The authors detail a change to semiautonomous workgroups undertaken in the stock transfer department of a metropolitan bank. Ultimately, the goals of increased job satisfaction, higher motivation, and greater productivity were not met, predominantly because the job enrichment planned for was not carried out. Believing that "through failure we often learn the most about the strengths and weaknesses of behavioral science techniques," the authors analyze the circumstances in the environment that compromised the success of the job enrichment project, admit lack of attention to workgroup theory, and prescribe four basic guides for the successful implementation of organizational change techniques that involve the redesign of work.
References
1.
Beer, M.The technology of organizational development. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1975.
2.
Davis, L. E., & Taylor, J. C.Design of jobs. London: Penguin, 1972.
3.
Emery, F. E.Characteristics of socio-technical systems. Document No. 527, Tavistock Institute of Human Relations, 1959. Excerpted in L. E. Davis and J. C. Taylor (Eds.), Design of jobs. London: Penguin1972.
4.
Ford, R. N.Motivation through the zvork itself. New York: American Management Association, 1969.
5.
Glaser, E. M.Improving the quality of worklife... And in the process, improving productivity. Los Angeles: Human Interaction Research Institute, 1974.
6.
Gomberg, W.Job satisfaction: Sorting out the nonsense. AFL-CIO American Federationist, June 1973.
7.
Gulowsen, J.A measure of work-group autonomy. In L. E. Davis and J. C. Taylor (Eds.), Design of jobs. London: Penguin, 1972.
8.
Hackman, J. R.On the coming demise of job enrichment. In Man and work in society. New York: Van Nostrand-Rheinhold, 1975.
9.
Hackman, J. R., & Lawler, E. E.Employee reactions to job characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology Monograph, 1971, 55, 259-286.
10.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R.Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Technical Report No. 6, Department of Administrative Sciences, Yale University, 1974. (To be reprinted in Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, in press).
11.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R.Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1975, 60, 159-170.
12.
Herbst, P. G.Autonomous group functioning. London: Tavistock, 1962.
13.
Herzberg, F.Work and the nature of man. Cleveland: World, 1966.
14.
Herzberg, F.One more time: How do you motivate employees?Harvard Business Review, 1968, 46, 53-62.
15.
Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., Snyderman, B.The motivation to work. New York: Wiley, 1959.
16.
Hulin, C. L., & Blood, M.Job enlargement, individual differences, and worker responses. Psychological Bulletin, 1968, 69, 41-55.
17.
Jenkins, G. D., Jr., Nadler, D. A., Lawler, E. E., & Cammann, C.Standardized observations: An approach to measuring the nature of jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1975, 60, 171-181.
18.
Maher, J. R. (Ed.) New perspectives in job enrichment. New York: Van NostrandRheinhold, 1971.
19.
Rice, A. K.Productivity and social organization. London: Tavistock, 1958.
20.
Sirota, D., & Wolfson, A. D.Job enrichment: What are the obstacles?Personnel, May-June 1972, pp. 8-17. (a)
21.
Sirota, D., & Wolfson, A. D.Job enrichment: Surmounting the obstacles. Personnel, July-August 1972, pp. 8-19. (b)
