Hawthorne Studies

Foundations

The alteration of behavior by the subjects of a study due their awareness of being observed.

Leadership Style: Participative, Directive, and Laissez-Faire

Laissez-faire leadership style- the leader gives the employee the freedom to do whatever he/she wants (pp. 271)

Laissez-faire –> Consensus –> Participative –>  Consultative –> Benevolent Autocratic –> Autocratic (pp. 271)

Absenteeism and turnover may be higher under autocratic leaders than their democratic counterparts–productivity may be lower (pp. 272)

Miller & Monge (1986) examined the relationship of participation with satisfaction and productivity using contingency model, affective model, and cognitive model. Found strong support for affective model, some support for cognitive model and no support for contingency model (pp. 272)

Directive Leadership- can positively affect performance; most likely to occur when the cognitive resources necessary for the attainment of performance rest with the leader (pp. 273)

The relationship between involvement-oriented leadership and performance unfolds along three paths

1. Motivational path (pp. 273)- Job satisfaction and job involvement improve as the result of participation, and that work withdrawal decreases. Participation is likely to increase experienced role ambiguity as there tends to be less leader directive behavior. Also leads to increased decision acceptance and commitment, heightened performance motivation and an increase in performance
2. Cognitive path (pp. 273)- Decision quality is often enhanced when different minds are brought to bear on the problem. Enhanced decision quality should positively affect performance, but this is only likely to be the case when those decisions are successfully implemented.
3. Inhibitor path (pp. 273)- focuses our attention upon a series of group maladies that can characterize groups, which often result in negative performance effects stemming from group involvement in decision-making processes.

Image from pp. 274 in textbook.

Miller & Monge article:

• Cognitive models of participative effects (pp. 279)
  • Increases knowledge (pp. 281)
  • Participation in decision making is a viable strategy because it enhances the flow and use of important information in organizations
  • If employees participate in decision making, they will know more about implementing work procedures after decisions have been made
  • Predict a definite pattern of results in empirical research investigating participation, satisfaction, and productivity
    • increases in productivity are expected to be stronger where workers have good information about decisions to be made (pp. 279)
    • do not predict immediate increases in satisfaction as a result of participation in decision making, as it is essentially a knowledge of results that is hypothesized to lead to eventual increases in satisfaction (pp. 280)
    • do not predict increases in workers’ productivity and satisfaction simply from their working in participative work climates or for non directive leaders (pp. 280)
• Affective models of participative effects (pp. 280)
  • Participation will lead to greater attainment of high-order needs, such as self-expression, respect, independence, and equality, which will in turn increase morale and satisfaction. (pp. 280)
  • Participation will enhance productivity through intervening motivational processes: participation fulfills needs, fulfilled needs lead to satisfaction, satisfaction strengthens motivation, and increased motivation improves workers’ productivity (pp. 280)
  • Predictions of affective models (pp. 280):
    • Participation will affect satisfaction in a wide variety of situations
    • Do not predict increases in workers’ satisfaction
    • Participation will more strongly influence lower-level employees, because managers’ higher-order ego needs may well be fulfilled by other aspects of their work
• Contingency models of participative effects (pp. 280)
  • Personality might mediate the effects of participation on satisfaction and productivity (Vroom, pp. 280)
    • Personality will positively influence only employees having personalities with low authoritarianism and high needs for independence.
  • Employees with high needs for independence and personalities with low authoritarianism will be most positively influenced by participation (pp. 281)
  • Some decisions are more appropriate for participation than others (pp. 281)
  • Employees who value participation will be the most positively influence by it, and these are likely to be higher level employees (pp. 281)
  • Mixed support with other studies (pp. 281)

Scholars

Lewin; Trist; Emery; Sales; Sagie & Koslowsky; Vroom; Locke & Schweiger; Ritchie & Miles; McGregor; Likert; Coch & French;

Research

Haire, M., Chiselli, E. E., & Porter, L. W. (1966). Managerial thinking: An international study. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Miller, K. I. & Monge, P. R. (1986). Participation, satisfaction, and productivity: A meta-analytic review. Academy of Management Journal. 29, 727-53.

Notes

(Affective Participation Model, pp. 273) Participation –> Higher Order Need Fulfillment –> Satisfaction –> Motivation –> Productivity

Related Theories

LMX