Interventions at Individual Level

1
Dezvoltare organizationala

2
Dezvoltare organizationala
• Job Design
• When modifications are made in the design of a job, the individual is not usually the direct focus of
the change, but the change effort is most often individually focused (Burke). Job design is often
used to enhance an individual’s satisfaction with his or her job (McLean, 2006).
• A basic premise in job design research is that stimulating jobs are associated with motivating
psychological states that contribute to favorable attitudinal and behavioral work outcomes (e.g.,
Morgeson & Campion, 2003; Parker & Wall, 1998).
• Job design is the process of incorporating tasks and responsibilities into jobs to make them more
meaningful, productive and satisfying. Various models can be followed in redesigning jobs,
including the job characteristics model (Hackman and Oldham, 1976), the job demand-control
model (Karasek, 1979) and the interdisciplinary approach of Campion and Berger (1990).
(Rothmann & Cooper, 2008).

3
Dezvoltare organizationala
• Job design helps determine
■ what tasks are done,
■ how the tasks are done,
■ how many tasks are done, and
■ in what order the tasks are done (McLean, 2006).

• The Job Characteristics Model

• Based on Turner & Lawrence (1965) work, Hackman & Lawler (1971), Hackman & Oldham (1975,
1976, 1980) defined the Job Characteristics Model (JCM).

4
Dezvoltare organizationala

JCM Hackman & Oldham (1976, p. 256)

5
Dezvoltare organizationala
• Skill variety. The degree to which a job requires a variety of different activities that involve the use
of a number of different skills and talents (Hackman 1977, p. 130). Work that stretches one's skills
and abilities invariably is experienced as more meaningful than work that is simple and routine.
• Task identity. The degree to which the job requires ompletion of a whole and identifiable piece of
work, that is, doing a job from beginning to end with a visible outcome (Hackman 1977, p. 130).
Putting together an entire product or providing a complete unit of service is inherently more
meaningful than being responsible for only a small part of the work.
• Task significance. The degree to which the job has substantial impact on the lives or work of other
people, whether in the immediate organization or in the external environment (Hackman 1977, p.
130). An activity that is consequential for the psychological or physical wellbeing of others is
experienced as more meaningful than is work that makes little difference to anyone else.
• Autonomy is the degree to which the work is structured to provide the employee with substantial
freedom, independence, and discretion in scheduling the work and indetermining the procedures
to be used in carrying it out. For high autonomy jobs, the outcomes of the work depend on the
jobholder's own efforts, initiatives, and decisions, rather than on the instructions of a manager or a
manual of job procedures. In such circumstances, the jobholder feels greater personal
responsibility for his or her own successes and failures at work. 6
Dezvoltare organizationala
• Feedback is the degree to which the outcome of thejob activities provides the employee with
direct information about the effectiveness of his or her performance. When someone receives
information about his or her performance from the work itself (e.g., when a salesperson closes a
deal and receives payment from a customer), that feedback is direct and immediate and,
therefore, contributes substantially to his or her overall knowledge of results about work outcomes.
• The conceptual core of the theory is the set of three psychological states that mediate between
job attributes and outcomes. They are:
• Experienced Meaningfulness. The degree to which the jobholder experiences the work as
inherently meaningful, as something that "counts" in his or her own system of values.
• Experienced Responsibility. The degree to which the jobholder feels personally accountable and
responsible for the results of the work he or she does.
• Knowledge of Results. The degree to which the jobholder has confident knowledge about how
well he or she is performing.

7
Dezvoltare organizationala
• The degree to which these five core job dimensions combine determines what Hackman(1977)
calls amotivatingpotentialscore(MPS).According to the Job Characteristics Model, a job high in
MPS must be high in at least one of the dimensions contributing to experienced meaningfulness
and also high in autonomy and feedback. Hackman depicts this part of the model as follows:
• MPS = (skill variety + task identity + task significance) /3 X autonomy X feedback

• GNS is the strength of a person's need for personal accomplishment, learning, and development.
The theory posits that jobholders who have strong growth needs value the opportunities for
accomplishment and self-direction provided by jobs high on the five core characteristics and, as a
result, respond positively to them. Low GNS jobholders, by contrast, place less value on the
opportunities provided by high MPS jobs and therefore respond less positively to them. Then,
authors add knowledge and skills to perform the work and work context such as pay, iob security,
coworkers and managers as moderators for the relationship.

8
Dezvoltare organizationala
• Five principles to follow in designing jobs
(Hackman, Oldham,Janson, and Purdy 1975):
1. Form natural work units—group tasks toward
some meaningful whole.
2. Combine tasks so that skill variety and task
identity may be maximized.
3. Establish client relationships—provide direct
contact between worker and client as well as
criteria and procedures for how the client can
judge the quality of the product or service.
4. Load the job vertically—give the worker,
asmuchas possible, direct responsibility for and
control over the way the job is to be done.
5. Open feedback channels—give the workers as
much direct information as possible about his or
her performance.
9
Dezvoltare organizationala
• Although the JCM became the dominant model of work design, it was not without its critics.
Scholars voiced concerns about weak relationships between job characteristics and objective
performance (Aldag, Barr, & Brief, 1981), the socially constructed nature of work perceptions and
job attitudes (Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978), the possibility that enriched jobs might only be preferred
when accompanied by pay increases (Simonds & Orife, 1975) that meet expectations (Locke,
Sirota, & Wolfson, 1976), and other challenges (for reviews, see Parker & Wall, 1998; Roberts &
Glick, 1981). In response to these critiques, the 1980s was marked by tests of the JCM,
investigations of the dimensionality and objectivity of job characteristics, and theoretical and
empirical comparisons and integrations with the social information processing perspective (e.g.,
Griffin, 1987; Oldham, 1996; Zalesny & Ford, 1990) (Grant & Parker, 2009).

10
Dezvoltare organizationala
• The Job Demands–Control Model
• Another work design theory, this time emerging
from research on work-related stress, is
Karasek’s demand-control model. Karasek
(1979) argued that psychological strain results
from the joint effects of the demands of a work
situation and the level of job control.
• The model predicts that stress-related health
problems increase, depending on the increase of
job demands and the decrease of job control
(and social support). This hypothesis, the strain
hypothesis (cf. dis-stress) is reflected by diagonal
A in Figure. High-strain work is characterized by
a combination of high psychological demands
and low job control (and low support).

11
Dezvoltare organizationala
• The model also predicts that, when both job demands and job control (and social support)
increase, work becomes more challenging and provides more opportunities for learning and
developing one’s abilities (cf. eu-stress). Diagonal B in Figure reflects this second “learning” or
“active–passive” hypothesis.
• Individually collected data are aggregated at group level. The unit of analysis is often
ahomogeneous group of jobs or positions.
• Although a detailed design theory and redesign strategy is lacking, clearly several principles for
job (re)design have been deduced from the model: preventing demands from becoming too
excessive, increasing control and increasing support. It is also emphasized that employees should
be provided with opportunities for learning.
• In relation to motivation and health-related outcomes, such as job satisfaction, the additive effect
of demands and control on strain has generally been supported (van der Doef & Maes, 1998).

12
Dezvoltare organizationala
• However, the buffering effect of job control, in which job demands do not cause strain so long as
job control is high, has received less consistent support (Marshall, Barnett, & Sayer, 1997; Van
Yperen & Snijders, 2000; Wall, Jackson, Mullarkey, & Parker, 1996). Despite the mixed evidence,
the possibility of a buffering effect has attracted much interest because of its practical implication
that increased demands is not necessarily detrimental to motivation or performance (see de
Lange, Taris, Kompier, Houtman, & Bongers, 2003; Parker, Turner, & Griffin, 2003; Sonnentag &
Frese, 2003). A further important implication of the demand-control model (Karasek & Theorell,
1990) that has received more recent attention concerns the potential learning-oriented
consequences of active jobs, such as their facilitation of outcomes such as selfefficacy, openness
to change, and mastery.

13
Dezvoltare organizationala
• To conduct a job design, the Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety (2002) outlined the
following steps:
1. Do an assessment of current work practices. Is job design needed or feasible? Discuss the process
with the employees and supervisors involved and be clear about the process or any changes or
training that will be involved.
2. Do a task analysis. Examine the job and determine exactly the job tasks. Consider what equipment
and workstation features are important for completing the tasks. Identify problem areas.
3. Design the job. Identify the methods for doing the work, work/rest schedules, training requirements,
equipment needed and workplace changes. Coordinate the different tasks so each one varies mental
activities and body position. Be careful not to include too little or too much in the job.
4. Implement the new job design gradually. You may want to start on a small scale or with a pilot project.
Train employees in the new procedures and use of equipment. Allow for an adjustment period and
time to gain experience with the new job design.
5. Re-evaluate job design on a continual basis. Make any necessary adjustments. You may also want to
establish a committee to represent the various groups involved. Job design should involve
employees, unions, the health and safety committee, and managers during the entire process.
Participation of all parties increases communication and understanding. 14
Dezvoltare organizationala
• Mentoring
• The origins of mentoring can be traced back to the Greek mythology of The Odyssey (Baker, 2001).
Mentoring has long been a popular means for sharing learning and knowledge from generation to
generation (Buhler, 1998). Today mentoring programs are widely used in organizations (Eby et al., 2000)
as an individual development strategy to facilitate attainment of a variety of positive outcomes (Atkinson,
2002 ; Knouse, 2001; O’Reilly, 2001).
• Mentoring is defined as ‘a relationship between two people with learning and development as its purpose’
(Megginson and Garvey, 2004: 2). In addition, Megginson and Garvey state that mentoring is primarily for
the mentee. Caruso (1992) reported that ‘mentoring help’ functions were identified in the mentoring
literature as:
1. learning technical skills and knowledge;
2. learning the current job;
3. learning organizational culture;
4. learning organizational policies;
5. preparation for a future job.

15
Dezvoltare organizationala
• Mentoring is an intentional, developmental
relationship in which a more experienced and
more knowledgeable person nurtures the
professional and personal life of a less
experienced, less knowledgeable person.
Typically, a mentor has been in an organization or
profession longer and has greater authority within
the organization or profession than does a
mentee. The combination of expertise and
position enables a mentor to have significant
impact on a mentee (Hart, 2009).
• Building on Burrell and Morgan’s work (1979),
Brockbank and McGill (2006) created a Map of
mentoring or coaching approaches (see figure
below).

Figure: Map of mentoring or coaching approaches (Brockbank & McGill, 2006, p.

11)

16
Dezvoltare organizationala
• The authors define ‘functionalist mentoring’ in terms of its purpose, process and learning outcome
as ‘an agreed activity between mentor and client with a prescribed purpose that may or may not
be assented to by the client, using a directive process, and the learning outcome is improvement’.
Functionalist mentoring adopts a rational reality model, promotes objectivity and is instrumental,
maintaining an equilibrium in the work context, and the mentoring purpose is to keep this reality
unchanged. The approach is typically hierarchical, and the process has been described as the
‘recycling of power’ (Darwin, 2000). ‘A relationship between a young adult and an older, more
experienced adult, that helps the younger individual learn and navigate in the adult world and the
world of work’ (Kram, 1988: 2). The process is typically didactic, emphasizing the transmission of
knowledge, and is typified by advice giving and direction.
• ‘Engagement mentoring’ is an agreed activity where the purpose is prescribed, which the client
may or may not be made aware of, which takes a humanistic stance that respects the client’s
subjective world and where the learning outcome is improvement leaving underlying values and
systems unchanged. The support and encouragement in some programmes of engagement
mentoring mask its hidden functionalist purpose.
• Revolutionary mentoring seeks to promote the transformation of society and radical change, and
is seeking to enable individuals to transform their beliefs and only in the fullness of time become 17
part of a larger, changed world for which they may aspire to be agents.
Dezvoltare organizationala
• Eby, s.a., (2007, p. 10) provide a common frame of reference for understanding mentoring:
• mentoring reflects a unique relationship between individuals (Austin, 2002; Garvey & Alred, 2003;
Jacobi, 1991).
• mentoring is a learning partnership (Garvey & Alred, 2003; Jacobi, 1991; Peper, 1994; Roberts,
2000). Nearly all mentorships involve the acquisition of knowledge. In fact, learning can occur in
mentorships that are highly effective as well as in relationships that fail to live up to one or both
individuals’ expectations.
• mentoring is a process, defined by the types of support provided by the mentor to the protégé
(Jacobi, 1991; Kram, 1985). While the specific functions that characterize mentoring vary, they are
broadly classified as emotional or psychosocial (e.g., friendship, acceptance, support) and
instrumental or career-related (e.g., coaching, information, advocacy, sponsorship) (Jacobi, 1991;
Kram, 1985).
• a mentoring relationship is reciprocal, yet asymmetrical. Although the mentor may benefit from the
relationship, the primary goal is protégé growth and development (Jacobi, 1991; Kram, 1985;
Levinson et al., 1978).
• mentoring relationships are dynamic; the relationship changes over time (Garvey & Alred, 2003;
Kram, 1985; Roberts, 2000) and the impact of mentoring increases with the passage of time 18
(Grossman & Rhodes, 2002; Kram, 1985).
Dezvoltare organizationala

Source: CLC.

19
Dezvoltare organizationala

Source: CLC.

20
Dezvoltare organizationala

Comparison of mentoring to similar types of interpersonal relationships (Eby,

s.a., 2007, p. 11)

21
Dezvoltare organizationala

Source: CLC.

22
Dezvoltare organizationala

Comparison of stepped approaches to designing a mentoring

program (Stokes & Merrick, 2013, p. 199)

23
Dezvoltare organizationala
• Training (Tammy D. Allen, Lisa M. Finkelstein,
and Mark L. Poteet, 2009)
• Training should be designed based on the
objectives of the mentoring program. A “one-
size fi ts all” approach to training is unlikely to
be successful. Program designers should
evaluate the program’s objectives and
determine what tasks, knowledges, skills, and
abilities will be required of mentors and
protégés, and then base the training program’s
objectives and content on those areas. In many
instances, training objectives will be the same
for protégés and mentors.

24
Dezvoltare organizationala
• The first layer of training content that we believe needs to be a part of any mentoring training
includes basic, foundational topics that would be appropriate for any formal mentoring program
regardless of its structure or design. Potential training topics for the fi rst layer of training include
defi ning mentoring, outlining the program’s objectives, reviewing roles and responsibilities for the
mentor and/or the protégé, outlining what protégés and mentors can and cannot expect, setting
expectations and understanding the program’s limitations, and introducing participants to
problems typical of formal mentoring relationships.
• The second layer of training also covers basic, foundational information, but varies from the first
layer of training in that the information should be tailored to the needs, objectives, structure, and
design of the organization’s unique mentoring program. For example, if the purpose of the
mentoring program is to promote diversity efforts, then training may include information on
sensitivity to different gender and racial issues.

25
Dezvoltare organizationala
• The third layer of training should focus on building specifi c skills and knowledge that protégés
and mentors will need in order to develop and maintain a high quality mentoring relationship.
Examples of topics: communicating clearly and with impact, listening actively and attentively,
delivering direct and constructive feedback in a way that maintains the target’s esteem, building
trusting relationships through strong interpersonal skills, and managing and resolving conflicts.
• The fourth, and fi nal, layer of training should cover advanced issues that sometimes infl uence
the success of close, organizational relationships. One such issue involves the challenges and
obstacles that are likely to occur during the course of the mentoring relationship.

26
Dezvoltare organizationala
• Potential Problems in Mentoring Relationships (Scandura & Pellegrini, 2007, p. 76).
• Marginal Mentoring. Mentoring is likely to be marked by both positive and negative experiences over
time. Marginal relationships may be limited in the scope or degree of mentoring functions provided.
They fall midway on a continuum anchored with highly satisfying relationships on one end and highly
dissatisfying relations on the other. For example, according to Eby and McManus (2004), the
protégé’s unwillingness to learn and performing below expectations may represent two broad
problems that characterize marginally effective relationships since they limit the benefits that can be
realized from the relationship but do not cause serious harm to the mentor or the relationship.
• Dysfunctional Mentoring. Dysfunctional mentoring relations are those in which the relationship is not
beneficial for either the mentor, protégé, or both (Scandura, 1998). Scandura (1998) emphasized that
most mentoring relationships are positive and productive; however, when dysfunction occurs, it may
have negative effects on the performance and work attitudes of the protégé, and the result may be
increased stress and employee withdrawal in the form of absenteeism and turnover (Scandura &
Hamilton, 2002). Moreover, the negative emotions resulting from mentoring problems may be
detrimental to both the protégé’s career progress and the organization (Hunt & Michael, 1983).

27
Dezvoltare organizationala
• Williams, Scandura, and Hamilton (2001) developed a measure of dysfunction in mentoring (DIM)
measuring four dimensions of dysfunctionality. Negative relations involve psychosocial problems with
bad intent (bullying, intimidation, overly aggressive behavior, abuse of power, and provoking diversity
issues). Difficulty involves psychosocial problems with good intent (different personalities, different
work styles, unresolved conflicts, disagreements, placement of binds by the mentor, mentor on the
wrong career track, and over-dependence). Spoiling reflects changes in the relationship that make a
previously satisfying relationship disappointing. It involves vocational issues with good intent
(vocational issues with the absence of malice, betrayal, and regret). Finally, submissiveness
reinforces the balance of power (the protégé is submissive, over-dependent, accommodating, meek,
and passive). Employing this scale, Williams et al. (2001) found that perceived dysfunction had a
negative effect on protégé performance and an even stronger negative effect on self-esteem.
• Eby and McManus (2004) suggested malevolent deception as another dimension of dysfunctionality.
This reflects overt acts of deceit on the part of the protégé. Given the essential role of trust in close
relationships (Lewicki & Bunker, 1995; Scandura & Pellegrini, 2003), perceptions of protégé
deception may lead to mentor’s psychological and/or physical withdrawal from the relationship. Eby
and McManus (2004) also discuss jealousy and competition as dimensions of dysfunctional
mentoring relationships since they can lead to suspicion, reduced trust, and counterproductive
behavior. 28