Organisational Behaviour and Managing Absenteeism

University Degree Business and Administrative studies

Part 1: Managing Absenteeism

Introduction

Absenteeism is a very expensive problem for businesses. By “absenteeism” it is meant as Cascio’s (2000) explanation: “any failure to report for or remain at work as scheduled, regardless of the reason”. Annual Absence & Labour Turnover Survey 2008 by the CBI and insurer AXA revealed that of the 172 million sick days lost to absence in 2007, more than one in ten (12%) are thought to be non-genuine. These 21 million “sickies” cost the economy £1.6bn. Some employees’ absences cannot be avoided of course, such as in the cases of serious personal or family member illness. These times of missed work can often be recognised as long in duration (defined as more than 1 or 2 days) on review of organisational records. However, research also indicates that an estimated 52% of total employee absences are discretionary in nature. These absences are the result of factors such as stress, personal needs, and entitlement mentality (VanDerWall, 1998).

Companies are addressing the money-drain of absenteeism in various ways. Some are introducing rewards schemes for employees not failing to come into work. General Motors implemented such a system some years ago and were not so satisfied with the results (Sadri, 1995). Whilst policies on the matter are important, one should ask whether cultural, organisational and management issues might be lurking behind high absenteeism rates.

Management Model

When it comes to dealing with absenteeism at an organisational level, the first thing that is likely to be considered is the management approach used globally in the organisation in question. Is the level of absence due to an environment that might be seen as too lax in where a human relations approach is being used to excess? This is certainly not what Elton Mayo hoped for when interpreting the results of the famous Hawthorne experiments which produced the human relations approach. Or is it due to a more classical verily scientific management style where everything is regulated and might be perceived as dictatorial by some employees who are dreaming for more independence in their working environment? Buchanan, D. and Huczynski, A. 2004 (2004) would most likely share this opinion whilst surely Frederik Winslow Taylor would disagree considering that he developed his theories bearing in mind people’s well-being while maximising productivity and quality of work. Although this latest approach is still being used today, particularly in manufacturing or jobs requiring repetitive tasks in administration for instance, it is considered obsolete and precarious in most modern working environment. It is indeed highly unlikely to find such a management approach in a financial services company for instance. The contingency approach is by far the most commonly used today as it adapts itself very well to the dynamic and multi-functional environment most businesses now operate in. As such it emphasises the need for flexibility which in the case of absenteeism is much needed to ensure maximum fairness between all employees and their particular case for presenteeism and their occasional lack of it. Nemiroff and Ford (1975, 1976), Porter, Lawler, and Hackman (1975), and Pierce, Dunham, and Blackburn (1979) have proposed contingency models which seek to make explicit predictions for employees reactions to various combinations of job attributes, individual needs, and social system structure. The unpredictability of the absenteeism matter makes this approach in the context of the papers written by the authors mentioned here rather attractive.

Organisational Structure and Design

In a contingency approach framework whereby situational factors dictate the organisational structure and design to adopt, it is important to identify what these factors are to categorise the current structure and design used within the organisation. The type of organisation and its purpose, power and control, history; skills, abilities, expertise of the employees; preference of top management and culture; size, technology, environment; all these aspects influence the pattern of relationships among positions in the organisation and among its members, defining tasks and responsibilities, work roles and relationships as well as channel of communication at all levels. The structure and design can vary between departments but must remain organised at all times to ensure organisation stability. The fundamental aspect of managing absenteeism relies on trust, which can only be achieved with a strongly established organisation structure and design. As Carolyn Taylor from Mettle Group (2005) rightly declared “The quality of the relationship between line and functional managers lies at the heart of achieving both compliance to rules and an ability to work the principles behind them. If the relationship is good, and trust and respect high, then both sides understand the importance if each other’s role... Line management knows they will always be pressing to drive harder on performance, but understand the functional roles are there to help crate, and strengthen, the boundaries they must not cross.” Having a clear hierarchy also makes it easier in terms of pin-pointing a possible failure in a specific department. The number of employees taking sick days in each department might enable management to spot a possible problematic work and address the issue with the specific manager.
It is agreed that there is no management structure or design to be favoured over another in terms of achieving results. May it be horizontal, matrix or hybrid; complex, horizontal or bureaucratic – they all have can share the same successful policies to combat absenteeism fairly.

Organisational Culture and Values

This is a preview of the whole essay

Organisational Culture and Values

McLean’s definition of organisation culture is very descriptive: “the collection of traditions, values, policies, beliefs, and attitudes that constitute a persuasive context for everything we do and think in an organisation”. The reason for this topic to be addressed in this essay is due to the fact that the organisational culture of a company largely influences employees’ behaviour. It dictates to them what is acceptable and not acceptable, what behaviour and actions are encouraged and discouraged. Management must therefore sway their organisational culture so that faking sickness is considered as intolerable and is recognised to be against the core values of the employees. Ethnographic interviews can be carried out to explore the organisational culture of a company. It identifies what makes the organisation unique, recognising the artefacts and behaviours, values and ideology as well as the more complex assumptions and beliefs. It is a useful tool to identify problems. An understanding of culture, and how to transform it, is a crucial skill to achieve strategic outcomes. It is possible to modify and create strong cultures by providing vision with clear goals and guidelines on how to achieve them. A careful recruitment selection and the introduction of induction and training programmes highlighting the company’s culture are all working towards the aspired of goal. Encouraging, praising and recognising appropriate behaviour while emphasising on individual contributions will provide clarity on the desired culture employees should adopt. People tend to be led by example, it is therefore crucial that managers and executives demonstrate the core values and embrace the corporate culture adopted by the company at all times through all types of communication and interaction with all members of staff. A strong leader will highly influence its company’s culture via personal characteristics, attributes and behaviour (Giberson, 2009).

Leadership – Power and Influence

There is an obvious link between organisational leadership and employees’ behaviour. By definition, leadership is the relationship through which one person influences the behaviour or actions of other people (Mullins, 2007). A transformational leadership for instance is likely to engender subordinates’ satisfaction, motivation and inspiration and will encourage them to be present in their workplace whenever possible. Leader communication tactics are effective management tools in the reduction of discretionary absenteeism. Self-management training and goal setting have both been recognised in studies as feasible interventions. And leader initiated feedback on absenteeism behaviours of followers showed promise in the same vein (Frayne & Latham, 1987; Gaudine & Saks, 2001; Unckless et al., 1998). Good leaders pursue their purpose with passion, practicing solid values, leading with heart, establishing enduring relationships and demonstrating self-discipline. The effective leader reinforces subordinate behaviour that leads to achieving organizational goals, and punishes the subordinate for behaviour that does not achieve such goals.

Whilst t is clear that the leadership style largely influences staffs’ will and want for coming to work, it must not be forgotten that it also needs to be adapted not only to each individual but also to the situation or objective at hand. The situational leadership model is a very effective way to ensure staff satisfaction which is likely to reduce absenteeism. Indeed providing the right level of support or direction at the right time for the right task will make employees feel valued, resulting in a mutual trustful relationship between employer and employee.

All members of an organisation directly managing staff, may they be first-line managers or executives on the company board, should follow a leadership style. Indeed every single one of them has a degree of power and influence over their staff members. For this power and influence to be used ethically, fairly and equally between all employees, rules on staff’s behaviour and expectation should clearly be circulated and discussed by the manager to his direct reports. The handbook as it called in most companies should be the same for each employee. The Human Resources department should be responsible to draw it to guarantee it is following the governing laws, and then approved by the board of directors to ensure it matches the working environment they wish their company to have. This will ensure a moral management where others are treated fairly while complying with both spirit as well as the letter of the law. Of course every manager, or leader, must occasionally use its power to influence others to go in a chosen direction. But provided it is clearly communicated and explained besides complying with the company’s rules, a trustful environment is settled ensuring good communication at all levels, trust, and therefore minimise absenteeism.

Individual Differences and Motivation

Meetings to build trust and to gain an understanding of how employees feel about their jobs and what is important to them should be scheduled with staffs that have shown a lack of motivation by for instance repetitive absenteeism. Such attention alone will foster a good degree of loyalty. It is important to find ways to make employees feel more committed and engender motivation. These include giving more responsibility, adding interesting tasks, asking them for their input and praising them regularly for desirable actions. All such engagement must take place in regular individual and team meetings. But considering that each individual is by definition unique, it is likely that a different type of motivation will be needed by each employee. Managers have therefore a difficult task in identifying what would motivate its employees, and evidently address it. Reminding ourselves of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is important to verify that the various needs groups are addressed in order. Although some individuals might have a reversed order; for instance a person who has been deprived from a loving childhood mat experience the permanent loss of belonging needs. Some companies might choose to assist managers by asking employees to take the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator for example. Such a tool can lead to recognition and respect for differences between people and appreciation for the value such differences bring. For instance a person who is highly confident not to say arrogant in his working skills might not benefit as much from intrinsic motivation if the appreciation is not voiced publicly. But creating an open, two-ways relationship as discussed previously, will largely diminish the difficulty of the employer in identifying staff’s motivation preferences.

Conclusion

Programs and policies that address excess absenteeism, or that identify its presence, are useful and even necessary. However, as long as they focus on the absenteeism itself – by rewarding timeliness, say, or punishing violators – they will never be entirely successful. Punitive measures are unlikely to be successful with employees who persistently fail to show up for work. In any case, such measures create a negative atmosphere which can make an organizational culture seem like a prison, thus even further motivating employees to seek ways of escaping. The only way to remove this problem as a thorn is to identify its source. Many people seek the cause of this problem in the nature of their employees, or the problems they confront getting to, or even dealing with the fact of, work. Addressing the latter category is an effective way to increase productivity and, certainly, reduce absenteeism.

But one should be prepared to find that the core cause of absenteeism problem lies in employees’ poor morale, and that the core source of that is to be found in the organisation’s culture, procedures, policies, and general management style – not in the general personal employees’ shortcomings.

Policies, procedures, and regulations facilitate the work of employees and should be put in place along stringent monitoring for the sake of consistency and fairness. Employees are individuals who with their uniqueness require attention which can be achieved through good communication. Understanding employees’ needs and wants is fundamental. People need and take deep meaning in and pleasure from their work. Providing strong leadership will give members of the organisation a genuine reason to find that important element of self-fulfilment. A good leader will also keep in mind that “life-happens”, and as such a degree of flexibility is necessary for a good working environment with a minimal level of absenteeism.

Part 2: Organisational Behaviour Theory in Everyday Practise

The subject of Organisational Behaviour is foreign to many, despite their familiarity with most of its topics. Indeed most people are aware of the concept of management, of individuality and behaviour, or culture - which are all, to a degree, encompassed in the fascinating subject matter of organisational behaviour. McGraw-Hill provides a good explanation of the topic as the study of the behaviour of people within an organisational setting. It involves the understanding, prediction and control of human behaviour. The common saying that people can “make or break” an organisation is at the very core of every business and is pivotal to organisational behaviour. Theories provided in this topic help better understand human behaviour in organisational context and how to influence it to achieve organisational goals.

Organisational behaviour theories can be used at many levels within any type of organisations. In a line-managing context for example, providing some theories on how to approach specific cases will assist the manager in referring and applying the theory into everyday work practises. For example, the situational leadership graph can hugely help a manager make the right decision on the level of support one his members of staff might require on a specific task. Using the situational leadership table, the manager will be able to identify the precise fit for the situation in question.

Another practical example could be a successful company that has recently been acquired by a very large company for development purposes. The purchased business will need to deal with dramatic organisational change. As changes are likely to lead to resistance, being aware of theories such as the growth curve model of organisational change will help senior managers in addressing the situation. Knowing Kotter and Cohen’s (2002) suggested framework for a successful large-scale change can also tremendously contribute to minimising the problems of organisational change.

The truth is that organisational behaviour is a helping hand to any company and can be so on all organisational fronts. “Management and Organisational Behaviour” by Laurie J. Mullins (2007) should be a bed-side book for any manager, metaphorically speaking of a bed as a desk. Some of the theories written a century ago can still be applied today. This said the very nature of organisational behaviour is related to the environment, and as such organisational behaviour studies must keep taking place. The ultimate test of the value of theory and research in organisational behaviour is when it leads to improved performance levels, which is the ultimate goal for most businesses. Surely if this is the purpose of organisational behaviour, every manager should be aware of it and put into practise some of its theories.

References

Buchanan, D. and Huczynski, A. (2004) Organizational Behaviour: An Introductory Text. 5th Ed. Harlow, Pearson Education Limited.

Cascio, W. (2000). Costing human resources: The financial impact of behaviors in organizations. 4th ed. Cincinnati, OH, South-Western College.

Frayne, C., & Latham, G. (1987). Application of social learning theory to employee self-management of attendance. Journal of Applied Psychology, pp. 387-393.

Gaudine, A. P., & Saks, A. M. (2001. Effects of an absenteeism feedback intervention on employee absence behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, pp. 15-29.

Giberson ,T., Resick C., Dickson , M., Mitchelson , J., Randall, K., Clark, M . (2009) Leadership and Organizational Culture: Linking CEO Characteristics to Cultural Values. Journal of Business & Psychology, Volume 24 Issue 2, pp 123-137.

Kotter, J.P. and Cohen, D.S. (2002) The Heart of Change. Harvard Business School Press.

McLean, A. (1993) Intervening in Cultures. Working paper, University of Bath.

Mullins, J. (2007) Management and Organisational Behaviour. 8th ed. UK, Pearson Education Limited.

Nemiroff, P. M. and Ford, D. L. (1976). Task effectiveness and human fulfillment in organizations: a review and development of a conceptual contingency model. Academy of Management Review. Vol. 1 Issue 4, pp69-82.

Pierce, J. L., Dunham, R. B. and Blackburn, R. S. (1979). Social systems structure, job design, and growth need strength: a test of a congruency model. Academy of Management Journal,Volume 22 issue 2, pp 223-240.

Porter, L. W., Lawler, E. E. Ill and Hackman, J. R. (1975). Behavior in Organizations. New York, McGraw-Hill.

Sadri, G., Lewis, M. (1995) Combatting Absenteeism in the workplace. Management Research News. Volume 18, Issue ½, pp. 14-30.

Taylor, C. (2005) Walking the Talk: building a culture for success, Random House, p290.

Unckless, A. L., Mathieu, J. E., & Kelley, P. (1998) The relative effectiveness of absence interventions: A meta-analysis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, San Diego.

VanDerWall, S. (1998) Survey finds unscheduled absenteeism hitting seven year high. HR News, p. 14.

Vecchio, R. And Keon, T. (2007) Predicting employee satisfaction from congruency among individual need, job design, and system structure. Journal of Organizational Behaviour. , pp 283–292.