empolyee empowerment

8/7/2019 Empolyee Empowerment

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/empolyee-empowerment 1/59

Employee Empowerment:

An Apprenticeship ModelJohn Fox

Barney School of Business University of Hartford

June 22, 1998

© 1998 by John Fox. All rights reserved.

Abstract

This thesis examines the topic of employee empowerment and seeks to provide a model for its

implementation which addresses needs identified in the literature but insufficiently addressed previously. Empowerment is defined as a process whereby: a culture of empowerment is

developed, information is shared, competency is developed, and resources and support are

provided. Each of the components of empowerment—culture, information sharing, competencydevelopment, resource provision, and support—is examined in detail as addressed in the

literature. The benefits of employee empowerment are noted, and objections to it are addressed.

Theoretical foundations of employee empowerment are examined in an extensive literaturereview.

A model for understanding and implementing employee empowerment is provided based

upon the precepts of apprenticeship. The apprenticeship model suggests that employees beviewed first as apprentices while their skills and knowledge within a given task set are

developing, then as journeypersons through continued development, and finally as masters of

their craft. An assessment of organizational empowerment is provided and training responses

based upon this assessment are suggested.

þÿ

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/

http://barney.hartford.edu/

http://barney.hartford.edu/

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/



Acknowledgements

Dr. Sandra Morgan. Every time I talked to her it was like moving to a higher plane of

intellectual existence. Sandra is down-to-earth person with deep empathy, an infectiousenthusiasm, and an enviable intellect. Someday I hope to be like my friend and teacher, Sandra

Morgan.Dr. Mel Donoghue, who taught several of my core courses. Mel's comfort in the classroom

and emphasis on creativity are inspirational. Her friendship is one I cherish.

My colleagues in the Office of Residential Life at the University of Hartford, without who's

support over the past five years I could not have completed my course of study. I especially

appreciate their tolerance of my absence while writing this thesis.Jean Long—without her advice and counsel I may never have completed this work.

And most especially, my wife, Kathleen Fox. By agreeing to live far from home and in

student residence halls for the past seven years, K has been my biggest supporter in my effort toattain a degree. It is she who introduced me to the concept of empowerment and who was my

first teacher on the subject. It is she who has tolerated my stress response during the completion

of this thesis. It is for her and our future life together that I have made the effort.

Dedication

To

Kathleen G. Fox

You were the first to teach me about empowerment.

You have provided loving support throughout my education.You are my best friend and my life-mate.

It is for all these reasons, and more, that

To you I dedicate this work.

Table of Contents

Abstract

Acknowledgements

Dedication

Introduction

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#abstract

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#acknowledgements

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#dedication

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#introduction

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#abstract

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#acknowledgements

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#dedication

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#introduction



Literature Review

Definition of Empowerment

Apprenticeship Empowerment Defined

Benefits of Empowerment

Objections Overcome

A Culture of Empowerment

Management Role

Information Sharing

The Value of Vision

Developing Competency

Importance of Resources

Sufficient Support

Theoretical Foundations

Implementation Timeframe

Situational Implementation

Assessment

The Apprenticeship Model

Apprentice level

Journeyperson level

Master level

Support, Culture, and Information

Value of Competency Development

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#literature%20review

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#definition%20of%20empowerment

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#apprenticeship%20empowerment%20defined

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#benefits%20of%20empowerment

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#objections%20overcome

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#a%20culture%20of%20empowerment

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#management%20role

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#information%20sharing

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#the%20value%20of%20vision

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#developing%20competency

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#importance%20of%20resources

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#sufficient%20support

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#theoretical%20foundations

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#implementation%20timeframe

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#situational%20implementation

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#assessment

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#the%20apprenticeship%20model

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#apprentice%20level

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#journeyperson%20level

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#master%20level

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#support,%20culture,%20and%20information

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#value%20of%20competency%20development

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#literature%20review

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#definition%20of%20empowerment

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#apprenticeship%20empowerment%20defined

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#benefits%20of%20empowerment

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#objections%20overcome

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#a%20culture%20of%20empowerment

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#management%20role

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#information%20sharing

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#the%20value%20of%20vision

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#developing%20competency

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#importance%20of%20resources

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#sufficient%20support

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#theoretical%20foundations

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#implementation%20timeframe

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#situational%20implementation

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#assessment

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#the%20apprenticeship%20model

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#apprentice%20level

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#journeyperson%20level

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#master%20level

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#support,%20culture,%20and%20information

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#value%20of%20competency%20development



Assessment Questions and Associated Responses

Assessment Questions

Training Responses

Bibliography of Literature Reviewed

Annotated Bibliography

Appendix

A. A Retail Example of the Apprenticeship Model

B. Other Models of Apprenticeship

Introduction

Employee empowerment is one of those terms that everyone thinks they understand, but few

really do. Ask a dozen different people and you'll get a dozen different answers to the question,"What is employee empowerment?". In fact, research a dozen organizational theorists and you'll

get as many answers to the same question. This paper seeks to answer that question in a way that

it can be understood by a greater number of people. Some writers indicate that empowerment

consists of sharing power and authority. Others say that empowerment occurs when theorganization's processes are set-up to allow for it. If you keep in mind the secondary dictionary

definition of "to give faculties or abilities to: enable" (Grove, 1971, p.744), with all that this

word implies, then you will be on the right track for the purposes of this paper.This paper also seeks to answer the question above in such a way that people who work

within organizations can apply the information to enhance employee empowerment. "Why

would we want to enhance employee empowerment?" you may be asking. That detailed answer

will be provided in the in the literature review section under the heading "benefits of employeeempowerment". However, it has been shown that employee empowerment results in increased

employee satisfaction, increased productivity, and increased customer satisfaction.

"Aren't there some strong objections to the implementation of an empowerment programwhich must be overcome if we are to receive these benefits?" The short answer is yes.

Empowerment, if it is to be implemented effectively, calls for a culture change for the typical

organization. Leaders must learn to be visionaries who can provide an idea to which employeeswill want to dedicate themselves. Supervisors must change their ways of supervising and learn

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#assessment%20questions%20and%20associated%20responses

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#assessment%20questions

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#training%20responses

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#bibliography%20of%20literature%20reviewed

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#annotated%20bibliography

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#appendix

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#a.%20a%20retail%20example


http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#b.%20other%20models%20of%20apprenticeship


http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#assessment%20questions%20and%20associated%20responses

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#assessment%20questions

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#training%20responses

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#bibliography%20of%20literature%20reviewed

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#annotated%20bibliography

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#appendix





to be coaches and mentors. All members of the organization must dedicate themselves to sharing

information and to training. Each of these issues will be addressed in turn.

Since this is an academic paper, I would be remiss if I did not include a section on thetheoretical foundations upon which the concepts of employee empowerment are built. While

there are few theorists who have delved very deeply into what makes up empowerment, what

they have mined is rich. There are more researchers who have attempted to provide a framework for what they have observed; their ideas which have merit will be addressed.

Implementation of empowerment programs seems to be the biggest challenge organizations

face. The popular press often writes about "failed" empowerment efforts. What has becomeevident to me is that there are some speed bumps on the road to empowerment; often these so

called failures are only rough patches which will be overcome. However, it is also evident that

the implementation often takes years, especially if the organization has a bureaucratic culture. It

also seems that empowerment implementation efforts are often haphazard. By providing aneasily understood definition of empowerment, some information about what must take place, an

assessment of how empowering your workplace is, and a model for implementation based upon

what is commonly understood as an apprenticeship system, I hope to address unmet needs with

this paper.

Literature Review

Definition of Empowerment

The common dictionary definition of empowerment, "to give official authority to: delegate

legal power to: commission, authorize" (Grove, 1971, p. 744) is the one most understood by

most people. As an example, Gandz (1990) writes, "Empowerment means that managementvests decision-making or approval authority in employees where, traditionally, such authority

was a managerial prerogative." (p. 75) However, this is not the definition of what is usually

called employee empowerment. One author notes empowerment is, "easy to define in its

absence—alienation, powerless, helplessness—but difficult to define positively because it 'takeson a different form in different people and contexts'" (Zimmerman, 1990, p.169). When most

people refer to employee empowerment they mean a great deal more than delegation. It is for

this reason that many authors provide their own definitions.Some of these are vague, and meant to be so. Block (1987) describes empowerment as "a

state of mind as well as a result of position, policies, and practices." (p. 65) One has to read an

entire chapter to understand what he means when he says,"To feel empowered means several things. We feel our survival is in our own hands. . . .We

have an underlying purpose. . . .We commit ourselves to achieving that purpose, now." (Block,

1987, p. 65). Other authors (Blanchard, Carlos & Randolph, 1996; Blanchard & Bowles, 1998)

use their entire book to define empowerment. Still others provide an excellent perspective of effective empowerment without mentioning the word even once (Freedman, 1998).

Other author provided definitions are simplistic on the surface, but have far greater

implications than a first reading would suggest. For example, Caudron (1995) articulates



.This manner of treating the notion of empowerment from a management practice perspective is

so common that often employee participation is simply equated with empowerment." (p. 471).

However, they also note, " We believe that this approach has serious flaws." (p. 471) Instead,the authors offer this definition, "empowerment is. . . a process of enhancing feelings of self-

efficacy among organizational members through the identification of conditions that foster

powerlessness and through their removal by both formal organizational practices and informaltechniques of providing efficacy information." (Conger & Kanungo, 1988, p. 474). Implied here

are new roles for managers and supervisors, that is, removing conditions that foster

powerlessness and providing feedback about performance, in other words mentoring.Other researchers have attempted to classify what has been written and practiced previously,

and found it lacking. Quinn and Spreitzer (1997) provide two such classifications. In the,

"mechanistic approach" (p. 38) managers and researchers "believed that empowerment was about

delegating decision making within a set of clear boundaries. . . . Delegate responsibility; andHold people accountable for results." (p. 37) In the, "organic approach to empowerment" (p. 37)

researchers and managers "believed that it [empowerment] was about risk taking, growth, and

change. . . .understanding the needs of the employees; model empowered behavior for the

employees; build teams to encourage cooperative behavior; encourage intelligent risk taking; andtrust people to perform." (p. 38) However, they found these two approaches lacking; some

combination of the two was needed. In the end, they indicate, "empowerment must be defined interms of fundamental beliefs and personal orientations. . . . Empowered people have a sense of

self-determination. . . .Empowered people have a sense of meaning. . . .Empowered people have

a sense of competence. . . . empowered people have a sense of impact." (Quinn & Spreitzer,

1997, p. 40)The most comprehensive definition of empowerment in the literature can be found in Thomas

and Velthouse's 1990 article entitled "Cognitive elements of empowerment: An 'interpretive'

model of intrinsic task motivation". The definition they provide is:To empower means to give power to. Power, however, has several meanings…authority, so that

empowerment can mean authorization. . . .capacity. . . .However, power also means energy.

Thus to empower also can mean to energize. This latter meaning best captures the presentmotivational usage of the term. Our perception is that the word empowerment has become

popular because it provides a label for a nontraditional paradigm of motivation. . . .change [has]

forced a search for alternative forms of management that encourage commitment, risk-taking,and innovation. . . .the newer paradigm involves relaxed (or broad) controls and an emphasis on

internalized commitment to the task itself. . . .We use the word empowerment to refer to the

motivational content of this newer paradigm of management. (p. 667)

In her excellent literature review of employee empowerment, Linda Honold indicates, "to be

successful, each organization must create and define it [empowerment] for itself. Empowerment

must address the needs and culture of each unique entity." (Honold, 1997, p. 202) It is in this

spirit that I offer my own definition of empowerment. I have drawn on several of the authorsnoted above and below for concepts. I will provide credit in the appropriate sections below.

Apprenticeship Empowerment Defined



Employee empowerment is a process whereby: a culture of empowerment is developed;

information—in the form of a shared vision, clear goals, boundaries for decision making, and the

results of efforts and their impact on the whole—is shared; competency—in the form of trainingand experience—is developed; resources, or the competency to obtain them when needed to be

effective in their jobs, are provided; and support—in the form of mentoring, cultural support, and

encouragement of risk-taking—is provided.Every employer uses employee empowerment to some extent, though it is often thought of as

delegation. No organization of more than one person can survive without some employee

empowerment. When the owner of a Mail Boxes, Etc. hires someone to work the weekends, that person is empowered. When a manager hires an accounting graduate to maintain the

departmental ledger, that person is empowered. When the director of advertising chooses which

slogan should go on the web banner, that person is empowered. In each of these instances the

empowered person has been provided with the training and experience they need to be effectivein their position. Each has the information to know how their decisions will impact the larger

whole. Each has access to the resources he or she needs to be effective. And the assumption is

that each will be supported in the decisions they make.

Empowerment is a process of becoming, not a task or end result in and of itself, Just as withcontinuous improvement, no organization is ever done with its empowerment implementation;

no person is ever "completely empowered". Empowerment becomes part of the culture of theorganization. Empowering others becomes a transparent act, nobody within the organization

notices when an act of empowerment is exercised. It may be noticeable in the extreme to

outsiders, but, if the implementation effort has been successful, it will be second nature to those

accculturated within the organization.Clearly, empowerment is not quick nor easy, except in the case of a newly formed

organization where the leaders understand it and have committed themselves and the

organization to it. Given that this is the case it becomes necessary to demonstrate the benefitsand provide an implementation strategy which builds upon a clear understanding of all that

employee empowerment entails.

Benefits of Empowerment

That employee empowerment benefits the organizations which implement it effectively iswidely noted in the literature. The popular press accepts the belief of benefit almost without

question. Thomas Petzinger, in his column "The Front Lines" in the Wall Street Journal, is a big

advocate for empowerment. He writes, "As a society we know the best way to organize peopleis freeing them to organize themselves. Why should it be any different in business?" (Petzinger,

1997a, p. B1). Also in the Wall Street Journal, Aeppel asks the rhetorical question, " What better

way to tap into workers' brains as well as their brawn than to encourage them to think on the job,to bring to it a greater sense of professionalism and self-motivation and to feel committed to thecompany's success?" (Aeppel, 1997, p. 1). Freeman (1998) writing in Inc. about applying

Marine Corps values in the growing corporate workplace advocates a form of empowerment

where training is key and, within clear missions, risk-taking is rewarded.However, a bunch of business writers jumping on a bandwagon was not sufficient for me to

believe that empowerment is beneficial. I wanted evidence and I found it. A number of writers

cited Kanter (1979) as the source of information about the efficacy of employee empowerment.



Kanter writing about positional power indicates, "Organizational power can grow, in part, by

being shared. . . .By empowering others, a leader does not decrease his power; instead he may

increase it--especially if the whole organization performs better." (Kanter, 1979, p. 73). Kanter then uses the logic that, "The productive capacity of nations, like organizations, grows if the skill

base is upgraded. People with the tools, information and support to make more informed

decisions and act more quickly can often accomplish more." (Kanter, 1979, p. 73).Many authors cite, "anecdotal and case evidence…to show that empowerment does produce

more satisfied customers and employees." (Bowen & Lawler, 1995, p.75). However Bowen and

Lawler go beyond this and provide additional evidence, "considerable research on practices suchas gain sharing, communication programs, work teams, job enrichment, skill-based pay, and so

on has shown the results of these practices are consistent and positive." (p.75). They go on to

cite survey research conducted by,

The Center for Effective Organizations at the University of Southern California…to determinethe degree to which firms are adopting practices that redistribute power, information, knowledge,

and rewards, and the effects. . . . The… data…suggest that empowerment may have a positive

impact on a number of performance indicators. Respondents report that empowerment improves

worker satisfaction and quality of work life. Quality, service, and productivity are reportedlyimproved as a result of employee involvement efforts in about two-thirds of the companies.

Approximately one-half of the companies also report that profitability and competitiveness haveimproved; this is supported by the finding of a relationship between empowerment and the firms'

financial performance. (Bowen & Lawler, 1995, p. 75)

This is the hard evidence most skeptics are seeking.

For those of us seeking softer evidence, Bowen and Lawler (1992) indicate empoweredemployees provide, "quicker on-line response to customer needs during service delivery;. . . .

quicker on-line responses to dissatisfied customers during service recovery;. . . . employees feel

better about their jobs and themselves;. . . . employees will interact with customers with morewarmth and enthusiasm. . . . when employees felt that management was looking after their needs,

they took better care of the customer;. . . . great word-of-mouth advertising and customer

retention" (pp. 33-34). Randolph (1995) indicates, "A more subtle, yet very powerful benefit" of employee empowerment was increased "trust in the organization" (p. 22). When employees trust

that the company is not out to suck their blood and is providing a competitive produce or service

they will respond positively, "people who have information about current performance levelswill set challenging goals--and when they achieve those goals they will reset the goals at a higher

level." (Randolph, 1995, p. 23).

A number of authors also indicate that the increasing competitiveness of the global

marketplace calls for better service and the benefit of drawing upon the entire pool of employeesfor creative ideas (Bowen & Lawler, 1992; Gandz, 1990). An example of this would be a

consumer products company looking to expand into less developed countries using custodial

staff who immigrated from those countries for marketing ideas and possible distributioncontacts. One never knows if someone has an uncle or aunt in his or her home country who

owns a chain of grocery stores, unless one asks. An empowered organization would think to ask,

or would at least encourage the employees to make helpful suggestions.

Objections Overcome



Management's fear of letting employees make decisions which can impact the profitability of

the company is a major factor in the ineffectiveness of many empowerment programs, and yet is

still a major objection. Even Kanter (1979) who, as noted above, is often cited as providingevidence of the effectiveness of empowerment indicates,

One might wonder why more organizations do not adopt such empowering strategies. There are

standard answers: that giving up control is threatening to people who have fought for everyshred of it; that people do not want to share power with those they look down on; that managers

fear losing their own place and special privileges in the system…and so forth. But I would also

put skepticism about employee abilities high on the list. (p. 74)This objection can be overcome if the managers in question can be assured that the employees

are ready for the level of authority being placed with them.

The apprenticeship model emphasizes the growth and training of the employee into readiness

to be empowered. Only when employees are trained in the ramifications of their actions and areable to see the big picture should they be allowed and encouraged to make decisions. The role of

the supervisor is as mentor and coach. The worker must be given the opportunity to make

decisions about less significant things and then the outcomes of these decisions reviewed so that

learning can occur.For example, when residential life staff members at the University of Hartford plan a bar-b-

que meal for the residents of a building they are given a budget and encouraged to shop for sufficient food to feed the number of people expected. If the worker has little experience, a list

of items to purchase is discussed prior to the shopping trip, however the quantity and brand

selection are left to the worker so that the budget can be maximized in the store. A common

mistake less experienced workers make is purchasing brand-name soda in cans. This is a veryexpensive way to ensure that drinks are available. As a result less food is able to be purchased

within the budget provided. The worker learns that brand-name canned soda is quickly drunk by

the people who arrive first and then no drinks are available to later attendees. It is better to buyinexpensive soda in bulk bottles, or some sort of drink mix, than to provide brand-name soda

because it meets the need and does not inspire greed. This lesson is best learned through direct

experience and review of the results with the supervisor. Being told this reality is not nearly aseffective.

Just as we would not expect a person with an associate's degree to articulate ground-breaking

new theories in their field; so too we should not expect untrained employees to make decisionswhich affect the bottom line. The manager who has been involved in the training of the worker

will have greater confidence that the worker will make a decision which is in the best interests of

the company. The benefit of empowerment is that it allows each employee to bring his or her

experience and creativity to bear on the decision.Middle managers often object to employee empowerment because they perceive that the

effort will take power away from them. The view is, as Blanchard & Bowles (1998) indicate,

"Managers must…give up the levers of control they've worked a lifetime to get hold of". I callthis the "hazing theory of management". One of the reasons initiation activities and hazing are

still a part of many fraternal organizations is that the current members want the opportunity to do

onto others as was done onto them. If, as a pledging member, they had to run errands for the brothers then they want the opportunity to have pledges run errands for them once they become

brothers. Running errands are the "dues" pledges must pay in order to join the brotherhood.

Working for the organization for years and being subjected to the decisions of others are the

"dues" middle managers have paid to obtain their positions.



This type of thinking is called zero sum change. That is, in order for you (the worker) to gain

something I (the manager) must lose an equivalent amount of that thing, in other words, win-lose

thinking. In order for an employee empowerment implementation to be successful, managerswith this objection must change their attitude. Ward (1996) asks the questions these managers

might ask, "How can I give up control when I am accountable for the results? How can I give

greater decision-making authority to employees, yet ensure the results are of good quality andare consistent with corporate objectives? How can I manage the empowerment process so

employees feel the project is their own?" (p. 21).

The answer to these questions, and the way this needed change is accomplished throughtraining. Managers must see that they still have a role despite authority being shared with

empowered employees. This new role is as mentor, coach, and facilitator. Training should be

provided for each aspect of this role. Acting as mentor comes easily to some people, however

others have difficulty seeing themselves as able to offer anything beyond direction. Proper training can show the reluctant mentor how to improve his or her skills. Coaching is another

skill some people have difficulty with. Again, training is called for in this instance. Because

empowered employees often are formed into self-managing teams they often need someone to

facilitate their discussions until this skill is developed among the members of the group—thisinitially becomes the role of the manager. Later on, as cross-functional teams are formed, the

manager's facilitation skills are called for again. Many managers will require training to enhancetheir ability to facilitate discussions.

Managers who take on these new roles of mentor, coach, and facilitator begin to recognize

that they are still needed. A new win-win attitude replaces the old win-lose attitude in those

managers who are successful at implementation of empowerment. As the benefits of empowering employees become apparent, the properly trained manager will become a strong

proponent of empowerment—he or she will recognize the value inherent in taking advantage of

everyone's experience and creativity. If one accepts the premise that empowered employees aremore satisfied with their jobs, and the premise that satisfied employees result in satisfied

customers, then logic dictates that managers will seek empowerment opportunities in an effort to

grow the business and increase revenues.Bowen & Lawler (1992) note other objections which are raised by management as a result of

these proposed changes, "a greater dollar investment in selection and training. . . . higher labor

costs. . . . slower or inconsistent service delivery. . . . violations of 'fair play'. . . . giveaways and bad decisions." (p.34-35). Still other management objections are noted by Conger & Kanungo

(1988), "Specifically, empowerment might lead to overconfidence and, in turn, misjudgments on

the part of subordinates." (p.480). These objections are valid in some respects; proper training

will overcome some of them, but not all. However I believe the benefits of employeeempowerment outweigh the detriments.

Union leaders often express some of the same reservations regarding employee empowerment

as do middle managers. Most union contracts call for seniority as the guiding principle for increased benefits. If one perceives decision-making authority as a benefit, then the union will

argue that those with the most seniority should receive it before those with less. If a team is

made up of employees of varying seniority, and all are empowered to make decisions after simultaneous training then the union may object to less senior members receiving a benefit at the

same time as more senior members.

Unions perceive that their power comes from collective bargaining with management on

behalf of the workers. Employee empowerment breaks down barriers to communication



between individual workers and the organization's management thereby reducing the role of the

union. It has been my experience that unions object when their roles are reduced.

Both of these objections may be valid. Both call for a shift in the focus of the union and anemphasis on new roles. Instead of using seniority as a guiding principle, unions may be

convinced of the increased organizational viability resulting from a guiding principle of ability.

That is, those with the greatest skills, rather than those with the longest tenure, should receive benefits first. Most managers, I think, would agree that what is best for the organization to

continue its competitive position is a greater focus on ability over seniority. Unions are in the

business of ensuring jobs for their members. If union jobs are lost because an organization goesout of business as a result of inflexibility on the seniority versus ability issue, then the union has

not been successful. If, however, the union changes its focus to ability, and the organization

grows, more jobs will be created.

Beyond the issue of seniority versus flexibility, unions can change the focus of their effortsfrom communicating with management on behalf of employees to providing training and pre-

qualification of skill-sets for an empowered workforce. Trade unions already serve this function;

witness the carpentry trade. The carpenter's union provides training opportunities for apprentice

carpenters, and the union bestows journeyperson and master status onto workers who havecompleted established parameters. These parameters may be number of hours on the job,

completion of training programs, demonstration of skills and abilities, etc. A union contract for agiven job will call for a set number of master level, journeyperson level, and apprentice level

carpenters; the union is then able to provide appropriately trained individuals to fill the positions

available. This could be the case for other unions as well. For example, a manufacturer might

have need for workers skilled in a specific process. The union runs a training program whichteaches workers the skills needed for this process and certifies their level of training. Workers

are then assigned to work on this process based upon their level of training and upon that which

is needed at that time.Employees, too, sometimes object to empowerment efforts. Aeppel (1997) noted that one of

the complaints by Eaton employees is the responsibility the group has for each individual, "with

everyone watching everyone else, it can feel like having a hundred bosses" (p.1) Another common employee objection is that they don't want any more responsibility than they already

have. My experience is that an employee with this complaint is already not sufficiently

motivated, and some management response is called for. Perhaps she or he is not aware of the benefits which accrue to the organization because of her or his work. Perhaps the employee

lacks the understanding that purposeful work is often less demanding than what she or he may

already be doing. Perhaps there are difficulties in other aspects of that employee's life which

could benefit from timely intervention by a caring supervisor. In any case, it is likely that thisobjection can be overcome.

Conger and Kanungo (1988) raise the possibility of, "major organizational changes…

seriously challenge[ing] employees' sense of control and competence as they deal with theuncertainty of change and accept new responsibilities, skills, and guidelines for action and

behavior." (p. 477). Bridges (1991) indicates, "Stability through change demands clarity about

what you are trying to do. . . .[there must be] a clear sense in people's minds of how their activities contribute to the entire undertaking." (p. 76). It is the responsibility of the leader to

provide the vision which assists employees to have this peace of mind.

At the Eaton plant noted above, an additional objection is, "The plant's emphasis on fitting

into the group can seem almost cultish. . . .Some people do well with all the physical aspects of



the work, but fall short by other measures--such as their communications skills." (Aeppel, 1997,

p. 1). In response to this objection I bow to the more articulate Linda Honold (1997) who states,

"The critiques of employee empowerment emanate from what appears to be half-heartedattempts by employers that allow for a very limited degree of decision making and control by

employees." (p. 210).

A Culture of Empowerment

An organization's culture is a complex thing, not easily described. Yet it is upon thisfoundation that empowerment is built. The organizations which successfully implement

employee empowerment will have certain values at their core from which the process of

empowerment can flow. Among these values are respect and appreciation for individuals andthe value they bring to the organization. Values alone do not make up an organization's culture,

and respect for individuals is only one of the outward signs of an empowered culture.

Edgar Schein defines organizational culture as,

a pattern of basic assumptions—invented, discovered, or developed by a given group as it learnsto cope with its problems of external adaptation and internal integration—that has worked well

enough to be considered valid and, therefore, to be taught to new members as the correct way to

perceive, think, and feel in relation to those problems. (Schein, 1985, p. 9)However coherent this definition seems, the concept is much more complex. Schein uses the

bulk of his book Organizational Culture and Leadership to provide a more complete

understanding of what culture really is. Such in depth study of this single concept is beyond thescope of this paper and I would refer the reader to Schein's book for a deeper understanding.

Nonetheless, the culture of the organization must support the thrust of empowerment if there

is any chance for success. I am resolved to discuss the "'artifacts' and 'values' that are the

manifestations or surface levels of the culture" (Schein, 1985, p. 6-7) since that is within the

scope of this thesis. Other authors try to get at this essence that is organizational culture whichmust be supportive for empowerment to succeed. By Schein's definition, they tend to focus on

the surface manifestations, though several try to imply the greater depth.For example, Quinn and Spreitzer (1997) indicate, "empowerment must be defined in terms

of fundamental beliefs and personal orientations" (p. 40), which is an apt description of

organizational culture. Yet they go on to note the manifestations, "Empowered people have asense of self-determination. . . .Empowered people have a sense of meaning. . . .Empowered

people have a sense of competence. . . . Empowered people have a sense of impact." (Quinn &

Spreitzer, 1997, p. 40). Other manifestations these authors note in an earlier article include,"actual barriers to change present …and the social support available to the manager from his/her

boss and peers." (Spreitzer & Quinn, 1996, p. 239), these barriers are aspects of culture. Another

example is provided by Gandz (1990), "A set of shared values is needed. . . .beliefs about theway things should be done, the standards of behavior that are appropriate, the ethics of organizational actions. . . .Such values compel and propel behavior" (p. 75)—significant cultural

artifacts which will lead to empowerment.

Ford and Fottler (1995) provide a model of how empowered an individual is on two scales, job content and job context. The aspects of job context are manifestations of culture; they

indicate, "Job context is much broader. It is the reason the organization needs that job done and

includes both how it fits into the overall organizational mission, goals, and objectives and the



organizational setting within which that job is done. Organizational structure, rewards systems,

mission, goals, objectives and so forth make up the rich tapestry of job context." (p. 22-23).

Organizational structure and reward systems are often put into place with the unknowing andunquestioned basic assumptions which are part of the culture of the organization. Shein's

position supports this view thusly, "If culture has developed in this sense, it will affect most of

the aspects of an organization—its strategy, its structure, its processes, its reward and controlsystems, and its daily routines." (Schein, 1985, p. 244)

An organization seeking to implement empowerment is likely to examine its structure and

reward systems, however if the culture is not also examined by the change agents, replacementstructures and systems are likely to reflect the old assumptions. One such assumption is whether

individuals or groups (teams) should be rewarded for their efforts. Many organizations in the

United States hold that country's value of individualism. If, on the one hand, teams are being

promoted as a tool of empowerment, and on the other hand, individuals are being rewarded for the work of the team, then employees will unconsciously (or consciously) pick-up on the cultural

norm and will be reluctant to dedicate themselves to the teaming concept where their work may

not be recognized and rewarded. In other words, empowered organizations put their money

where their mouth is.Mallak and Kurstedt (1996), perhaps more articulately, express this sentiment when they

write, "Managers who understand how empowerment integrates with organizational culture aremotivated to lead employees…and help them internalize the values and traditions [of

empowerment]. These managers help create a work environment where employees take action

for intrinsic reasons more so than for extrinsic reasons." (p. 8). Mallak and Kurstedt provide a

four stage model for cultural integration, because they understand how important theorganization's culture is to the successful implementation of empowerment.

Shipper and Manz (1992), in their description of W. L. Gore and Associates, demonstrate

how committed to empowerment that company is by describing the cultural manifestations.Some examples include: there are no position titles, all employees are called Associates; every

associate has one or more sponsors who provide training, act as coach or mentor, and advocate

with the compensation committee for the employee's pay increases; all associates are encouragedto apply their creativity, even to the extent of finding their own job within the organization after

being hired. While these tactics far surpass what another organization interested in empowering

its employees is likely to do, they do reflect what has been successful for Gore. The culturalvalues which brought about this unique organizational culture are the result of the personal

values of Gore's founder. Schein notes, "Founders usually have a major impact on how the

group defines and solves its external adaptation and internal integration problems." (Schein,

1985, p. 210), these are essential components of the development of culture.Other authors provide less articulate, though no less powerful, demonstrations of the

importance of organizational culture to employee empowerment. Witness: Blanchard and

Bowles (1998), "It's the understanding, not the work. It's how the work helps others, not unitsdealt with." (p. 170); Block (1987), "Creating a vision of greatness [is] the first step toward

empowerment" (p. 99); Ginnodo (1997) "Empowerment serves a purpose. It's not a feel-good

program. It's about accomplishing business objectives. It's a means to an end, not an end initself. Empowerment helps employees help the organization and themselves…." (p.12).

By now, it should be clear that the organization's culture is important to employee

empowerment. If an organization's culture does not already support empowerment it must be

changed, However, as Schein points out, "we may be suggesting something very drastic when



we say, 'Let's change the culture'" (Schein, 1985, p. 5). And you may be asking yourself, "How

would we go about changing the culture, should we decide we need to do so?". A very good

question indeed. Fortunately, Schein provides some insight into this. He notes, "Leaders createculture, but cultures, in turn, create their next generation of leaders." (Schein, 1985, p. 313). If

the leader is acting in a growing organization, he or she needs, "both vision and the ability to

articulate it and enforce it." (Schein, 1985, p. 317). If, however, the organizational culture ismature, "If it is to change its culture, it must be led by someone who can, in effect, break the

tyranny of the old culture." (Schein, 1985, p. 321). This is accomplished through replacement of

assumptions. "If an assumption is to be given up, it must be replaced or redefined in another form, and it is the burden of leadership to make that happen." (Schein, 1985, p. 324) Schein

makes a distinction between leaders and managers. I make that distinction as well in the section

on the manager's role below. Schein also provides a useful table of organizational, "Growth

Stages, Functions of Culture, and Mechanisms of Change" (Schein, 1985, p. 271-272).

Management Role

In an empowered organization the managers and supervisors take on a different role than they

usually would in most organizations. The literature is unanimous on this point. It may be

obvious that one aspect of this role change is the sharing of power and authority. Yet, manymanagers and supervisors already do this, either actively or passively, through delegation or

abdication, neither of which is empowering people.

Empowerment implies a great deal more. There is an active role for managers andsupervisors rather than the passive one of abdication. There are stages an employee must go

through before he or she should have authority delegated to him or her. There should also be a

recognition that while the employee may be ready to have one aspect of the job delegated to her

or him, she or he may not be ready for delegation in other functional aspects of the job

(Blanchard, Zigarmi & Zigarmi,1985). Managers and supervisors must reframe their perceptionof their roles because, "The primary task of supervision is to help people." (Block, 1987, p. 63).

Block (1987) also tells us, "As managers we become more powerful as we nurture the power of those below us." (p. 64).

So what are these new, active roles for managers? First we must understand that, "Managers

and supervisors need to be empowered, too" (Ginnodo, 1997, p. 12). One use of manager's newfound empowerment should be to allow them to remove barriers to employee empowerment.

Conger and Kanungo (1988) describe this as, "providing autonomy from bureaucratic constraint"

(p.478). Harari (1997) asks us to, "imagine that your job is to create an environment where your people take on the responsibility to work productively in self-managed, self-starting teams that

identify and solve complex problems on their own." Ginnodo (1997) tells us this, "involves

articulating a vision, values, strategies and goals; aligning policies, practices and business plans;improving processes; organizing, communicating and 'walking the talk' of total quality. . . .andremoving barriers that prevent outstanding performance"[italics are mine] (p. 8). Gandz (1990)

indicates, "Managers need to be willing and capable of changing their roles from supervisors and

work directors to visionaries and coaches." (p. 77)This new role of coach is also nearly universal in the literature. Coaching is defined as,

"teaching and practice focused on taking action, with celebration when things go well and

supportive redirection when things go wrong, while all the time creating excitement and



challenge for those being coached" ( Blanchard & Bowles, 1998, p.159). Ward (1996) indicates

of coaching, "The objective is to keep giving employees responsibilities which move them along

the capability continuum, eventually reaching 'fully capable of the task'. Naturally, the manager must be careful to keep adjusting his or her leadership style as the employee becomes more

capable." (p. 22) "Managers also have to learn how to nurture and reward good ideas." (Caudron,

1995, p. 30)Conger and Kanungo (1988) discuss the importance of the employee's sense of their own

abilities as a factor in their empowerment. These coaching, or, "empowerment strategies…[are]

aimed not only at removing some of the external conditions responsible for powerlessness, butalso (and more important) at providing subordinates with self-efficacy information" (p. 478).

Among the coaching strategies noted are, "(a) expressing confidence in subordinates

accompanied by high performance expectations, (b) fostering opportunities for subordinates to

participate in decision making, (c) providing autonomy from bureaucratic constraint, and (d)setting inspirational and/or meaningful goals."(p. 478). Thomas and Velthouse (1990) indicate

events such as, "inputs from supervisors, staff peers, and subordinates, for example, performance

evaluations, charismatic appeals, training sessions, mentoring advice, and general discussions of

ongoing projects…provides data on which to base task assessments." (p. 671). Task assessmentsare those perceptions by the employee of his or her ability to perform, or interest in, the task.

That is, management can change the environment to make completion of the tasks rewardingintrinsically (for example, through praise and recognition or increased opportunities), or

management can work as a mentor to help the employee perceive his or her contribution as

valuable.

Mallak and Kurstedt (1996) echo this mentoring approach for employees, "and help theminternalize the values and traditions [of the organization]. These managers help create a work

environment where employees take action for intrinsic reasons more so than for extrinsic

reasons." (p. 10). Another aspect of mentoring is role modeling. Block (1987) indicates, "Oneway we nurture those below us is by becoming a role model for how we want them to function."

(p. 64). Other authors use a sports analogy to get this same point across. "By setting the key

goals and values, you define the playing field and the rules of the game. You decide who playswhat position. Then you have to get off the field and let the players move the ball." ( Blanchard

& Bowles, 1998, p.79)

If a manager does not perceive her or his role is to help those she or he supervises to grow, thenany empowerment implementation effort will not be successful. A change in role perception is

called for in this instance when implementing employee empowerment. The supervisor must see

potential in the employee and work to bring that potential out. The process is best described as

mentoring or coaching and it entails:determining the skill level of the employee

sharing information about the goal to be achieved and why it is important to the organization

as a whole providing for employee training as needed

depending upon the employee's skill level, providing appropriate supervisory support

a directing style for those tasks for which the employee has a low skill level

coaching for those tasks with which the employee has some skills but is lacking experience

or motivation

a supporting style for those tasks where the employee knows what to do but is still lacking

confidence in their abilities



a delegating style for those tasks where the employee is motivated and fully capable.

(Blanchard, Zigarmi & Zigarmi,1985)

ensuring that the employee is consistently growing in skill by providing new responsibilities

for which a higher level of supervision is needed

mentoring the employee such that they absorb both the organizational culture and the value

of empowermentremoving barriers to empowerment present in the organizational structure

ensuring that appropriate resources are available for the employee, or ensuring that the

employee has the appropriate skills to obtain needed resources providing support for the continued empowerment of the employee

and sharing information about the employee's and the organization's effectiveness.

Information Sharing

Information is what the organizational culture is made of initially. Information is the

gatekeeper to power. The literature is unanimous on this point as well, every author indicated a

need for increased information sharing. Each author provided a different way of describing theimportance of sharing information, "The first key is to share information with everyone. . .

.People without information cannot act responsibly." (Blanchard, Carlos & Randolph, 1996, p.

34); "[if information shared] is zero, nothing happens to redistribute…[it], and empowermentwill be zero." (Bowen & Lawler, 1995, p. 74); "Communication and information are the

lifeblood of empowerment." (Ginnodo, 1997, p. 12). In the absence of information employees

do not know the ramifications of their actions and therefore are not responsible.Caudron (1995) in reporting about, "How to get the best from employees…[in Eastern

European countries]" indicated, "managers gave employees information about the business,

invested in new skills training, set goals for employees and gave them ongoing feedback on howthey were meeting those goals." (p. 28). The author reports that the results in this case study are,

"nothing short of amazing. . . .Job satisfaction is high, most employees appear to trustmanagement, and when you ask Berry [director of human resources] if he thinks workers have become empowered, he answers with an emphatic 'Yes.'" (Caudron, 1995, p. 28). Despite the

workers having never been exposed to this type of involving management, and perhaps never

having trusted management before, the effort was a success—due to the power of information

sharing.Block (1987) advises, "Share as much information as possible. . . .Most supervisors think part

of their role is to shield their subordinates from bad news coming from above. When we shield

our people we are acting as their parents and treating them like children. If we are trying tocreate the mind-set that everyone is responsible for the success of this business, then our people

need complete information." (p. 90-1). An important part of employee empowerment is

demonstrating confidence in the worker, yet many managers hesitate to just let people go on their own. This may be a call for some limitations in the form of shared information.

Blanchard, Carlos and Randolph's (1996), "second key is to create autonomy through

boundaries." (p. 40). This statement sounds counterintuitive, however the authors explain that

when employees understand the boundaries they are then free to take any action within those boundaries; they can bring their own creativity to bear on the task at hand and perhaps improve

its effectiveness. Other authors cite the need for boundaries, "The third lever is discipline and

control. . . .While they [employees] have autonomy, they are aware of the boundaries of their



decision-making discretion." (Quinn & Spreitzer, 1997, p. 45) "Setting clear boundaries tells

people what they're authorized to do" (Ginnodo, 1997, p. 12). Bowen and Lawler (1995) also

address the issue of, "setting reasonable boundaries for employee heroism" (p. 79) whenresponding to a service failure or the customer's needs. Shipper and Manz (1992) in their case

study of W. L. Gore and Associates note one of the four principles all employees are expected to

abide by is, "Consult with other Associates prior to any action that may adversely affect thereputation or financial stability of the company. . . . associates can (and are encouraged to) make

decisions on their own as long as the downside risk does not threaten the organization's

survival." (p. 51). Creating boundaries avoids one of the objections noted in the section above,that is, that employees will become overconfident and exceed their authority.

Sharing information about goals and, "Effective communication about the organization's

plans, successes, and failures." (Byham, 1997, p. 27) may seem commonplace, however its

importance cannot be undervalued. Randolph informs us that, "research…revealed that peoplewho have information about current performance levels will set challenging goals—and when

they achieve those goals they will reset the goals at a higher level." (Randolph, 1995, p. 22)

Spreitzer (1995) provides additional evidence of this value; she notes,

Hypothesis 2d: Access to information about the mission of an organization is positively relatedto psychological empowerment

Hypothesis 2e: Access to information about the performance of a work unit is positively relatedto psychological empowerment. . . .

Hypothesis 2f: An individual-performance-based reward system is positively related to

psychological empowerment. . . .(p. 1448)

Spreitzer supports hypothesis 2d and 2e with this information, "Information about mission is animportant antecedent of empowerment because (1) it helps to create a sense of meaning and

purpose and (2) it enhances an individual's ability to make and influence decisions that are

appropriately aligned with the organization's goals and mission." (p. 1448).As noted in the management role section above, one of the skills of this new role is sharing

feedback about the employee's effectiveness. Cauldron (1995) indicates, "empowerment

programs fail because HR initiates the process the wrong way. . . . empowerment isn't somethingyou do to people. . . . [rather it is developed by] creating an empowering environment--one in

which employees are given goals, information, feedback, training, and perhaps most importantly,

positive reinforcement. [italics mine]" (p. 29). Conger and Kanungo (1988) use nearly the samewords to express the same sentiment, "The employment of these strategies is aimed not only at

removing some of the external conditions responsible for powerlessness, but also (and more

important) at providing subordinates with self-efficacy information (p. 474). Without this

positive reinforcement employees do not easily come to realize how skilled they really are andhow important their work is to the success of the organization, "Empowered people have a sense

of competence . . . empowered people have a sense of impact." (Quinn & Spreitzer, 1997, p. 40).

The importance of, "Performance management systems that provide a clear understanding of jobresponsibilities and methods for measuring success." (Byham, 1997, p. 25) "is fundamental to

reinforcing a sense of competence and believing that one is a valued part of an organization."

(Spreitzer, 1995, p. 1450)To make employee empowerment work, not only do we need to give them information about

their own work, we must, "Give employees information about the business and demonstrate how

their work fits in. . . .'Everyone wants to feel they do something of value. When you demonstrate

the value individuals bring to the business, people want to grow.'" (Caudron, 1995, p. 29).



"Empowerment must be placed in a context of responsibility to the larger whole." (Mohrman,

1997, p. 16) Managers must help employees understand that their work is, "directly aligned with

strategic goals and individual accountability [is maintained] all the way along the line to senior management, customers and stockholders." (Ettorre, 1997, p. 1), and that they are considered,

"partners in the business, all with an eye to the bottom-line implications." (p. 1). Empowered

employees will only understand these bottom line implications if organizational information isshared with them.

The Value of Vision

The value of providing a compelling vision of an empowered workplace should not be

underestimated. Because empowerment is often poorly understood, and usually has not beenexperienced by employees, it is the vision of what is possible that brings their commitment to it.

Vision is perhaps the most visible component of organizational culture; it is through the vision of

what is possible that leaders can inspire employees to apply their skills, knowledge, and

creativity towards its achievement. Whatever the mind of man can conceive, and believe, it canachieve.

Charismatic leaders understand the power of vision; Thomas and Velthouse (1990) report,

"the most important motivational aspect of charismatic/transformational leadership is theheightened intrinsic value of goal accomplishment produced by the articulation of a meaningful

vision or mission." (p. 668). Witness President John F. Kennedy's vision of a man on the moon

by the end of the decade of the 1960s. Because JFK was able to envision the possible, and toarticulate it effectively, he was able to marshal the resources of the entire country to achieve it.

There are numerous examples of the importance of providing a vision in the literature. Block

(1987) identifies, "Creating a vision of greatness [as] the first step toward empowerment." (p.

99). Vision provides employees with that sense of "what do we do next" which can inspire

creativity; Bowen and Lawler (1995) describe this as, "Awareness of the context." (p. 75). Italso allows for employees to not make decisions which are in the direction opposite that of which

the leaders of the organization believe is right. On the importance of organizational visionGandz (1990) indicates, "There needs to be a shared vision. . . .lacking buy in to such visions,

employees can hardly be expected to be self-directing in their fulfillment." (p. 75). Quinn and

Spreitzer (1997) identify, "The first lever" of "organizational characteristics [which] facilitateemployee empowerment. . . .is a clear vision and challenge." (p. 43).

Blanchard and Bowles (1998) use the term "values" in place of vision. They indicate,

"Values guide all plans, decisions and actions." (p. 171). The authors make a distinction betweengoals and values: "Goals are for the future. Values are now. Goals are set. Values are lived.

Goals change. Values are rocks you can count on. Goals get people going. Values sustain the

effort." (Blanchard & Bowles, 1998, p. 171).Some other authors indicate that the vision is articulated through the basic values of theorganization. At W. L. Gore these basic values are, "1. Try to be fair. 2. Use your freedom to

grow. 3. Make your own commitments, and keep them. 4. Consult with other Associates prior

to any action that may adversely affect the reputation or financial stability of the company."(Shipper & Manz, 1992, p. 51). Within these values is the vision of a growing, profitable

concern which has instilled employee empowerment to its core.

The question of what vision to instill is answered by Gandz (1990), "There are many



appealing visions such as the provision of excellent customer service, that are the precursors of

profit, productivity and market share growth; but they must be articulated as such for them to be

compelling. (p. 75). In short, employees must understand and share the vision of theorganization if they are to empowered.

Developing Competency

In order to implement employee empowerment the employees must be competent.

Competency goes beyond developing job-task specific knowledge. Bowen and Lawler (1995)cite the importance of "training in which employees are familiarized with how their jobs fit into

upstream and downstream activities." (p.80). "Employees must be properly trained. It does not

make sense to empower employees to do things such as make decisions or approve or initiateaction if they are not properly trained." (Gandz, 1990, p. 76) Byham (1997) indicates that among

the "Characteristics of an empowered organization" (p. 25) are, "Empowering

leadership/training. . . .Job and technical skills/training. . . .Interpersonal and problem-solving

skills/training. . . .Front-line customer service skills/training. . . .Empowering supportgroups/training." (p. 28-30). Gandz (1990) indicates, "Technical training, decision making

skills, group process skills, all are required if empowerment is to be accepted and produce

results." (p. 76).Authors indicate the importance of training throughout the literature. Caudron (1995)

indicates, "Once employees understand what needs to be done to improve the company, they

must have all the skills and resources necessary to be able to accomplish those improvements."(p. 32). Kanter (1979) notes, "spreading power means educating people to this new definition of

it." (p. 73) Ginnodo (1997) indicates, "Empowerment training is more than remedial; it prepares

people for collaboration and higher level performance, and sends a message to employees: we're

spending money on you because this is important to the organization's future." (p. 13). Ettorre

(1997) defines empowerment, "as employees having autonomous decision-making capabilitiesand acting as partners in the business, all with an eye to the bottom-line implications." (p. 1).

One must then ask, "Where do employees get those decision-making capabilities and informationabout bottom line implications?" The answer, of course, is through training.

Training does not come cheaply. Not only must empowered organizations invest in training

materials and facilitators, they must value training sufficiently to release employees from regular work duties to attend. Gandz (1990) reports, "it is a common experience for organizations that

seek to empower employees to find that their training and development budgets are woefully

underfunded. (p. 75).However, it is not only the responsibility of the training department and supervisors to

provide training. "There must be procedures and occasions for empowered individuals and

teams to learn from each other." (Bowen & Lawler, 1995, p. 81) In an empowered environmentmore experienced, "employees tend to take a more active role in intervening in the actions of newer employees and offering feedback regarding culture-consistent behaviors." (Mallak &

Kurstedt, 1996, p. 8). "In short, these newly empowered participants empowered their associates

through their actions. They shared success stories and helped one another diagnose situations todevelop appropriate coping strategies." (Quinn & Spreitzer, 1997, p. 43)

"Stories make information easier to remember and more believable." (Morgan & Dennehy,

1997, p. 495) Freedman (1998) reports that for the U.S. Marines, "Sea stories are the very best



way to…" (p. 60) pass on learning and recognition of problem patterns. The marines have

institutionalized organizational storytelling, these sea stories, as a valid way to train employees.

A good story which emphasizes the value of errors is the one about the 3M engineer who wastrying to formulate a new adhesive. Unfortunately the glue was not sufficiently sticky and pieces

of paper glued with it could be pulled apart. The engineer could have decided his effort was a

failure, however 3M has a corporate value of risk-taking and encourages workers to find other applications for their products. The engineer described the failed glue's properties one day in a

group meeting and was asked by another worker if the adhesive could be applied to bookmarks.

It seems that the second worker was a member of a church choir and his bookmarks would oftenfall out of his choir book making it difficult to find the next song they were to sing. His thought

was that if the bookmarks had a removable glue applied they would stay in place and yet still be

movable to the next week's song selections. The engineer agreed to provide the choir with some

pieces of paper with the adhesive applied. The engineer also kept some of these removable notesto use on memos and such. Soon he was supplying all the workers in his area with pads of these

removable notes. One day someone said, "we should market these!" and so was born the post-it

note. The engineer learned that what seems like a mistake one day can be of tremendous benefit

the next. Now the Post-It? note is one of 3M's biggest sellers."Another approach is through interventions that provide unusually dramatic, memorable

examples of high task assessments and, thus, are more likely to shift a person's globalassessments. This approach is analogous to the one taken in such programs as Upward Bound."

(Thomas & Velthouse, 1990, p. 679) This may be an example of challenge and support training.

Challenge and support (Sanford, 1962) is a concept used in the field of student affairs to

describe how to help students learn and grow. The concept proceeds from the perspective that people do not learn or grow when they are comfortable. Nor do they learn when they are too

uncomfortable.. The lack of interpersonal skills training in the Eaton company is a situation

where too much challenge and insufficient support were provided, "new workers are required togive speeches before new employees and managers and to attend training seminars about saying

'we,' never 'I' or 'you,' when being critical, to avoid sounding accusatory." (Aeppel, 1997, p.10).

If this is the extent of their communications skills training, then it leaves a great deal to bedesired. The plant manager indicates, "It can be taught...but the worker has to want to learn it."

(Aeppel, 1997, p.10). And, as this company has learned, must be taught if empowerment is to be

well received.When past coping behaviors or understandings of the-way-things-are become insufficient for

the present circumstances people experience feelings of discomfort. This uncomfortable feeling

is called cognitive dissonance. At the point of cognitive dissonance people are ready to learn a

new way of coping or to develop a new understanding of the-way-things-are. This is "theteachable moment". It is at this point that employees will be most receptive to learning

something new.

If we choose to help people to grow it is incumbent upon us to challenge them to the point of cognitive dissonance. We can then use the teachable moment to provide new information that

the person can use to change their perspective on the-way-things-are. However, if too much

challenge is provided, people will revert to old ways of coping and avoid the learning experienceall together. Because the environment often provides so many challenges that the learning

individual can become overwhelmed, we must provide sufficient support to them so they do not

regress.

Challenging and supporting then become new roles for the teaching supervisor. We do not



want to allow people we are trying to empower to grow too comfortable in their roles such that

there is no reason for them to expand their knowledge and grow in their empowerment. Nor do

we want to provide so much challenge that the employee tosses in the towel and decides to work elsewhere. Rather we want to provide sufficient challenge to allow for growth and sufficient

support to avoid overwhelming our associates.

Just as individuals must be developed through the apprenticeship stages noted below, teams,too, must be supported and trained as they go through stages. Blanchard, Carlos and Randolph

(1996) indicate, "You have to start by giving them what they need at the place where they

are."(p. 63) That is,groups, like individuals, go through predictable stages of development. They need different

kinds of leadership at each stage. . . .the orientation stage. . . is a time when a team needs strong,

clear leadership. . . .dissatisfaction stage. The reality of working as a team always seems to be

more difficult than team members expect. . . .need continued strong, clear leadership. But theyalso need support. . . .resolution [stage]. . .when members begin to learn to work together we

start to rotate the role of team coordinator among team members. . . .production stage. . . .A self

directed team acts to direct and support individual efforts itself." (Blanchard, Carlos, &

Randolph, 1996, p. 100-101).

Importance of Resources

In many organizations access to resources is controlled by supervisory staff. If employee

empowerment is to be implemented successfully, those controls must be removed and resources

placed under empowered employees' control. "Resources include items such as funding, accessto support staff, or experts who have knowledge on which the employee can draw." (Ward, 1996,

p. 22) Typically restriction of access to resources is in place to avoid employee abuse.

However, if information about the costs and effect on the bottom line procurement of resources

has is shared with employees they are not likely to abuse them. Caudron (1995) notes, "Once

both employees and managers have received proper training, the next step is to give employeescontrol of the resources needed to make improvements. Nothing is more demotivating or

disempowering than being stopped in your tracks because you either don't know how to proceedor lack the tools necessary to do a good job." (p. 31).

Bowen and Lawler (1995) describe what happens if insufficient resources are provided.

Relying on people to provide service improvements without resources is called the humanresources trap. "The HR trap occurs when managers expect their front-line people to provide

better and better service without simultaneously trying to improve the core service offering itself,

enhance the tangibles, make available state-of-the-art technology and market research, and soon. It can result in unreasonable responsibility for damage control placed on the front-line

workers in a poorly designed, inadequately coordinated service system." (Bowen & Lawler,

1995, p. 82)Release of control to employees demonstrates management trust and confidence in their competence. This is very empowering.

Sufficient Support



The organization which chooses to implement empowerment must ensure that sufficient

support is available to keep it going. Blanchard and Bowles (1998) remind us, "You can't be in

control unless the rest of the organization supports you and doesn't rip you, or your work, apart."(p. 172). Zimmerman (1990) notes that, "It [empowerment] is not an absolute threshold that

once reached can be labeled as empowered. Empowerment embodies an interaction between

individuals and environment that is culturally and contextually defined. . . . sense of community plays an important role in the development of personal control and participation." (p. 170-1). In

other words, the environment must be a supportive one.

Support can take the form of workplace social supports. Spreitzer and Quinn (1996) note,"managers who made transformational organizational change had significantly higher social

support scores" (p. 249). In other words, the more support the managers had the more effectively

empowered they were. "Empowerment techniques and strategies that provide emotional support

for subordinates and that create a supportive and trusting group atmosphere can be moreeffective in strengthening self-efficacy beliefs." (Conger & Kanungo, 1988, p. 479) Also,

"inputs from supervisors, staff peers, and subordinates…mentoring advice, and general

discussions of ongoing projects. . . .provides data on which to base task assessments." (Thomas

& Velthouse, 1990, p. 671). The task assessments, as noted above, are the employee's perceptionof his or her abilities and motivation and are the basis for intrinsic motivation. So we can

conclude that with a good support system in place the likelihood of employees developingintrinsic motivation and a sense of self-efficacy is increased, thereby increasing empowerment.

Support can also take the form of, "recognizing and rewarding improvement efforts and

success" (Ginnodo, 1997, p. 8). "Reward and recognition systems…build pride and self-esteem."

(Byham, 1997, p27) Blanchard and Bowles (1998) note, "Congratulations are affirmations thatwho people are and what they do matter, and that they are making a valuable contribution toward

achieving the shared mission." (p. 174) Spontaneous, Individual, Specific, and Unique" (p. 175)

congratulations are most effective. These authors also tell us, "You can't overdo TRUEcongratulations: Timely, Responsive, Unconditional, [and] Enthusiastic." (p. 174). Ginnodo

also indicates, "Celebration and recognition for forward motion and accomplishment are

needed." (p. 13).Quinn and Spreitzer (1997) raise other aspects support by noting, "The fourth lever [of

effecting empowering changes] is support and a sense of security" (p. 46). Shipper and Manz

(1992) discuss the powerful and general support which is provided to associates at W. L. Gore,every associate has one or more sponsors who provide training, act as coach or mentor, and

advocate with the compensation committee for the employee's pay increases. . . .The sponsor

tracks the new associate's progress, providing help and encouragement. . . .A sponsor is a friend

and an Associate. All the aspects of the friendship are also present. (p. 51).Gandz (1990) indicates, "Managers need faith in employees. . . .Risks can be minimized through

training and shared vision, values and benefits, but the empowered organization requires

confident managers who have faith in employees. . . .The overall culture of the organization mustsupport risk taking." (p. 76-7).

Theoretical Foundations

One author in the field of social psychology writes, "psychological empowerment refers to the

individual level of analysis, but does not ignore ecological and cultural influences.



Psychological empowerment is a contextually oriented conception of empowerment that

embraces the notion of person-environment fit. It includes, but is not limited to, collective

action, skill development, and cultural awareness…" (Zimmerman, 1990, p. 173-4). This perception of empowerment raises the questions, so as to bring about a more empowered

workplace, How does one:

• bring about employee collective action?

• provide for employee skill development?• increase employee cultural awareness?

Spreitzer (1995) presents her hypothesises thus:

Hypothesis 1a: There are four distinct dimensions of psychological empowerment.

Hypothesis 1b: Each dimension contributes to an overall construct of psychologicalempowerment. . . .(p. 1446)

Hypothesis 2a: Self-esteem is positively related to psychological empowerment. (p. 1446)

Hypothesis 2b: Locus of control is positively related to psychological empowerment. . . .(p.

1447)Hypothesis 2c: Self-esteem and locus of control are distinct from the overall construct of

psychological empowerment. . . .(p. 1447)Hypothesis 2d: Access to information about the mission of an organization is positively related

to psychological empowerment.

Hypothesis 2e: Access to information about the performance of a work unit is positively relatedto psychological empowerment. . . .(p.1447)

Hypothesis 2f: An individual performance-based reward system is positively related to

psychological empowerment. . . .(p. 1448)

Hypothesis 3a: Psychological empowerment is positively related to managerialeffectiveness. . . .(p. 1449)

Hypothesis 3b: Psychological empowerment is positively related to innovative behaviors.These predictions represent a partial nomological network for the construct: the variablesincluded are believed to be key personality and contextual antecedents and individual

consequences of psychological empowerment. (p. 1449)

Spreitzer goes on to check the validity of the instrument she created through combining andrefining previous instruments which measured the dimensions noted above. She reports,

both internal consistency and the test-retest reliability are established for the empowerment scale

items. . . .Contrary to expectations, locus of control (gamma = .05) was not found to be

significantly related to empowerment. Because the theoretical links between locus of control andempowerment are quite strong, the lack of support for this hypothesis may be a result of

measurement limitations. . . . support for Hypothesises 2a, 2c, and 2d was found, though support

was not found for Hypothesis 2b. . . .(p. 1458) support for Hypotheses 2d and 2e was found. . . .(p. 1460) These findings provide support for Hypotheses 3a and 3b and suggest that managerial

effectiveness and innovative behaviors tend to be moderately related. (Spreitzer, 1995, p. 1460)

Despite these positive findings, Spreitzer (1995) notes, "The limited discriminant validity foundher and some differences across the two samples suggest that continued refinement of the

measures is necessary. . . .A more powerful test of the full empowerment model would be to tie

empowerment to certain organizational manipulations" (p. 1461)The questions then become, How does one



• increase employee self-esteem?

• Increase access to information about the mission?

• increase access to information about the performance of the work unit?

In a later article, Spreitzer (1996) indicates, "perceptions of both empowerment and social

structural characteristics were the primary focus in this study." (p. 486). She goes on to note,this work contributes to the literature by articulating the importance of perceptions in the

interpretation of the work environment as either empowering or disempowering to individuals. . ..by providing one of the first empirical examinations of the relationship between social structure

and empowerment. . . .This study supports the proposition that high-involvement social

structures (specifically , low role ambiguity, wide supervisory spans of control, sociopoliticalsupport, access to information, and a participative climate) create opportunities for

empowerment in the workplace. In spite of these contributions, the study has a number of

limitations and raises questions for future research on the nature of the relationship betweensocial structure and empowerment. (p. 500).

Additional questions raised by this research are, How does one

• ensure employees have low role ambiguity?

• ensure wide supervisory spans of control?

• provide sociopolitical support?

• provide access to information?

• create a participtative climate in the organization?

Unfortunately, one study which sought to answer some of these questions had an excellentstudy design, but the null hypothesis was not rejected. The study design used a study group who

were being empowered and a control group who were not. "Both groups had responded to a

previous, extensive survey of management practices, which served as a baseline measure."

However, apparently due to an organizational downsizing effort in the middle of the study,"Results provided minimal support for the positive influence of empowerment. The null

hypothesis that empowered workers would have no difference in how they viewed their situation

than non-empowered workers was not rejected." (Thorlakson & Murray, 1996, p. )Some definitions are needed to help understand Thomas and Velthouse's (1990) perspective

on empowerment. These include, "intrinsic task motivation involves positively valued

experiences that individuals derive directly from a task. . . .Task assessments are presumed to bethe proximal cause of intrinsic task motivation and satisfaction. . . .task refers to a set of

activities directed toward a purpose." (p. 668) So, when a person does a set of activities (read

work) he or she assesses the task at hand and decides if it is motivating and satisfactory. Over the course of time the individual generalizes these individual task assessments into an overall

perspective of this type of work. If the intrinsic task motivation is present and is supported by

management, that person becomes empowered.Thomas and Velthouse (1990) report,

Thus far, two studies have provided support for the parts of the model that involve interpretive

styles and task assessments. . . .A more extensive test of the model…involved a questionnaire

survey of 164 managers in three organizations, using multiple-item measures of the task assessments and interpretive styles. Factor analysis of the task assessment items demonstrated

four separate factors, corresponding to the task assessments [impact, competence,



meaningfulness, and choice] in the present model. The authors identify, "Two general

intervention strategies…: changing the environmental events on which the individual bases his or

her task assessments and changing the individual's style of interpreting those events." (p. 667)Additional questions raised by this study include, How does one:

•

change environmental events on which the individual bases perception of her or hisimpact, competence, meaningfulness of the task, and choice about the task?

• change the individual's style of interpreting the environmental events on which the task assessments regarding impact, competence, meaningfulness, and choice are based?

Spreitzer and Quinn (1996) provide follow-up to their initial studies conducted at Ford. Their

research efforts were targeted at what could be learned from those middle managers who

attended Leadership Education and Development (LEAD) programs and who then wereencouraged to effect change on behalf of the organization. The authors report,

only those with positive affect, self-esteem, and social support embraced the charge to make

transformational change. Those with negative affect, poor self-esteem, and little social support,

responded with management style changes that had little affect on the organization. The findingssuggest that individual mind-set was a key moderator in determining who embraced change and

who resisted it. (p. 250)these results show, when stimulated to make change, middle managers with negative affect tend

to be unsuccessful in their efforts. Second, developing transformational middle managers may

require much more than most senior executives want to consider expending. . . .real changerequires real investment. The LEAD program represents creative design, long-term

commitment, and heavy expenditure. But the long term pay-offs can be high. . . .Third, the

findings also suggest that an important resource in many organizations may be unintentionally

wasted or consciously destroyed. . . . In this study, it was found that the plateaued managers weremost likely to take the greatest risks on behalf of the company. (p. 252)

this article…has several limitations. First, the study is primarily exploratory in nature. . ..Second, the generalizability of the findings is limited. . . .Third. . . .causality cannot beascertained. (p. 252-253)

It seems that the questions raised by this article have already been raised by the articles above.

In some cases, the authors of the studies provide suggested answers to these "How does one"questions, in others the questions are left for the reader. My hope is that with the information I

have provided above, and the information I will provide below, I will answer all of these

questions.

Implementation Timeframe

It should be clear at this point that implementing an empowerment program is quite andextensive affair. I would be remiss if I did not support the contention that it may take several

years before the organization will see the benefits of empowerment. Several authors echo this

sentiment: Caudron (1995), "empowerment doesn't provide immediate gratification. . . . thelength of the learning curve is the greatest challenge to most empowerment programs" (p. 28);

Gandz (1990), "keep at it!. . . .It will not be done through a 90 day program with empowerment

t-shirts and coffee mugs. It is critical to signal that this will be a new way of running the



organization that might take several years to develop." (p. 78); Ginnodo (1997), "Empowerment

is hard work and takes time." (p. 13); Quinn and Spreitzer (1997),"empowerment is anything but

simple and quick--it demands a willingness to embrace uncertainty, trust people, and exercisefaith." (p. 43); and Thorlakson and Murray (1996), "recognize that empowerment is not an

overnight process but rather a 'way of life,' which can take time to implement. Finally, view

empowerment not as a fad but as an opportunity and a challenge to help unleash anorganization's full potential." (p. 79). 'Nuff said!

Situational Implementation

A number of authors indicate that employee empowerment is a process which must be

implemented in stages. This concept applies both for each individual and for the organization asa whole. From the overall effort described by Blanchard, et al. in all three books cited in this

paper (Blanchard & Bowles, 1998; Blanchard, Carlos & Randolph, 1996; Blanchard, Zigarmi &

Zigarmi, 1985), to those who draw upon their work (Ward, 1996), to the social psychologists,

who note that, "It [empowerment] is not an absolute threshold that once reached can be labeledas empowered." (Zimmerman, 1990, p. 170), there is this sense that empowerment is not an all or

nothing proposition.

Bowen and Lawler (1992) identify three levels of empowerment in organizations. From leastempowering, or "control oriented", to most empowering, or "involvement oriented" (p. 35).

Caudron, 1995 indicates, "The best way to empower team members is gradually and

systematically. . . . Responsibilities for self-management and decision making should be turnedover to employees on as as-ready basis." (p. 30).

Conger and Kanungo, (1988) echo this perspective, "When subordinates perform complex

tasks or are given more responsibility in their jobs, they have the opportunity to test their

efficacy. Initial success experiences (through successively moderate increments in task

complexity and responsibility along with training to acquire new skills) make one feel morecapable and, therefore, empowered" (p. 479). In other words, employees must be developed

through ever more challenging tasks. The concept is that as they experience success with lesschallenging tasks they will develop confidence in their skills and be ready and willing to accept

further challenge. The authors note, "Empowerment techniques and strategies that provide

emotional support for subordinates and that create a supportive and trusting group atmospherecan be…effective in strengthening self-efficacy beliefs." (p. 479).

Ford and Fottler (1995) also recommend an incremental implementation of an employee

empowerment program, "this approach would focus first on the job content and, later, theempowered employees would become involved in making decisions about job context as well.

Management could oversee the progress to assess the readiness of employees as well as their

own comfort level with giving up authority." (p. 26).One of the factors which cause many empowerment programs to fail is a lack of recognitionthat, "empowerment is a continuous variable; people can be viewed as more or less empowered,

rather than empowered or not empowered." (Spreitzer, 1995, p. 1444) as well as that,

"empowerment is not a global construct generalizable across different life situations and roles but rather, specific to the work domain." (p. 1444). Indeed, I would argue that it is not

generalizable from one work task to another.



Assessment

The literature is ripe with ways to assess an organization either for how ready it may be for an

empowerment effort, or how empowered it currently is. Conger and Kanungo (1988) indicate,

"The first stage is the diagnosis of conditions within the organization that are responsible for

feelings of powerlessness among subordinates." (p. 474). They provide a table of, "ContextFactors Leading to Potential Lowering of Self-Efficacy Belief" (p. 477) which can be used to

create an instrument to ensure these factors are eliminated or minimized.

Caudron (1995) provides an, "HR Checklist: do you have an empowered environment?" (p.33) based upon the Colgate-Palmolive model which may be useful as a measuring device for

workplace empowerment efforts. Byham (1997) provides 14 "characteristics of an empowered

organization" and indicates "These factors are basically goals to be achieved." (p. 25). Ginnodo(1997) also provides a list of dos and don'ts from which a survey could easily be developed.

Ettorre (1997) provides a seven question survey, "How empowered are your managers?" (p. 3).

Randolph (1995) provides an exhibit of, "The Empowerment Plan" (p. 29) which could beadapted into a survey to determine if these factors are currently present within the organization.

Ford and Fottler (1995) provide an implied survey with their "Employee Empowerment Grid" (p.24). An assessment of where the employee's decision making authority lands on the job contentand job context helps to identify how empowered that employee is.

Quinn and Spreitzer (1997) provide "Seven questions every leader should consider" on, "The

road to empowerment" (p. 37); they are:

1. What do we mean when we say we want to empower people?2. What are the characteristics of an empowered person?

3. Do we really need empowered people?

4. Do we really want empowered people?5. How do people develop a sense of empowerment?

6. What organizational characteristics facilitate employee empowerment?

7. What can leaders do to facilitate employee empowerment? (p. 45)The authors indicate that the questions above raise "Some Hard Questions" and "Some Harder

Questions" (p. 44), which provide more of an assessment set for the organization.

Bowen and Lawler (1992) provide a table reproduced below to assist with determination of

the best strategy given the contingencies of the organizational environment.

ContingencyProduction

Line ApproachEmpowerment

Basic

business

strategy

Low cost,

high volume1 2 3 4 5

Differentiation,

customer

personalized

Tie tocustomer

Transaction,short time

period

1 2 3 4 5Relationship,long time period

TechnologyRoutine,

simple1 2 3 4 5

Nonroutine,

complex

Business Predictable, 1 2 3 4 5 Unpredictable,



environment few surprises many suprises

Types of people

Theory X

managers,

employeeswith low

growthneeds, lowsocial needs,

and weak

interpersonalskills

1 2 3 4 5

Theory Y

managers,employees with

high growthneeds, high

social needs andstrong

interpersonal

skills

(Bowen & Lawler, 1992, p. 37)

Clearly, within each contingency, the higher number circled, the more likely that employee

empowerment will be effective in the organization conducting the survey.

Bowen and Lawler (1995) also provide measures of how effective empowerment efforts have been. The authors include: asking employees if they feel more empowered, "survey customers

to determine if they view employees as empowered,. . . . track changes in the percentage of

employees who are 'covered' by empowering management practices,. . . . monitor changes inorganizational structure. . . . decreasing management levels and increasing span of control are

important indexes of empowerment success." (p. 77).

Thorlakson and Murray (1996) provide a table with the results of their survey whereresponses have been categorized. The actual survey can be obtained from one of the authors.

Spreitzer and Quinn (1996) also provide a table with categorized responses from which a useful

assessment instrument could be developed. Spreitzer (1996) provides a table with the actual

questions used in her survey. Spreitzer (1995) provides an appendix with the "Text of ItemsMeasuring Empowerment" (p. 1464).

The Apprenticeship Model

Apprenticeship, as commonly practiced in the trades, consists of three levels of competencyand an associated level of empowerment. This concept can easily be transferred to any

organizational environment. Employees do the work and make the decisions for which they

have sufficient skills and knowledge. Employees and their employer also recognize their responsibility to continue the training and development of the employee. Because the

empowerment concept calls for a recognition of the value of every employee (Blanchard &

Bowles, 1998), no employee is looked down upon based upon his or her job responsibilities or level of skill.

Apprentice level

Rather than as a lowly, know-nothing, the apprentice is viewed as an unskilled worker with

potential. He or she may be assigned tasks which are seemingly menial yet are essential to the

effective working of the shop. The apprentice is expected to be aware of how the organization

works and to ask questions at appropriate times. Also he or she is expected to be eager to learn



new skills and to practice these skills under the guidance of journeymen and masters.

Journeyperson level

Journeypersons do the primary work of the organization. In order to be considered a journeyperson an individual is expected to have all but the most specialized skills of their craft.She or he must be able to work without supervision. There must also be a recognition of one's

responsibility to provide skills training for apprentices. Journeypersons know how to get the

answers to their questions, and are developing the sense of what are the right questions to ask.

Master level

Masters provide the overall direction and vision for the organization. They decide which jobsto do and how they can be done. Masters understand their responsibility to supervise the

continued development of journeypersons so as to teach and develop the next generation of leaders. As part of sharing their vision, masters provide information about the overallorganization to both journeypersons and apprentices. As befitting their advanced knowledge,

masters advance the trade through innovation and complete the work for which only they are

trained.

This model is deceptively simple. Anyone can quickly grasp the three levels (Freedman,1998) and place workers they know into one of the three categories. However, it is important to

realize that the model calls for a recognition that an individual could be at any one of the three

levels for different aspects of their job (Blanchard, Zigarmi, & Zigarmi, 1985; Blanchard, Carlos& Randolph, 1996; Ward, 1996). I have provided an example of how this may be the case in a

retail department store in Appendix A.

Support, Culture, and Information

One must also realize that the model calls for individuals with greater skills to acceptresponsibility for training those who are less skilled (Thomas & Velthouse, 1990; Conger &

Kanungo, 1988; Zimmerman, 1990; Blanchard & Bowles, 1998; Blanchard, Zigarmi, & Zigarmi,

1985). This form of mentoring also provides the necessary social support for empowerment tooccur (Ginnodo, 1997; Byham, 1997; Quinn and Spreitzer, 1997; Shipper and Manz, 1992;

Thomas & Velthouse, 1990; Conger & Kanungo, 1988; Zimmerman, 1990; Blanchard &

Bowles, 1998).

An additional consideration is the importance of passing along the culture (Schein, 1985;Quinn & Spreitzer, 1997; Mallak & Kurstedt, 1996; Shipper & Manz, 1992; Blanchard &

Bowles, 1998; Block, 1987). As noted above, the apprentice develops a sense of the values of

the craft as he or she watches the care the master puts into his or her work. A recognition of theimportance of every task is developed while sweeping the floor—for without a swept floor the

shop becomes potentially dangerous and may drive away paying customers. Both the master and

the journeyperson share this perspective with the apprentice as the floor is swept.It is this type of information sharing which will allow the apprentice to grow and develop



Based on the research cited in the Assessment Instruments section above, and keeping in

mind my definition of empowerment (culture, information, competency, resources, and support),there seems to be a need for an assessment instrument which leaders can use to assess the

empowerment level of their organization within the constructs of the apprenticeship model. I

would argue that assessing is only half of the effort needed to successfully implementempowerment. The other half is responding with organizational changes and competency

development. The assessment questions below are the starting point. The training responses in

the next section are cross-referenced by question number, then lettered to provide the appropriateresponse based upon the answer to the question. For example, after answering question 237, the

organizational leader can look for the appropriate response under 237A, 237B, or 237C

depending upon the what fits best given the organizational circumstance present. If this

instrument was based on a computer, hyperlinks could be created from the possible answersdirectly to the appropriate response.

Any survey of this type has its drawbacks. I address these first so that an understanding can

be achieved that these questions and the associated training responses in no way represent the

only possible way to implement an empowerment program in a given organization. It is possiblethat the individual or group which uses the assessment instrument do not know the organization

sufficiently well to be able to answer the questions; or that they will want to make theorganization look good and skew the results.

As in any assessment instrument, the terms used within are subject to interpretation by the

users, this could cause confusion and thereby not address the needs of the organization. A

significant event in the life of the organization could completely change how the questions areanswered or whether the training responses are appropriate. Certainly, the ability of the

instrument users to implement or recommend change or training might make the entire exercise

worthless. Nonetheless, I believe the instrument and the suggested responses to be useful.

Assessment Questions

1. Can a consensus be reached by any group of organizational members as to the definition of

empowerment?

YES NO DON'T KNOW

2. What perquisites become available as climbs up in the organizational hierarchy?

NONE FEW MANY DON'T KNOW

3. Who are your mentors within the organization?

MANY FEW NONE

4. In the course of a week, how may times does a low-level, front-line employee need to seek

approval for an action she or he believes is the correct one?

NONE FEW MANY

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#1a%20yes

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#1b%20no

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#1c%20don't%20know

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#2a%20none

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#2b%20few

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#2c%20many

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#2d%20don't%20know

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#3a%20many


http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#3c%20none










http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#2d%20don't%20know

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#3a%20many








5. Can any given employee accurately answer the question, "How is the organization doing"?

YES NO DON'T KNOW

6. What is the vision of the organization?

EASILY ANSWERED DON'T KNOW

7. In what aspects of your job have you reached master status?

SEVERAL FEW NONE—NEW TO ORG. NONE—NO EFFORT

8. Are you providing training to anyone within the organization?

YES NO

9. In what aspects of your job do you continue to grow?

SEVERAL FEW NONE

10. When was the last time a project or work effort was delayed due to lack of resources?

LONG TIME AGO RECENTLY ALL THE TIME

11. If your supervisor was away and a customer or another department asked you to complete a project for which you knew there was capacity to complete, would you be able to agree to

complete the project and access the needed resources?

YES YES, AFTER SEEKING APPROVAL NO

12. If the above request slightly exceeded the known capacity to complete, what would be your supervisor's boss's response if you decided to accept the project anyway?

PRAISE DON'T KNOW ANGER

13. How would such a decision affect the organization?

POSITIVELY NEGATIVELY DON'T KNOW

14. What would you do if another member of your department disagreed with you about the

decision to accept the project?

DISCUSS TO RESOLUTION GO OVER HIS/HER HEAD

15. Who are your friends in the organization?




http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#6a%20easily%20answered

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#6b%20don't%20know

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#7a%20several


http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#7c%20none,%20because%20i%20am%20new

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#7d%20none%20no%20effort%20made






http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#10a%20long%20time%20ago

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#10b%20recently

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#10c%20all%20the%20time


http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#11b%20yes%20with%20approval

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#11c%20no

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#12a%20praise


http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#12c%20anger

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#13a%20positively

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#13b%20negatively


http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#14a%20discussion%20to%20resolution

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#14b%20go%20over%20head




http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#6a%20easily%20answered




http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#7c%20none,%20because%20i%20am%20new

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#7d%20none%20no%20effort%20made






http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#10a%20long%20time%20ago

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#10b%20recently

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#10c%20all%20the%20time


http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#11b%20yes%20with%20approval

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#11c%20no

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#12a%20praise


http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#12c%20anger

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#13a%20positively

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#13b%20negatively


http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#14a%20discussion%20to%20resolution

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#14b%20go%20over%20head



those with less experience.

4A. NONE: Good. The organization has probably established clear boundaries for decision-making for these employees. This is also an indication that trust has been placed in their ability

to make good decisions, generally this type of trust comes from effective competency

development, clear vision, and good information about the impact of decisions on the bottom

line. It also indicates that appropriate resources have been made available to these individuals.

4B. FEW: Work to increase these individuals' skills and understanding of their impact on the

work of the organization. Establish clear boundaries for their decisions and share the

organization's vision with them. Ensure that the resources they need are at their disposal.

4C. MANY: Does your organization consider itself an empowering one? If so, then this is animportant place to begin demonstrating commitment thereto. These front-line workers interact

with your customers so empowering them will enhance your customer service. Implement

whatever changes are needed in higher levels of your organization, then follow the suggestionsin 4B.

5A. YES: Your organization is probably sharing information about the bottom line and how

that individual impacts it. This is very empowering.

5B. NO: Work to increase information sharing. Empowered individuals understand how their

work impacts the bottom line. If employees don't know what that bottom line is then they cannot possibly know their impact upon it. Of course, employees will need to be trained to understand

whatever information is shared with them, so developing this competency is an important step aswell.

5C. DON'T KNOW: This is probably an indication that they don't. Refer to the suggestions in5B.

6A. EASILY ANSWERED: Very good. Sharing a vision is an important aspect of empoweringemployees—it allows people to think about how their work fits into the larger picture and

provides opportunity for them to apply their creativity to help achieve that vision.

6B. DON'T KNOW: Work to develop a vision for the organization, or at least for your unit.

Help employees to see where the organization hopes to go so they can help to get it there.

7A. SEVERAL: Great! This is an indication that you have been developed to this point. Besure that you are training journeypersons and apprentices in what you know. Also, keep

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/thesis.html#7






challenging yourself to achieve master level in other aspects of your job or in tasks beyond your

current responsibilities.

7B. FEW: Continue to work to achieve this level. See suggestions in 7A as well.

7C. NONE, BECAUSE I AM NEW: Continue to work to achieve this level. See suggestions in7A.

7D. NONE, NO EFFORT MADE: Work to enhance your skills. Seek out mentors and people

with additional skills and information who can help you to grow professionally. Even if your job

responsibilities seem menial, you have an impact on the organization's bottom line so enhancingyour skills will be of benefit to the organization.

8A. YES: Good. Continue to develop the skills of others as you continue to develop your own.

8B. NO: If your organization is an empowering one, you must ask yourself "Why not?". If youconsider yourself too busy, reconsider. Think of your responsibilities for the future needs of the

organization—will you ever be less busy if you don't train others to do what you do? If you don't

think you have sufficient stills to teach anyone anything, think again. Perhaps you are the most

inexperienced person in your department, but are there people in other areas with whom youcould share what little experience you do have. Do you have talents which are not apparent in

the organizational setting? If so, share those with your colleagues so that the balance is

maintained.

9A. SEVERAL: Very good. This demonstrates a recognition of the importance of developingcompetency. Even if you are a master at all aspects of your current job, you are seeking

opportunities to learn aspects of other jobs. Even if you are the CEO you recognize that you

don't know everything. Allowing an employee at a lower level to provide the CEO with trainingis tremendously empowering to them.

9B. FEW: Unless you are relatively new to your position, this is still good. See ideas in 9A.

9C. NONE: Probably not an empowering organization. Work to develop the apprenticeship

model within your organization. Seek out opportunities to develop your competency to the pointof mastery. Or, if you have achieved mastery in your area of specialty, seek out opportunities to

grow in other areas.

10A. LONG TIME AGO: Good. Empowering organizations provide the resources needed for employees to get the job done, or the employees have developed the competency to obtain

needed resources themselves.






10B. RECENTLY: Unless this was an unusual circumstance, work to develop systems or

competencies which make the needed resources available to empowered employees.

10C. ALL THE TIME: Probably not an empowered organization. Work to make neededresources available to employees. Develop employee competency such that they can obtain

resources they need. Work to develop trust in employees such that higher-ups will haveconfidence that resources will not be squandered.

11A. YES: This is a clear indication that you are empowered. Continue doing whatever

brought you to this point and work to enhance other's ability to reach it.

11B. YES, WITH APPROVAL: This is either an indication that you are new and still

developing competency, or that the organization is not empowered. If you are still developingask the approving individual what factors she or he took into consideration when making the

decision. If not an empowered organization, work to develop employees competency such that

they would be able to make the decision for themselves. If the answer is going to be yes, better that those closest to the customer have all the information needed to give the answer more

quickly.

11C. NO: Either you are still developing competency, or the organization is not empowered.

See suggestions in 11B.

12A. PRAISE: Great! This demonstrates support for risk-taking and is very empowering. Italso provides the opportunity for continued challenge and ever increasing goals to become the

norm.

12B. DON'T KNOW: This may be an indication of lack of support for risk-taking and could be

disempowering. It is also an indication that insufficient communication is occurring about theorganization's vision and between levels of the organization.

12C. ANGER: Very disempowering. Unless there is a clear explanation of why this was a bad

decision and how it negatively impacted the organization, no learning will take place. Keep inmind the benefits to the customer of allowing employees at the lowest level possible to make

decisions. Also, work to develop an understanding of continued incremental challenges inherent

in the apprenticeship model.

13A. POSITIVELY: This demonstrates an understanding of the bottom line implications of

one's work and the presence of a clear vision. There also seems to be support for risk-taking.

Good!






13B. NEGATIVELY: Well, at least there is an understanding of the implications of one's

work. This may be an indication of a disgruntled employee who is working to sabotage the

organization's success, and knows how to do it. It may also be an indication of insufficientlydeveloped competency. Work to develop competency to make this type of decision such that it

has positive impact on the bottom line.

13C. DON'T KNOW: This is an indication of insufficient information sharing and lack of clear

vision. Employees must have access to the information about how their work impacts theorganization as a whole if there is any hope of a successful empowerment implementation.

14A. DISCUSSION TO RESOLUTION: Good. This is an indication that employee

competency has been developed in the skills of communication among an empowered group.There is also evidence that the environment is supportive and this will enhance empowerment.

14B. GO OVER HER/HIS HEAD: This is very disempowering. Work to develop the

competencies needed for employees to be able to discuss differences of opinion and learn fromeach other's perspective. Also, work to develop an environment which is supportive of employee

risk-taking.

15A. MANY: Good. This may be an indication of a supportive environment within which

employees can challenge themselves to grow.

15B. FEW: If you are new to the organization, this is probably OK. If tenured, then this is asign of a lack of a supportive environment and could be disempowering. Work to develop an

organizational value of friendliness and cooperation.

15C. NONE: May be a bad sign for organizational empowerment. Even if you are a brand new

employee, there should be somebody with whom you are friendly. Work to change theorganizational culture to make friendliness a value.

15D. DON'T KNOW: Look out! If you don't know who your friends are in the organization,

the they all may be enemies. Empowerment depends, in part, upon a supportive environment.This doesn't sound like one, or it is an indication that this issue has not been evaluated. Work to

ascertain who your friends are in the organization. Be friendly and approachable yourself. Offer

assistance and mentoring advice, if appropriate. Work to change the organizational culture to

make friendliness a value.

Bibliography of Literature Reviewed

Aeppel, T. (1997, September 8). Missing the boss: Not all workers find idea of empowerment

as neat as it





sounds. The Wall Street Journal, pp. 1, 10.

Blanchard, K. & Bowles, S. (1998). Gung Ho! Turn on the people in any organization. New

York: WilliamMorrow.

Blanchard, K., Carlos, J.P. & Randolph, A. (1996). Empowerment Takes More Than a Minute .

SanFrancisco: Berrett-Koehler.

Blanchard, K., Zigarmi, P. & Zigarmi, D. (1985). Leadership and the One Minute Manager:

IncreasingEffectiveness Through Situational Leadership. New York: William Morrow.

Block, P. (1987). The Empowered Manager: Positive Political Skills at Work . San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass.

Bowen, D.E. & Lawler, E.E. (1992). The empowerment of service workers: What, why, howand when. Sloan

Management Review, Spring 1992, p. 31.

Bowen, D.E. & Lawler, E.E. (1995). Empowering service employees. Sloan Management

Review, Summer 1995, p.73.

Bridges, W. (1991). Managing Transitions: Making the Most of Change . Reading, MA:Addison-Wesey.

Byham, W.C. (1997). Characteristics of an empowered organization. In Ginnodo, B. (ed.) The

Power of

Empowerment: What the Experts Say and 16 Actionable Case Studies . Arlington Heights, IL: Pride

Caudron, S. (1995). Create an empowering environment. PersonnelJournal, 74-9, p.28.

Conger, J.A. & Kanungo, R.N. (1988). The empowerment process: Integrating theory and practice. Academy

of Management Review, 13-3, p. 471.

Ettorre, B. (1997, July). The empowerment gap: Hype vs. reality. HRfocus, p.1.Ford, R.C. & Fottler, M.D. (1995). Empowerment: A matter of degree. Academy of

Management Executive,

9-3, p.21.Freedman, D.H. (1998, April). Corps values. Inc., pp. 54-66.

Gandz, J. (1990). The employee empowerment era. Business Quarterly, 55-2, p. 74.

Ginnodo, B. (ed.), (1997). The Power of Empowerment: What the experts say and 16

actionable casestudies. Arlington Heights, IL: Pride.

Grove, P.B. (ed.), (1971). Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English

Language Unabridged.Springfield, MA: G&C Merriam.

Honold, L. (1997). A review of the literature on employee empowerment. Empowerment in

Organizations, 5-4, p.202.

Kanter, R.M. (1979). Power failure in management circuits. Harvard Business Review , 57-4, p.

65.

Mallak, L.A. & Kurstedt, H.A., Jr. (1996). Understanding and using empowerment to change



organizational

culture. Industrial Management, 38-6, p. 8.

Menon, S.T. (1995). Employee Empowerment: Definition, Measurement and ConstructValidation. Doctoral

dissertation, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. Abstract available:

http:// wwwlib.umi.com/dissertations/search Publication Number: AAT NN08135.Mohrman, S.A. (1997). Empowerment: There's more to it than meets the eye. In Ginnodo, B.

(ed.) The Power

of Empowerment: What the Experts Say and 16Actionable Case Studies . Arlington Heights, IL: Pride.

Morgan, S. & Dennehy, R.F. (1997). The power of organizational storytelling: a management

development

perspective. Journal of Management Development ,16-7, p. 494.Petzinger, T. (1997, January 3). The front lines: Self-organization will free employees to act

like bosses. Wall

Street Journal, p. B-1.

Petzinger, T. (1997, March 7). The front lines: How Lynn Mercer managers a factory thatmanages itself. Wall

Street Journal, p. B-1.Petzinger, T. (1997, October 17). The front lines: Forget empowerment this job requires

constant brainpower.

Wall Street Journal, P. B-1.

Quinn, R.E. & Spreitzer, G.M. (1997). The road to empowerment: Seven questions everyleader should

consider. Organizational Dynamics, 26-2, p.37.

Randolph, W.A. (1995). Navigating the journey to empowerment. Organizational Dynamics,23-4, p.19.

Sanford, R.N. (1962). The developmental status of the freshman. In Sanford, R.N. (ed.),

(1962). The AmericanCollege. New York: Wiley

Schein, E.H., (1985). Organizational Culture and Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Shipper, F. & Manz, C.C. (1992). Employee self-management without formally designatedteams: An

alternative road to empowerment. Organizational Dynamics , 21-3, p. 48.

Spreitzer, G.M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions,

measurement, andvalidation. Academy of Management Journal , 38-5, p.1442.

Spreitzer, G.M. & Quinn, R.E. (1996). Empowering middle managers to be transformational

leaders. Journalof Applied Behavioral Science, 32-3, p.237.

Thorlakson, A.J.H. & Murray, R.P. (1996). An empirical study of empowerment in the

workplace. Group &Organization Management, 21-1, p.67.

Thomas, K.W. & Velthouse, B.A. (1990). Cognitive elements of empowerment: An

"interpretive" model of

intrinsic task motivation. Academy of Management Review , 15-4, p. 666.



Ward, B. (1996). How to empower. Canadian Manager, 21-4, p. 20.

Yates, R.E. (1992, September 20). Workers go back to school as firms learn to compete.

Chicago Tribune, p. 1.

Zimmerman, M.A. (1990). Taking aim on empowerment research: On the distinction between

individual and psychological conceptions. American Journal of Community Psychology , 18-1, p.169.

Annotated Bibliography

Aeppel, T. (1997, September 8). Missing the boss: Not all workers find idea of empowermentas neat as it

sounds. The Wall Street Journal, pp. 1, 10.

Type: Newspaper article. High usefulness.

Audience: general public, managers, CEOs.

This article uses the example of the employee empowerment process in the EatonCorporation's South Bend, IN forge plant to highlight some of the problems experienced by

newly empowered workers. Interviews with former employees who departed because of the

expectations placed upon them are coupled with information about Eaton's empowerment

procedures and interviews with workers who have stayed. There is a clear slant to the article,despite the author's efforts to provide a balanced view, that there are some serious problems with

the empowerment movement.

The article fails to delve into root causes of the problems identified and leaves the reader either convinced that employee empowerment is seriously flawed or wanting a great deal more

information.

Blanchard, K. & Bowles, S. (1998). Gung Ho! Turn on the people in any organization . NewYork: William

Morrow.

Type: Book. High usefulnessAudience: CEOs, managers, general public.

This book is the sequel to Raving Fans a Revolutionary Approach to Customer Service. The

concept was to write about how to make employees as enthusiastic about their work as the

customers of Raving Fans were about doing business with the company. Written as a first handaccount of one manufacturing plant's efforts to "Gung Ho themselves", the book provides a



Situational leadership calls for a diagnosis of the employee's development level. Employees

with "low competence and high commitment" as is typical of the newly hired are at the first

development level; employees with "some competence and low commitment" as is typical of employees with incomplete training and for whom the excitement of the newness of the job has

worn off are in the second development level; employees who have "high competence and

variable commitment" typical of mid-management are in the third development level; andemployees with "high competence and high commitment" typical of senior managers and high

performers are at the fourth level.

Once the development level is known the appropriate leadership style can be used with thatemployee.

'Directing (Style 1) is for people who lack competence but are enthusiastic and committed (D1).

They need direction and supervision to get them started. Coaching (Style 2) is for people who

have some competence but lack commitment (D2). They need direction and supervision becausethey're still relatively inexperienced. They also need support and praise to build their self-

esteem, and involvement in decision-making to restore their commitment. Supporting (Style 3)

is for people who have competence but lack confidence or motivation (D3). They do not need

much direction because of their skills, but support is necessary to bolster their confidence andmotivation. Delegating (Style 4) is for people who have both competence and commitment

(D4). They are able and willing to work on a project by themselves with little supervision or support.'

This book again uses a pseudo-case study as evidence to support the theory. Logical argument

is also used to support this management scheme. I find the logic compelling and there is strong

alignment between this theory and the apprenticeship model presented in this paper.

Block, P. (1987). The Empowered Manager: Positive Political Skills at Work . San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass.

Type: Book. High usefulness.Audience: Managers.

In this oft cited and influential book written early in the empowerment movement, Block

provides advice for managers seeking to move their organizations from a bureaucratic one

toward an entrepreneurial one. Block notes the bureaucratic cycle and contrasts it with the,entrepreneurial cycle. Block then goes on to discuss the origins of each cycle and provides

reasoning behind moving toward the entrepreneurial one.

Block notes, "empowerment is a state of mind as well as a result of position, policies, and practices. As managers we become more powerful as we nurture the power of those below us.

One way we nurture those below us is by becoming a role model for how we want them to

function." (p. 63-4). Block also advises managers to, "Share as much information as possible. . . .Most supervisors think part of their role is to shield their subordinates from bad

news coming from above. When we shield our people we are acting as their parents and treating

them like children. If we are trying to create the mind-set that everyone is responsible for the

success of this business, then our people need complete information." (p. 90-1). Block identifies,"Creating a vision of greatness [as] the first step toward empowerment" (p. 99)



Bowen, D.E. & Lawler, E.E. (1992). The empowerment of service workers: What, why, how

and when. Sloan

Management Review, Spring 1992, p. 31.

Type: Journal article. High usefulness.

Audience: CEOs, managers, researchers.

The authors provide information useful to managers about how to assess the appropriateness,

costs, and benefits of empowerment within their organizations. The authors then analyzeservice employee empowerment first by identifying the benefits, which include: "quicker on-line

response to customer needs during service delivery;. . . . quicker on-line responses to dissatisfied

customers during service recovery;. . . . employees feel better about their jobs and themselves;. . .

. employees will interact with customers with more warmth and enthusiasm. . . . when employeesfelt that management was looking after their needs, they took better care of the customer;. . . .

empowered employees can be a great source of service ideas;. . . . great word-of-mouth

advertising and customer retention." Next the costs of empowerment are examined: "a greater

dollar investment in selection and training. . . . higher labor costs. . . . slower or inconsistentservice delivery. . . . violations of 'fair play'. . . . giveaways and bad decisions."

Bowen and Lawler identify three levels of empowerment in organizations. From leastempowering, or "control oriented", to most empowering, or "involvement oriented", they are:

"suggestion involvement. . . .employees are encouraged to contribute ideas through formal

suggestion programs or quality circles, but their day-to-day work activities do not reallychange. . . . job involvement. . . . [where] jobs are redesigned so that employees use a variety of

skills. Employees believe their tasks are significant, they have considerable freedom in deciding

how to do the work, they get more feedback, and they handle a whole, identifiable piece of work.

. . . high involvement organizations give their lowest level employees a sense of involvement not just in how they do their jobs or how effectively their group performs, but in the total

organization's performance."The authors consider "when to empower" and identify a "contingency approach". They present a short list of contingencies which are ranked on a scale with production line approach at

one end and empowerment at the other.

This article provides a sophisticated definition of empowerment, and an effort to develop acosts/benefits analysis for the implementation of empowerment. The authors categorize

empowerment within several levels and try to provide direction for managers seeking to

implement the appropriate level of empowerment given their circumstances.

Bowen, D.E. & Lawler, E.E. (1995). Empowering service employees. Sloan Management

Review, Summer

1995, p.73.

Type: Journal article. High usefulness.Audience: managers, academic researchers.

An excellent overview of what empowerment is and how it has been implemented and

successful at a variety of service organizations. Strong research foundation (though many self



references by the authors) is provided to support assertions made by the authors. Previous books

have documented the success of empowerment programs in manufacturing environment. This

article provides a good list of references.The authors indicate that, "The empowerment equation is: empowerment = power x

information x knowledge x rewards. A multiplication sign, rather than a plus, indicates that if

any of the four elements is zero, nothing happens to redistribute that ingredient, andempowerment will be zero.". The authors discuss the factors which contribute to an "empowered

state of mind". These include: "Control over what happens on the job. . . . Awareness of the

context. . . . and Accountability for work output." They provide evidence of effectivenessthrough anecdotal and case evidence, and also through "Research on individual management

programs, work teams, job enrichment, skill-based pay, and so on. . . " The authors provide

evidence that there is "a positive correlation between employee satisfaction and customer

satisfaction." Measures of how effective empowerment efforts have been are provided.Other issues the authors address include assessing the "degree of fit" of employees and the

utilization of the empowerment approach; "setting reasonable boundaries for employee heroism",

"training in which employees are familiarized with how their jobs fit into upstream and

downstream activities". The authors suggest that organizations take "a contingency approach toempowerment". They go on to state, "Evidence indicates that empowerment can have positive

returns for employees, customers, and the bottom line -- when it is right for the situation.However, empowering service employees also brings new challenges, such as setting boundaries

for service recovery, ensuring organizational learning, and integrating empowerment with other

change initiatives."

Caudron, S. (1995). Create an empowering environment. PersonnelJournal, 74-9, p.28.

Type: magazine article. Medium usefulness.

Audience: CEOs and managers.

The article opens with a case study of Colgate-Palmolive in Central Europe's former

communist countries where employees had never experienced anything like empowerment previously. The author reports that the results in this case study are "nothing short of amazing."

The author asserts several concepts about how to go about creating an empowering

environment, and supports these assertions with testimony from authors and successfulmanagers. Several steps toward creating an empowering environment are presented: "first of

these changes is information sharing." Next the author recommends providing training and

resources. Next comes, "helping management learn to empower others. . . . [this is] more aboutcoaching and creating an environment open to new ways of doing things. . . . Managers also have

to learn how to nurture and reward good ideas." The author indicates, "The best way to empower

team members is gradually and systematically. . . . Responsibilities for self-management anddecision making should be turned over to employees on as as-ready basis." "The next step is to

give employees control of the resources needed to make improvements."

This pattern of creating an empowering environment fits well with Bowen & Lawler's (1995)

framework article. They posit an empowerment equation which requires that power,information, knowledge, and rewards all be provided for empowerment to be successful. All

these components are part of the recommendations provided for by this author. This author also



presents an "HR Checklist: do you have an empowered environment" which may be useful as a

measuring device for workplace empowerment efforts.

Conger, J.A. & Kanungo, R.N. (1988). The empowerment process: Integrating theory and

practice. Academyof Management Review, 13-3, p. 471.

Type: Journal article. High usefulness.Audience: researchers, CEOs, managers.

This article seeks to analyze empowerment through diverse theoretical foundations. The

authors cite research from psychology, sociology, leadership and management, and team

building. The authors indicate that most management writing on this topic takes the view of empowerment as a set of management techniques, "and have not paid sufficient attention to its

nature of the processes underlying the construct."

A review of the management and social influence literature regarding power is provided. Theauthors go on to analyze the psychology literature. Two dictionary definitions of empowerment

are compared to contrast the typical management view and the typical psychological view. The

authors, "propose that empowerment be viewed as a motivational construct--meaning to enable

rather than simply to delegate. . . . Enabling implies creating conditions for heighteningmotivation for task accomplishment through the development of a strong sense of personal

efficacy."

The authors propose five stages of the empowerment process, "The first stage is the diagnosisof conditions within the organization that are responsible for feelings of powerlessness among

subordinates. This leads to the use of empowerment strategies by managers in Stage 2. The

employment of these strategies is aimed not only at removing some of the external conditions

responsible for powerlessness, but also (and more important) at providing subordinates with self-efficacy information in Stage 3. As a result of receiving such information, subordinates feel

empowered in Stage 4, and the behavioral effects of empowerment are noticed in Stage 5."

The authors cite works by A. Bandura who identified sources of personal efficacy."Information in personal efficacy through enactive attainment refers to an individual's authentic

mastery experience directly related to the job. When subordinates perform complex tasks or are

given more responsibility in their jobs, they have the opportunity to test their efficacy. Initialsuccess experiences (through successively moderate increments in task complexity and

responsibility along with training to acquire new skills) make one feel more capable and,

therefore, empowered."The authors provide little support for their model beyond logical reasoning. When placed in

the context offered by the authors, this model is sensible. It makes sense to evaluate why

employees may feel disempowered; this acknowledgment may lead to managers seeking toimplement empowerment processes. Helping employees to develop self confidence is a logical

next step, and is essential in the author's context. However, self confidence is not equivalent to

empowerment, yet the authors indicate that "as a result of receiving such [self-efficacy]

information [in stage 3], subordinates feel empowered in Stage 4, and the behavioral effects of empowerment are noticed in Stage 5." There seems to be no recognition that an organizational

culture change must occur, that employees will need training and resources to increase their



sense of self-efficacy, or that continued support is necessary for the successful implementation of

an empowerment program.

No evaluation of the model is provided, nor even suggested. It appears that the authors expectthe reader to be so appreciative of the research they conducted in other fields that no expectation

of proof will be forthcoming. Unfortunately, this may not be the case. Given the date the article

was authored (early in the employee empowerment movement), this article may have providedthe theoretical foundation for others to evaluate the model's applicability. Nonetheless, this

article presents a simplistic understanding of the implementation of employee empowerment.

Ettorre, B. (1997, July). The empowerment gap: Hype vs. reality. HRfocus, p.1.

Type: Magazine article. High usefulness.Audience: HR professionals, managers.

The author attempts to call attention to a common problem with employee empowerment

implementation efforts. There is a clear slant toward favoring empowerment and the articleseeks to assist the reader to successfully implement it by highlighting how to avoid falling, "into

the empowerment trap", that is, "'Empowerment by default...when management turns its back,

pulls away resources and leaves workers to their own devices.'" The gap noted in the article title

is the one between common empowerment implementation efforts and successful ones; it is afocus on the bottom line and big picture by every employee which is often lacking and causes the

gap. No effort is made beyond logical argument to provide evidence in support of the author's

views.

Ford, R.C. & Fottler, M.D. (1995). Empowerment: A matter of degree. Academy of

Management Executive,9-3, p.21.


Audience: CEOs, managers.

This article presents a construct for determining extent of empowerment within "two

dimensions: content and context. Job content represents the tasks and procedures necessary for carrying out a particular job. Job context is much broader. It is the reason the organization

needs that job done and includes both how it fits into the overall organizational mission, goals,

and objectives and the organizational setting within which that job is done."

The authors recommend an incremental implementation of an employee empowerment program, "this approach would focus first on the job content and, later, the empowered

employees would become involved in making decisions about job context as well."

Management could oversee the progress to assess the readiness of employees as well as their own comfort level with giving up authority.

This article presents another theoretical framework for employee empowerment without any

evaluation thereof. The authors use logical reasoning to support their contention thatempowerment is a construct of content and context. Also, the authors provide no evidence that



an employee's decision-making authority progresses in the order they articulate--from problem

identification, to alternative development, to alternative evaluation, to alternative choice, to

implementation/follow-up. It may be that there are times when employees are thrown into thedeep end of the pool and are expected to make alternative choices without having first grown

through the levels below. This growth is an essential step in the empowerment process, a point

not clearly made by the authors. This article may be an attempt to describe how empowerment isimplemented in real organizations, however that is not how the information is presented. Rather,

the authors seem to indicate that this is the way empowerment should be implemented. If this is

the case, too little evidence is supplied to convince most readers. No evaluation of the model of the content and context construct is offered, though one is

clearly needed. The authors also do not have the luxury of having written early in the timeline of

employee empowerment, by 1995 the concept was well developed and most academics were

seeking information and instruments to evaluate empowerment efforts, rather than a new model.The model is not useless, because it does have an internal logic. A visionary manager may be

able to develop the organizational culture and other systems needed to utilize this construct as a

way to implement an empowerment program, however no one will know how effective it could

be due to the lack of an objective and replicable evaluation.

Gandz, J. (1990). The employee empowerment era. Business Quarterly, 55-2, p. 74.

Type: Journal article. High usefulness.Audience: Managers, human resources professionals.

In this article Gandz relies on logical analysis to predict the increasing importance of

employee empowerment. He notes the benefits of empowerment as, "liberating the creative and

innovative energies of employees to compete effectively in a global environment. Within

coherent and articulated visions, employees at all levels will be freed to pursue goals andobjectives." The author provides a number of useful definitions and perspectives: training,

organizational vision and culture, risk-taking, new roles for managers, and the time involved in

the implementation process.

Ginnodo, B. (Ed.) (1997). The Power of Empowerment: What the experts say and 16

actionalble casestudies. Arlington Heights, IL: Pride.

Type: book. High usefulness.

Audience: general public, managers.

This collection of articles from "experts" provides a good overview of empowerment--what it

is, characteristics of empowered organizations, defining boundaries, roles and behaviors, preparation of supervisors and employees, as well as looking at the strategic implications of

effecting an empowering organizational change. The only problems with this book are its

reliance on so called experts and the relative lack of references.The case studies (including ones from Marriott, Federal Express, Monsanto Chemical, USAA,



Motorola, Saturn, as well as other companies) provide the only supporting evidence beyond the

reasoning of the chapter authors. In general, the authors' reasoning is valid and they provide

useful guidelines for the practicing manager. Despite being edited by a single individual, the book presents a choppy view of empowerment; it seems as if the chapters were written as

independent articles, though, with minor exceptions, there is no indication of this. Each chapter

author, however, has written other books, and it may be from these sources from which theydraw their information and ideas. Ginnodo presents 12 guiding principles from interviews he has

conducted in companies. These guiding principles are useful and can be referred to by nearly

anyone writing on the topic of employee empowerment.Another chapter of this book was written by Susan Albers Mohrman who is a researcher at

University of Southern California. This author provides the working definition of employee

empowerment for the book. Mohrman notes, "Empowerment must be placed in a context of

responsibility to the larger whole." Mohrman goes on to say that, "Studies have demonstratedthat it is possible to teach disempowerment. . . .when people repeatedly experience negative

consequences as they try to accomplish things." She argues that the manager's task then

becomes "to remove the 'electric shocks' that result in a low sense of efficacy." Mohrman

presents a sociological view of empowerment and an organizational design view, and notes thatempowerment includes both an individual and an organizational focus." The author relies on

logical reasoning and spurious conclusions drawn from animal psychology experiments tosupport her arguments. Nonetheless, Mohrman provides the reader with food for thought and a

strong summary of the complexity of the concept of employee empowerment.

The next chapter author, William C. Byham, a consultant and author, discusses the

characteristics of an empowered organization. Again personal experience, and logical reasoningare used as the supporting foundation. Byham defines "14 factors that are needed to achieve

maximum empowerment. . . .These factors are basically goals to be achieved.". These factors

provide useful information about the empowerment implementation process.Other chapters include one on the boundaries of empowerment written by Ken Somers who is

a consultant; one on training employees and managers to be empowered written by John R. Dew

a facilitator with Lockheed Martin; and one on empowerment fundamentals for strategic changewritten by consultant Steven A. Leth. The remainder of the book provides case studies which

demonstrate the concepts in practice.

Honold, L. (1997). A review of the literature on employee empowerment. Empowerment inOrganizations,

5-4, p. 202.

Type: Journal article. High usefulness

Audience: researchers.

In an excellent literature review on the topic of employee empowerment, Honold tracks the

history of the movement, seeks a clear definition, and reviews the various approaches which

have been used to provide a theoretical framework for employee empowerment. The author

attempts not to draw conclusions, rather she makes observations based upon what she has foundin her research. Clearly, an author must summarize what has been written by others and this

process emphasizes some information and de-emphasizes other points; I believe that Honold has



provided as fair an overview as anyone is capable.

In seeking a definition Honold points out, "to be successful, each organization must create and

define it [empowerment] for itself. Empowerment must address the needs and culture of eachunique entity." The aspects of individual and organizational readiness for empowerment are

reviewed. Honold notes some historical terms for what can now be considered empowerment:

"The socio-technical approach. . . .the idea of job enrichment. . . . job autonomy. . . . employee participation." Honold indicates, "The literature on employee empowerment can be divided into

five groupings: leadership, the individual empowered state, collaborative work, structural or

procedural change, and the multi-dimensional perspective which encompasses most of the four previously stated categories." She then goes on to summarize the works she has reviewed and

places them into these categories.

Honold also has a section regarding critiques of employee empowerment. Here she does draw

the conclusion that those who cite the failure of empowerment programs have studied oneswhere the implementation effort was incomplete or unsophisticated. Other conclusions she

draws are that, "it appears as though employee empowerment is on the rise in organizations. As

well, it looks as though it is an evolutionary process that cannot be achieved in the short term.

Initially, there will be mistakes as both employees and management internalize what it means to be empowered."

Kanter, R.M. (1979). Power failure in management circuits. Harvard Business Review , 57-4, p. 65.


Audience: Managers, CEOs, academics.

This article seeks to identify some of the causes of a feeling of powerlessness among specific

groups within organizations. These groups are first-line supervisors, staff professionals, andchief executive officers. The author argues that each of these groups suffers from the common

problems of lack of open channels to supplies, support, and information. The author uses a case

study to demonstrate that by sharing what power the individual members of these groups havethey are able to thereby increase their own power, and the effectiveness of the organization.

The shortcomings of this article are its age (for example, the author devotes a section to the

special problems of powerlessness felt by women managers), the fact that a model is providedwhich relies primarily upon logical analysis for support, and the fact that a single case study is

cited as evidence. Nevertheless, this article provides support for what many who study

organizations would consider self-evident. That is, that organizations which take better advantage of their human resources will be more productive and successful. "Access to

resources and information and the ability to act quickly make it possible to accomplish more and

to pass on more resources and information to subordinates."

Mallak, L.A. & Kurstedt, H.A., Jr. (1996). Understanding and using empowerment to change

organizational

culture. Industrial Management , 38-6, p. 8.



Type: Journal article. Medium usefulness.

Audience: Managers, researchers.

This article presents a model of the stages employees go through as they internalize theorganization's culture. The authors posit that the more that the employee has internalized the

culture, the more empowered he or she becomes. Mallak and Kurstedt note that empoweredemployees give feedback to others to enhance cultural consistency. The authors adapt other

theorists' models and use logical analysis to support their position. The importance of mentoringemployees through their internalization of the culture is noted.

Menon, S.T. (1995). Employee Empowerment: Definition, Measurement and Construct

Validation. Doctoraldissertation, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. Abstract available:

http://wwwlib.umi.com/dissertations/search Publication Number: AAT NN08135.

Type: Dissertation abstract. Medium usefulness.Audience: Researchers.

Within the abstract Menon provides a definition of empowerment, "the empowered state was

defined as a cognitive state of perceived control, perceived competence and goal internalization. .

. .The empirical results supported the view that empowerment is a construct conceptually distinctfrom other constructs such as delegation, self-efficacy and intrinsic task motivation." The author

notes, "Empowerment was also found to be significantly related to a number of outcome

variables including job satisfaction, job involvement and organizational commitment." Menon

also cites antecedents of prior research and creates, validates, and applies an instrument tomeasure empowerment.

Petzinger, T. (1997, January 3). The front lines: Self-organization will free employees to actlike bosses. Wall


Petzinger, T. (1997, March 7). The front lines: How Lynn Mercer managers a factory thatmanages itself. Wall


Petzinger, T. (1997, October 17). The front lines: Forget empowerment this job requiresconstant brainpower.

Wall Street Journal, P. B-1.

Type: newspaper column. Medium usefulness.

Audience: Managers, general public.



In a regular column, Thomas Petzinger, Jr. provides his perspective on what is happening in

the front lines of business. This series of columns, though unrelated, all have employee

empowerment as the topic. Petzinger seems to liken an empowered organization to an organic being; he advocates for empowering the workforce by noting how responsive it can be just as a

living organism is responsive to stimulus. Petzinger provides examples from actual companies

which demonstrates the effectiveness of employee empowerment—documenting increased productivity and high employee morale. Clearly these are opinion pieces, but are useful for the

examples they provide.

Quinn, R.E. & Spreitzer, G.M. (1997). The road to empowerment: Seven questions everyleader should

consider. Organizational Dynamics, 26-2, p.37.

Type: Journal article. High Usefulness.

Audience: Researchers, CEOs and managers.

This article examines factors related to why empowerment efforts in the work place are often

ineffective. In a very good literature review, the authors provide two approaches to defining

empowerment. The authors contrast the "mechanistic approach" with the "organic approach to

empowerment". The authors indicate that to be successful and empowerment program mustinclude aspects of both the mechanistic and organic approaches.

The authors describe what I would call a mentoring approach to the enhancement of

empowerment in the work place: "In short, these newly empowered participants empoweredtheir associates through their actions. They shared success stories and helped one another

diagnose situations to develop appropriate coping strategies. In addition, they built networks to

expand their power base in the organization." However the authors were quick to point out that

senior executives must feel empowered before they are likely to support the process of empowerment, and that many executives are not empowered. They remind the reader,

"empowerment is anything but simple and quick--it demands a willingness to embrace

uncertainty, trust people, and exercise faith."The researchers indicate, "Based on our research, we suggest four key levers that can assist

this integration [between the mechanistic and organic perspectives of empowerment]. The first

lever is a clear vision and challenge. . . . The second lever is openness and teamwork. . . . Thethird lever is discipline and control. . . .The fourth lever is support and a sense of security." The

seven questions mentioned in the article title are: "1. What do we mean when we say we want to

empower people? 2. What are the characteristics of an empowered person? 3. Do we reallyneed empowered people? 4. Do we really want empowered people? 5. How do people develop

a sense of empowerment? 6. What organizational characteristics facilitate employee

empowerment? 7. What can leaders do to facilitate employee empowerment?" The authorsmake it clear that neither the mechanistic nor the organic approach alone is sufficient to ensure

success, rather both together are needed.

This article provides a description of in-place empowerment efforts. The research conducted

was in the form of observation. An analysis of the observed behaviors was then conducted in anattempt to find and define the process which must take place for employee empowerment

implementation to be effective. While the researchers are careful to tie their model back to their



observations, they rely on the weight of their logical reasoning to stand up to critical scrutiny.

No replicable tests have been conducted on this model, and so it is best used as a tool toward

understanding rather than as an accurate description of employee empowerment and how best toimplement it.

Randolph, W.A. (1995). Navigating the journey to empowerment. Organizational Dynamics,

23-4, p.19.


Audience: managers, CEOs.

Randolph is one of the authors of Empowerment Takes More Than a Minute. This article

provides a short overview of the concepts presented in that book and provides additionalsupporting evidence of the effectiveness of employee empowerment in the form of case studies

from ten companies with which the author has worked; this documentation is far superior to that

which is presented in the book. Compelling logical analysis is also used as support for theauthor's thesis.

Shipper, F. & Manz, C.C. (1992). Employee self-management without formally designated

teams: Analternative road to empowerment. Organizational Dynamics, 21-3, p. 48.

Type: Journal article. Medium usefulness.

Audience: Managers, change agents.

The authors provide a broad review of how employee self-management works at W.L. Goreand Associates. The organizational culture of Gore is discussed in depth. Gore has takenemployee empowerment to an extreme degree. The authors try to organize Gore's philosophy

into themes which can be applied elsewhere, however the article reads like a public relations

piece for the company. The article does provide a perspective of what can go right whenemployee empowerment is effectively implemented. It is clear, however, that this system is not

for everyone.

Spreitzer, G.M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions,measurement, and

validation. Academy of Management Journal , 38-5, p. 1442.


Audience: researchers.

The author designed an instrument designed to measure psychological empowerment felt by

employees. A review of literature is provided which coincides with much of my own research.

Spreitzer offers this definition: "psychological empowerment is defined as a motivational



construct manifested in four cognitions: meaning, competence, self-determination, and impact.

Together these four cognitions reflect an active, rather than a passive, orientation toward a work

role. . . .The four dimensions are argued to combine additively to create an overall construct of psychological empowerment. In other words, the lack of any single dimension will deflate,

though not completely eliminate, the overall degree of felt empowerment." This additive

construct is distinct from Bowen & Lawler 's (1995) construct which is multiplicative, indicatingthat the absence of any one of their four elements (power, information, knowledge, and rewards)

will completely eliminate empowerment.

Spreitzer makes several assumptions in her research which are very useful, these include:"First, empowerment is not an enduring personality trait generalizable across situations, but

rather, a set of cognitions shaped by a work environment. . . . Second, empowerment is a

continuous variable; people can be viewed as more or less empowered, rather than empowered or

not empowered. Third, empowerment is not a global construct generalizable across different lifesituations and roles but rather, specific to the work domain." I am completely in agreement with

these assumptions. I believe it is a lack of understanding of the second one which causes many

so called "empowerment programs" in organizations to fail.

Spreitzer goes on to check the validity of the instrument she created through combining andrefining previous instruments which measured the dimensions noted above. She reports, "both

internal consistency and the test-retest reliability are established for the empowerment scaleitems." There were some results which did not confirm what was expected, yet support for

several hypothesises was provided at the significant level. The author notes, "A more powerful

test of the full empowerment model would be to tie empowerment to certain organizational

manipulations in order to better explain the degree to which situational changes can producemotivational changes in employees."

The article presents the results of measurements in near ideal format. The author uses

standard statistical analysis and points out the shortcomings in the research method. The articleis doubly useful because it presents results from replicable research and because it identifies the

sources of potential error.

Spreitzer, G.M. & Quinn, R.E. (1996). Empowering middle managers to be transformationalleaders. Journal

of Applied Behavioral Science, 32- 3, p.237.


Audience: Researchers, CEOs and managers.

Report of a field study conducted with middle managers at Ford who attended a Leadership

Education and Development training session which sought to develop middle managers into

transformational leaders. While the findings are not generalizable due to the homogeneity of thesample (80% white men, aged 40 to 50, who work for Ford), there were some findings which

were not expected and are of interest.

The most transformational middle managers (as measured by the type of change process they

initiated in a six month interval) were not the ones on the promotion fast track. Rather, theytended to be the plateaued managers. "The study indicates that both individual characteristics and

the organizational context influence the propensity of middle managers to embrace



transformational change", through empowerment. The individual characteristics cited include

self-esteem and affect about work. Those with highest self-esteem and most positive affect

about work were most likely to feel empowered to effect transformational change.The article is written such that the research could be replicated, although the likelihood of

achieving the same results is doubtful because of the homogeneity of the sample. This potential

source of error was well reported in the article. The authors do not attempt to apply theinformation beyond the organization from which it was gathered, however, as noted above, there

may be some generalizable results from this study.

Thorlakson, A.J.H. & Murray, R.P. (1996). An empirical study of empowerment in theworkplace. Group &

Organization Management, 21-1, p.67.


Audience: researchers, OD consultants.

A study which "evaluates the effect of a controlled introduction of empowerment, with

reference to power, managerial functions, leadership styles, and employee motivation." An

excellent study design which used a study group who was being empowered and a control group

who was not. However, apparently due to an organizational downsizing effort in the middle of the study, "Results provided minimal support for the positive influence of empowerment." The

null hypothesis that empowered workers would have no difference in how they viewed their

situation than non-empowered workers was not rejected.The article provides a good review of literature related to power, management and leadership,

and employee motivation. A balanced view of the concept of empowerment is provided, that is,

while it is clear that the researchers wanted to demonstrate positive effects of employee

empowerment they did relate references to prior writings critical of empowerment, and they diddecide to publish a study where the expected results were not achieved. The authors state, "The

outcome of this study may also serve as a case example of an ineffective way to implement

empowerment."

Thomas, K.W. & Velthouse, B.A. (1990). Cognitive elements of empowerment: An

"interpretive" model of intrinsic task motivation. Academy of Management Review, 15-4, p. 666.


Audience: Researchers.

Thomas and Velthouse provide a great deal of useful information, including a definition of

empowerment. Some definitions which will help to understand the authors' perspective include,"intrinsic task motivation involves positively valued experiences that individuals derive directly

from a task. . . .Task assessments are presumed to be the proximal cause of intrinsic task

motivation and satisfaction. . . .task refers to a set of activities directed toward a purpose." (p.668) So, when a person does a set of activities (read work) he or she assesses the task at hand



and decides if it is motivating and satisfactory. Over the course of time the individual

generalizes these individual task assessments into an overall perspective of this type of work. If

the intrinsic task motivation is present and is supported by management, that person becomesempowered.

This comprehensive theoretical article seeks to provide a description of the cognitive elements

which comprise intrinsic motivation. An excellent literature review on topics ranging fromleadership style to individual choice to globalization of understanding is provided. Not only do

the authors extrapolate from past writings of a number of theorists, but they also provide

empirical support. The authors note the benefits of their new model, and implications for implementation of employee empowerment are noted. That is, management can change the

environment to make completion of the tasks rewarding intrinsically, or management can work

to help the employee perceive his or her contribution as valuable.

What Thomas and Velthouse have provided is a theoretical framework within whichempowerment and its proximate causes can be understood. They provide too few examples to

make the work accessible to most people. However, they provide theoretical foundations for

some of the reasoning within the apprenticeship model. In the apprenticeship system,

inexperienced workers are expected to make errors—this is viewed as part of the learning process rather than an indication of future performance. The empowering manager will explain

the value of the error in terms of the learning experience it provided and in terms of the value of breaking habits and taking risks.

Ward, B. (1996). How to empower. Canadian Manager, 21-4, p. 20.

Type: magazine article. High usefulness.

Audience: managers.

The author uses simplified tenets of situational leadership to describe the stages an employeemust go through while becoming empowered and the appropriate managerial style to address

employee needs at each stage. Ward also uses Stephen Covey's "idea of an 'agreement' between

manager and employee which clarifies the 'terms' under which the employee is empowered. Theauthor uses logical analysis and the weight of what another author has proposed to support his

thesis. Few writers provide any perspective that empowerment is a process and that workers

should not be given authority before they are ready to properly exercise it. Because Ward does, Itend to overlook his lack of references beyond Covey and have used some of the information he

has provided.

Ward notes the importance of training and the changes to the manager's role, "The objective isto keep giving employees responsibilities which move them along the capability continuum,

eventually reaching 'fully capable of the task'. Naturally, the manager must be careful to keep

adjusting his or her leadership style as the employee becomes more capable." The assignment of responsibilities which move the employee on the continuum is a form of training not usually

thought of as such. Resource availability is also noted as important, "Resources include items

such as funding, access to support staff, or experts who have knowledge on which the employee

can draw." Ward also makes note of an important tenet of situational leadership, "The leadershipstyle does not have to be the same throughout—it can change on each component of the task."

That is, if the employee is skilled in one aspect of a project that aspect can be delegated to him or



her, however if the employee lacks skill in another component a different, more directive,

leadership style is called for. The author goes on to provide an example of this.

Zimmerman, M.A. (1990). Taking aim on empowerment research: On the distinction between

individual and psychological conceptions. American Journal of Community Psychology, 18-1, p. 169.

Type: Journal article. Medium usefulness.Audience: Researchers, social scientists.

While this article is from outside the management field, it does provide some useful

conceptions which help in understanding empowerment. The author argues that the individual

perspective of empowerment is too limited. The article, which introduces a series of articles onthis topic, favors a psychological perspective of empowerment. This perspective includes the

context within which the individual makes decisions and acts out his or her empowerment.

This article is primarily a literature review and seeks to synthesize the articles which followinto a coherent whole using logical analysis. Because the perspective is outside the field of my

thesis, I have taken only that which seems applicable. Namely, the definition of empowerment

and the perspective that empowerment must pervade the organization's culture in order to be

effective.

Appendix

A. A Retail Example of the Apprenticeship Model

An empowered organization will recognize the contribution of all employees and will work todevelop each to his or her full capability. An empowered organization will recognize that

competency in one area does not indicate competence in another area; the effort of every

employee has an impact on the success of the entire organization and all work is valued. That is,the effectiveness of the store depends upon properly displayed merchandise, appropriate

acceptance of returned goods, and clean toilets.

However, the customer service desk manager may not know how to properly clean toilets or how to display merchandise, the janitor may not know how to accept returns or display

merchandise, and the department manager may not know how to accept returns or clean toilets.

It is conceivable that an apprentice in one area of competence will be a journeyperson in another,and that as a journeyperson he or she will mentor an apprentice in that area. It is conceivable

that a pair of employees will mentor each other across several competencies.An example will make these concepts clearer. This example is provided not as a case study,

but rather to more clearly articulate the concepts under consideration. Imagine a departmentstore where employee skill levels are ranked either as apprentice, journeyperson, or master.

Please refer to the chart below for each of five employee's position, and skill level in each of four

competency areas:



COMPETENCY AREAS

employee

nameposition title registers

merchandisedisplay

merchandise codes

employeescheduling

Smithcustomer service

desk manager

master journey master journey

Jonesassistant store

managerjourney master journey master

Samson hardware clerkapprentic

eapprentice journey apprentice

Kirkwood ladies wear clerk journey journey apprentice apprentice

Bhatia crafts manager master apprentice apprentice journey

In the above example it would be expected that Smith would mentor Jones in the operation of the registers and in the codes associated with merchandise, Jones would mentor Smith in

merchandise display techniques and employee scheduling. This is clear because each is a master in some areas and a journeyperson in others. If we carry this concept of more experienced people providing training and mentoring to less experienced people within a competency area,

we would assume Smith and Kirkwood share responsibility for training Samson and Bhatia on

merchandise display. That Jones and Kirkwood mentor Samson on the registers, and are in turn

mentored by Smith and Bhatia, and so forth.

B. Other Models of Apprenticeship

The apprenticeship system is paralleled in the field of education and in the management

theory of situational leadership. Just as there is a hierarchy in the levels of the trades (apprentice, journeyperson, master) the field of higher education has its own hierarchy:

• Associates--have an introduction to the field of study and are expected to be competentassistants or workers in that field.

• Bachelors--have a deeper and broader understanding of the field of study; are able to

work independently in that field.

• Masters--have a greater theoretical understanding of the subject; have developedexpertise in a specific area; are able to teach the subject.

• Doctorate--have a broad theoretical understanding of the entire subject; have developed

original research or thought in one or more areas; are considered to be experts in the

subject.

Situational Leadership (Blanchard, Zigarmi, & Zigarmi, 1985) seeks to identify the

employee's knowledge, skills, and motivation level for each set of tasks he or she performs on

the job. The manager/leader then provides the correct combination of direction and motivationto respond to the employee's needs:



• Directing (or telling)--is the leader's response to an employee who has little or no skills or

knowledge of the task and is highly motivated. The employee's motivation will not be

significantly impacted by the lack of input they have because they are still learning theropes.

• Coaching (or selling)--is the leader's response to an employee who still lacks skills or

knowledge and yet has lost some motivation. This technique seeks input from theemployee as a motivator, yet still provides the opportunity for the manager/leader to

provide needed direction and to increase the employee's knowledge.

• Supporting--is the appropriate leader response to an employee who has developedknowledge and skills, yet is still experiencing motivation problems. The manager/leader

seeks opportunities to praise the good work effort of the employee and provide positive

feedback as a motivator.

• Delegating--is the highest step in this hierarchy, the highly skilled employee who provides their own motivation is appropriately supervised through delegation. It becomes

the employee's responsibility to seek out the manager/leader when problems are

encountered.

Back to Fox homepage

http://members.tripod.com/j_fox/index.html

empolyee empowerment

Documents