EMPOWERING WORKERS TO MEET GLOBAL COMPETITION J. Mike Rayburn, University of Tennessee-Martin L. Gayle Rayburn, Southeast Missouri State University ABSTRACT Allowing empowered line employees to make routine decisions frees supervisors from responsibilities for less important tasks. While managers recognize the advantages of employees taking an active part in the decision making process, conflicts may develop. For empowerment to be effective, the organization must be committed to the program and be willing to devote both resources and time to its implementation. INTRODUCTION The need to change the way organizations and their employees conduct business is becoming more apparent as the economy moves into the new millennium. Escalating development of the global market, rapid changes in technology, a shifting work force and customer demographics, and an increased emphasis on quality and flexibility of products and services all point to the need for change. Recent forces in the business community, such as globalization, skill staff shortages, and the need for innovation and productivity, have added momentum to the search for ways to survive. Today, a traditional bureaucratic management style is no longer effective. Sweeping changes are needed throughout most organizations to better meet competition. Empowerment of workers is one of the management approaches used today by companies in response to the need for change. However, empowerment is based on a set of assumptions that are in contrast to those normally made by managers. Empowerment threatens to reduce the manager's control over employees in three directions: downward, inward, and outward. Downward loss of control can be seen by the delegation of decision making to front-line employees. Many managers, most of which have more training than line employees, believe that delegating decision making to a "less qualified-person" is not logical. They believe they are the best qualified to make these decisions and they are the only ones that should make them (Foegen, 1998). CHARACTERISTICS OF EMPOWERED EMPLOYEES Empowerment, a vehicle of participative management, is very difficult to manage and implement properly. Often times workers do not understand the process, and this is why it fails. For empowerment to work successfully, employees must be provided the information needed to maximize their own potential contribution; the training and development experiences necessary to maximize their own added value; and the opportunity to influence the basic processes of the organization in which they operate and

perform. Communication must be present for empowerment to be effective. However, many other factors must work in unison for the synergy of empowerment to be fully enjoyed. Empowerment Defined Just what is employee empowerment and why are many companies considering its use? Ettorre (1997) defines empowerment as employees having autonomous decision making capabilities and acting as partners in the business, all with an eye on the bottom line. Companies use different terms, but all terms have basically the same intent of employee participation and involvement. Empowered employees make decisions traditionally reserved for management. Empowerment is not just delegating decision making authority; it is also setting goals and allowing employees to participate (Riggs, 1995, p. 7). This concept began in the late 1970's and early 1980's with experiments using Quality Circles, Quality of Worklife, and Total Quality Management programs (Juravich, 1996). Empowerment can be defined in either a relational or a motivational sense. In the relational sense, empowerment is "the granting of power, the delegation of authority". Defined motivationally, any practice that enhances a belief in self-efficacy increases a sense of power. An effective way to bring about an increase in self-efficacy is through active attainment, the authentic mastery of the tasks related to a job (Burpitt, 1997, pp. 415-417). Worker empowerment is a complicated issue because managers differ as to what the term empowerment really means. Some managers view the definition as the voluntary transfer of ownership of a task or situation to an individual having the ability and willingness appropriate to that situation. However, the practice of empowerment in that context is rare. Other managers believe that empowerment should be viewed as a process, affected by different variables such as economic factors, government regulations, and company policies. These variables could at times enlarge or shrink the authority of organizational members to make decisions. Reasons for Empowerment Some employers believe that the empowerment issue has become increasingly more important because of the younger generation in the workforce that seems to be driven by different goals that their parents. These employers believe that the workers of the newer generation X seeks a more participative than directive leadership style. Generation X'ers are not very accepting of authority. They are very prone to resisting bureaucracy, which leads to decreased productivity and lack of service. They expect a leadership style that is participative, not militaristic. Early in the twentieth century, with the extension of scientific management techniques and the assembly line as dominant models of administration and production, industrial managers attempted to assert greater control over the work process. Their initiatives provoked protest from workers who resisted managerial encroachment on their traditional

practices of setting the pace of work and regulating productivity. More recently, operating under the rubric of employee involvement, workers and managers have developed new participatory schemes aimed at boosting productivity, improving competitiveness, and decentralizing decision making authority. While the goals and expectations surrounding worker participation and workplace democracy have changed, these concepts have continued to generate interest among both historians and contemporary observers seeking alternatives to a centralized, bureaucratic style of management. Education is Basis of Empowerment A growing feeling among industry leaders emphasizes education as the basis of empowerment. Empowering workers is a value which needs to be affirmed as more people seek to be included in our future economy. Most people see empowerment as a means of using their creative energies in the new environment of American business (Jasinowski, 1997, p. 2). Empowered workers are believed to have ownership of their work process and a commitment to its continuous development. This suggests that empowerment can enable employers to improve the quality of employee performance by allowing them to make decisions about their work in the form of new ideas for production or ways to improve current work. Teamwork is believed to improve the effectiveness of employee problem solving and is a way to make workers feel more confident in their worth as individuals and employees. The process of empowering employees involves the establishment of a supportive communication climate. Supervisory personnel have the opportunity to set up and maintain an atmosphere of open communication through both their words and deeds. Something as simple as a sincere word of encouragement or praise from a supervisor has been shown to foster and encourage subordinates' reciprocity of an open and honest dialogue with the supervisor and aid the employee in feeling empowered (Valerius, 1998, pp. 38-40). Empowerment and Lean Production Managers of all size companies face critical questions about how to operate profitably in a lean, mean, competitive environment. In today's environment of keen competition, more companies are adopting lean production, which is a strategy that faces competition head-on, rather than avoiding it. Operating on the assumption that sustained product advantage is unlikely, lean producers compete differently from mass producers. Mass producers create traditional organizations which separate accounting, manufacturing, marketing, and other activities by functions. Lean competitors develop overlapping systems for cost, quality, design, and production that create intense pressure on all elements of cost. Mass producers such as GM, Ford, Chrysler, and AMC compete with lean producers, such as Toyota, Nissan, and Honda (Cooper, 1996, p. 28). The ability of lean enterprises to make products economically at lower volumes than mass producers allows them to compete for new market niches. For example, firms such as Mercedes and BMW now confront the Lexus and Infiniti classes of automobiles. Lean producers, like

Nissan, have also tried to reduce the number of products they offer because the costs associated with launching too many new models makes it difficult to achieve acceptable profit levels. Although brand names may provide protection for a while, they will not provide a sustainable competitive advantage over the long run. Is there a relationship between empowered workers and lean production? Combining lean production and worker empowerment is more than a question of how to produce goods more efficiently. Even the most ardent supporters of lean production are not suggesting that empowerment fully reintegrates workers into the complex process of product design or coordinating the production process. Certainly this new system of work will not return workers to the level of worker empowerment enjoyed by skilled craft workers in the nineteenth century. Instead, empowered workers have the authority to make decisions which directly affect how they work. They participate in day-today problem solving and have some influence over how they should perform their work. Through this process, they are able to enhance the quality of their working life. Thus, an empowered worker has some authority over such day-to-day decisions as how and when work should be performed rather than decisions over corporate policy, choice of technology, or product design. In a study conducted by the Work in America Institute, Allnoch (1997) identified what is called a gap between the rhetoric of empowerment used by many firms and its actual status. Many companies use their human resource practices strategically to close this gap. Allnoch believes that in order for a company to fully use empowered employees, three conditions must already exist within the firm. First, employees must have participation in problem solving and decision making about their own job. This can be accomplished by allowing the employee to have some input regarding the strategies and direction of the firm. Second, the organization and employees must continue to increase their skill levels and work together to ensure quality performance and growth of the firm. Third, employees must be rewarded with either financial or nonmonetary awards for their contribution to the organization's success. Flexibility in the Work Environment It is hard to conceptualize workers being empowered in a way which enhances the quality of working life unless they have some ability to change things they do not like about their jobs. Thus, an overall indicator is an employee's flexibility in the work environment. Work flexibility is defined as being able to do things other than the work assigned and the freedom to communicate with other workers. This enhances employees' ability to make decisions which may improve the quality of their working lives. Thus, empowered workers have the ability to: (1) take time off from work, (2) influence when the work is done by varying the rhythm of work over the course of the day, (3) modify their jobs, and (4) leave their workstations. The flexibility that workers have to do things other than the specific production tasks they were assigned during the day indicates the degree of empowerment they possess.

Whether they have to work as fast as they can just to keep up with the work flow and the potential for them to interact with other workers are important factors. Each of these are indicators of the degree to which the workforce has the potential for independent actions and can focus on matters other than the immediate tasks assigned. Caudron (1995, p. 34) provides the following characteristics of an organization's environment that supports empowered employees: 1. The workplace has established self-directed teams. 2. Superiors freely share information about the company's directions and goals with the entire employee base. 3. Employees receive training needed to achieve goals, whether specific work skills or educational issues, such as time management or leadership. 4. Employees continually develop new work skills. 5. Managers understand and respect the challenges of an empowering workplace by performing more as coaches instead of bosses. They empower gradually and systematically as team members are ready and do not expect or push for immediate results. 6. Employees are in control of the resources needed to meet their goals. 7. The company provides measurements to ensure idea effectiveness of the teams. 8. Team members are treated to continual positive feedback and reinforcement. Management should believe that their workforce is capable to deal with the increased flexibility and can make decisions on their own. If managers think their workforce is incompetent to perform at a higher level, empowerment may not occur. Managers must have confidence in employees to proceed with an empowerment program. THE POSITIVE ASPECTS OF EMPOWERING WORKERS Generally, the increases in autonomy from empowering workers results in increased motivation, job satisfaction, and enhanced job performance. Not only do employees have power to make decisions, they also have useful knowledge and internal motivation to make certain that the company goals are being achieved. Customer-Related Many employers do not realize that in order to provide a superior customer service they must have an empowered workforce. Companies that empower their workers believe the increased attention to their employees and customers is justified. This results because employees best understand the customer's needs, employees will have increased job satisfaction, and there will be improvements in profits. Empowered employees have autonomous decision making capabilities and act as partners in ensuring the firm earns profits. True empowerment means employees can bend the rules to take care of the customer. Effective service management requires the active management of both the empowerment process and the complete service delivery system.

Management's responsibility is to coordinate all the elements, human and otherwise, that must be woven together to deliver the quality of service that customers value. Motivates Employees Empowering workers increases bottom-up decision making, reduces checks and controls, and transforms managers into mentors. Implementing teams to improve the quality of work life as well as customer satisfaction is often the motivating factors for moving to an empowered work team type of organization. Moreover, empowerment, allied with selfdiscipline, eliminates many of the financial and time costs inherent in the separation of decision making and execution and maximizes the potential contribution from all workers. Empowering service employees also brings new challenges, such as setting boundaries for service recovery, insuring organizational learning, and integrating empowerment with other change initiatives. Positive Impact on Profits Not only can empowerment have positive returns for employees and customers, it significantly impacts an organization's bottom line. Empowered employees have autonomous decision making capabilities and act as partners in ensuring the firm earns profits. Employee empowerment can radically change operations and boost corporate performance and profits. New products, creative ways, and innovation often result because employees are stimulated to play an active role in the organization. THE NEGATIVE ASPECTS OF EMPOWERING WORKERS While it may seem that the benefits of empowerment are limitless, this is not the case. Empowerment is often not performed correctly and then fails miserably. As a result, managers blame the concept and do not recognize the true cause of their errors. Empowerment is not for every organization and will not work unless the implementers understand exactly what their objectives are and how to go about attaining them. Employees, accustomed to grand announcements by management, followed by little or no action, are reluctant to get their hopes or expectations up, fully expecting yet another disappointment. This is often the case when empowerment is viewed as this year's agenda. Leaders attend a conference or workshop and come back with intentions to fully implement this year's panacea. Based on past experience, employees often believe that these efforts are usually more trouble than they are worth so employees opt to wait it out to see how dedicated management is to ensuring the program's success. However, these roadblocks can be managed by anticipating them and developing strategies for overcoming them. Costly Endeavor Empowerment can be costly if managers and employees do not enjoy the advantage of having centralized information readily available. However, providing this information can be expensive. Local employees are only familiar with the conditions and projects

conducted at their own divisions; they are not usually aware of the experiences of other divisions. Therefore, they may attempt projects which have already failed at other facilities. If they had access to central information about other division's previous experiences, they rationally would not make these mistakes. This is why it is imperative for central management to encourage cominunication within the organization. Effective communication minimizes transferal costs. However, such costs cannot be eliminated and remain a hindrance to empowerment. Time Consuming Implementing empowerment is not an overnight process but rather a "way of life", which can take time to implement. There are also coordination costs to the firm. Two employees could be working on the same problem at the same time and not even realize it. Since control is in the hands of the employee, management may not be aware that such an event is occurring. This could lead to dual costs for both projects, when the problem could have been solved for half the cost. Also, two employees might require the same information. If they are unaware that the other also needs it, they could accumulate double costs for acquiring the same information to the firm. Shift Unwanted Responsibility to Employees In many organizations, employees have viewed management's attempts to empower them and include them in the decision making process with distrust. They believe that management is using empowering as a strategy to get something for nothing. They see it as a ploy to get lower level employees to do management's work -- the employee thinks that it is not my job. Employees often view empowering as a way of shifting the burden downward, and they are reluctant to accept that added responsibility. This scenario typically plays out in organizations where distrust has been wide spread. Previously management has made insufficient efforts to communicate its intentions and the envisioned benefits for the empowered employees. Certainly, empowering employees is a collaborative effort. Both the leader and the employee must see value in the empowering process or it will fail. Difficulty to Implement in Large Corporations Koch and Godden (1997) argue that empowerment is a good idea but unworkable for large corporations. They believe empowerment is an inefficient way to run a large corporation; instead, the optimal way for large companies to survive is to have strong leadership and a singular direction. They argue that large corporations benefit from market power and economies of scale. Instead, many researchers argue that empowerment should only be tried in small companies where the risks of failure are less. According to Argyris (1998), it is unrealistic to think that management would allow thousands of employees to have decision making authority without some limits.

McClenahen (1995) also agrees that empowerment should not be used in large decentralized companies where performance pressure is substantial and people work at a distance from senior management. Particularly at risk are large, decentralized businesses. To focus on the bottom-line, employees need the information concerning all aspects of the organization--the same information senior management routinely receives. With this in mind, one may wonder if management has a clear idea of what real empowerment is. They have given the employees the ability to solve problems and make decisions but routinely leave out the most important part of the equation, that of allowing employees to take actions based on decisions. Therefore, management must learn how to empower and how to make true empowerment a part of their skill and thinking. CHARACTERISTICS FOR SUCCESSFUL EMPOWERMENT Thus, achieving an empowered organization requires the complementary efforts of two major components: an organizational support system and individual and team empowerment. An organizational support system consists of the practices, policies, and procedures that are facilitated by leadership and management to ensure the effective implementation of empowerment. Individual and team empowerment refers to empowered employees. That is, employees who are self-managed, highly competent, and continuously learning. Employee empowerment relies upon effective coaching as managers help employees accept more responsibility. It requires more questions being asked and listening well to the workforce. Managers should first seek to understand issues and perspectives of clients and colleagues before moving on to problem solving. To be successful, employee empowerment requires a give-and-take relationship between management and labor. Managers give employees the authority to make decisions, and employees take greater responsibility in their jobs. Employee empowerment must be encouraged. Its emphasis should be to give the employees the ability and responsibility to identify problems and apply quality customer service effectively in the work environment. Front-line employees must be given the authority to respond to the issues and needs of individual customers in a courteous and timely manner. The process of empowering employees is established through support and communication. Communication is also the key to opening the opportunities that foster relationships needed between the customers and the organization. The goals of the organization should help direct how an organization moves toward empowerment. Companies must begin with commitment, which is not simply about human relations but rather about generating human energy and activating the human mind. Empowerment involves a high form of leadership but too many top managers think that simply announcing their desire for an empowered work force will make it happen. They do not understand that they, too, must undergo change--both in their own ideas and those of their organizations.

Two-Way Commitment Commitment comes in two forms--extemal and internal. External commitment is what an organization receives when workers have little control over their destinies. When management single-handedly defines work conditions, employees will be externally committed because all that is left for them to do is what is expected of them. Tasks are defined by others; behavior required to perform tasks is defined by others; performance goals are defined by management; and the importance of the goal is defined by others (Argyris, 1998). If management wants employees to take more responsibility for their own destiny, it must encourage internal commitment, which comes from within, which indicates individuals are committed to their organization. Internal commitment is what an organization receives when workers participate in the overall efforts of the companies. The workers want to participate in this effort for their own reasons and motivations. If a firm wants to empower their employees, they must first get internal commitment from them. Internal commitment is participatory and closely aligned with empowerment (Argyris, 1998). Everyone must participate in order for empowerment to exist. Individuals define tasks; individuals define the behavior required to perform tasks; management and individuals jointly define performance goals that are challenging for the individual; and individuals define the importance of the goal. Argyris (1998) argues that employees usually resent executives emphasizing internal commitment while continuing to demand external commitment. Information Sharing To accomplish a change to an empowered environment, the first critical key is information sharing. An entrenched organizational bureaucracy will block change. Even if both managers and employees think empowerment is a valid idea, it will not occur unless management is willing to first share all critical information about the organization with its employees. People need information if they are to understand the desired direction. A powerful benefit of information sharing is trust. Employee empowerment programs are not the cure for all organizational problems but they can be a potent organizational performance enhancer. Empowerment allows the employee to take a more active role in the success of the company. Empowerment alone is not enough. In order for an empowerment program to be successful, it has to have the full support of everyone in the company. Management resistance to efforts to change the hierarchical, chain-of-command managerial approach is a key factor in the success or failure of empowerment programs. The company needs to ensure that the systems are in place to completely support the empowerment (Houston & Talbott, 1996).

CONCLUSIONS How, then, do we make empowerment -- which will certainly be a reality in the near future -- work? The answer may be in training and teamwork, both of which, if applied correctly, should insure success in most organizations. Managers can adapt their leadership and decision making styles to the situation, the time, and people involved. If all employees involved have had input, it is not a violation of empowerment theory for a team leader to make the final decision. Organizations can create an empowered environment if they give employees information, resources, and training, and a follow-up with measurements and reinforcement. However, empowering employees is a continual process; it is a race without a finish line. Companies that take the first step by creating an environment conducive to empowerment will likely be the industry's leaders. Empowerment is a very complex undertaking even for the most experienced firm and the program should not be adopted without much planning. The impact of empowerment is definite as it can greatly enhance the ability of the firm to compete in today's increasingly competitive world. However, these benefits are not enjoyed without a cost to the firm. Cost-benefit analysis helps managers determine the optimum level of empowerment. Even though empowerment is not a solution to all an organization's problems, it can lead to motivating employees to increase productivity and efficiency. However, managers must have confidence that the program will be successfully implemented. REFERENCES Allnoch, Allen. (1997). Closing the Participation Gap. HE Solutions, 29, pp. 6-8. Argyris, Chris. (1998). Empowerment: The Emperor's New Clothes. Harvard Business Review, 76, pp. 98-106. Burpitt, William. (1997). Leadership and Innovation Among Teams: The Impact of Empowerment, (August) Sage Publications, Inc., pp. 414-423. Caudron, S. (1995). Create an Empowering Environment. Personnel Journal, 74, p. 28. Cooper, Robin. (1996). Lean Enterprises and the Confrontation Strategy. The Academy of Management Executive, (August), 10, 3, p. 28. Ettorre, Barbara. (1997). The Empowerment Gap: Hype vs. Reality. BRFocus, 62, pp. 46. Foegen, Joseph. (1998). Are Managers Losing Control? Business Horizons, 41, pp. 2-4. Houston, Margaret & Talbott, John. (1996). Worker Empowerment Works--Sometimes. CMA-The Management Accounting Magazine, 70, pp. 16-19.

Jasinowski, Jerry. (1997). Growth: The Imperative of Diversity in the 21st Century-Vital Speeches of the Day. (Nov.). Juravich, Tom. (1996). Empirical Research on Employee Involvement: A Critical Review for Labor. Labor Studies Journal, 21, pp. 51-63. Koch, Richard & Godden, Ian. (1997). Why Empowerment is Unworkable. Across the Board. 34, p. 11. McClenahen, John. (1995). Empowerment's Downside. Human Resources, 48, pp. 57-58. Riggs, Joy. (1995). Empowering Workers by Setting Goals. Nations Business, (January), pp. 6-8. Valerius, Laura. (1998). Supervisor-Subordinate Relationship: National Recreation and Park Association. (January), pp. 38-45.