Employee ownership:

According to Park (2003:43), employees will be more motivated to do their jobs well if they
have ownership of their work. This requires giving employees enough freedom and power to
carry out their tasks so that they feel they own the result.

As individuals mature in their jobs, the organisation should provide them with opportunities for
added responsibility.

Gardner (2009:210) states people may show up for work, but are they engaged and productive?
People are more committed and engaged when they can contribute their ideas and suggestions.
This gives them a sense of ownership. The Sony Corporation is known for its ability to create
and manufacture new and innovative products. In order to foster the exchange of ideas within
departments, they sponsor an annual Idea Exposition. During the exposition, scientists and
engineers display projects and ideas they are working on (Erasmus, et al., 2003:374)

Proponents of employee ownership argue that employee ownership can increase efficiency by
giving employees incentives to work harder and smarter and to cooperate with the management
and each other. Employee ownership makes the interests of employees correspond with those of
the company. Because higher stock prices and more dividends mean more income for employees,
employee ownership can motivate employees to work voluntarily harder (Kruse & Blasi, 2000;
Windier & Marens, 1997). Therefore, it can be more effective than other pay systems, especially
in an industry or company where centralized monitoring of employees is more costly, and worker
cooperation is indispensable to success.

In contrast to the prediction of opponents that employee ownership can raise decision-making
costs, proponents note that a cooperative culture in an employee owned company may reduce
bargaining costs and conflict costs, which many conventional companies cannot commonly
avoid. The coincidence of interests within the company helps mitigate possible conflicts between
the company and its employees (Ben-Ner, 1988). Also, such a culture facilitates employee
involvement in day-to-day work, which is important because front line workers know their jobs
best. The voluntary involvement can help improve the production process and quality of
products, and bring down the product defect rates.
 An additional argument for employee ownership is based on human capital theory. If a
cooperative culture and sense of ownership cause an employee-owned company to have fewer
layoffs and lower quit rates, it is likely that firm-specific human capital will increase. The
tendency toward long-term employment makes the company invest more in training its
employees. Accordingly, employment stability in an employee-owned company can facilitate
investment in human capital and skill accumulation, which improves firm performance of the
employee-owned company.

The above arguments regarding relative efficiency depend upon workplace culture and relations
in employee-owned firms. One key factor may be worker participation in decision-making: if
employee-owners are excluded from 8 RHOKEUN PARK ET AL. decision-making, the
company might not enjoy improved attitudes and worker effort. Moreover, if the relationship
between employee-owners and management is hostile, employee ownership may not facilitate
better work effort and accumulation of human capital, and may increase bargaining costs.

This study finds that employee ownership companies survive longer, consistent with the limited
prior research on this topic (Blair et al., 2000; Kruse & Blasi, 1999; Welbourne & Cyr, 1999).
Employment in employee ownership companies is also found to be more stable, consistent with
Craig and Pencavel (1992) and Blair et al. (2000). In addition, productivity is found to be
positively related to some measures of employee ownership, consistent with some but not all
prior studies (reviewed in Kruse, 2002; Kruse & Blasi, 1997). The apparent effect of
employment stability is complex, and may involve more mechanisms. Company policies
designed to increase commitment of employees will help make employment more stable. These
policies may affect identification of employees with the company, which may increase
productivity and the willingness of workers to be flexible and make adjustments during
economic difficulties.
Kruse, D., & Blasi, J. (2000). The new employee-employer relationship. In: D. Ellwood, R.
Blank, J. Blasi, D. Kruse, W. Niskanen & K. Lynn-Dyson (Eds), A Working Nation: Workers,
Work, and Government in the New Economy. New York: Russell Sage.
Ben-Ner, A. (1988). The life cycle of worker-owned firms in market economies. Journal of
Economic Behavior and Organization, 10.
Blasi, J. R., & Kruse, D. L. (1991). The new owners: The mass emergence of employee
ownership in public companies and what it means for American business. New York:
HarperCollins.
Kruse, D., & Blasi, J. (1997). Employee ownership, employee attitudes, and firm performance: A
review of the evidence. In: D. J. B. Mitchell, D. Lewin & M. Zaidi (Eds), Handbook of Human
Resource Management (pp. 113-151). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Welbourne, T., & Cyr, L. (1999). Using ownership as an incentive. Group & Organization
Management, 24

Workload:
The impact of staff turnover results in an extra work load for the remaining staff members
performance and on organisational effectiveness. Mathis and Jackson (2007:119) state that
employees have to work extra hours to compensate for the work of those that have resigned.
Russell and Bvuma (2001:47) state that cost is not only financial but must also be measured in
terms of the damage to staff morale and deficits in meeting customer demand. The increased
workload leads to low morale and high levels of stress which in turn leads to absenteeism
amongst employees. . In the context of voluntary staff turnover, when the employee relates the
work load with pay and benefits which may be perceived to be lower than the amount of work
performed, work overload may then incite staff turnover intention (George and Jones,
2002:108).

Workload refers to the intensity of job assignments. It is a source of mental stress for employees.
Stress is an active state of mind in which human being faces both an opportunity and constraint
(Robbins, 1996). There are various ways that stress symptoms or outcomes are reflected in the
workplace. In stress, outcome that is desired from an employee is generally perceived to be both
uncertain and important (Robbins, 1996).
In organizations, reaction of people toward workload is different. Some tackle much better while
others suffer in destructive consequences. Just as workload differs as a function of the individual,
it also differs as a function of ones type of occupation. Some occupations are, inherently more
work loaded than others. All the stress strain relationships have an apparent impact on the
organization and industry. A research on the topic describes that certain individuals, in different
occupations, are increasingly exposed to be under unacceptable level of workload stress (Schultz,
2002).
Change in workload tends to change the stress level of employees, which ultimately affect the
performance of employees. Stress is not necessarily bad in and of itself, while it is typically
discussed in a negative context. It is an opportunity when it offers potential gain. (Robbins, OB).
Workload is an opportunity for the employees to learn and prosper more quickly. As employees
do their jobs they gain more work experience, which enrich their exposure. It is also viewed that
employees who have enough work to do remains more active and energetic while work-less
employees leftover inactive and lazy. Workload pressure can be positive leading to increased
productivity. Under utilization of human skills or failing to reach the full potential of the
employees is also one cause to increase stress. Employees who possess the capabilities to
perform a job enjoy workload. However, when this pressure becomes excessive it has negative
impact. In this stage, the individuals perceive that they dont possess necessary skills and
abilities, required to affray with the stress. However, occupational stress is discomfort at a
personal level unless it exceeds a persons coping capabilities and resources to handle them
adequately (Malta, 2004). Stress is acknowledged to be one of the main causes of absence from
work (Mead, 2000). If employees are not interested with their jobs or they are not satisfied with
the job field they take extra work as fatigue and it causes to contribute job stress. Parikh &
Taukari (2004) says, another contributing factor is the nature of the job, which might amount to
an immense amount of physical and emotional exhaustion. In the late 1980s, a survey of HSE
department, USA showed that stress is second major cause of ill health in serving employees
(Colin J. Mackay et al, 2004). Organizations must create work environments that merge these
employees related concerns to simultaneously get the optimal from employees to meet the goals
of the organization.
Robbins P. Stephen (1999), Organizational Change and Stress Management, Organizational
Behavior, 8th Edition, p 653, Prentice Hall of India, New Delhi 110.001.
Robbins P. Stephen (1999), Organizational Change and Stress Management, Organizational
Behavior, 8th Edition, p 466, Prentice Hall of India, New Delhi 110.001.
Mackey Colin J, Cousins Rosanna, Kelly Peter J., Lee Steve, McCaig Ron H. (2004),
Management Standards and work-related stress in the UK: Policy background and science,
Work & Stress, April-June 2004, Vol. 18, Issue. 2.

Expectation:
Employee expectations include the timely and accurate payment of wages, adequate training,
safe working conditions, full explanation of all company policies and especially of your job
responsibilities, and fair and constructive feedback from your supervisor.
New employees have expectations but when these expectations are not met, they may start
withdrawing from work using sick leave, family responsibility leave and all kinds of excuses (De
Vos, Strydom, Fouche and Delport, 2007:303). Employees expect that their performance will
correlate with the rewards received from the organisation. Employees set expectations about
rewards and compensation to be received if certain levels of performance are achieved. These
expectations determine goals or levels of performance for the future. Employees achieving the
desired levels of performance expect a certain level of compensation. If employees see that hard
work and superior performance are recognised and rewarded by the organisation they will expect
such relationship to continue in the future. Therefore they will set higher levels of performance
expecting higher levels of compensation. If employees see little relationship between
performance and rewards, then they may set minimum goals in order to retain their jobs but will
not see the need to excel (Birdi, Clegg, Patterson, Robinson, Stride, Wall and Wood, 2008:68).

There are many explicit expectations in the employer-employee relationship such as salary,
compensation and job duties. In addition to the explicit agreements between employer and
employees, there are often unacknowledged and unspoken expectations. These are part of the
psychological contract. The psychological contract is an unwritten agreement that sets out what
employers expect from employees and what employees expect from employers. In practice most
psychological contracts are between managers and their direct reports. This contract defines the
expectations each person has for the people in the role called manager and the role called
worker. Managers are expected to treat workers fairly, to give feedback on how workers are
performing their jobs, to provide acceptable working conditions, and to communicate clearly
about relevant organizational issues. Workers are expected to provide a fair days work for their
pay, to have a positive attitude, to follow directions, to show up every day, and to demonstrate
loyalty to the organization (embodied by the manager). It should be emphasized that the
employer and employee need not communicate, nor agree on the specifics of the psychological
contract for the contract to exist, and, for the contract to have behavioral consequences. The
psychological contract has an impact on the amount and quality of work and employee provides,
even whether the employee stays with the organization.
We have found in recent research into the psychological contract is that this contract is a
powerful determinant of behavior in the workplace. However, most people do not communicate
their expectations clearly, to the appropriate person, and at the most effective times. Broken
psychological contracts between employers and employees are at the root of many workplace
conflicts, absenteeism, poor performance, and costly employee turnover. This silence about the
expectations in the psychological contract seems to be the rule, rather than the exception. So
why do we not communicate our work expectations with each other? First, we often do not even
know what the elements of the contract were until we have been disappointed because some
important expectation was not met. Second, the need to actually discuss work expectations is
relatively new in many cases. Until relatively recently workers and managers agreed that
workers were expected to keep their jobs until they retired unless they failed to perform in some
important ways. With the rapid changes in workplaces today, this agreement can no longer be
taken for granted. In order to have a high quality employer-employee relationship it is helpful to
have more explicit discussions about worker-manager / employer-employee expectations, and to
have these discussions regularly. The process of clarifying and discussing expectations reduces
turnover and increases productivity and job satisfaction. One of the most powerful motivators in
organizations is managerial attention. Discussing expectations clearly helps employees believe
someone in the organization cares about them as individuals.
Expectations can be organized in many ways but should cover aspects of work and life important
to the people involved both the explicit expectations for task performance, managerial
direction, and organizational resource support, and, more personal expectations each person has
for respectful treatment, work environment quality, personal expression and growth. In each
description both the manager (as an individual and a representative of the employer) and the
employee have expectations. Sometimes these expectations match. The problems occur when
the expectations do not match.
An example of conflicting expectations might be the case where an employee expects clear
direction from their manager and the manager expects the employee to work with general
guidelines in a more unstructured way. The manager gives ideas and suggestions thinking they
are encouraging the employees autonomy, initiative, and development. The employee is
frustrated by the lack of direction and thinking the manager is unable or unwilling to make
organization commitments for employee performance and reward. At the performance review
the manager feels the employee has not done as well as they should in the job and gives that
employee a mediocre review. The employee feels the manager has not done their job and is
being subjective or idiosyncratic in the review. Neither the manager nor the employee is happy
or productive. Discussing these expectations and differences in preferred employer-employee
style is likely to have made both employer and employee more effective.

MOTIVATION:

Nel, et al. (2004:310) define motivation as the force that makes us do things; this is a result of
our individual needs being satisfied (or met) so that one has inspiration to complete the task.
Bittel and Newstrom (2002:67), state that these needs vary from person to person as everybody
has their individual needs to motivate themselves. They may further determine the effort they put
into their work and therefore increase the standard of output. Harrison and Kessels (2004:148)
state that a motivated person is always aware of the fact that a specific goal must be achieved and
continuously direct his/her efforts at achieving that goal, even in the face of adversity. According
to Herzberg, et al. (2002:351), the quality of work and the output of a motivated person are very
good. But if employees work only for the sake of money and not 43 having the love of the
organisation at heart, then the quality of work is often compromised.

The term motivation is derived from o Latin word movere which means to move (Dhameja,
2009). It means influencing workers behaviour to achieve organizational goals and objective. It
determines whether an employee will do his job properly. Motivation increases workers
performance. Pay, punishment or praise are external incentives or motivational factors that need
to be internalized in order to become effective. Internal incentives on the other hand, are ego
needs of the employee. It includes job satisfaction, job accomplishment and prestige (Dhameja,
2009).
Motivation is a psychological process. A recent data-based comprehensive analysis concluded
that competiveness problems appear to be largely motivational in nature (Mine, Ebrahim, and
Watchel, 1995). Along with perception, personality attitudes, and learning, motivation is a very
important element of behavior.
Nevertheless, motivation is not the only explanation of behaviour. It interacts with and ads in
conjunction with other cognitive processes. Managers today are using work environment as a
means of effectively improving workers performance (Robertson, 2006). They are also using
monetary and non-monetary incentives to foster staff retention and effectiveness (Kepner, 2001).
Monetary and non-monetary incentives are both critical in staff turnover and productivity
(Nelson, 1999; Kepner, 2001). Motivation is something that can come and go in an instant. The
workplace often can be a fun and enjoyable place, but other time can be a pit of hell. Motivation
is delivered in many different ways. Each person may be different, but sometimes we share the
same types of motivation with Luthans (1998) asserts that motivation should not be thought of as
the only explanation of behavior since it interacts with and acts in conjunction with other
mediating processes and with the environment.
Like other cognitive process, motivation cannot be seen. All that can be seen is behavior, and this
should not be equated with causes of behavior (Luthan, 1998)
Motivating workers for effective job performance through adequate recognition includes among
others, recognizing and praising employees as soon as an assigned task is completed.
Recognizing employs staff small improvement a workplace and recognition of other emotional
needs of employees in and outside the workplace (Kepner, 2009).

So whether your employees are disgruntled or not, you should check out these strategies to see
how you can make their work lives more satisfying and productive:
building employees' involvement in the business

Building Employees' Involvement

Every employer's dream is to have employees who care as deeply for the success of the business
as they would if the business were their own. While you may never get employees to care that
much, you can build a sense that what's good for the business is good for them. Here are some
steps to building that type of commitment and involvement:
Identify any problems that might stand in the way. Again, the types of problems that
lead to absenteeism, turnover, and generally low morale will be barriers to developing the
type of commitment to the business that you're seeking.

Give some power to employees. If you want employees to care, you have to give them
some responsibility and some decision-making latitude. Employees have to believe that the
decisions they make and the work they perform has a direct impact on the product or service
you provide. This may be easier to achieve and demonstrate in a small business than it would
be in a larger one.
Encourage risk-taking. Let employees experiment and try to find new ways to help the
business reach its goals. Don't create a culture where employees are afraid to try anything new
because if they fail they will be punished. Allow a certain amount of failure, and reward
people for trying.
 Use reward systems. When your employees do well, reward them. Tailor your reward
systems to specific accomplishments. If you have one employee who sells 25 percent more
than everyone else, but everyone gets the same bonus, your star sales rep. isn't going to be
particularly motivated to excel in the future.
Plan social and athletic activities. These types of activities allow people to interact with
each other on a level that can build stronger professional bonds. If your business is small,
perhaps just an annual dinner or picnic somewhere is enough. If you have several employees
with a similar hobby or athletic interest, maybe your business can sponsor a team in a local
league.

Dhameja, S.K and Dhameja, S. (2009), Industrial psychology New Delhi. S.K

Kataria and sons.

Kepner, K. (2009) Understanding Motivation: An Effective Tool for Managers.

(Online), available; hUp//cdis.ifas.ed/#KOl7

Organizational Culture: