Buy custom Design of Work essay
The Differences between Job Rotation and Job Enrichment
According to Attewell, Huey, Moray and Sanderson (1995), job enrichment is a way of redesigning a given job with the aim of reversing the effects of repetitive tasks that require little autonomy. It is a vertical restructuring method that gives employees extra autonomy, authority and control over their jobs. On the other hand, job rotation is a management technique that involves moving employees from one job to another at regular intervals within minimum time frames. Job rotation is done to improve employees’ production rate. The periodic movement of employees to varied jobs relieves them from the monotony that comes as a result of job specialization.
Through job enrichment and job rotation, employers provide their employees with opportunities to perform new tasks that would enable them learn new skills. Routine work makes employees suffer from boredom, lack of flexibility and general dissatisfaction with the work environment. Secondly, job enrichment and rotation improve employee motivation and personal satisfaction. When given a chance to exercise their authority and autonomy at work, employees develop a sense of self-drive that boosts their performance rate. They become more responsible and are obliged to make healthy decisions that can benefit their organization (Docherty, Forslin, Shani, & Kira, 2002).
Job enrichment and rotation also help to reduce the rate of employee turnover. In most cases, employees leave their organizations to seek opportunities in other organizations. This is the case when an employer fails to make the working environment conducive. Through job enrichment, employees become satisfied with their job environment and reluctant to seek opportunities elsewhere. Other advantages of job enrichment and job rotation include; creation of more interesting and challenging jobs, improved decision making, and reduced work load of superiors.
The Relationship between Stress and Personality
There is a significant link between stress and the individual’s personality. Various temperaments ith which individuals are born largely determine their levels of tolerance to stressful situations. The differences in response behavior to stress are attached to their varied cognitive reactions to stressful situations. Basically, the reactions are conditioned by individual’s appraisal of the implications, vitality and the nature of the situation (Cooper & Payne, 1991).
Personality originates from various biological, psychological, social and behavioral factors. Some of the personality features make individuals distinct from others. However, there are other personality factors that are shared among people. The similar factors are called personality traits, and they can make one either more or less vulnerable to stress. In relation to personality, there are two groups of people. There are those who fall in the type A personality while others fall in type B. Individuals who belong to the first type are more vulnerable to stress than those who belong to type B.
Limited time Offer
The difference in the level of exposure to stress among the two groups of individuals is attributed to the variance in the personality traits of the two groups of individuals. The aspects of personality that increase the exposure of group A individuals to stress include their aggressive nature, time consciousness, ultra competitiveness and desire for perfection. Other elements are inability to relax, tendency to multitask and the urge to accomplish their tasks. The personality traits exert pressure on the individuals thus exposing them to stress.
On the other hand, group B individuals are less exposed to stress. The elements of personality that reduce their exposure to stress include lack of motivation to accomplish tasks, less competitive nature, calmness, involvement in social activities, and relaxed state of mind. These traits make group B individuals experience no pressure even in stressful situations. The complexity of one’s personality is shaped by the individual’s family dynamics, genetic factors, personal experiences and social influence. As such, people have different emotional appeals that determine their nature of responsees in relation to coping abilities and appraisal of the situation at hand.
The Recent Job Design
Of late, advancements in technology have led to issues related to how best organizations can be designed to survive in a competitive market. Thus, organizations need to ensure that their jobs are designed in a manner that it is possible for them to adopt the latest technologies to compete favorably in the market. This topic appeals to me most based on the fact that, lately, technologies like telecommuting have been used by organizations to allow flexibility at work. It is a recent technology that allows workers to effectively attend to their work while they are away from the office (Johnson, 2001).
Being that employers have adopted the use of telecommuting to help them ensure efficiency and employees’ satisfaction at work, the topic equips learners to enable them to be more relevant to the job market. In its application, the technology works in a manner that employees do not have to work in organizations’ offices. Telecommuting has helped organizations to solve the problem of office space. Many organizations operate within minimal office space such that they have no room for many workers. In such a situation, the world is approaching a period in which employees will be given a chance to work away from the organization and present their work online. This reduces organizations’ operation cost while boosting efficiency at the same time (Gajendran & Harrison, 2007).
Telecommuting helps in boosting effective communication between employees and their employers. Communication is an important tool that helps in creating good working relations between workers and their employers. Through telecommuting, employees can communicate to their employers by use of email and other electronic communication gadgets. This makes communication to be fast and more effective (Johnson, 2001). When workers are given the opportunity to use these recent organizational designs, they feel motivated and satisfied with their work environments. The designs help organizations to reduce the rate of staff turnover.