Participative Management

An Analysis of its Effect on Productivity

Dr Michael H. Swearingen

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2017
• eBook ISBN: 9781351359481
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Business General
• Index: Business

This study, first published in 1997, examines the relationship between the style of management used and the level of productivity, measured in terms of the organization's financial stability. Other variables examined include the age of the top level managers, their educational level, the size and age of the organization, and the organization's physical parameters. By determining whether or not productivity is affected by the use of a participative style of management, the author is laying the groundwork for making companies more competitive.

V

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

CONCLUSIONS

Optimal productivity is the goal of every “for-profit” organization. Optimal productivity can be gained through the use of a number of different elements, including technologically advanced machinery, increased computer usage, redesigning work station flow and advanced management methods, to name a few.

One of the “new” management techniques is participative management, where everyone in the organization has some input into the decisions made. The advantages of participative management are obvious, you get input not only from the management side, but also from the workers, the employees who will be performing the work. This group of people know the actual production operation inside and out and are able to give additional insight that may not be readily apparent from casual observation.

Participative management also has problems, especially in its inception. Most managers in established organizations tend to continue running the organization as it had been run, following the axiom “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”. Some of these managers are not easily able to relinquish the control that they have, and participative management requires that everyone share the responsibilities and decisions, although not necessarily on the same level.

Adherents of participative management strongly support the concept being applied to all organizations and at all levels, while its detractors point to the fact that no one is in clear control and making all of the decisions. Both viewpoints have flaws in how they portray their point of view and that of their opponents.

The review of literature examined a number of organizations, both private and public non-profit and “for profit” organizations, and their attempt to integrate some, if not all, of the elements of participative management into their organization’s management structure. The general consensus of the studies was that participative styles of management help increase the efficiency of the organization, although actual “pre” and “post” implementation measurements of efficiency were not performed, therefore the most that can be said is that the use of participative management leads to better working conditions, in the opinion of the employees of the organizations about whom the articles were written.

Response Rate

The low response rate occurred for a number of different reasons that were listed earlier. The most likely reason that the surveys were not completed was that there was no “buy in” for the participants. It did not directly affect them since they were not involved other than filling out a questionnaire, it therefore gave little or no value for the time involved. Future studies of this nature might fare better if concentration were focused on a smaller number of companies, and these companies were visited in person. This would cause a face to be attached to the questionnaire which would allow the respondent to feel as though they were a bigger part of the project rather than just a set of numbers for another “college study”.

Correlational Analyses

As stated previously, the correlations did not reveal any startling facts nor do they lead to any startling conclusions. There were a number of high correlations, however, since most of these correlations were measuring the same property, it would therefore stand to reason that they would correlate fairly well with themselves or similar factors. The correlations between sex and number of employees in the organization (0.18) and sex and the respondent’s level in the organization (0.27) were calculated using a point bi-serial correlation because sex only has two conditions, female or male.

The correlations between number of employees and the number of work sites (0.59), the number of employees and number of employees on the respondent’s level (0.35), the number of employees and number of employees in the top two levels of the company (0.46), the number of employees and annual sales ((0.73), number of employees and financial stability rating (0.61) are obviously going to be high due to the fact that Factor (Question) 17 asks for the total number of employees in the company. Each of the factors that correlate highly with Factor 17 (the number of employees) are concerned in some way with size of the organization or the logical results that occur as an organization increases in size. As an organization grows larger, there is an increase in the number of buildings occupied (Factor 18), more managers (Factors 21 and 22) to run the organization and the larger the organization the greater the annual sales (Factor 27). The financial stability rating (Factor 29) is a direct product of the annual sales (Factor 27) and the organization’s current financial status, as appraised by Dun & Bradstreet (Factor 28), so if the correlation between the number of employees and annual sales is high, then the correlation between the number of employees and the financial stability rating will also be high.

The correlations between the number of work sites and annual sales (0.44), the number of work sites and the financial stability rating (0.39) are high due primarily to the same reasons that the correlations involving the number of employees are high, larger organizations have larger infrastructures.

The correlations involving the organization’s age and financial stability rating (0.41)) are also significant for the same reasons that were stated earlier in the analysis of factors involving the number of employees and the number of work sites, that is, as organizations grow older, they usually get larger, with more employees and more work sites....

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Table of Contents
• List of Tables
• I. Introduction
• II. Review of Related Literature
• III. Design and Methodology
• IV. Results
• V. Conclusions and Recommendations
• Appendices
• Bibliography
• Index