S. Linstead, Management: A Critical Text, Macmillan, South Yarra, 1999
D. van den Broek, G. Callaghan and P. Thompson, 'Teams without
Teamwork? Explaining the Call Centre Paradox', Economic and Industrial
Democracy, vol. 25, no. 2, 2004.
P. Thompson and D. McHugh, Work Organisations: a critical introduction,
3rd ed., Palgrave, Houndsmill, 2002, Chapter 8.
C. Axtell Ray, 'Corporate Culture: The Last Frontier of Control', Journal of
Management Studies, vol. 23, no. 3, May 1986, pp. 287-297.
A. Felstead, N. Jewson and S. Walters, 'Managerial Control of Employees
Working at Home', British Journal of Industrial Relations, vol. 41, no. 2,
2003.
Taylor, F.W. Shop Management,revised 1947 and republished 1964 as scientific Managament,New York: Harper and Row 1903
Kirkman, B.L. and Sahpiro, D.L (1997) 'The impact of cultural values on employee resistance to teams: Toward a model of globalised self-managing work team effectiveness", Academy of Management Review in L. Fulop and S. Linstead, Management: A Critical Text, Macmillan, South Yarra, 1999, pp244
Allen,N.J. and Meyer, J.P. (1990) 'The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization' Journal of occupational Psychology in L. Fulop and S. Linstead, Management: A Critical Text, Macmillan, South Yarra, 1999, pp 259
Davis, J.H, Schooram, F.D. and Donaldson, L.(1997) 'Towards a stewardship theory of management Studies34 in L. Fulop and S. Linstead, Management: A Critical Text, Macmillan, South Yarra, 1999, p277
This is the complete article, containing 2,980 words
(approx. 10 pages at 300 words per page).
