Description and Analysis of the Hawthorne Study Discussion and reply to 2 student discussions

Describe how the components of the Hawthorne study are incorporated in current human resource functions. What was the main idea behind this study? How have you been impacted by the components of this study in your current or past work setting? Respond to at least two of your peers posts.

REPLY TO EDWARDS DISCUSSION:
The components of the Hawthorne study are incorporated in human resource functions by way of maximizing workers ability in production, working well with others and retaining them. The main idea behind this study was to see if things in work environment play a factor in how colleagues perform their task in a team player atmosphere. In the research, the lighting in the workplace was improved in to determine if it would change the way the colleagues worked. Once the lighting improved within the workplace, the employees’ morale increased which led them to enjoy doing their work and putting forth best effort in their work which led to more work getting done. More importantly, the lighting change within the work environment created team collaboration where workers communicated and performed on the same level, anyone who went against the group norms was considered an outsider.  The study ended, “that workers are motivated by more than money and social interactions constitute a key part of the organizational experience. Individual attitudes and collective employee morale were significant determinants of productivity levels” (Baack, 2017, p. 1.2). As a result of this study, I have concluded that high employee morale is not just based around money, elements of the work environment such as the equipment, lighting, furniture and other elements play a part. For instance, a company that pays the workers well but has faulty equipment will create distress amongst employees. Once workers become frustrated, they will get annoyed with the job and underperform, which will decrease company metrics and cause a company to lose profit.  References  Baack, D. (2017). Organizational behavior. [Electronic version]. Retrieved from https://ashford.content.edu

REPLY TO TYRETTA:
The idea of focusing on human emotions as well as interactions to achieving higher success level is the driving principle behind the Hawthorne study. People are not solely motivated by monetary incentives, It’s more, which is why Mary Parker Follett believed that if employees worked together and supervisors became coaches instead of monitors then employee’s morale would increase and also the company’s productivity would increase. “Mayo and Roethlisberger concluded that workers are motivated by more than money” (Baack, 2017). Further more, the study showed that people react positivity and pleasantly to monetary incentives, feeling valued and appreciated, and being able to engage/collaborate with other employees, in turn they will organically categorize individuals based on their social behavior (Work ethic).  Ultimately creating a happy, healthy and productive environment, full of individuals who are socially attached and satisfied with their environment, allowing them to operate at their optimal level.   I can’t help but to reminisce on my past work setting, at a retail store which I reference to more often than I should, but it spark memories after a six year stretch, both good and bad. I instantly think of,  the routine end of the quarter surveys every staff member from the store manager, to the pharmacy technicians, even to the door greeter, were Inspired to take. Which was simply a way to collect each members perspective of the job, displaying if they were happy, the likely hood of staying long-term, if we felt valued as an employee and so forth.  Even having the opportunity, to make additional notes and comments just in case we felt that strongly about expressing something that was missed.  I say this to say, besides this survey, visibly the components of Hawthorne study weren’t carried out as they should have. The environment and management style reflected Theory X (in my opinion).The environment was very tense and majority of the staff were not satisfied, just content to working there. Typically you worked with the same individuals from day in today out, no  cross functioning of stations. The idea of monetary incentives and creating fear was the norm.  An although, our store produced the numbers when it came to comparing sales among store. If the store manager focused more on the social dynamics of the entire groups, allowing more collaboration and opportunities to have input (beside survey), and genuinely motivating individuals (not when it’s beneficial), creating a happy environment through understanding the social environment of it’s workers would have added greater levels of success for the store and it’s employee