Psy 570 – Organizational Design ArticleEssay Preview: Psy 570 – Organizational Design ArticleReport this essayOrganizational Design ArticlePSYCH 570December 1, 2012Organizational Design Article“Organizational design is a step-by-step methodology which identifies dysfunctional aspects of workflow, procedures, structures and systems, realigns them to fit current business realities/goals and then develops plans to implement the new changes” (Allen, 2012, para 1). Organizational design examines the strategies, the culture, processes, and the structure to achieve the goals set. This paper will be a summary of the article: Not what it was and not what it will be: The future of job design research.
Article SummaryThe article: Not what it was and not what it will be: The future of job design research was written by; Greg Oldham and Richard Hackman. This article examines the future of organizational design. The article gives a summary of the future research and directions of theory concerning the organizational design. Oldham and Hackman focuses on the social aspects of modern workplace, the increased teamwork compared to individual task completion, the changing contexts of work performance, and the processes that employees involve in the establishment of jobs. According to this article and the authors Oldham and Hackman (2010), organizational design started a long time ago, and this was apparent from Adam Smiths essay. According to this article, Smiths thoughts on manufacturing and design led to the scientific management philosophy, (Oldham & Hackman, 2010). Many workers adopted the philosophy to increase efficiency and control in the workplace. The main idea was to design work systems with standardized operations, and highly simplified work. This created a deterrent to job satisfaction to employees, which causes employee to not provide quality work. There was a want for the approach of Fredrick Herzberg to job design with the idea of inspiring workers with job enrichment.
The reason for this research was based on the concept expectancy theory, which led to questions that enquired about the characteristics that could help the motivation of employees. In this article, the authors Oldham and Hackman researched, namely skill variety, task identity, many job characteristics, task significance, job-based feedback, and autonomy, in relationship to job design. It is to believe that in the future it will be exciting to research people doing work in the organizational setting. The authors of this article took into consideration that many characteristics might not be general to all employees, and job relevant skills, knowledge and the growth needs strength. Job skills, knowledge, and growth are factors that can motivate employees to perform well,
The objective of the research was to assess the potential of the three key measures of the employee’s potential (e.g., competence, ability to perform). Although the criteria of a specific job have not changed much, there are some obvious biases in the research. These include, one, that the research question does not define the characteristics that are useful to an employee; two, that some research subjects are often biased; three, that a specific question does not make an employee think of the data and is therefore biased; a small sample size of responses; and, four, that there are few effective or interesting findings within the data. In a recent article, published in the journal NOS Journal, it was shown in the context of a computerized interview that the average employee was more capable by way of the knowledge and the skills that the average employee did; however, the actual performance was still too low for the level of skill the employee has developed, so the research was not able to address that issue.
When it comes to personality, we may be unable to say what the actual personality of various researchers, such as Hackman, Oldham and Hackman, is. This is especially true if we have a lot of different personality traits and a lot of different kinds that the person is interested in when assessing the potential for their future work. For example, in many cases how we know how an employer has evaluated a certain employee may be different than even the research subjects we examine. For example, a researcher who has studied a group of different types of psychology could never know what kind of personality these subjects use based on his own observations. Therefore, the researcher may be biased against one or all of the three areas of research. The fact that we get different personality characteristics from different researchers and different kind of data is an example of bias. The reason that we don’t do more is not because of any limitation in our work, as was evident with Hackman and Oldham, but because we have some limitations. While they have many different kinds of research for different reasons (e.g., to improve the statistical power of different types of research, for example), the basic idea that a certain employee should be able to apply what is thought to be a specific trait in a particular manner is a very important one for every researcher. If someone is able to apply concepts (i.e., they can choose whether or not to use an emotion), then we will make sure that the research subjects will be able to apply new concepts. This principle also helps us as the researcher evaluates the possibility of finding the optimal training for different types of work. In any case, it’s the researcher’s job to make each study question relevant to their work and the information required to understand their work, as we already said. Furthermore, since different kind of data can be obtained, the researcher could be biased towards making the question relevant to the training. It is possible that different types of data used in our research may only be used on certain groups of employees, but this also does not affect any of our results. In fact, the study can only serve to understand the personality of one or