Culture and job design

Economics and management

Human Resource Management

Introduction
The article Culture and job design by Miriam Erez analyzes an important aspect of human resource management job design in the context of cultural differences. Job design can be defined as the process of assigning tasks to a job, and it also includes the interdependency of those tasks with other jobs. A well defined job makes working experience interesting and satisfying for the employee, which leads to increased performance and productivity. If a job fails to be motivating and leads to employee dissatisfaction, it has to be redesigned based upon the feedback from the employees. We believe that the influence of culture on job design is relevant, because today more and more companies choose to operate on an international level and we are witnessing the emergence of a global work culture. As globalization becomes more prevalent in the modern world, companies have to deal with increased cultural diversity within the workforce and have to adopt new policies and guidelines for workers. This increased cultural diversity also has produced many benefits as companies gain new insights into different cultures from a management and a marketing perspective. The paper we have examined takes a multi-level approach to understanding the influence of job crafting on the worker, it analyzes the top-down effects of culture on job design and also bottom-up effects of job design on macro-level systems. The author concentrates her attention not only on the traditional job design models, but also talks about new emerging trends in job crafting, the impact of globalization on job design characteristics, development of multi-cultural virtual teams and the relational aspects in the service jobs. All these topics covered in the article are of great importance in the changing working environment and could be the basis for the future research in job crafting.

The structure of the article

In the first half of the article the author examines three different approaches to designing work that emerged in the United States, northern Europe and Japan in the 1970s and 1980s, which tend to favor three different job design models. All three models are directed towards job enrichment and increasing its meaningfulness for a person's self-worth and well-being. The articles proves that these three models lead to the same psychological experience, because they were generated by three different value systems, each of which gives a different definition of job meaningfulness according to their respective cultural values. Then the article analyzes the impact of globalization on two job design characteristics autonomy and feedback, the teamwork interdependences, the positive effect of the relational aspect on service jobs, multi-cultural virtual teams. The job enrichment model developed by Hackman and Oldman is based on the job characteristics (skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, and feedback) which can be combined to form a motivating potential score (MPS) for a job. The MPS can be used to examine how likely a job is to affect an employee's attitudes and behaviors. The model assumes that if the five core job characteristics are present, three psychological states critical to motivation are produced, which lead to positive work outcomes, job satisfaction and performance increase. Hackman and Oldman discovered that a challenging job enhances motivation in these individuals who have a strong need for personal growth, which is a characteristic of the US culture, along with high level of individualism and a low power distance. Job enrichment allows individuals to experience a feeling of self-worth and personal responsibility.

Hackman and Oldhams job characteristics theory proposes that high motivation is related to experiencing three psychological states such as: Experienced Meaningfulness of the Work: The degree to which an individual experiences the job as one which is generally meaningful, valuable, and worthwhile. Experienced Responsibility for Work Outcomes: The degree to which an individual feels personally accountable and responsible for the results of the work he or she does. Knowledge of Results: The degree to which an individual knows and understands, on a continuous basis, how effectively he or she is performing the job.

In turn, each of these critical states are derived from certain characteristics of the job: 1. Skill variety (SV): the degree to which the job requires different skills. 2. Task identity (TI): the degree to which the job involves completing a whole, identifiable piece of work rather than simply a part. 3. Task significance (TS): the extent to which the job has an impact on other people, inside or outside the organization. 4. Autonomy (AU): the extent to which the job allows jobholders to exercise choice and discretion in their work. 5. Feedback from the job (FB): the extent to which the job itself (as opposed to other people) provides jobholders with information on their performance. Motivating Potential Score (MPS) A way to combine the five core job characteristics to give a single index of the overall potential of a job to promote work motivation. MPS = [(SV + TI + TS)/3] x AU x FB Hackman and Oldham also stated that people who have high need for personal growth and

development will respond more positively to a job high in motivating potential than people with low growth need strength. Another interesting model that is related to job design across cultures is the Hofstedes model of cultural dimensions that has been recognized internationally. In his model Hofstede described 5 dimensions that distinguish one culture from another: Individualism (IDV) This dimension refers to the strength of the ties people have to others within the community. A high IDV score indicates a loose connection with people. In countries with a high IDV score there is a lack of interpersonal connection and little sharing of responsibility, beyond family and perhaps a few close friends. A society with a low IDV score would have strong group cohesion, and there would be a large amount of loyalty and respect for members of the group. Power distance (PD) This dimension refers to the degree of inequality that exists and is accepted among people with and without power. A high PD score indicates that society accepts an unequal distribution of power and people understand "their place" in the system. Low PD means that power is shared and well dispersed. It also means that society members view themselves as equals. Uncertainty avoidance (UAI) This dimension concerns the level of acceptance for uncertainty and ambiguity within a society. Cultures with high uncertainty avoidance try to avoid ambiguous situations whenever possible. Low uncertainty avoidance scores indicate that a society enjoys novel events and values differences, there are very few rules and people are encouraged to discover their own truth. Masculinity (MAS) This dimension refers to the degree societies reinforce, or do not reinforce, the traditional masculine work role model of male achievement, control, and power. High masculinity scores are found in countries where men are expected to be tough, to be the provider, to be assertive and to be strong. In the societies characterized by low masculinity the roles are simply blurred, women and men work together equally across many professions, men are allowed to be sensitive and women can work hard for professional success. Long-term orientation (LTO) This dimension refers to how much society values long-standing as opposed to short-term traditions and values. This is the fifth dimension that Hofstede added in the 1990s after finding that Asian countries with a strong link to Confucian philosophy acted differently from western cultures. In countries with a high long-term orientation score, delivering on social obligations and avoiding "loss of face" are considered very important. According to Hofstede, the United States have a high level of individualism and a low level of power distance, with the IDV score equal to 91 and PD score equal to 40, which we can see in the table below.

The model of job design developed in the northern Europe is the socio-technical model of autonomous groups. It reflects distinct cultural values prevalent in those countries, particularly the values of collectivism at the societal level. In the northern Europe autonomous work groups were formed as the preferred model of job design. These groups of employees operated without direct supervision from superiors, taking decisions themselves on the division and allocation of tasks, selection and training of new group leaders, methods of working. The most famous case of their successful use in Europe is a Volvo manufacturing plant in Sweden, which implemented job rotation, on-going training of workers and within-group coordination of employees. In the Netherlands, this form of direct consultation was implemented in the 1970s and 1980s in various sectors such as the ready-to-wear clothing industry, Ned-Car, banking, chemical industry, and mechanical engineering. Thus, we can see that in the Northern Europe cultural values of collectivism shaped a job design model of autonomous groups, as opposed to the individualist job enrichment model of the United States. In recent years a lot of attention has been given to the success of Japanese quality control circles. These circles are small groups, usually composed of seven to ten workers, which are organized at the production levels within most large Japanese factories. A typical quality control circle is a relatively autonomous unit led by a senior worker. Its major tasks are to improve methods of production, develop production skills among its members, improve worker morale and motivation, and stimulate teamwork within work groups. The main reason for the success of the quality control circles in Japan is that the model perfectly accommodates two distinct cultural values of collectivism and power distance. The hierarchical system of the quality control circles found its success in Japan, because it perfectly fits into the Japanese culture characterized by high power distance, which means that the society accepts an unequal distribution of power and people understand "their place" in the system. To sum up, we can see that these three different cultures adapted completely different job design models, which were reinforced by their cultural values and provided a particular way of increasing the persons self-worth and well-being.

In the next section of the article the author talks about the influence of globalization on job design. She examines the question of the effectiveness of two job design characteristics autonomy and feedback in the home and host countries. Work autonomy is considered to be an important motivational factor in individualistic cultures, because it provides an individual with the opportunity to take responsibility for his own actions and gain control in the workplace. Making autonomous work decisions promotes creativity, independence and leads to increased efficiency. Feedback should be an integral part of work, it is an important job characteristic that allows an employee to evaluate his performance and have a control over the work environment. Each employee should receive proper feedback about his work performance. The individualistic cultures are characterized by a more prevalent need for self-control, because it allows a person to correct his behavior independent of others. On the other hands, the collectivistic cultures value group harmony and face saving, and are more willing to accept implicit feedback directed to a team and not to individual employees.

The next part of the paper looks at the job design from a macro-economic perspective, which is known as a bottom-up approach, and answers a question whether job design can shape culture. The author develops the idea that in the modern highly complex organizations the importance of teamwork has significantly increased task interdependences, which leads to value sharing among different cultures. Today we are witnessing the formation of a global work culture shared by multinational organizations that operate in the global environment. Thus, through the bottom-up processes, the national-level cultural values can merge and create a global culture. Another important aspect of the modern working environment is the rapid growth of the service sector, which requires a new model of job design where employees connect and interact with other people. The author argues that including this relational aspect into service jobs improves motivation and performance of employees. The new tool that allows employees in different countries to work together is a multi-cultural virtual teams. Such teams often experience communication barriers, and

Conclusions
The traditional Tayloristic approach to job design doesnt explain why motivation is so important for workers if an individual doesnt get satisfaction from work, he will probably leave the workplace. So the need to experience self-worth and meaningfulness is universal, but different cultures approach this issue in a different way. In light of globalization, it is critical to gain a deeper understanding of how job designs popular in one culture influence the reactions of employees in other cultures. She discusses evidence that differences in cultural values such as individualism-collectivism and power distance are likely to moderate how employees react to job design. She also raises the captivating possibility that job designs are influences on, not only products of, cultures, as job designs can influence the values

emphasized in teams, departments, organizations, and industries. Her commentary paves a promising path toward a new wave of cross-cultural studies on job design When designing jobs in different countries, the national cultural characteristics should be taken into consideration. The concepts of teamwork, team building, and self-directed work teams have penetrated nearly every segment of the business world in recent decades. More and more businesses are introducing or expanding teamwork as part of their production processes, with varying results.
Analyzing this paper we discovered that culture plays an important role in job crafting, mainly because certain job designs are more suitable for certain cultures, according to the specific codes of conduct adapted in different environments. The author argues that individuals try to enhance the meaningfulness of their job in the workplace. Moreover, the tasks that an individual performs should be allowing him to experience self-worth and well-being. Hackman and Oldmans job enrichment design satisfies the motives of self worth and well being of members whose cultural values prize high individualism and low power distance.

While the Japanese quality control circles have been phenomenally successful, a great deal of that success must be attributed to the Japanese cultural values, personnel management practices, and the homogeneity of the Japanese population.

References
http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newLDR_66.htm http://www.argentinepost.com/2008/02/argentina-hofstedes-cultural-dimensions.html http://www.hotelmule.com/management/html/11/n-3111-5.html http://www.managementstudyguide.com/factors-affecting-job-design.htm http://profitduck.com/organisational-behaviour/job-design-in-organisations/ http://www.yourcoach.be/en/employee-motivation-theories/hackman-oldham-job-characteristicsmodel.php http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/emire/NETHERLANDS/AUTONOMOUSWORKGROUPS-NL.htm http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/10785/ http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m4339/is_4_23/ai_95967279/pg_2/ http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp? _nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED206031&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&ac cno=ED206031

Brown, R. (n.d.). Design Jobs that motivate and develop people. Retrieved February 14, 2004, from

http://www.media-associates.co.nz/fjobdesign.html. Cunningham, J. B., & Eberle, T. (1990). A guide to job enrichment and redesign. Retrieved February 10, 2004, from http://faculty.washington.edu/~janegf/jeguide.pdf. Drez, J.(1999). Chapter seven motivation through needs, job design, and satisfaction, slide 20. Retrieved February 14, 2004, from http://www.siu.edu/departments/cola/psych/psyc323/chat07/index.htm. Fourman, L.S. & Jones, J. (1997, October). Job enrichment in extension. Journal of Extension, 35, Number 5. Retrieved from http://www.joe.org/joe/1997october/iw1.html. Kotila, O. (2001). Job enrichment. Retrieved February 8, 2004 from http://academic.emporia.edu/smithwil/001fmg456/eja/kotila456.html. Leach, D. & Wall, T. (n.d.). What is? Job design. Retrieved February 10, 2004 from http://www.shef.ac.uk/~iwp/publications/whatis/job_design.pdf.