North-Holland
795
h s paper argues that the existing theoretical explanations of work alienation and corrective
management practices developed in the Western world have Limited cross-cultural applicability.
This argument is supported f i s t by identifying the cultural bias inherent in the Western
explanatory models of alienation and then by indicating how such a bias fails to adequately
explain work alienation and its opposite work involvement phenomena in Eastern societies Like
India. Finally, the paper probes into the role of some critical indigenous variables responsible for
the development of alienation among workers in India. The case of Indian workers provides an
illustrative example of what is needed for alienation research in a developing country context: to
avoid the folly of uncritically accepting the Western explanatory models and to encourage the
discovery of indigenous explanations.
0020-7594/90/$03.50
B.V.(North-Holland)
196
191
198
799
800
801
802
ing, feeling, and performance they are shaped by such ideological and
cultural influences. Early interactions with social institutions and their
specific representatives form the basis of many enduring psychological
characteristics of future personality. The influences of socialisation in
India produce three types of behavioural dispositions (or ethics) that
are particularly relevant in the context of work motivation. These
dispositions w i l l be referred to as (a) a personal ethic of helplessness,
(b) an organisational ethic of personalised relationships, and (c) an
idealized, family-centred work ethic.
Workers at all levels of organisations in India seem to manifest a
personal sense of helplessness. In their day-to-day work and non-work
spheres of life, they exhibit a passive attitude towards their environment. They feel that they can do nothing (in a direct manner) to change
their environment. They have inculcated an external orientation; i.e. a
belief that the external environment controls them, rather than them
controlling their environment. Thus they become insecure and demonstrate a strong need for dependence on others to reduce their feeling of
insecurity. As individuals, they feel that they are insignificant, powerless particles of humanity and, therefore, believe in the futility of their
actions. These beliefs create an attitude of fatalism and they become
indifferent to work and work organisations. As individuals, therefore,
they do not strive for challenge and excellence, but rather remain
content with status quo and mediocrity. They become the victims of
what can I do? and chulegu type syndrome. (Chalegu is a common
vocabulary often used to express ready acceptance of status quo and
mediocrity).
Some social scientist (Kapp 1963; Weber 1958) have argued that the
passive helplessness attitude of the Indian worker may result from the
influence of Hindu doctrines of (a) Moksha (salvation) through renunciation of all material possessions (Sanyas) as an ultimate goal in
life, (b) illusory nature of the material world (Maya) and the experiences of present life resulting from the actions in previous life (the law
of Karma in an endless cosmic causal chain). Although such beliefs
may play a role in the development of certain attitudes toward life in
general (such as contempt for competitive acquisitiveness or equanimity in the face of extreme sufferings and hardships in life), they
certainly are not the soIe reasons for the helplessness feelings in a
workers day-to-day life. The helplessness feeling and the attitude of
fatalism or external locus of control (Rotter 1966) orientation are
803
acquired primarily through socialisation practices related to action-contingent reward allocation in family, school, work organisations or other
social institutions. This point will be discussed later in the section.
The organisational ethic of Indian workers is also shaped by a strong
sense of insecurity and dependence on others. Their work relationships
are personalized rather than contractual. They work for their superiors,
friends, and relatives, rather than for accomplishing the task or organisational goals under contractual obligations. Personal loyalty takes
priority over organisational efficiency. Within the organisation, seeking
and maintaining personal status becomes the primary objective for
which organisational interests can be sacrificed. Most supervisors provide personal rather than institutional leadership. Their leadership
behaviour is directed towards maintaining their status or saving their
skin by pleasing everyone, avoiding conflicts or confrontation, and by
not taking any risk that might rock the boat even if such actions are
desirable for protecting organisational interest.
Indian workers also manifest a family centered work ethic. Most
workers believe that work is necessary and good, primarily for maintaining ones family, providing for the well-being of aging parents,
spouse, and children. Work for the sake of personal mastery over the
job, or for personal sense of task accomplishment is somewhat alien to
many. They have, however, an idealized form of work ethic derived
from the Bhagavat Gita. They tend to subscribe in the abstract to the
norm: Your right is to work only. But never to the fruit thereof. Let
not the fruit of action be your object. Nor let your attachment be to
inaction. Such abstract principles are hardly every practised in real
working life. Duties are performed generally in the family context, but
the same sense of duty does not prevail at work place. In fact, Indian
workers subscribe more to leisure and to family ethic than to work
ethic. They are more familiar with the sneha (fondness), shrudha
(affection), and arum (relaxation) culture than with Karma culture.
There is an emphasis on idle leisure pursuits that satisfy security and
affiliative needs, rather than creative leisure pursuits that achieve work
objectives; on maintaining status positions rather than task goal
accomplishments; on performing socially approved duties in interpersonal contexts rather than in the job contexts. These are the typical
characteristics of the Indian personality, and constitute disguised
manifestations of a feudalistic temperament that prevails among most
Indian workers.
a04
Four key elements in the socialisation process in India are responsible for the formation of the three types of ethic that we have identified.
First, the authoritarian practices in the family, the educational system,
and the religious institutions act to create a strong sense of dependence.
This is reinforced by the hierarchical authority structure in all of these
institutions. Those who are in authority position tend to overcontrol
their subordinates through the use of formal authority or rule-minded
supervision. Unconditional obedience by surrendering to authority is
considered a virtue. Personal initiative, originality, and independence in
thinking and decision making in every sphere of life meets with social
disapproval. As a result, independent critical thinking and reasoning
(i.e. to solve ones own life problems) diminish. Positional or status
authority rather than personal informed reason, forms the basis of
blind conformity and compliance.
Second, the reward systems within Indian social institutions tend to
promote helplessness and external orientation. Very often people in
authority positions (parents, teachers, political leaders) promise valued
rewards for the desired behaviour of subordinates but do not furnish
these rewards. Such broken promises create a state of uncertainty of
goal attainment, a deep sense of insecurity, external orientation, powerlessness and, finally, low self-reliance. Furthermore, pervasive attitudes
of negativism (searching only for what is wrong with an individual) and
pessimism about outcomes of every action on the part of superiors,
discourages risk-taking and responsibility-seeking behaviour, eventually
leading to passivity in ones dealings with the environment.
Third, family and religious traditionalism of the Indian culture has
created a time perspective that has an emphasis on the past rather than
on the present. Emotional gratification of ones desire to maintain
self-esteem through the recollection of past achievements is quite a
commonplace happening. In a sense, most individuals live physically in
the present, but psychologically in the past, and are unconcerned about
the future. Emphasis on the past and a lack of futuristic orientation
leads to a lack of planning while trying to achieve task goals. Thus,jobs
are handled as they come up, and problems are seldom anticipated
ahead of time for making adequate preparation to solve them. Without
prior preparation to solve anticipated problems, most problem solving
behaviour becomes chaotic, unplanned, and unorganised. Failures to
solve problems are then attributed to the complex and unanticipated
R N. Kanwgo /
a05
806
going to receive in.return for their work, and the manner in which the
employees are treated by their superiors.
Task-related experiences
Work motivation suffers if there are no clear job expectations
regarding what the employee is supposed to do on the job, and whether
he can get what he values most through his job behaviour for the
satisfaction of his important needs. No one would perform adequately
on the job when one lacks job clarity, and is unable to satisfy his
pressing needs.
Many employees do not have clear task objectives. Very often, they
have confused knowledge of what their responsibilities are, what task
goals or targets they should be aiming for, what paths or procedures
they should be following to reach such targets and how they are moving
on these paths. Lack of job clarity in the employees mind is the fault
of management. Managements fail to develop adequate job descriptions and job standards which might clarify employees duties and
responsibilities. Supervisors fail to provide their subordinates with
concrete task goals, and specified time periods for completion of the
job.
Furthermore, neither supervisors nor subordinates receive proper
feedback of work progress because of the absence of a systematic
reporting system and feedback procedures. Reporting and feedback
systems at work are simply absent, and the employees know it. When
standards of performance are an unknown quantity in the organisation
(in the minds of all employees including management), the problem of
increasing motivation for improving performance becomes meaningless. Employee motivation and performance can improve only when the
employees have a clear job perception with regard to what is required
of them for attaining very specific task goals within some prescribed
time by following some well tested paths (i.e. a work method). Task
clarity, goal specificity, and targeted time for task completion constitute the minimal condition for improved work motivation and performance.
Reward-related experiences
Even if job clarity is a necessary condition for worker motivation
and productivity, it is not sufficient. What is also needed is to provide
employees with job outcomes or rewards and compensations that the
807
808
years later when the employee has already forgotten that for which he
is being rewarded.
In many Indian organisations, compensation schemes are set up and
administered without any consideration of their value, equity, contingency, visibility, and timing. Employees are hired with the understanding of receiving a compensation package that is largely time-based,
rather than performance or skill-based. Employees know that their
skills and performance have no relation to the salary and benefits they
receive from the organisations. Many so-called performance- or meritbased rewards are clearly perceived as arbitrary and inequitable since
the employees work in an inadequate (mostly non-existent) appraisal
system. They are often ill-informed about the reward system and
consequently perceive a state of randomness or arbitrariness in reward
allocation. Since job performance does not bring in the sought-after
reward, they feel impotent in controlling the reward through their job
behaviour and consequently develop apathy toward their job. They
withdraw their energy from the job and engage in organizationally
dysfunctional activities (gossiping, ingratiating supervisors, etc.) hoping
that such activities w i l l bring in the valued rewards (status in the eyes
of co-workers, or perhaps a promotion or accelerated salary-increment
from superiors). Organizationally dysfunctional behaviour among Indian employees is so pervasive that like the black market money
crippling Indian economic system, blackmailing at work (through deliberate inefficiency and apathy) is destroying the moral fabric or
Dharma and Karma ethic of the Indian society.
Supervision-related experiences
In addition to the lack of task role clarity and inadequate reward
system, many Indian organisations emphasize bureaucratic practices
with excessive reliance on rules and regulations. Such practices create
an organisational norm that is perceived by employees as cold and
impersonal. Workers in these organisations see themselves as legalistic
robots guided by rules and regulations of a depersonalized organisation. An impersonal and legalistic environment alienates workers from
both their job and the organisation. Organizational interests are seen as
separate and distinct from the interests of the workers, and workers
behaviour is often directed toward meeting their own interests even at
the cost of organisational interest.
Supervisors and executives within organisations who engage in such
(c) Religious
Traditionalism
(b) Noncontingent
Reward System
(a) Authoritarian
Practices
Practices
Socialization
--
Leading
to
I. Historial Predisposing
Causes:
Reflected
in
Three Levels
(c) Idealized
Family Context
Work Ethic
Personalized
Relationship
(b) Organizational
QLE!iuG
Importance of Meeting
Obligatory Damands
Lack of Futuristic
Thinking
Dependence
Stable Behavior
Alienation
and Low
Productivity
B
P
2.
s%
c,
4-
Leading
to
__t
rn
organizational
Eracticea
Work Methods
Perceived
Powerlessness
Perceived
Env ironment
Resulting
in
Fig. 1 (continued).
Perceived Inequity
of Rewards
Perceived Absence of
Reward for Good
Performance
(I
Lack of Job
Job Perceotions
commitment
Job Motivation
Alienation
and Low
Productivity
811
References
Ashforth, B.E.. 1986. The experience of powerlessness in the operating core of the machine
bureaucracy. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto.
Blamer, R, 1964. Alienation and freedom: The factory worker and his industry. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
812
Chao, Y.T., 1988. Corporate culture and Chinese management. Keynote speech, International
Symposium on Social Values and Effective Organization, November 26-30, Taipei, Taiwan.
Hackman, J.R. and G.R Oldham, 1976. Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory.
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 16.259-279.
Herzberg, F.. 1968.One more time: How do you motivate employees? Harvard Business Review,
J a n w - F e b m , 53-62.
Inkeles. A. and D.H. Smith, 1974. &coming modem: Individual change in six developing
countries. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kanungo, RN.. 1971. The concepts of alienation and involvement revisited. Psychological
Bullelin 86, 119-138.
Kanungo, RN.. 1981. Work alienation and involvement: Roblems and prospects. International
Revim of Applied psYch010g~30,l-16.
Kanungo, RN., 1982. Work alienation: An integrative approach. New York: Praeger.
Kapp. W.K., 1963. Hindu culture, economic development and economic planning in India.
Bombay: Asia Publishing
Kipnis D.,1976.The powerholdcrs. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
hurler, EE and J.R Hackman, 1971.Corporate profits and employee satisfaction: Must they be
in conflict? California Management Review 14.46-55.
Man, K., 1932. Economic and philosophical manuscripts'. In: K. Maor and F. Engels,
Gesamtausgbe, Vol. 3. Berlin: Marx-Engels Institute (first published in 1844).
Man. K., 1968. 'Critique of the gotha programme'. In: K. Man and F. Engels, Sclected works.
New York: International Publishas ( f i t published in 1875).
Maslow. A.H., 1954.Motivation and personality. New York: Harper.
Mehta, P., 1976. From economic to democratic commitment: The role of worker participation.
Vialpa (4)l. 39-46.
Mehta, P.. 1978. Objective and subjective factor in employee satisfaction. Indian Journal of
Industrial Relations 2(13), 433-444.
O F , C., 1978. The Work values Of Westem and tribal black CIXIPIOYCCS. Journal of Crm-Cultural Psychology 9. 99-112.
Rabinowiy S. and D.T. Hall, 1977. Organkational research on job involvement. Psychological
Bulletin 84. 265-288.
Rotter, J.B., 1966.Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement.
Psychological Monographs 80(1), 1-28.
Seeman, M., 1959.On the meaning of alienation. American Sociological Review 24,783-791.
Shepard, J.M.,1971. Automation and &enation: A study of office and factory workers. Cambridge. MA: M.I.T. Ress.
Weber, M., 1930.The protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. London: Men and Unwin.
Weber,M., 1958.The religion of India: The Sociology of Hinduism and Buddhism. (H.H.
Gcrth
and D. Martindale US. and eds.) Glencoc, CT Free h.
Cette ttude soutient quc les explications thtoriques existantes de I'alitnation au travail et les
pratiques administratives correcuices mists au point dans le mondc occidental podde nt une
valeur d'application interculturelle limit&. Cet argument a t appuyt d'abord en identifiant l
a
biais culturels inhCrents aux modkles utplicatifs occidcntaux de I'alitnation et ensuite cn indiquant
comment un tel biais nc r k i t pas A expliquer adtquatement l'alitnation au travail, ainsi que le
phknomhe oppod d'implication au travail, dans des sociktts orientals cornme I'Inde. Enfin,
cettc ttudc examine le r8le de Ccrtaines variables indighes critiques qui scraicnt responsables du
dtveloppement dc I'alihation cha les travailleurs Indiars. Lc cas d a travailleucs Indiens fournit
unc illustration de cc que la recherche sur I'alihation a besoin dans Ic contcxte d'un pays en voie
de dCveloppemcnt: Cvitn la foiie d'acccptcr sans esprit critique les modtles #explication occidentaux et encourager la dtcouverte d'explications indighnes.
Copyright of International Journal of Psychology is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied
or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission.
However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.