Friday, September 11, 2015

A520.5.3.RB Forrester's Empowerment

Welcome to week five, readers! Our lesson has been about empowering our employees and subordinates, as well as proper techniques and principles for delegating duties and authority.

We had a reading assignment in our text by Whetten & Cameron (2011), along with an article by Russ Forrester (2000). They both provided comprehensive discussions about empowerment, which we can review.

Mr. Forrester started his article off by citing what he calls the “Six Short Circuits to Organizational Empowerment”. (2000, p. 68) When companies attempt to make changes to how power is wielded too quickly, the shock to the organization leads to an empowerment failure. Providing more work without providing the authority to get the work done will kill empowerment plans, too. Failure to realize that the amount of information and authority being given out must be tailored to the abilities of the workers will lead to problems, as will not understanding that those who are losing (now sharing) the power will have acclimatization issues. Going too slow in the implementation of a plan will lead to failure and will echo the result of implementing only pieces of a plan instead of a whole organized effort.

Whetten & Cameron (2011) touched upon three areas that inhibit empowerment in the workplace. A lack of faith by managers in their subordinates competency, or a belief the workers don’t really want more responsibility and power are two attitudes that mangers can exhibit that will undermine empowerment plans. Add to that, reticence to train workers appropriately or a belief the subordinates just don’t rate the power and you have great examples of how managers can stop empowerment plans in their tracks.

If a manager fears they will lose the opportunity for personal recognition and rewards, Whetten & Cameron (2011) pointed out that power sharing will suffer. They also described the situation where managers may just have a high need to be the person in charge. The likelihood of that manager sharing his or her power is nil.

Regarding the barriers to implementing empowerment, the reading materials give ample evidence that empowerment plans must be planned and executed with abundant care. There is a “Goldilocks” feel to the speed of implementation (not too slow, not too fast, not just pieces). The personalities and capabilities of the leaders and the subordinates need examination and consideration. Even the managers’ perceptions of their workforce must be surveyed before attempting this significant task.
Mr. Forrester (2000) set forth six avenues to successful implementation of empowerment plans. He advocated giving more, not less, power to subordinates. He noted, “Feelings of self-efficacy come from having real power, they don’t produce it.” (Forrester, 2000, p. 73) I think that is a compelling statement.

Providing learning and growth opportunities, as well as expanded experiences and responsibilities, also imbue the subordinates with power. The depth and breadth of the employees’ power will be enhanced by this exposure.

While it sounds like common sense, it is vital that the company (senior management) knows what it wants to accomplish with the power shift. Accounting for the change in roles for the workforce is a must. There will be costs.

Leaders need to differentiate the amounts of power and responsibility that they dole out. Not all employees are equal, be it in desire, experience, capability, or competence.
Senior management needs to support the middle managers who are being required to give-up some of their power and responsibility by providing them growth opportunities, as well. Concurrently, allowing the current power holders the right to decide where their power will be shared is a form of empowerment.

The change must be upheld with the application of constant attention and the goal must constantly remain in focus. Refinements to the goal must be made. As a last thought, remember that, “Access to rewards for their work is a form of power for employees.” (Forrester, 2000, p. 79)

Whetten & Cameron (2011) echoed many of the points made by Forrester.  Communicating a clear vision and goals, fostering self-efficacy, availability and application of support apparatuses for all involved, and providing abundant resources and information are presented by both.

Tying the workers emotions to the goals, connecting the workers to the outcomes of their work, creating confidence, and modeling are points that Whetten & Cameron (2011) provide as additional areas of focus for an empowerment plan.

The emotional facets of empowerment plans are the less tangible, but equally necessary ingredients for success. They cannot be ignored, or no amount applying of the other principles lead to a positive result.

Having works that are a decade apart to compare is helpful in seeing the maturation of the theories behind empowerment and delegation. The basics were bolstered and the peripheral points were developed and enhanced over the time period.

The in depth introduction and review of the concepts was very beneficial for me. In my current job I am privileged to have the opportunity to grow and empower a number of employees. The reminders of goal setting and communicating, providing information and tools, and the emotional consequences for all involved are points I will reinforce immediately.

Forrester, R. (2000). Empowerment: Rejuvenating a Potent Idea. The Academy of Management Executive (1993-2005), 14(3), 67-80. doi:10.2307/4165660

Whetten, D. A., & Cameron, K. S. (2011). Developing Management Skills (E. Svendsen Ed. 8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

No comments:

Post a Comment