Free Human Relations And Its Impact On Work Productivity Dissertation Introduction Sample

Introduction

Hypothesis
The concept of human relations is applied in organizations today to try and elaborate the characteristics of man in relation to task performance. An organization should look after the welfare of its employees as far as their development and management are concerned (Wood and Wall, 2002). Independent variables in human relations include employee integration, good communication, and promotion at work, motivational pay, and job security. The aforementioned factors lead to great skill and knowledge in the workplace, and thus, increase the yields in an organization. Good communication, motivation at work, job security among other factors leads to high involvement by employees. Employees will put in much effort in a job they are assured to be theirs and will work with greater commitment when they are given a commission for jobs well done. The need to be promoted further makes employees work with dedication sailing an organization to greater heights (Guthrie, 2001). Good human relationship between bosses and staff leads to mutual understanding, which in return improves organization's productivity. Good relationship should exist throughout the organization from the highest manager to the grounds man in the organization.

Problem

Ways in which human relations bring employees together in a way that it gives them a motive to work unanimously in a productive, unity and with economic, psychological and social satisfaction is an area that is widely researched. Diverse claims have been established on the effect of happiness in employees on productivity. Pleasure in life is believed to produce interaction and much involvement, in the end, raising productivity. Comfort according to other people reduces the motive to work and improve on skill; thus, resulting to stagnancy and monotony leading to passive and dull employees. The questions that arise are:
Do happy and satisfied employees produce higher yields and if so is it because they are contented or the other way round?
What factors make employees hard to deal with at places of work and what factors cause them to contribute dismally to work?
First, relationships between persons; particularly the emotions and attitudes within employees are critical to the success of an organization. People tend to search for emotional satisfaction at work and as such, organizations should search for a way to satisfy these emotional needs of employees. Employees should be viewed as social beings that greatly depend on the interaction for motivational purposes. In recognition of this, many organizations have put up human resource management to look into the welfare of its employees. An organization should have a straight forward channel of communication. It builds trust among the employees as a clear communication channel ensures transparency. Employees will work well in a transparent organization maximizing on yields, and as such, making an organization successful (Appelbaum et al. 2000). Proper channels of communication also build healthy relationships between employees, and that is what is needed for productivity.
In addition to that, employees find satisfaction in factors that result from work, which are promotions, recognition, and proficiency in the particular field. These are the primary factors of employee satisfaction. These are motivators because they drive employees to great output at work. When motivators are designed for the work itself, motivation is upheld (Way, 2002). These factors increase the morale of all employees, and they make them benefit the organization with the great effort they put in. Familiarity with a particular job reduces the morale to do that job this calls for job rotation or leave from work. Employers are encouraged to rotate employees at work because a constant relationship of employees with one type of job makes them bored because of the monotony (Godard, 2004). Monotony kills the morale to work and, as a result, leads to lower yields.
Job characteristics directly affect the attitude and behavior of employees. The satisfaction that employees get from the environment in which their work is situated contributes to their input in the work. A person who enjoys field work will perform dismally in an office; this translates to the culture of the person in question. The environment of work, therefore, should be conducive for an employee if they have to perform. An employee has a positive attitude in an environment he likes and tends to withdraw in an environment he believes him. Employees are also choosy and will not perform in an environment that affects them psychologically (Wood and Wall, 2002). Employees who work on jobs that are considered to be of high class show great commitment, purpose and a regular attendance, behavior, unlike their counterparts who hold jobs considered to be of low class.
When employees understand that the end product of their work may make a significant impact in the life of someone they tend to put more focus into that work (Godard, 2004). A person is assembling, and aircraft will work with a lot of care, unlike someone who puts papers in a box. Employees who worked to be used by human beings are, therefore, motivated by the fact that they should do a fine job because other humans depend on them and will appreciate their efforts on products. It in return increases proficiency and makes an organization successful.

Conclusion

Human relations at places of work should be upheld and encouraged so that organizations experience high yields. Motivation, effective communication, among other factors provides their platform on which employees put in more effort to achieve greater yields for an organization.

References

Appelbaum, Eileen, Thomas Bailey, and Peter B. Berg. Manufacturing Advantage: Why High-
Performance Work Systems Pay Off. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press, 2000. Print.
Guthrie, James P. High involvement work practices, turnover and productivity: Evidence from
New Zealand. Academy of Management Journal, 2001, 44, 180-90.
Godard, John. A critical assessment of the high-performance paradigm. British Journal of
IndustrialRelations, 2004, 42, 349-78.
Wood, Stephen J., and Wall, Toby D. Human resource management and business performance.
In P.B Warr [Ed.], Psychology at work. Harmonsworth: Penguin, 2002.
Way, Sean A. High performance work systems and intermediate indicators of firm performance
within the US small business sector. Journal of Management, 2002.