WHAT IS JOB DESIGN?

JOB DESIGN

Job analysis helps in developing appropriate design of job to improve efficiency and satisfaction. Job design is the process of deciding on the contents of a job in terms of its duties and responsibilities, on the methods to be used in carrying out the job, in terms of techniques, systems and procedures and on the relationships that should exist between the jobholder and his superiors, subordinates and colleagues. It is a deliberate and systematic attempt to structure the technical and social aspects of work so as to improve technical efficiency and job satisfaction. Job design is an attempt to create a match between job requirements and human attributes. It involves both organising the components of the job and the interaction patterns among the members of a work group. The main objective of job design is to integrate the needs of the individual and the requirements of the organisation. Needs of employees include job satisfaction in terms of interest, challenge and achievement? Organisational requirements refer to high productivity, technical efficiency and quality of work. Today, educated and creative employees demand well-designed jobs. Therefore, increasing attempts are being made to redesign jobs so as to improve the quality of working life. A systematic body of knowledge on the designing of jobs has been developed after the Industrial Revolution and the large scale enterprises.

 Approaches to Job Design: The main approaches to job design are described below:

1.     Classical Approach: Also known as engineering approach, it was developed by F.W. Taylor and his associates. The principles of scientific management formed the basis for designing jobs in most Organisations. These principles focus on planning, standardising and improving human effort at the operative level in order to maximise productivity. In the words of Taylor, ―the work of every workman is fully planned out by the management at least one day in advance and each man receives in most cases complete written instructions, describing in detail the task which he is to accomplish. This task specifies not only what is to be done but how it is to be done and the exact time allowed for doing it. Jobs designed on the basis of classical approach are not appropriate in the modern environment characterized by increased awareness, improved education and rising expectations of workforce.

2.     Behavioral Approach: The findings of Elton Mayo, Frederick Herzberg and other human relations experts led to search for alternative ways of designing jobs so as to avoid the dysfunctional consequences of standardisation and simplification. Job redesign, work structuring, job enrichment, participative system and other similar strategies were developed to improve the quality of work life. The aim of all these attempts is to design jobs which will not only ensure technical efficiency but will satisfy social and psychological needs of workers. The most popular behavioral approach to job redesign is the Job characteristics model of Hackman and Oldham. This model is based on the assumption that three key psychological stats of a jobholder determine his motivation, satisfaction and performance on the job. Behavioral approach to job design is a socio-technical approach as it deals with both the technical and social aspects of a job. It is, therefore, an improvement over the classical approach which considered only the technical side of jobs. Tavistock Institute of Human Relations, London has carried out several experiments in the application of the socio-technical approach to job design. The job characteristics model, however, suffers from some limitations. It is probabilistic and has an intuitive appeal. But there is little empirical evidence to support it. In one study of bank employees in India growth need has not been found coaching, counselling etc., are examples of corrective actions that help to improve performance.

Limitations of Performance Appraisal: The main problems involved in performance appraisal are as follows:

1. Errors in Rating: Performance appraisal may not be valid indicator of performance and potential of employees due to the following types of errors:

(a) Halo Effect: It is the tendency to rate an employee consistently high or low on the basis of overall impression. One trait of the employee influences the rater ‘appraisal on all other traits. For example, an employee may be rated high on performance just because he sits on the job late in the evening. Similarly, a person 36

Who does not shave regularly may be considered lazy at work and may be underrated. This error may be minimised by rating all the employees on one trait before taking up anther trait.

(b) Stereotyping: This implies forming a mental picture of a person on the basis of his age, sex, caste or religion. It results in an over-simplified view and blurs the assessment of job performance.

 (c) Central Tendency: It means assigning average ratings to all the employees in order to avoid commitment or involvement. This is adopted because the rater has not to justify or clarify the average ratings. As a result, the ratings are clustered around the midpoint.

(d) Constant Error: Some evaluators tend to be lenient while others are strict in assessing performance. In the first case, performance is overrated (leniency error) while in the second type it is underrated (strictness error). This tendency may be avoided by holding meetings so that the raters understand what is required of them.

(e) Personal Bias: Performance appraisal may become invalid because the rater dislikes an employee. Such bias or prejudice may arise on the basis of regional or religious beliefs and habits or interpersonal conflicts. Bias may also be the result of time. Recent experience or first impression of the rater may affect the evaluation.

(f) Spill Over Effect: This arises when past performance affects assessment of present performance. For instance, recent behavior or performance of an employee may be used to judge him. This is called regency.