Participative Versus Assigned Production Standard Setting in a Repetitive Industrial Task: A Strategy for Improving Worker Productivity

• Autorzy: Das B. , Shikdar A. A.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The participative standard with feedback condition was superior to the assigned difficult (140% of normal) standard with feedback condition in terms of worker productivity. The percentage increase in worker productivity with the participative standard and feedback condition was 46%, whereas the increase in the assigned difficult standard with feedback was 23%, compared to the control group (no standard, no feedback). Worker productivity also improved significantly as a result of assigning a normal (100%) production standard with feedback, compared to the control group, and the increase was 12%. The participative standard with feedback condition emerges as the optimum strategy for improving worker productivity in a repetitive industrial production task.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

participative standard; assigned standard; performance feedback; repetitive industrial task; worker productivity

PL

produktywność pracowników; wydajność pracowników; produkcja przemysłowa

• Wydawca: Taylor & Francis
• Czasopismo: International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics
• Rocznik: 1999
• Tom: Vol. 5, No. 3
• Strony: 417--430
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 31 poz., rys., tab., wykr.

Twórcy

autor

Das B.

• Dalhousie University, Canada

autor

Shikdar A. A.

• Sultan Qaboos University, Oman

Bibliografia

• [1] Ammons, R.B. (1956). Effects of knowledge of performance: A survey and tentative theoretical formulation. Journal of General Psychology, 54, 179-299.
• [2] Awdia, G., Brown, K.G., Kristof-Brown, A., & Locke, E.A. (1996). Relationship of goals and microlevel work processes to performance on amultipath manual task. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(5), 483-497.
• [3] Becker, L.J . (1978). Joint effects of feedback and goal setting on performance: A field study of residential energy conservation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(4), 428-433.
• [4] Das, B. (1982). Effects of production feedback and standards on worker productivity in a repetitive production task. IIE Transactions, 14(1), 27-37.
• [5] Das, B., & Shikdar, A.A. (1989). Assigned and participative production standards and feedback affecting worker productivity in a repetitive manufacturing task. Journal of Human Ergology, 18(1), 3-12.
• [6] Das, B., & Shikdar, A.A. (1990). Applying production standards and feedback to improve worker productivity and satisfaction in a repetitive production task. IIE Transactions, 22(2), 124-132.
• [7] Dossett, D.L., Latham , G.P., & Mitchel, T.R. (1979). Effects of assigned versus participatively set goals on employee behaviour when difficulty is held constant. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64(3), 291-298.
• [8] Earley, P.C., Connally, T., & Ekergren, G. (1989). Goals, strategy development and task performance: Some limits on the efficacy of goal setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 24-33.
• [9] Erez, M. (1977). Feedback: A necessary condition for goal setting-performance relationships. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62(5), 624-627.
• [10] Gilliland, S.W., & Landis, R.S., (1992). Quality and quantity goals in a complex decision task: Strategies and outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(5), 672-681.
• [11] Ivancevich, J.M. (1982). Subordinate reactions to performance appraisal interviews: A test of feedback and goal setting techniques. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67(5), 581-587.
• [12] Ivancevich, J.M., & McMahon, J.T. (1982). The effects of goal setting, external feedback and self-generated feedback on outcome variables: A field experiment. Academy of Management Journal, 25(2), 359-372.
• [13] Kim, J.S., & Hamner, W.C. (1976). Effects of performance feedback and goal setting on productivity and satisfaction in an organizational setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61(1), 48-57.
• [14] Knafer, R., Ackerman, P.L., Murtha, T.C., Dugdale, B„ & Nelson, L. (1994). Goal setting, conditions of practice, and task performance: A resource allocation perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(6), 826-835.
• [15] Latham, G.P., & Kinne, S.C. (1974). Improving performance through training in goal setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59(2), 187-191.
• [16] Latham, G.P., Mitchel, T.R., & Dossett, D.L. (1978). Importance of participative goal setting and anticipated rewards on goal difficulty and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63(2), 163-171.
• [17] Latham, G .P., & Saari, L.M. (1979). The effects of holding goal difficulty constant on assigned and participatively set goals. Academy of Management Journal, 20, 163-168.
• [18] Latham, G.P., & Steele, T.P. (1983). The motivational effects of participation versus assigned goal setting on performance. Academy of Management Journal, 26(3), 406-417.
• [19] Latham, G.P., Winters, D.W., & Locke, E.A. (1994). Cognitive and motivation effects of participation: A mediator study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15, 49-63.
• [20] Latham, G .P., & Yulk, G.A. (1975). A review of research on the application of goal setting in organization. Academy of Management Journal, 18, 824-845.
• [21] Leamon, T.B. (1974). An investigation into the effects of knowledge of results on operator performance. Ergonomics, 15(5), 639-650.
• [22] Locke, E.A. (1968). Toward a theory of task motivation and incentives. Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, 3, 157-189.
• [23] Locke, E.A., & Latham , G .P. (1984). Goal setting: A motivational technique that works! Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
• [24] Locke, E.A., Shaw, K .N., Saari, L.M., & Latham , G.P. (1981). Goal setting and task performance: 1968-1980. Psychological Bulletin, 90(1), 125-152.
• [25] Ludwig, T.D., & Geller, E.S. (1997). Assigned versus participative goal setting and response generalization: Managing injury control among professional pizza deliverers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(2), 253-261.
• [26] Phillips, J.M., & Gully, S.M. (1997). Role of goal orientation, ability, need for achievement and focus of control in the self-efficacy and goal-setting process. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(5), 792-802.
• [27] Ray, A.A. (Ed.). (1982). SAS user guide: Statistics. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.
• [28] Sanders, M.S., & McCormick, E.J. (1993). Human factors in engineering and design (7th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
• [29] Shikdar, A.A. (1991). An investigation on the application of production standards, production feedback and monetary incentive in industry. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Industrial Engineering, Technical University of Nova Scotia, Canada.
• [30] Shikdar, A.A., & Das, B. (1992). The effects of assigning progressively harder production standards with feedback on worker productivity and satisfaction. International Journal of Human Factors in Manufacturing, 2(4), 325-337.
• [31] Wofford, J.C., & Goodwin, V.L. (1990). Effects of feedback on cognitive processing and choice of decision style. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(6), 603-612.