Impact of HPWS in the Workplace The emergence of high-performance work systems has been prominently implemented in a number of contemporary work environments. The very nature of the high-performance workplace is a complex notion as it involves a number of human resource inputs. Broadly speaking, the high-performance work environment is understood as business practices that implement innovative organizational approaches, and high-involvement systems as a means of achieving greater workplace efficiency and productivity. This essay considers high-performance work systems from the perspective of the employer and the employee and critically considers the extent that this offers a mutual gains approach.
High-performance work systems have been implemented in a wide variety of industries and work environments. In terms of the employer, such systems have regularly demonstrated efficacy in terms of greater workplace productivity. The specific nature of these systems is oftentimes industry specific, but there are a number of proscriptive elements that attest to the functionality of these systems from the employer’s perspective. Some of the most prominent implementations of these systems have occurred in manufacturing industries. For instance, Hunter (2009, p. 7) indicates, “auto assembly plants with teamwork, employee involvement, and job rotation had higher labor productivity and lower levels of productive defects. ” While this example is of the auto-industry, it’s clear that such increased productivity levels are a primary advantage for employers.
While high-performance work systems have been demonstrated to contain strong benefits for employers, questions remain whether such practices positively benefit the employee. Prominent considerations in these regards are the potential of such systems to increasingly demand involvement on the employees and higher workloads. Within this context of understanding, the main point is that these systems function to innovatively restructure the work environment for increased performance rather than simply demanding employees work harder (Bauer 2004).
These structural shifts have even been demonstrated to have a mutual gains approach for employer and employee. As demonstrated above, the high performance workplace has been demonstrated to have productivity benefits for employers. In terms of employees, Scotti, Driscoll, Harmon, and Behson (2007, pg. 112) note that, “workers exercise relatively broad discrentionary decision-making authority, rather than suspending their independent judgment. ” In addition, it’s noted that the rotation methods allow employers variety of tasks.
Ultimately these elements combine to create a work environment that escapes the monotony of the traditional workplace, and allows the employee increased independence. In conclusion, this essay has examined high-performance work systems from the perspective of the employer and the employee and has critically considered the extent that this offers a mutual gains approach. The essay has revealed that these systems have significant productivity and profit gains for employers and increased independence for employees. Ultimately, the high performance work environment constitutes a significant and positive structural innovation on the traditional work environment for both employer and employee.
References Bauer T. High Performance Workplace Practices and Job Satisfaction: Evidence from Europe Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit Institute for the Study of Labor. 2004 Hunter, L. 2009. ‘What Makes a High-Performance Workplace? Evidence from Retail Bank Branches. ’ Wharton. 2009. Scotti, D, Driscoll, A, Harmon, J, & Behson, S 2007, Links Among High-Performance Work Environment, Service Quality, and Customer Satisfaction: An Extension to the Healthcare Sector, Journal of Healthcare Management, 52, 2, pp.