Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Employee Empowerment Perception and Involvement
Employee Empowerment Perception and Involvement
Introduction
In the complex area of people management paradigms, the terms Empowerment, Participation
and Involvement are frequently used within the literature but often interpreted quite differently
depending on the perspective of the reader and / or writer. This guide aims to offer an insight
into these terms and to posit them respectively within the context of unitary and pluralist people
management perspectives. Firstly it is necessary to distinguish between Participation and
Involvement, and then to examine where Empowerment fits within these perspectives.
According to Farnham (1997) Employee Participation is one of four policy choices for managing
the employment relationship. Cited in Rose (2001, p380) Farnham states:
‘…an employee has the right to question and influence organization decision making’ and ‘….
this may involve representative workplace democracy.’
The other policy choices Farnham identifies are worker subordination via managerial
prerogative, union incorporation via collective bargaining and finally employee commitment via
employee involvement.
It is clear then that there are differences between employee participation and employee
involvement. The literature suggests that employee participation is a pluralist/collective
approach with a continuum from ‘no involvement’ to ‘employee control’ (Blyton & Turnbull,
1998). As such it may involve processes and mechanisms such as:
This is often found as part of a ‘soft’ HRM approach (Rose 2000) and usually involves upwards
and downwards communications flows :-
Downward communication flows (top management down to line staff) may involve written
information (e.g. staff newsletters notice-boards, staff handbooks, house journals) and
other formal channels such as team/cascade briefings and staff forums.
Upward communication flows (formal and informal) may involve such tools as employee
suggestion schemes (paid/unpaid), surveys of staff (general/attitudinal), appraisal schemes
(traditional/upward (boss) appraisal, and is sometimes linked to quality management TQM
tools such as quality circles, quality improvement teams etc.
Empowerment
Having identified that there are significant differences between employee participation and
employee involvement, where empowerment sits within these approaches is perhaps more
complex and hinges on interpretations of ‘power’ and how ‘empowered’ workers actually are
where such schemes are implemented.
The literature suggests a range of opinions from the more cynical one, that sees empowerment
as a management control/manipulation tool, to the soft HRM view that it is essential for
achievement of maximum organizational potential. For example Goldsmith et al (1997:145)
suggest ‘it is predominantly about encouraging front-line staff to solve customer problems on
the spot, without constant recourse to management approval’. Whereas Bowen and Lawler,
(1992) cited in Lashley (1996:334) take the view that it is about ‘management strategies for
sharing decision-making power’.
Perhaps the most widely shared view amongst employee relations writers is that there is very
little true ‘power’ in the hands of ‘empowered’ workers as currently practised. Using Rose’s
(2001:5) definition of power as: ‘..the extent to which one party to a relationship can compel the
other to do something he otherwise would not do voluntarily’, it is hard to see that any real
‘power’ is afforded to employees, outside the narrow scope of task-related decisions aimed at
satisfying external customer needs quickly, without having to refer to management. Wilkinson
(1998: 49) for example asserts that ‘management have defined the redistribution of Power in
very narrow terms…strictly within an agenda set by management…
Another sceptical viewpoint is that such schemes, usually resulting from some delayering of the
organization’s management structure, add a further burden of responsibility on workers without
increasing pay levels or status of the workers. Hyman & Mason (1995:387) state for example:
‘empowerment becomes a euphemism for work intensification’.
This is supported further by Hollinshead et al (1999:324) who state: ‘developments in the 1980s
and 1990s suggest that the process (empowerment) only appears to give employees greater
control and, in reality remains dominated and restricted by management’ and (Argyris 1998)
who says ‘Empowerment is still mostly an illusion ‘.
Work by Hales and Klidas (1998: 93) carried out in a sample of five star hotels supports this
notion too when they state :
‘…the overwhelming impression to be gained from the literature is that empowerment entails
some additional employee ‘choice’ at the margins of their jobs, rather than any substantial
increase in employee ‘voice’.
Summary
It appears that whilst it ought to be possible to really ‘empower’ employees in the workplace
through pluralist, democratic processes i.e. an employee participation paradigm with
collectivized relations that share decision making and power; ‘empowerment’ as currently
applied within many organizations inside and outside of the hospitality and tourism industries,
appears largely to be of the unitarist / HRM variety which seeks to gain commitment through an
employee involvement paradigm.
• Marchington M (1993) ‘Fairy tales and magic wands: new employment practices in
perspective’ Employee Relations Vol. 17 No 1
• Wilkinson A (1998) Empowerment : theory and practice, Personnel Review Vol. 27 No.
1 pp40-56
These three articles are broadly sceptical in their view on how empowering ‘empowerment’
actually is (as currently applied in many organisations). The research is generic rather than
industry specific. They provide a good bibliography of empowerment related references.
This article takes a similar view to Argyris, Marchington and Wilkinson however the
research is applied within the hotel sector. This also has a detailed bibliography of relevant
sources related to empowerment and employee involvement.
• Lashley C (1997) Empowering Service Excellence: beyond the quick fix, London,
Cassell
Probably the most prolific writer on employee involvement, empowerment and participation
in hospitality. These sources investigate in depth, the complex concept of empowerment as
it is applied across a number of hospitality organisations. Lashley recognises a broad
spectrum of interpretations of ‘empowerment’ including ‘participatory’ approaches, however
the main foci are on forms of empowerment centred on ‘employee involvement’.
• Cloke, K. (2002) The end of management and the rise of organizational democracy San
Francisco, Jossey-Bass
Personnel Review
http://elvira.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/urlResolver.do?uri=%2Fvl%3D4345373%2Fcl%3D1
25%2Fnw%3D1%2Frpsv%2Fpr.htm
Provides guidance based on research for those who practice, teach, research or study in
the field of human resource management. Part of the MCB portfolio and therefore full text
articles are available through Emerald
Employee Relations
http://fernando.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/urlResolver.do?uri=%2Fvl%3D3110480%2Fcl%3
D78%2Fnw%3D1%2Frpsv%2Fer.htm
A highly respected UK based international journal from MCB which covers a broad range of
HR related issues including employee participation, involvement and empowerment.
Regularly features research into service sector HR issues including hospitality leisure and
tourism fields. Articles are usually available via Emerald Full text service.
UK Government statistics –
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/
Includes labour market information and statistics
People Management
http://www.peoplemanagement.co.uk
The official ‘webzine’ of the Chartered Institute of Personnel Development. It provides online
HR news, legal updates, resources and reviews, top HR jobs , comment and analysis.
HR Gopher
http://www.hrgopher.com/
A search engine and links to a wide range of HR related topics
Labourstart
http://www.labourstart.org/
A multilingual site for trade unionists giving global news on industrial relations and disputes
world-wide
Library of Congress
http://www.loc.gov
A useful US based site for searching by key words, for book publications in any topic area
including HR practices and procedures
This topic has been delivered by means of a one hour lecture using animated power-point
slides (http://www.hlst.ltsn.ac.uk/resources/empowerment.ppt). It is supported through a
reading list and selected articles provided in a reading pack.
(http://www.hlst.ltsn.ac.uk/resources/empowerment_resourcespack.pdf)
One week later there is a student led debate whereby two teams construct opposing arguments
based on the title:
Empowerment, Participation and Involvement – workplace democracy or management
manipulation?
Following this debate there is a class discussion where the tutor ensures that no key issues are
omitted from consideration for the essay
(http://www.hlst.ltsn.ac.uk/resources/empowerment_tutornotes.pdf).
Students could be asked to reflect on some or all of the following key questions within their
preparation for the debate
¾ What is power and how would you define ‘empowerment’?
¾ Do empowerment schemes really give 'power' to employees?
¾ To what extent have empowerment schemes been adopted by hospitality
organisations?
¾ What are the motives for introducing empowerment schemes?
¾ Does the use of ‘empowerment’ schemes signify a loss of control by employers
in the employment relationship?
¾ What are the sceptics’ views on employee participation and empowerment
schemes?
Currently this topic is assessed by means of a 2000 word essay. This is submitted one week
after the debate and two weeks after the lecture. The essay title is:
Evaluate the proposal that employee participation involvement and empowerment
represent the ‘new industrial democracy’.
(http://www.hlst.ltsn.ac.uk/resources/empowerment_markingscheme.pdf)
Peter McGunnigle is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Hotel and Restaurant Management at
Oxford Brookes University. He teaches in the area of Human Resource Management and
currently leads the undergraduate module Employee Relations in the Hospitality Industry. Peter
is research active and has published in the area of HRM and employee commitment. He is
particularly interested in the impact of specific HRM interventions (such as empowerment) on
employee motivation and commitment. Peter would welcome suggestions for further materials
for this resource guide from others teaching and researching in this field.