Job Enrichment

Organizational Behavior Concept: Job Enrichment Jared Stern Introduction The concept of Job Enrichment is a very broad theory within the field of organizational behavior that is applicable within all sectors of organization. Used synonymously with â€Å"job enlargement†, the term job enrichment refers to different methods that are aimed at increasing employee’s job motivation, satisfaction, self-worth, in an attempt to ultimately increase the overall employee productivity within the organization.Research studies conducted on Job Enrichment and its influence on employee productivity date back to the 1950s and 1960s and throughout those years a wide variety of methods have emerged. Most commonly job enrichment is attributed to the process of job redesign in order to reverse the negative effects monotony of employee tasks, which will include boredom, lack of autonomy and dissatisfaction. Other variances of job enrichment include providing worker incentives by involving the employee in the decision making process, the implementation of quality work groups and team building, and job independence as an incentive to increase productivity.Evolution of the concept of Job Enrichment Beginning in the middle of the 20th century up until present day, the theory of job enrichment has offered many compelling concepts to increase employee productivity while simultaneously enriching the employees work experience, all of which remain applicable today. The early works which established Job enrichment among organizational behavior theorists was Frederick Herzberg’s â€Å"Hygiene Theory† and Hackman and Oldham’s â€Å"Job Characteristic Model†.The Hygiene Theory The central figure in developing the theory of job enrichment within the framework of organizational behavior was Frederick Herzberg who’s pivotal â€Å"Hygiene Theory† has contributed a solid basis and foundation for subsequent generations to expand upon. According to Herzberg, for a worker to be happy and therefore productive the environmental factors of his workplace must not cause him discomfort. Herzberg further asserts that although providing employees with a more comfortable environment may in turn make them more productive, this does not necessarily mean they will be motivated to perform their duties.Simonds & Orife, 1975) Herzberg believed that the process of motivating workers is by enhancing their feeling of responsibility and connection to their work. In this case, Herzberg proclaims that it is the work itself that is rewarding. Managers can help the employees connect to their work by giving them more authority over the job, as well as offering direct and individual feedback. The Job Characteristics Model In 1975 Hackman and Oldham advanced the ideas of Herzberg by introducing what they called â€Å"The Job Characteristics Model†. This model is formulated on the assumption that if five core job characteristics are present, thre e psychological states critical to motivation are produced, resulting in positive outcomes. † (Griffin, Patterson, & West, 2001) The five core job characteristics consist of skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, and feedback. Hackman and Oldham state that the three psychological states that motivation is dependent upon are experienced meaningfulness of work, responsibility for work outcomes, and knowledge of results. Hackman andOldham then proclaim that to the degree that these psychological states are present, high personal employee work motivation will result. Relevance of Job Enrichment in 2007 The early works of Herzberg and Hackman & Oldham have provided a feasible and effective framework for increasing employee productivity through job enrichment that is just as applicable today as it was when their research was first conducted. Within the past half century there have been numerous researches conducted that provides useful empirical evidence to illus trate the rewards and benefits of job enrichment.We will further discuss each method that an organization can implement in an attempt to improve worker productivity through job implementation. Employee autonomy In a study analyzing job independence as an incentive device to increase employee productivity, Kay Mitusch emphasizes that when employee autonomy is present it can compensate for an organization lacking an extrinsic reward program yet still remain productive. â€Å"This is pivotal for explaining why workers in independent, responsible jobs are willing to invest in their jobs even if there is no reliable, formalized system of rewarding them. (Mitusch, 2000) To provide further evidence of the success of employee autonomy as a method of job enrichment Griffin, Patterson, and West explored the relationship between teams and satisfaction using data from a large research project in the U. K. that investigated management practices and employee attitudes in manufacturing companies. The researchers conducted this study by distributing a questionnaire survey which asked them to rank their preferred working conditions in response to hypothetical situations which were designed to relate to their actual work duties.The study showed that â€Å"job enrichment was positively related to job autonomy but was not significantly related to perceptions of supervisory support. † (Griffin, Patterson, and West, 2001) The researchers also concluded that â€Å"while both autonomy and supervisory support were important positive influences on job satisfaction, the positive association of teamwork on job autonomy was explained by job enrichment that accompanied teamwork and could not be attributed to teamwork itself. (Griffin, Patterson, and West, 2001) This data shows that by simply trusting an employee’s expertise at his or her job and allowing them to operate more independently an employee will develop an increased level of job satisfaction and in turn increase t he productive output of that worker. Skill Variety Another technique to enrich an employee’s work experience is to utilize employees with a wide range of skills so they can apply them to their daily work routine.In his article White Collar Job Enrichment: The Pay Board Experience, Tim McNamar explored the Pay Board’s experience with job enrichment. By replacing a traditional method of processing cases with an approach built around work groups performing interrelated tasks, it increased productivity, provided better motivation, and vastly improved opportunities for individual self-actualization and esteem. † (McNamar, 1973) By changing the previous operational procedures and by allowing employees to engage in more of a shared task structure, the Pay Board experienced increased productivity across the spectrum. The decision to adopt a team concept for case management was not due to any of the traditional reasons given for blue collar job enrichment – high ab senteeism, low morale, and the like. Rather, it was instituted in hopes that it would drastically increase productivity. Nevertheless, the approach turned out to provide a variety of benefits, many of which directly related to the question of job enrichment. † (McNamar, 1973) Also, the inclusion of employees in critical decisions that will effect the organization as a whole, shows improvement in the employee’s orale regarding their importance within the organization and in turn increase their motivation.â€Å"In general, research on participative decision making has found that participation improves employees’ attitudes and increases their organizational commitment and job satisfaction. † (DeLancer Julnes, 2001) Job Feedback Another key aspect of job enrichment can be achieved through the simple process of providing employees with useful feedback concerning the work performance along with clearly established expectations. Job enrichment focuses on creating individual tasks that give people feedback, increase their influence how work is done, require them to use a variety of skills, and give them a whole piece of work. † (Mohrman, Lawler, Mohrman, 1992) Task significance and task identity The installation of job enrichment by way of task significance is the extent to which an employee’s work has a meaningful impact on other jobs in the same workplace.This can be accomplished with the installation of teams within the employee work population. Teamwork typically involves groups of interdependent employees who work cooperatively to achieve group outcomes. Effective team implementation can enhance the motivational properties of work and increase job satisfaction. † (Griffin, Patterson, and West, 2001) A direct correlation between task significance and task identity can be seen by the use of teams and specific job duties. The idea of task identity is the measure to which the job requires completion of a number of whole a nd identifiable pieces of work. Theoretically, the choice between teams and individual job enrichment should be made based upon the technology of the workplace. Teams are more complicated to build and to maintain, but may be necessary if the work is such that no one individual can do a whole part of it and get feedback about it. Teams are often appropriate, for example, in process production facilities such as a chemical plants and oil refineries and in complex service organizations such as banks and airlines.Where the technology allows an individual to do a whole task or offer a whole service, individual designs are preferred because they are simpler to install and give the individual more direct feedback. † (Mohrman, Lawler, Mohrman , 1992) The city of Rockville, MD conducted an experiment where managers and line staff collaborated in the decision making process and the result was astonishing, including cost savings, improvement of morale and the appreciation of the need for productivity within the organization increased. The key ingredients in the program’s success was the consultation with supervisors and employees and their involvement in selecting the projects. † (Hobbs, 1976) Counter argument of job enrichment Despite all of the overwhelming evidence of the success that is attributed in implementing job enrichment programs there is a minority of speculators that job enrichment is not always the best option when an organization’s sole objective is to reduce costs. The possible increase in the satisfaction of the employees is probably not a sufficient reason for managers to support job enrichment programs. A survey by Reif and Schoderbek showed that the main objective of top management in companies introducing job enrichment programs was to reduce costs. Hence, management support for a new job design approach has to be gained through a cost-benefit treatment to job design. † (Globerson, 1977) If a company’s sole aim is to reduce costs then investing in your current work force might not be the preferable avenue.However, if an organization or company is interested in fully utilizing its talented workforce and provide increased worker motivation and in turn increase worker productivity, then adopting a job enrichment program is the most effective option. Conclusion Throughout the last few decades, the implementation of a job enrichment program has successfully shown to increase employee’s job motivation, satisfaction, self-worth, in an attempt to ultimately increase the overall employee productivity within the organization.No matter what the function or sector of an organization whether it be a government agency, non-profit organization, or company operating within the private sector, the implementation of job enrichment into your organization will result in the key areas of employee production and worker motivation. It is obvious through years of conducted research that a happy and motivat ed workforce coupled with an effective and flexible management will ultimately result in a highly productive organization.Works Cited Albers Mohrman, Susan, Lawler III, Edward E. , Mohrman, Allan M. 992. â€Å"Applying Employee Involvement in Schools. † Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis DeLancer Julnes, Patria. 2001. â€Å"Does Participation Increase Perceptions of Usefulness? † Public Performance & Management Review Globerson, Shlomo. 1977. â€Å"The Just Noticeable Difference in Complexity of Jobs. † Management Science Griffin, Mark A. , Patterson, Malcolm G. , and West, Michael A. 2001. â€Å"Job Satisfaction and Teamwork: The Role of Supervisor Support† Journal of Organizational Behavior Hobbs, Daniel D. â€Å"Productivity Through Worker Incentive and Satisfaction. Public Productivity Review King, Albert S. 1974. â€Å"Expectation Effects in Organizational Change. † Administrative Science Quarterly McNamar, Tim. 1973. â€Å"White Col lar Job Enrichment: The Pay Board Experience. † Public Administration Review Mitusch, Kay. 2000. â€Å"Job Independence as an Incentive Device. † Economica Simonds, Rollin H. and Orife, John N. 1975. â€Å"Worker Behavior Versus Enrichment Theory. † Administrative Science Quarterly Staudohar, Paul D. 1975. â€Å"An Experiment in Increasing Productivity of Police Service Employees† Public Administration Review Job Enrichment Based on a major study of High Performance Work Practices (HPWPs) in North America by Appelbaum et al. (2000) found that new forms of job design provided production line employees with the opportunity to contribute increased discretionary effort and to participate in workplace problem-solving. These researchers provided empirical evidence that conscious efforts by employers to increase employee discretion and job autonomy resulted in improved job satisfaction for employees and higher levels of organizational performance (Appelbaum et al. 000). Workforce involvement in decision-making may also be consistent with job enrichment practices (Spence Laschinger et al. 2004). Job enrichment involves providing increased levels of responsibility to lower level employees, including the delegation of work tasks previously undertaken by supervisors, and the provision of increasingly skilled tasks to line employees.The theoretical basis for enrichment efforts is Hackman and Oldham's (1975) ‘ job characteristics' model, which explores how a combination of specific job characteristics such as skill variety and task significance affect the individual's experience of meaningful work and their sense of responsibility for work outcomes. These characteristics have, in turn, been linked to improvements in work motivation, job satisfaction and work quality, reduced absenteeism and lower labour turnover (Ford 1969; Hackman et al. 1975).However, job enrichment has received wide publicity but has not always produced favourable results in the workplace. A great deal of debate exists over the benefits and limitations of job enrichment: it clearly is not for everyone. Ralph Brown (2004) summed it up very nicely: Some people are very resistant to more responsibilities or to opportunities for personal growth. Researchers report that some people they expected to resist seized the opportunity. Enriching jobs is a particularly effective way to develop employees provided the jobs are truly enriched, not just more work for them to do.The disadvantages are that job enrichment may lead to greater work pressure and that employees have to start performing tasks which were not originally required of them. Job design: Job design is the specification of the content of a job, the material and equipment required to do the job, and the relation of the job to other jobs. A well-designed job promotes the achievement of the organization’s strategic business objectives by structuring work so it integrates management requirements for efficiency and employee needs for satisfaction.Thus, effective job design presents a major challenge for the HR manager. And job enrichment is one of the methods of job design. Job enrichment is an attempt to motivate employees by giving them the opportunity to use the range of their abilities. It is an idea that was developed by the American psychologist Frederick Hertzberg in the 1950s. It can be contrasted to job enlargement which simply increa ses the number of tasks without changing the challenge. As such job enrichment has been described as ‘vertical loading' increases the complexity of work to promote interest.Thus, job enrichment builds motivating factors into the job content by: combing tasks, establishing client relationships, creating natural work units, expanding jobs vertically and opening feedback channels. Supporter: Patterson, West and Wail (2004) found that firms providing lower level employees with job enrichment and skill enhancement experienced a significant boost in productivity and profitability. A Sri Lankan study of the impact of introducing self managed teams in a large textile mill reported increased productivity, higher product quality, lower reject rates and higher employee satisfaction.The process of delegating increased decision-making responsibility to workplace teams changed the organization’s structures, decision making processes and job design at workplace level, with increased l evels of empowerment and training being provided to team members (Jayawardana and Fonseka 1996). Nevertheless, the potential for improved performance outcomes to follow the provision of increased employee input into workplace decision-making relies on employee acceptance of the relevance of these practices and on the existence of a climate of involvement.One means of creating this climate is to appoint work group leaders who will model the behaviours valued by the organisation, and who are also able to motivate employees to mirror these behaviours (Richards and Vandenberg 2005). In Sri Lanka's Garment Industry, the manager introduced process controllers into the three production lines from January to April 2002; line employees underwent a series of training programs. The training focused on the company's customers and products, the production process and techniques related to increasing quality and problem-solving.The sessions were conducted by the plant manager, the quality assuran ce manager and the work study manager. Each session was followed by a discussion with production line members. The training programs lasted for two hours after work, with all line employees paid for their participation. At production meetings, held once a week, line employees were given feedback on their performance, in particular in relation to line efficiency and end-line rejects. During the initial training, production line employees were given a briefing on market conditions in the industry and customer requirements.They were also provided with an opportunity to study their line's performance for the previous three months in relation to on-time delivery, total rejects and customer returns. The training provided encouraged employees to take responsibility for performance outcomes such as product reject rates and on-standard efficiency levels. The training manager provided feedback to line employees where the performance of one production line lagged that of the organisation as a whole. The training also addressed skill development, the organisation of work and the use of computer-aided information systems and quality control systems.Each machine was equipped with a computer terminal, which gave details of efficiency standards, losses, stoppages and earnings based on incentive payments. The case explored the impact of a job enrichment initiative to devolve increased responsibility for monitoring workplace productivity, product quality and workforce attendance to line employees. We found that the introduction of process controllers generated substantial improvements in LM Collection's performance over this period.Efficiency levels rose from 41 per cent to 61 per cent and product rejects declined from 10 per cent to 2 per cent, while absenteeism levels declined from almost 10 per cent to 2. 4 per cent by March 2003. On the whole, productivity levels improved, product quality increased and workforce absence and turnover episodes declined over the period of this study. Critiques: In the other hand, there are drawbacks of job enrichment when the HR managers do not think about the matters from employees, and no one seems to mention the costs.In some employees eyes, the job enrichment is merely an enforce change to jobs in order for the organisation to obtain higher productivity from its workers. With the pressure of more responsibilities and tasks, the employees may not have enough time to give the feedback of performance. Either actually the workers do not want enriched their jobs or the job is not that easy to enrich. . Job enrichment is a type of job redesign intended to reverse the effects of tasks that are repetitive requiring little autonomy.Some of these effects are boredom, lack of flexibility, and employee dissatisfaction (Leach & Wall, 2004). The underlying principle is to expand the scope of the job with a greater variety of tasks, vertical in nature, that require self-sufficiency. Since the goal is to give the individual exposure to tasks normally reserved for differently focused or higher positions, merely adding more of the same responsibilities related to an employee's current position are not considered job enrichment.Job enrichment can only be truly successful if planning includes support for all phases of the initiative. Ohio State University Extension began a job enrichment program in 1992 and surveyed the participants five years later. The results, broken down into 3 sub-buckets of data beyond the main grouping of advantages/disadvantages as shown in Table 1, indicate the University had not fully considered the planning and administrative aspects of the program (Fourman and Jones, 1997).While the benefits are seemingly obvious, programs fail not because of a lack of benefits, but rather due to implementation problems. These problems can include a perception of too great a cost, lack of long-term commitment of resources, and potential job classification changes (Cunningham and Eberle, 1990). In order for a job enrichment program to produce positive results, worker needs and organizational needs must be analyzed and acted upon. According to Cunningham and Eberle (1990), before an enrichment program is begun, the following questions should be asked: 1.Do employees need jobs that involve responsibility, variety, feedback, challenge, accountability, significance, and opportunities to learn? 2. What techniques can be implemented without changing the job classification plan? 3. What techniques would require changes in the job classification plan? A job enrichment program can be a very effective intervention in some situations where a Performance Technician is faced with a request for motivational training. Conclusion:In my opinion, job enrichment can bring about improvement in both job performance and job satisfaction. A survey of almost 100 research studies found job enrichment resulted in greater productivity, improved product quality, fewer employee grievances, improved worker att itudes; reduce absenteeism and labour turnover, and lower costs. Therefore, improved quality of working life brought about by job enrichment has not only social benefits but also bottom-line benefits to the organization. Job Enrichment Organizational Behavior Concept: Job Enrichment Jared Stern Introduction The concept of Job Enrichment is a very broad theory within the field of organizational behavior that is applicable within all sectors of organization. Used synonymously with â€Å"job enlargement†, the term job enrichment refers to different methods that are aimed at increasing employee’s job motivation, satisfaction, self-worth, in an attempt to ultimately increase the overall employee productivity within the organization.Research studies conducted on Job Enrichment and its influence on employee productivity date back to the 1950s and 1960s and throughout those years a wide variety of methods have emerged. Most commonly job enrichment is attributed to the process of job redesign in order to reverse the negative effects monotony of employee tasks, which will include boredom, lack of autonomy and dissatisfaction. Other variances of job enrichment include providing worker incentives by involving the employee in the decision making process, the implementation of quality work groups and team building, and job independence as an incentive to increase productivity.Evolution of the concept of Job Enrichment Beginning in the middle of the 20th century up until present day, the theory of job enrichment has offered many compelling concepts to increase employee productivity while simultaneously enriching the employees work experience, all of which remain applicable today. The early works which established Job enrichment among organizational behavior theorists was Frederick Herzberg’s â€Å"Hygiene Theory† and Hackman and Oldham’s â€Å"Job Characteristic Model†.The Hygiene Theory The central figure in developing the theory of job enrichment within the framework of organizational behavior was Frederick Herzberg who’s pivotal â€Å"Hygiene Theory† has contributed a solid basis and foundation for subsequent generations to expand upon. According to Herzberg, for a worker to be happy and therefore productive the environmental factors of his workplace must not cause him discomfort. Herzberg further asserts that although providing employees with a more comfortable environment may in turn make them more productive, this does not necessarily mean they will be motivated to perform their duties.Simonds & Orife, 1975) Herzberg believed that the process of motivating workers is by enhancing their feeling of responsibility and connection to their work. In this case, Herzberg proclaims that it is the work itself that is rewarding. Managers can help the employees connect to their work by giving them more authority over the job, as well as offering direct and individual feedback. The Job Characteristics Model In 1975 Hackman and Oldham advanced the ideas of Herzberg by introducing what they called â€Å"The Job Characteristics Model†. This model is formulated on the assumption that if five core job characteristics are present, thre e psychological states critical to motivation are produced, resulting in positive outcomes. † (Griffin, Patterson, & West, 2001) The five core job characteristics consist of skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, and feedback. Hackman and Oldham state that the three psychological states that motivation is dependent upon are experienced meaningfulness of work, responsibility for work outcomes, and knowledge of results. Hackman andOldham then proclaim that to the degree that these psychological states are present, high personal employee work motivation will result. Relevance of Job Enrichment in 2007 The early works of Herzberg and Hackman & Oldham have provided a feasible and effective framework for increasing employee productivity through job enrichment that is just as applicable today as it was when their research was first conducted. Within the past half century there have been numerous researches conducted that provides useful empirical evidence to illus trate the rewards and benefits of job enrichment.We will further discuss each method that an organization can implement in an attempt to improve worker productivity through job implementation. Employee autonomy In a study analyzing job independence as an incentive device to increase employee productivity, Kay Mitusch emphasizes that when employee autonomy is present it can compensate for an organization lacking an extrinsic reward program yet still remain productive. â€Å"This is pivotal for explaining why workers in independent, responsible jobs are willing to invest in their jobs even if there is no reliable, formalized system of rewarding them. (Mitusch, 2000) To provide further evidence of the success of employee autonomy as a method of job enrichment Griffin, Patterson, and West explored the relationship between teams and satisfaction using data from a large research project in the U. K. that investigated management practices and employee attitudes in manufacturing companies. The researchers conducted this study by distributing a questionnaire survey which asked them to rank their preferred working conditions in response to hypothetical situations which were designed to relate to their actual work duties.The study showed that â€Å"job enrichment was positively related to job autonomy but was not significantly related to perceptions of supervisory support. † (Griffin, Patterson, and West, 2001) The researchers also concluded that â€Å"while both autonomy and supervisory support were important positive influences on job satisfaction, the positive association of teamwork on job autonomy was explained by job enrichment that accompanied teamwork and could not be attributed to teamwork itself. (Griffin, Patterson, and West, 2001) This data shows that by simply trusting an employee’s expertise at his or her job and allowing them to operate more independently an employee will develop an increased level of job satisfaction and in turn increase t he productive output of that worker. Skill Variety Another technique to enrich an employee’s work experience is to utilize employees with a wide range of skills so they can apply them to their daily work routine.In his article White Collar Job Enrichment: The Pay Board Experience, Tim McNamar explored the Pay Board’s experience with job enrichment. By replacing a traditional method of processing cases with an approach built around work groups performing interrelated tasks, it increased productivity, provided better motivation, and vastly improved opportunities for individual self-actualization and esteem. † (McNamar, 1973) By changing the previous operational procedures and by allowing employees to engage in more of a shared task structure, the Pay Board experienced increased productivity across the spectrum. The decision to adopt a team concept for case management was not due to any of the traditional reasons given for blue collar job enrichment – high ab senteeism, low morale, and the like. Rather, it was instituted in hopes that it would drastically increase productivity. Nevertheless, the approach turned out to provide a variety of benefits, many of which directly related to the question of job enrichment. † (McNamar, 1973) Also, the inclusion of employees in critical decisions that will effect the organization as a whole, shows improvement in the employee’s orale regarding their importance within the organization and in turn increase their motivation.â€Å"In general, research on participative decision making has found that participation improves employees’ attitudes and increases their organizational commitment and job satisfaction. † (DeLancer Julnes, 2001) Job Feedback Another key aspect of job enrichment can be achieved through the simple process of providing employees with useful feedback concerning the work performance along with clearly established expectations. Job enrichment focuses on creating individual tasks that give people feedback, increase their influence how work is done, require them to use a variety of skills, and give them a whole piece of work. † (Mohrman, Lawler, Mohrman, 1992) Task significance and task identity The installation of job enrichment by way of task significance is the extent to which an employee’s work has a meaningful impact on other jobs in the same workplace.This can be accomplished with the installation of teams within the employee work population. Teamwork typically involves groups of interdependent employees who work cooperatively to achieve group outcomes. Effective team implementation can enhance the motivational properties of work and increase job satisfaction. † (Griffin, Patterson, and West, 2001) A direct correlation between task significance and task identity can be seen by the use of teams and specific job duties. The idea of task identity is the measure to which the job requires completion of a number of whole a nd identifiable pieces of work. Theoretically, the choice between teams and individual job enrichment should be made based upon the technology of the workplace. Teams are more complicated to build and to maintain, but may be necessary if the work is such that no one individual can do a whole part of it and get feedback about it. Teams are often appropriate, for example, in process production facilities such as a chemical plants and oil refineries and in complex service organizations such as banks and airlines.Where the technology allows an individual to do a whole task or offer a whole service, individual designs are preferred because they are simpler to install and give the individual more direct feedback. † (Mohrman, Lawler, Mohrman , 1992) The city of Rockville, MD conducted an experiment where managers and line staff collaborated in the decision making process and the result was astonishing, including cost savings, improvement of morale and the appreciation of the need for productivity within the organization increased. The key ingredients in the program’s success was the consultation with supervisors and employees and their involvement in selecting the projects. † (Hobbs, 1976) Counter argument of job enrichment Despite all of the overwhelming evidence of the success that is attributed in implementing job enrichment programs there is a minority of speculators that job enrichment is not always the best option when an organization’s sole objective is to reduce costs. The possible increase in the satisfaction of the employees is probably not a sufficient reason for managers to support job enrichment programs. A survey by Reif and Schoderbek showed that the main objective of top management in companies introducing job enrichment programs was to reduce costs. Hence, management support for a new job design approach has to be gained through a cost-benefit treatment to job design. † (Globerson, 1977) If a company’s sole aim is to reduce costs then investing in your current work force might not be the preferable avenue.However, if an organization or company is interested in fully utilizing its talented workforce and provide increased worker motivation and in turn increase worker productivity, then adopting a job enrichment program is the most effective option. Conclusion Throughout the last few decades, the implementation of a job enrichment program has successfully shown to increase employee’s job motivation, satisfaction, self-worth, in an attempt to ultimately increase the overall employee productivity within the organization.No matter what the function or sector of an organization whether it be a government agency, non-profit organization, or company operating within the private sector, the implementation of job enrichment into your organization will result in the key areas of employee production and worker motivation. It is obvious through years of conducted research that a happy and motivat ed workforce coupled with an effective and flexible management will ultimately result in a highly productive organization.Works Cited Albers Mohrman, Susan, Lawler III, Edward E. , Mohrman, Allan M. 992. â€Å"Applying Employee Involvement in Schools. † Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis DeLancer Julnes, Patria. 2001. â€Å"Does Participation Increase Perceptions of Usefulness? † Public Performance & Management Review Globerson, Shlomo. 1977. â€Å"The Just Noticeable Difference in Complexity of Jobs. † Management Science Griffin, Mark A. , Patterson, Malcolm G. , and West, Michael A. 2001. â€Å"Job Satisfaction and Teamwork: The Role of Supervisor Support† Journal of Organizational Behavior Hobbs, Daniel D. â€Å"Productivity Through Worker Incentive and Satisfaction. Public Productivity Review King, Albert S. 1974. â€Å"Expectation Effects in Organizational Change. † Administrative Science Quarterly McNamar, Tim. 1973. â€Å"White Col lar Job Enrichment: The Pay Board Experience. † Public Administration Review Mitusch, Kay. 2000. â€Å"Job Independence as an Incentive Device. † Economica Simonds, Rollin H. and Orife, John N. 1975. â€Å"Worker Behavior Versus Enrichment Theory. † Administrative Science Quarterly Staudohar, Paul D. 1975. â€Å"An Experiment in Increasing Productivity of Police Service Employees† Public Administration Review