This is an essay to discuss the statement that organisations never have full control over the actions and behaviour of their employees at work. Control can be defined as the system in which is concerned with the regulations of behaviours, Mullins, L (2013). This is supported by Torrington et al (2009) who further explains there is always a need for management to supervise what their employees are doing and generally to exercise a degree of control within an organisation. Throughout this essay, the author intends to research different methods of control and explain and give examples where possible. In order to ascertain this research will be read and gathered from different sources, such as books and journal articles. This will be in preparation to conclude with an answer to whether employee behaviour can ever be fully controlled by management.
Beardwell and Claydon (2010) identifies that there are a potential three different methods of control. Firstly, manager-directed control which can be expressed as a way for employers to give directive instruction to their employees. Along with the organisations’ rules of expected behaviour and the methods of monitoring employee activities. Secondly, Bureaucratic control is a way to establish procedures and specifications for employee activities and these are expected to be accepted as the way an employee must behave. Thirdly, Employee centred control is to influence the ways in which people think about their personal actions and whether this is consistent with the organisations’ objectives.
Employee centred control according to Rollinson and Dundon (2007), connects with the high commitment model. This style of control emphasises employee discretion and aims to encourage employees to adopt self-control and behave in ways that are harmonious with their organisations objectives.
Commitment strongly links with employee involvement, with the expectation that there would be improvements of productivity levels, which will lead to high performance within the workplace. Using practices such as informing and consulting with employees will make them feel more involved and empowered by the feeling of making a valued contribution to the organisation. Being directly involved is expected to have a positive impact on the level of productivity, employee commitment to the organisation, colleagues and their own job. Also, this should cause a decrease in labour turnover and absenteeism. Commitment is an attitude and the relationship between attitudes and behaviours is not straightforward. Behaviour depends on a variety of different influences of the employee. Including values and beliefs, what motivates the employee. Resulting in the conclusion that attitudes are not always reflected in behaviours (Foot et al. 2016).
Control is a consistent method needed in an organisation but the extent and manner depend on the intended outcome and to which it is exercised. Control can be viewed as an essential feature in ensuring management position and hierarchy positioning of authority. This method of control can be referred to the idea of ‘Taylorism’ or scientific management, Mullins, L (2010).
Torrington et al (2009) suggest that Taylorism and Scientific management is a form of control called direct control or manager-directed control. Which is accordingly when all work is closely supervised by management, who also determine what work is completed when it is to be finished and by whom. This method of control can be viewed as being very similar to that within the armed forces. Direct control originates from Taylor and the school of scientific management much in the way that an engineer might design a machine. Mullins, L (2010) further implies that Taylors’ theory was about increasing the level of productivity but realised that this came with an obstacle raised by the employees. Who used a system of ‘Systematic soldiering’ in a deliberate attempt to their own best interests and keep management in the dark about how fast work could be carried out, this especially applied when the work was piece-rate work.
Although Torrington et al (2009) are in agreement with Beardwell and Claydon about manager-directed control, they suggest that there is only a second control method, which is responsible autonomy or employee centred control. The method is intended to be subtle and more pleasant from the employees point of view. It is also seen as a more desirable approach by management due to this method reducing any conflicts from employee’s and can be cost effective. This would be because there would be fewer hours needed to manage the progression of work. Responsible autonomy is centred around an organisation clearly stating their objectives, as to what they want but they leave it down to the employees to decide when and how these objectives are meet. This method also has to take into account the effects of various job roles. As an example a sales representative could vary their own hours and decide on their own sequence of calls, they also have the power to choose how they deal with customers. Whereas a checkout operator has less scope on how they can deal with customers and they also have reduced the opportunity to dictate how they fulfil their job requirements.
When control within an organisation is researched, it is felt that individual behaviours must be taken into consideration. Many employees show uncertainty towards control and although they may not wish to have control directed at themselves from other personnel they do recognise that there is the need for some level of control. Some people can actually desire control and this is because of the need to recognise how well they are doing at work. For this reason, control can actually be seen as reliable, ordered and stable. This can be used as a basis for training needs, personal motivation to progress within an organisation and reach higher standards. At this point, though, Wilson (2004) reminds that individuals are not submissive objects of control. Employees will always have the ability to accept, deny, react, reshape, rebel or conform and create themselves within constraints imposed on them.
Malmi and Brown (2008) have given a further set of control methods through cultural control. Cultural control can be defined as a shared set of values, beliefs and social normalities by all members and these would influence the employees’ thoughts and actions. Although at times cultural control may be beyond the control of management, culture is, however, a control system used in the hope to regulate employee behaviour. This control method can be sectioned into three subcategories of Value based control, symbol based control and clan control.
Simons, R (1995) suggest that value-based control can also be referred to as a belief system and explains that this as a set of definitions provided by the organisations’ managers which are communicated formally and are reinforced systematically in order to provide basic values, purpose and direction. Value based control is expected to have an impact of values on behaviour, traditionally through belief systems which are further believed to work on three levels. Firstly, an organisation would deliberately employ people who already share the values of the organisation. Secondly, an organisation would socialise the employees until their values have been changed to coordinate with the organisation (Alvesson and Johansson, 2004). Thirdly, when the organisation explains their values and expects the employees to behave in accordance to these even if they don’t on a personal level.
Schein, E.H. (1993) articulates that symbol based control is a method used by an organisation that creates visible expressions to develop a particular type of culture via building or workspace design and using a dress code. For example, an organisation may design an open-plan office, very similar to what you would find in a call centre, this in the hope of creating good communication and collaboration in the attempt to control the employees’ behaviours. In order to help create professionalism and a status of unity, an organisation may have a dress code or uniform.
There is a reason to believe that within an organisation there are distinct subcultures, Dent, J (1991), this statement is supported by Clegg et al (2005) who further explains that the subcultures or micro-cultures have been labelled as ‘Clans’. The concept of Clan resides on the idea that an organisation would expose their employees to a socialisation process which would instil in them a set of values and skills which the organisation believes in, Ouchi (1979). The socialisation process may relate to different professions; such as doctors or accountants. It may also be related to different groups, units or divisions within the organisation.
The opinion of Mullins. L (2013) who implies that concerned with the regulation of behaviour further suggests that control is a sensitive implication and is seen as a negative enforcement within an organisation. Mainly because control has a manner to suggest direction or command by the giving of orders. Employees are suspicious of control because they see them as a way to add pressure to the workloads and a way of maintaining discipline. Watson, T.J (2006) suggest that although process rational thinking recognises the objectives of those in charge within an organisation. To achieve control over employees’ behaviours in the workplace, two other control assumptions must be recognised. Firstly, only part control can ever be achieved because organisations are teamed with human relationships between management and employees. One human being would never fully allow control over their working behaviours and these would often be resisted. Secondly, control that is achieved, is done so through a process of negotiation, persuasion and manipulation etc. this is typically adhered to from a setting of rules and official procedures.
The author is inclined to suggest that an organisation would never have full control over their employees’ behaviours. Due to the research gathered, which has given many different methods and interpretations of how employees would entertain these methods. Although some form of control must be adhered to by employees at all times, the way an employee greets any type of control would be influenced by their own personal values, beliefs, wants and needs. The employee may not agree with the organisations’ values and beliefs. They may not respond positively to changes or being instructed by higher personnel.