Submitted To UGC sponsored refresher course in Business Studies

By Dr. Jyotirmayee Choudhury Department of Business Administration, Utkal University

Introduction
The main objective of any management is to create and develop an environment conductive to the work, harmonising organisational goal with individual goals. Such a work environment comprises two factors: one, concerned with the actual physical environment in which the work is performed and the other, concerned with the mental or conceptual environment in which the employees operate. The physical environment is concerned with all the physical aspects such as temperature, noise, light, ventilation, the tools which are used, the methods of work, the material employed, the sequence in which work is performed. The mental or conceptual environment deals with the attitude of an employee how he perceives his environment. The manager aims at creating a positive attitude or frame of mind for each employee which will encourage him to participate in the affairs of organisation. Employees must be made to understand why the company needs them, why they should participate in work and how their personal goals or objectives can be achieved through mutual co-operative endeavour. These two environments do not and cannot exist independently. It is a simple fact that the intrinsic satisfaction offered by work is a powerful motivator and that a dull and dreary job tends to be demotivating regardless of compensation. Initially it was thought that the scientific management theory invented by Frederick Taylor was the most efficient concept of management. But with the passage of time, it was realised that it cannot continue to motivate people to give optimum results and money is not the only motivator. Taylors theory was further refined by Gantt who wanted to emphasis the human aspect. However, Frant Gilbert concentrated primarily on work process. The objective was loud and clear improving organisational part in such a way that they function efficiently. It was German sociologist Max Weber who wanted to discover law of social behaviour in a work environment which led to the Bureaucratic. However, this theory also ultimately did not prove quite successful in spite of being in existence for a pretty long time and the search for secret regarding impact of human behaviour on work continued to bother social scientists and management experts all over the world. The breakthrough was achieved by Hawthome experiment 2

conducted by Elton Mayo and his associates on the workers of Western Electric Company, Texas, while studying the impact of human behaviour in the work situation. The work group was the essence of this experiment wherein influence of various formal and informal groups and various physical environment factors was studied on the performance of the employees. The objective of this study was to find out how the performance of the employees can be improved through the study of human behaviour. Performance by self-discipline and self control was the basis of formulation of theory y by renowned management scientist McGregor. Initially Gregor came out with the theory X, the presumption of which was just opposite of theory Y. He noticed in various organisations that the performance by close supervision and through fear of punishment can only give short term results but if the management has to get long term results, it has to consider the human aspects of work. Despite the fact that these theories are known to most of the managers, they are unable to make their best use because of their own style of management. Confusion, misunderstanding and lack of contribution where everything is left to the discretion of top management, can be symbolised as management by crisis. A predominant feature of Indian Industry is management by drive where top most priority is given to a problem over a time bound programme and results are tried to be achieved. The often leads to a situation where the management does not take a total view of the whole situation and other objectives are often compromised in order to show achievement of results in one particular sphere within a short time. The first practice should be to build responsibility and achievement into job and work force. The work itself has to be made productive so that the employee can work at making himself highly achieving. The employee needs to meet the demand of the discipline and the incentive of responsibility. The Manager must treat the people with whom he works as resource to himself. He has to look to them for guidance regarding his own job. He has to convince them that it is their responsibility to enable their manager to do a better and more effective job. Perhaps, the most important element in humanising work and managing people is to place them where their strength can become productive. Placement, however, is left largely to chance. Yet no two people have the same configuration of strength and weakness.

Job rotation within same department not only motivates employees but also helps management to have well groomed employees who are capable of managing senior position in future. Job enlargement and job enrichment are very effective tools for motivating employees in large companies where promotion avenues are few and it takes longer for employee to get promotion. Involvement of employees in day-to-day working, decision making, getting feed back, brings a sense of participation. Establishing a positive rapport through emphathetic supervision is most important for humanisation of work. Principle of individualisation by having a sincere concern and respect for competence, recognising the individual identity and a genuine concern for career progression of employees motivate them to give their best to the organisation. Man being a social animal by nature equally needs group identity. Fostering a feeling of pride through appreciation and attaching himself to what other employees do and through positive team work help managers to enhance the image of the company. Beyond involvement in the work lies involvement in the organisation. Every manager should act as a salesman for the organisation not only in terms of promotion of sales of its product but also by building up its corporate image by visualising the distinct role of the organisation in the total system.

Responsibility for The Humanisation

A corporation, company, government department, are virtual entity, and have no capacity for feeling or emotion in and of itself. Within that virtual entity, there are usually many other smaller entities that may well be misaligned or actively opposed to each other and it is natural that the loyalty of the individuals within the organisation must be brought and that that loyalty will change if the individual leaves the organisation, or even moves within it. It is critical to the success of modern organisations that they be seen has having human traits being ethical, caring for the customer, caring for the environment, hungry for success. It is important that not only that this view is held about the organisation itself, but that it is also held about other organisations that it interacts with. For example, most customers are not individuals but organisations in their own right, but staffs need to feel an emotional connection to that virtual entity.

3. A Case Of Rest Period

Entitlement to rest periods during working hours is recognised as a basic right of workers in the European Union. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European
Union stipulates: Every worker has the right to limitation of maximum working

hours, to daily and weekly rest periods and to an annual period of paid. Daily Rest Periods The stipulation of a minimum 11 hours of rest in a 24-hour period implies potentially a lawful 13 hour working day. However, this is unlikely to be allowed by reason of other provisions of the directive. First, the imposition of a minimum 11 hours of rest (implying a maximum working day of 13 hours) is supplemented by a general provision, which reads: Member States shall take the measures necessary to ensure that an employer who intends to organise work according to a certain pattern takes account of the general principle of adapting work to the worker, with a view, in particular, to alleviating monotonous work and work at a predetermined work-rate, depending on the type of activity, and of safety and health requirements, especially as regards breaks during working time This principle of the humanisation of work and the emphasis in Scandinavian countries on the psychological and social drawbacks of working time, such as monotony, lack of social contacts at work or a rapid work pace, were the inspiration for the Commissions proposal on working time regulation and here receive explicit recognition. Breaks at work are not aimed solely at avoiding dangers to health and safety: they are to be integrated as a means of humanising work patterns. The requirement in the directive for rest periods during working hours effectively reduces the maximum 13-hour working day by the amount of the rest periods. It is unclear whether daily breaks for rest count towards daily working hours within the meaning of working time as defined in Article 2(1) of the directive. But whether the duration of the working day includes rest periods or not, it cannot be prolonged beyond 13 hours, as this would violate the requirement of 11 consecutive hours of rest. The minimum EU standard for the duration of the working day is, therefore, 11 consecutive hours of rest, and a maximum 13 hours of work punctuated by at least one long break, or two or more shorter breaks, the intervals being not more than six hours apart. In any case, a working time regime which opted for such a long working day would be constrained by the provisions on maximum hours in a working week. 5

Rest breaks The Working Time Directive allows for collective agreements to fix or define relevant standards of rest breaks during working hours. The directive gives priority to collective agreements over legislation in determining the EU standard. The EU standard is to be determined by collective bargaining (though without specifying the appropriate level) and, only in its absence, by legislation. The duration of rest breaks is not indicated, but certain criteria may be expected to emerge following precedents involving the balancing of employer and worker interests in the EC law on indirect sex discrimination. These criteria might require that the duration of the rest period responds to the human needs of the worker, and is appropriate, having regard to the length of the preceding and subsequent work periods. The criteria take into account all the different possibilities of organising the working time of the workforce as a whole so as to provide adequate rest periods for all workers. The directive obliges employers who intend to organise work according to a certain pattern take account of the general principle of adapting work to the worker, especially as regards breaks during working time. Member States must require employers to organise working time taking into account this principle of the humanisation of work. If it can be shown that an organisation of working time, including work breaks, would ameliorate these problems, it is arguable that the employer has at least to justify not introducing them. Daily rest breaks, which do not respond to the workers human needs and which the employer cannot justify, violate the EC standard. Member State legislation which does not secure that such rest breaks are provided would arguably be in violation of the duty to implement the directives requirements, and state liability might be imposed to compensate the workers affected. Weekly Rest Periods The Working Time Directive stipulates a standard of weekly rest in . Member States shall take the measures necessary to ensure that, per each seven-day period, every worker is entitled to a minimum uninterrupted rest period of 24 hours plus the 11 hours daily rest referred to in Article 3. The weekly rest period must follow on from one of the 11 hour daily rest periods, so as to constitute a continuous break of 35 hours at least once a week, averaged over more than 14 days. 6

There is an ambiguous provision tacked on to the end of Article 5: If objective, technical or work organisation conditions so justify, a minimum rest period of 24 hours may be applied. The meaning of this exception is not clear. There are two possibilities. Each eliminates one of the qualifications attached to the provision in the first paragraph: either, that 24 hours be added to the 11 hours of daily rest; or that the 24 hours be without interruption. Most likely, it refers to the requirement that the 24 hour weekly rest period be connected to a previous 11 hour rest period, so as to constitute a solid block of 35 hours rest per week. Apparently, a minimal 24 hour period may be justified in some circumstances. The only other possibility would seem to be that the provision for a 24 hour rest period is not to be a consecutive period, but is to be added to the 11 hours minimum daily rest and distributed throughout the week, so that there is no consecutive 24 hour period.

4. Conclusion
Humanising is all about emotional involvement with the job and with the surroundings. As work is a means to man's self-affirmation and self-fulfilment in society. It is an incessant process that thoroughly penetrates the existence of man. An autonomy oriented work organization with all options of decentralization and delegation of decision with the help of technology may include stress-reducing and personality developing elements making the work environment conducive, productive, functional and moreover congenial. People may exhibit organization citizenship behaviour (OCB) and their work behaviour may remain miles away than that what is prescribed by the roles and responsibility of work. In fact humanisation is imprinting and embedding B2E - Business to Employee to the glossary of new economy. It is about Business to Employee, with the former empowering the latter and as we all know that people are critical to any organization and if they are well informed they are happy and happy employees are the best brand ambassadors of the company.

References
Devine, J. (1989), "Paradigms as Ideologies: Liberal vs. Marxian Economics", Review of Social Economy, 3(1), 293-312. Elster, J. (1989), "Social Norms and Economic Theory", Journal of Economic Perspectives, 4(1), 99117. Funkhouser, G.R.(1989), "Values Changes Necessary for a Sustainable Society", Science, Technology and Society, 9 , 19-32.

Harmin, R.D(1989) "Ethical Economics", Futures,, 608-618. Kvapilov, E. (190), "Problmy kultry prce v prestavbe spolonosti", Filozofia, 1, 18-22. Moser, M.R.(1988), "Ethical Conflict at Work: A Critique of the Literature and Recommendations for Future Research", Journal of Business Ethics, 7, 381-387.