Workplace core values and workplace behavioral partialities exam the variability of various generational topics many generations prefer in a company. These topics include; development work ethic attitudes and behavior preferences for managerial interaction and employment core personal and workplace values and characteristics, generational recruitment and retention approaches, and necessary employment preferences (Martin & Ottemann, 2015). Discovering methods to boost productivity in associates can be a challenge contingent on the type and magnitude of an establishment. Many companies make a high determination in identifying the right steadiness in this subject matter.
In many occasions, employees receive incentives and end up wanting more to work harder or get more accomplished in the time frame required by the company.
When employees want more, it can cause more issues for the company if they do not have the resources to provide what the employees are seeking. There are many things a company can offer its employees to boost productivity in the workplace. According to Self-Determination Theory (SDT), employees feel better and perform well when their motivation is autonomous, meaning, the employee volitionally participates in work because work is pleasurable, exciting, or relevant to them (Jungert et al.
, 2018). Some of these incentives include; physical conditions of the office, employee recognition, health benefits, raises and paid vacations. Each motivation has its risks and cost for the employer and the employee. To the dispute that this will be unjustifiably costly, a program should be structured carefully, so additional payouts reflect defined revenues and earnings (Haider et al., 2015).
One of the most common things that companies use to boost productivity is the use of health benefits or human resources (HR) bundles.
Companies use different types of benefits or bonuses to cater to different types of employees. One benefit to consider would be medical insurance. Most companies use medical benefits to motivate employees to want to work for them. The cost of the medical benefits package is contingent on the size of the company, changes with the number of employees that are eligible or not eligible for these incentives (Jungert et al., 2018). A smaller company may only be able to provide primary medical and maybe dental or vision insurance for their employees where a larger company can offer all three coverages and have life, disability, and workers comp.
The larger the benefits package, the more cost that the company must pay to provide it. Even though companies use medical benefits to boost employment and productivity, most companies are required to offer these benefits by law. Companies who specifically include base salary, incentives, guaranteed payments, benefits, recognition, work-life programs, job-specific training, and career development will have more Long-term employees who will help the owners strive and will end up with better benefits that will change over their career path and advance the organization (Martin & Ottemann, 2015). This requirement by law makes offering health benefits more expensive for the company (Jungert et al., 2018), and with the tremendous increase in health care costs in the United States far, exceeding general inflation increases.
Moreover, these health care benefits have been an important factor in job selection and in the ability to make career changes. It is apparent, over the last few years, the price of health care has knowingly reduced costs on other benefits. These increases have hurt the overall benefits packages and individual employees’ earnings and company profits.
The focus of management is customarily on sustaining competitiveness, growing profits and production, whereas the workers focus on working hours, fringe benefits, labor safety, and pay standards (Aliprandini & Newton, 2019). Another way a company way tries to boost productivity would be to utilize a raised system for pay. Using raises can go one of two ways, unfortunately. On the one hand, the employee would receive their raise and work harder so they could earn another increase in the future. The argument with some business owners and economists is that wage standards do not have the intended effects for productivity. Wages affect businesses to reduce or increase the number of employees to compensate workers in corresponding to federal standards. Rather than encouraging productivity from employees, the minimum wage can assure employees an awareness of entitlement of pay based only on the number of hours worked, rather than the amount of work performed.
On the other hand, the employee would gross a raise, then be content and show no change in productivity to achieve any additional increases in the future. The raise system works well most of the time if the company has strict guild lines on how to earn the raise. A failure to abide by the guild lines could cause abuse in the raise system and cost the company more money for less productivity. Opponents of wage standards argue that the strategies of the government can help to alleviate poverty rather than requiring businesses to pay a set salary. Finally, money spent on higher wages could instead be used to train the employees to learn more skills within the company (Aliprandini & Newton, 2019).
Some companies also offer vacations, sick days, and paid holidays. Some people may think that these types of incentives have nothing to do with boost productivity, but it has more to do with it. Offering paid vacations and sick days shows an employee that the company understands there needs to be a break or people get sick.
Managers see higher productivity levels when employees like working for the company and are happy in their job. Paying an employee to take a week off to rest shows the employee that the company cares for the employee’s well-being and wants to show them as such by offering this type of incentive. When a company pays for holidays off for the employees, it prevents the employees from feeling the loss on a day of pay for something they could not control. Martin & Ottemann, (2015) state, if an employee wants to change their ‘the reward package,’ then the employee has two possibilities: try to negotiate a different package containing a special deal or to look for a different employer and thus, exercise voluntary turnover behavior to secure the desired reward package. For the company to pay for these types of incentives, the employees must be productive, and the company must utilize the money made to provide for the employee.
Designed economic incentives help companies to ensure that employees of all levels can take advantage of them. Management tends to focus most profoundly on senior-level economic incentives. While this is entirely logical, companies should try not to neglect functional incentives for entry-level employees, especially if the company wants to keep them around or keep the company successful. DuVernet& Popp (2014) state increasing productivity through different games and by awarding points to employees as they interact with one another or the instructors. Awards can also be achieved by completing learning tasks or completing module sessions as they learn. The more levels, points, or badges the individual earns, the up higher on the leader board they are for a more significant incentive.
The atmosphere of a company dramatically affects how productive an employee may be. Companies that allow some freedom and flexibility tend to show higher productivity rates and happier employees. The more an employee enjoys their job, the more they will work to benefit their employer and the company and vice versa. If a company does not value its employees and provide a pleasant, comfortable work environment, then the likelihood of lower productivity rates grows significantly (Basu et al., 2015). Companies can use minor things to make the work environment more appealing to the employees. Providing a breakroom, uniforms, or even as much as a comfortable chair can significantly improve productivity for such a small effort. Some larger companies go as far as having recreation areas with basketball courts, walking paths, and exercise rooms for the employees to have fun and get healthy without having to pay for a membership somewhere else. Some have full-service cafeterias and catering for mealtimes and breaks. All these services are not to make the customers happy but, to specifically improve the work experience for their employees.
Understanding the workplace environment, where exposure of stress is to the employees, is very important to management. Therefore, all the employees included in the business are the prime element of a firm. As time passes, employees gain experience and become a more critical implement of the firm. It is evident that a poor working environment is one of the causes of stress. It is imperative to give them a healthy work environment, so they remain more useful for a more extended time (Basu et al., 2015 & Martin & Ottemann, 2015). Workplace designs have a direct association with the high efficiency of workers. Employees tend to be more productive if employers pay more attention to the work environment. Employers should recognize the specific sources of stress and take concrete measures to address the stressors to deal with the growing dilemma of work-related stress. The American Institute of Stress says that “occupational pressures and fears are far and away from the principal source of stress for American adults.” When a team member is stressed out, it is a big deal. The whole team takes a hit because the team member is emotionally, mentally, or physically unable to do the task at hand.
One of the most common practices that can either increase or decrease productivity is the type of management in the company. In a study done by Judd et al., (2017) raising an issue with management, it was never adequately resolved. Whereas, other employees felt uncomfortable asking for help, while some expressed concerns about a lack of privacy when they raised an issue. The study further states that if there is a good manager taking care of the employees, those employees will work hard and be very productive for that manager and the company. If the manager is not a good manager, there is a delay in productivity, and it could also cause employees to seek employment elsewhere. Realistically the line between the two different types of management is almost invisible. A manager could be a great manager to some employees and a bad one to others.
Managers should have an obligation to find ways to manage several types of employees to be able to continuously increase productivity and growing the company to keep up with the demand of workload. Communication between management, supervisors, and employees can provide a path of motivation. Communication skills, employees need to express their viewpoints, listen actively to each other, and collaboration, a discussion of how they account for each other’s characteristics (Jungert et al., 2018). Ensuring employees to open and talk about what motivates them and engaging in motivational discussions builds a better team which includes all employees. Managers that can cope with the different types of employees tend to push the employees to expand with the company through promotions and other opportunities (Judd et al., 2017).
When management notices that their employees are getting burned out, there are several steps that management can take to help get the employees back on track. Employers can listen to the employee of what may be the stressor of their burnout. Montero-Marín et al., (2013) explain that day to day workload can be too extreme for employees could be the trigger that manifests to the exhaustion. Equipment’s performance also can expose the employee’s inadequate production. Aggravation with faulty equipment can aggravate work-related stressors immensely. Therefore, management should recognize the need to upgrade equipment, so the failure or lack of productivity of the employees clear the environment of any vulnerability.
Nothing causes burnout quicker than watching someone else receive privileged treatment or gets recognition for the wrong reasons. Even worse is an unfairness that seems arbitrary (Seeman & Seeman, 2015). Pay inequality, automatic attention, and random promotions; all these things can create hatred or a sense of despair in an employee. These feelings are made worse by, in most cases, by the employee bottling up their feelings of unfairness. For employees who feel like they have no say in structural decision-making, burnout can be expected or a natural consequence, (Montero-Marín et al., 2013).
Hiring new employees may mean employees make less money in the short-term while the business gets going again. If the employer cannot afford the expense of added employees, it is probably the time not to hire new employees.
Innovative suggestions are absent because of tight work schedules, and multiple responsibilities lead to stress that suppresses employees’ creative thinking. Creativity is only placed high within the hierarchy, and lower down people do not need to be creative and indeed, to say anything different is insubordination. Seeman and Seeman, (2015)found positive stress and peak performance from corporations dragged employees down to fulfill the obligations of their required duties. With a high concern for organization welfare and a deep concern for employees’ well-being, this state not only finds employee needs unimportant but also puts pressure on employees through rules and punishments or penalties to achieve the company goals. While high output is achievable in the short term, but there is loss through employee dissatisfaction, this state is suitable only for performing short-term economic tasks. In other cases, a condition is found to be inappropriate (Seeman & Seeman, 2015).
Even though actual differences in workplace values and expectations across different generational associates that are present, it is meant to point out significant similarities that exist across generations. These similarities may help guide a more holistic approach to the utilization of reward practices for all generational employees. Some of the similarities across generational cohorts include the following. First, engage in behavior that builds mutual trust with employees. Across generations, confidence has been shown as a significant factor for establishing strong relationships and has implications for how employees are inclined to stay with a company. Second, assume an individual-oriented and reward consideration approach to working with employees. Managers need to work to tailor their relationships and interactions to the specific needs of their employees across generations. Third, the pay level is one component of total reward practices that stands out as being relevant across all generational categories. Pay is considered as one of the most effective and vital job attributes in determining applicant attraction and employee retention.
When a firm has low employment and production capacity, high-skill employees are the backbone, and they require a friendly workplace. Specialized and well-trained production workers help to promote manufacturing, raise profitability, and bring the firm to the cutting edge of the industry. Strong management skills create highly productive workplaces; employees are more driven in a well-organized and managed environment. These are all substantial factors for a new firm to thrive (Ruohan, 2015).
Companies are considering employee performance as the dependent variable since this is an essential proximal outcome reflecting behaviors that are under employees onto land that help to achieve organizational goals. However, given that there is a high exit rate from this sector, it may be challenging to attract and retain workers necessary to support the scheme operation. Creating boundaries around work-related issues is critical for reducing the negative effect of workplace pressure on both physical and psychological outcomes for employees and employers. team-based programs may be useful in creating need support among team members such that team members feel more satisfied in their basic needs and report more increased autonomous motivation. Equitable levels of pay have been known to be essential to motivate employees for them to perform well, but it appears that money is an avenue of motivating employees is less efficient than fulfilling their psychological needs through a supportive work environment. Work options that help employees remain longer with a company and provide the rationale for offering them various reward choices.
👋 Hi! I’m your smart assistant Amy!
Don’t know where to start? Type your requirements and I’ll connect you to an academic expert within 3 minutes.get help with your assignment