Empowering Individuals in a Team Setting and Its Impact on the Organization
Abstract
Employee empowerment is the process of delegating decision making power to junior workers’ in an organization. It may also refer to the process of motivating employees in the organization. The concept of employee empowerment started during the world wars and has evolved over time to the present day special organization structures designed to facilitate employee empowerment. This paper, in exploring the historical development of the concept has identified four basic dimensions of employee empowerment as autonomy, responsibility, information and creativity. Through a literary review of past studies, this paper highlights that workers’ empowerment is important in improving employees commitment to their work which is essential to improving overall performance. Management support is also necessary in building of strong teams in an organization. This paper also finds out that for service organizations such as banks, employee empowerment plays a key role in improving service quality and customer satisfaction.
Key words: employee empowerment, delegating decision making process, motivating employees, autonomy, responsibility, creativity, information, organizational structure.
Introduction
Empowerment, in an organizational context, can be defined in two basic ways: the situational context and the psychological context (Wooddell, 2009). The situational approach refers to the transfer of power to employees from high-level management levels by engaging the employees in the decision making process. It is also commonly referred to as management practice or relational approach. The psychological approach, however, lays less emphasis on delegation of the decision making function. On the contrary, it encourages processes that lead to workers’ motivation in an organization.Thus, the psychological approach looks at empowerment in terms of a series of psychological cognitions aimed at enhancing intrinsic motivation among workers within an organization. Whereas, the situational approach emphasizes power/resource delegation, the psychological approach emphasizes more on improving the workers’ feelings (Camp, 1993).
The situational context of empowerment has been criticized by supporters of thepsychological approach on grounds that it undermines the psychological value of empowering employees. Kay et al(2008) argue that the situational approach poses a great dilemma to managers since the success of the approach relies heavily on the manager’s capability to balance their loss of control with the need to achieve certain goals. They also allege failure by the approach to take into account the employees’ cognitive state since simple sharing or delegation of decision making powers to subordinates may not necessarily translate into a state of mind of hard work to increase productivity of the organization. According to Wooddell (2009),resource sharing or delegation of power provides only a single set of conditions which may, though not necessarily, empower or enable subordinate but fails to consider the nature of real empowerment as per their experiences. This paper focuses on general empowerment of individuals in a team setting and its impacts on an organization.
Findings
Historical Development of Workers’ Empowerment
Before we embark on an in-depth analysis of its impacts, it is important to understand the historical context of the concept of employee empowerment. Though, today, organizations have developed very sophisticated strategies of empowering their workers for better performance, management experts agree that employee empowerment has evolved over time. In order to understand the chronological development, let us review a study conducted by Holden Len in which he summarizes the conclusions made by various researchers on the history of employee empowerment in his attempt to establish the effect of employee empowerment on organizational communication over time.One common factor that cuts across all the studies is the fact that employee empowerment is a dynamic concept with its various forms changing over time with changes in social, economic as well as political pressures (Holden, 2005).
The concept of workers’ of workers’ involvement and empowerment dates back to the 1st world war during which, there was a considerable increase in employee militancy following the emergence and rise of left-wing ideologies. In the year 1917, in Russia, the famous Bolshevik revolution also significantly affected workplace relationships (Holden, 2005).Around the same time, Britain also witnessed considerable increase in efforts to have employees and their workers’ unions engage with top management of organizations in pay and working condition negotiations. However, following the economic recession that hit Britain in n the 1920s and the subsequent world economic downturn of the 1930s, most of these efforts did not bear sufficient fruits despite having been promoted so much by the need to involve employees in their work as a means of boosting performance (Kemal &Erbas, 2010).
Significant efforts were to be realized during the Second World War. During this time, there was heightened need to increase productivity in order to meet the demand of the war. As a result, employees demanded to be delegated greater authority over their firms’ operations in return for their increased efforts to expand productivity. This phenomenon greatly revitalized most of the employee empowerment schemes of the time (Holden, 2005). Many factories and organizations established work committees and joint consultative forums, some of which continued into the post-war period, to take care of the workers’ interests. However, in the 1950s the top management and unions of the time lost interest in these committees and forums sending many of them to decline and collapse. This was promoted by the rising popularity of the concept of “direct collective bargaining” through employer organizations, workers’ unions as well as the employers themselves (Kemal &Erbas, 2010).
In the 1960s and 1970s, the concept of “industrial democracy” again began to receive a considerable boost. Most shop keepers and other junior staff of organizations began to receive some delegated authority over their roles in the organization (Holden, 2005). The Bullock Committee report of 1977 provided a basis for increasing agitation and adoption of industrial democracy. This was facilitated by the emerging trends in democratization of politics and other aspects of the society (Kemal &Erbas, 2010).The European Community played a significant role in pushing the Bullock Committee to establish ways by which its partners could adopt the best forms of Industrial democracy. Several workers’ cooperatives and societies were born out of this quest in Europe. Managerial employee empowerment schemes which were closely associated with human resource management followed the erosion of anti-empowerment political environment in the 1980s (Holden, 2005).
The subsequent years witnessed rapid evolution in the forms of employee empowerment across organizations in the world. Management studies and experts established various forms of organizational design and structures that would spearhead autonomy, responsibility, information as well as creativity among workers. Several studies were conducted which showed that employee empowerment was a perfect way of motivating workers. This would have significant impact on their commitment to work, workplace communications and overall organizational performance.
Employee Empowerment for Workplace Commitment
Employees’ commitment to their work is one of the most important factors that bear great influence on the performance of an organization. It is essential to the clear understanding of the motivation of workers as well as an organization’s system maintenance (Fornes,Rocco, &Wollard, 2008). Chandan Kumar Sahoo of India’s National Institute of Technology and SitaramAdas of North Orissa University, Schools of Business Management conducted a survey whose main objective was to assess the impact of empowering workers in a team on their commitment to work. In their study, conducted between the years 2010-2011, Chandan and Sitaran sampled a number of organizations in India and interviewed their employees to assess their levels of motivation by their organizations. They also conducted detailed organizational analysis across these organizations gauge the level of commitment of their employees and see whether this had any relationship with employees’ motivation (2011).
In their study, Chandan and Sitaran identified various indicators of workplace commitment. They noted that many of the organizations had considered employee empowerment and improvement as a fundamental business management practice and had therefore implemented some strategies to empower their employees. However, this had been attained at various levels across the organizations (Fornes, Rocco, &Wollard, 2008). Employee empowerment begins with a strategic fit among workers in the working environment. Organizational tasks, information flow processes as well as technology used in an organization must also fit in a perfect manner as a sign of commitment of the workers to their work (Lease, 1998). To this effect, Chandan and Sitaran observed a chronological and perfect fit amongst most of the organizations that had succeeded, to a greater extent, in implementing strategies to empower their workers.
Organizations that enjoyed high levels of employee commitment had implemented such strategies as: authority delegation to subordinates, formation of all inclusive workers – management bipartite committees that promote healthy relations among workers, cultivation of a sense of trusteeship in workers by their employers as way of motivating them and creation of a workers’ suggestion scheme through which the employees are given a chance to influence the decision making processes of the managers (Chandan&Sitaram, 2011).Most of the organizations that exhibited superior workplace commitment had also adopted such organizational structures that promote interactions with the top executives of the organizations like the CEOs and the boards of directors. This provided a perfect platform for discussing the businesses of the organizations as well as for the workers to raise the issues affecting them (Fornes, Rocco, &Wollard, 2008).
In his book, Lease (1998) noted that “workplace commitment generally reflected through generating energy and activating the human mind and through optimum utilization of resources for better performance. It is also an important aspect of work behaviors and behavioral intentions of workers comprising the tree aspects of affective, continuance and normative” (p.45).In this regard, Chandan and Sitaram noted that the top 10 organizations which spent a considerable part of their capital in employee empowering activities enjoyed the greatest workplace commitment among their workers. This could be seen in the positive attitudes of the employees as well as their personal attachment to these organizations. Most of such employees exhibited strong and affective emotional acceptance of the core values, goals, mission and vision of their respective organizations. Organizations which were still stringent towards workers’ empowerment showed very little sense of personal commitment among their employees (Chandan&Sitaram, 2011).
With strong workplace commitment, employees would be more than willing to commit additional efforts and time towards their work. There would be fewer cases of dissatisfaction and absenteeism among the workers (Fornes, Rocco, &Wollard, 2008). 30% of the organizations whose organizational structures were associated with work congruency, autonomy among workers, job equity and fairness as well as worker’s purpose clarity were seen to have their employees emotionally and personally to their organizational work. This had a considerable positive impact on their productivity. They also noted that empowerment was important in promoting not only personal commitment to the common organizational objectives, but it also fostered a sense of self discipline among the employees (Chandan&Sitaram, 2011).Most of the organizations which strongly empowered their workers were seen to have their employees conduct their work with admirable decorum and discipline (Sergio &Tima, 2010).
The findings of Chandan and Sitaram’s study of the Indian organizations is justified in the fact that empowerment gives workers an opportunity to develop a sense of belonging to an organizations. As a result, the employees feel motivated and would tend to perform their duties with great personal commitment of time and effort. However, there are various other external factors that significantly influence their commitment to work. These would include factors such as family affairs, personal attributes as well as career choices (Chandan&Sitaram, 2011).In their study, Chandan and Sitaram focused only on the internal (organizational) factors that impact on workplace commitment. More studies therefore ought to be conducted to combine both internal and external factors and their combined influence on employees’ workplace commitment.
Dimensions of Team Empowerment and Team Output
Team empowerment, in an organizational context, can be viewed in terms of various elements and dimensions. Most management experts agree on four basic elements that would promote organizational performance by empowering employees. The four elements include: autonomy, responsibility, information and creativity (Parick& Chris, 2012).These four elements apply mostly in a team managed organization. In a self-managed firm, decision making is clear and straight forward hence issues of autonomy and delegation of decision making powers would not often arise(Hasan,Mehnet&Demet, 2011). However, under team work, the success of the organization is based not only on the success of an individual, but also on the corporate success of the team. An organizational structure must therefore be designed that will promote the productivity of the teams and empowerment plays a key role here in fostering the requisite team spirit (Sergio &Tima, 2010).
To understand these four basic elements of team empowerment, let us consider a study that was conducted in Pakistan to analyze the impact of the different dimensions of empowerment on team performance. The study was conducted by Muhammad Jawad, Tahira Malik, AneelaAbraiz and Sobia Raja of the Institute of Information Technology, Pakistan. The study was conducted by sampling a number of service based organizations in Pakistan. They carried detailed organizational analysis and audits to identify the basic dimensions and elements that comprise workers’ empowerment. Their results identified and discussed the four dimensions as follows:
Autonomy
Autonomy refers to independent decision making ability by members of an organization. This is the power of self-determination among individuals in an organization (Seung-Bum & Sang,2009). The autonomous power to make certain decisions is often delegated from the top management of an organization, to a specified tier of workers down the organizational structure. Autonomy in decision making, in a large organization, helps to ease the decision making process and make it less time-consuming since important decisions can be made and acted upon by employees at various levels of the organizational hierarchy instead of waiting to be made at a central top management level of an organization(Parick& Chris, 2012).In addition, as noted by Muhamadet al (2012), a sense of autonomy among employees plays a significant role in their empowerment and this subsequently boosts the productivity and overall performance.
Autonomy instills a sense of authority in workers and plays the role of an extrinsic motivation to workers. This gave autonomous employees a reason to do a given task even when they have no personal interest in doing the same. This was witnessed in a number of organizations in which employees interestingly performed some given tasks despite having no personal background, education or experience in the same. They simply performed them since the have been delegated the authority to do the same by power delegation from top management (Muhamad et al, 2012). Studies in other areas have also indicated that autonomy encourages flexibility of workers since they may be given authority over any task. It also gives special inspiration that enables the organization to attend to the tasks at hand and thereby promoting organization’s performance (Seung-Bum & Sang, 2009).
Responsibility
The performance of a team, in an organization, can be assessed by responsibility for the output of team members. Employee empowerment entails a joint responsibility that may be used by members of a team to enhance and track their performance. The teams operate in a manner that they all have similar responsibility to the prosperity of the organizations (Seung-Bum & Sang, 2009).In their survey, Muhamad et al (2012) noted that delegation of responsibility to lower levels in an organizational structure was a significant element in the development of successful team empowerment. They also indicated that employees tended to feel extremely motivated when they are aware that their teams bear some high responsibility of performing some essential tasks of the organization. Other studies have also indicated that without a serious aspect of team empowerment in an organization, employees tend to have a lot of suspicious information and are reluctant to take risks as opposed to empowered teams where people take risks and learn from their mistakes. This improves organizational performance even for the future (Muhamad et al, 2012).
Information
Another important dimension of team empowerment is information. Management experts agree to the fact that information, provides employees with sufficient skills and basis upo which they can make important decisions. It is therefore a fundamental element in the process of team empowerment (Parick& Chris, 2012).In organizations with less empowered teams, most of this information lies only with the top management who are directly involved in decision making. The lower-cadre employees are simply decision takers and are ignorant about such information and this has an adverse impact in performance of their companies. However, teams in more empowered organizations exhibited a great sense of information on most pertinent issues of their firms. This understanding improves their handling of these issues and has a general positive effect on performance of their organizations (Muhamad et al, 2012).
Creativity
Creativity is the autonomy, freedom or independence of employees to do their work with innovativeness (Hasan, Mehnet&Demet, 2011). In their survey, Muhamad et al (2012) conducted interviews with some street level officials who are employed in many service organizations in Pakistan. They reported that employees who empowered workers displayed a great sense of creativity/innovation in their work, for which they are rewarded by incentives. This further motivates them to be even more innovative in their subsequent tasks (Muhamad et al, 2012). Certainly, such a culture will have beneficial impacts on overall organizational performance.
Effect of Management Support on Team Performance
The management of an organization plays a central role in coordinating activities of the various teams with an aim to streamline them towards common organizational goals. In fact, generally speaking, whereas the success of an organization depends primarily on the efforts of the workers, the success is often attributed to the top management, especially from an external sense (Hasan, Mehnet&Demet, 2011). Thus, organizations should adopt well designed organizational structures that will ensure a coherent relationship between the top management and the teams. This section reviews a study that was conducted in Sri Lanka to assess the impact of management support on team performance. The study focused on the apparel industry in Sri Lanka and was conducted by Pathirage, Jayawardena and Rajapaksha of the Postgraduate Institute of Agriculture, University of Peradeniya.
The leading apparel manufacturer selected for this study is located in Kandy district. The study made use of the methods of questionnaires and focused group interviews to gather the pertinent information. A random sample of 114 employees of the manufacturing plant was surveyed (Pathirage, Jayawardena and Rajapaksha, 2012). The study was based on the fact that the manufacturing and production industry has experienced significant new concepts in the recent past. These include focused factories, timeline production, total quality assurance, flexibility in manufacturing as well as the concepts of lean production and mass customization (Kemal &Erbas, 2010). These concepts have revitalized the manufacturing industry management in the country whose GDP recorded a tremendous growth of 5.7% in its history, with the apparel industry being the greatest earner of foreign exchange, contributing 46% of total export earnings. The industry further employs about 200000 and 400000 people directly and indirectly respectively (Pathirage, Jayawardena and Rajapaksha, 2012).
The study noted that in light of the apparent demand and challenges that the industry has faced, there was great need for it to get a big pool of motivated workforce who will engage in reviving performance in the sector (Pathirage, Jayawardena and Rajapaksha, 2012). They also noted that the manufacturing industry was greatly increasingly relying on team based approaches, necessitating stringent management support to motivate the teams(Kemal &Erbas, 2010). Pathirage, Jayawardena and Rajapaksha found out that the top management played a key role in determining information flow and organizationastructute in general. As a result, most of the organizations preferred top managers who are experienced, with 64% of the firms recruiting top managers with experience in the apparel industry in addition to the continuing education programs of the company (Pathirage, Jayawardena and Rajapaksha, 2012).
From the results, it was indicated that team performance increased significantly with increase in the level of management support. Employees were specifically happy and greatly satisfied with their problem-solving ability and culture as well as the support they received from their top management towards the same(Pathirage, Jayawardena and Rajapaksha, 2012). These results have been used by various team managers and leaders to comprehend the importance of management support in boosting team performance in an organization(Kemal &Erbas, 2010). They also concluded that, “activities are directly observed through outputs, interactions are related to being contact and sentiments are reflected through motivations and emotions,” (Pathirage, Jayawardena and Rajapaksha, 2012, 121). However, this research was only limited to a single apparel manufacturing plant. Perhaps, in order to obtain a more holistic result, further research should contemplate focusing on more industries in the sector. It would also be important to engage not only employees, but also all other stakeholders in their analysis.
Impact of Empowerment on Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction
Empowerment is important for service organizations. This is because in such organizations, both the employees as well as customers are simultaneously involved in service production. The quality of service must be satisfactory to the customers in order to improve the organization’s performance (Shulagna,2009). The organization’s management must therefore make a critical decision on how to offer the best services to its customers either by the approach of empowerment or by the traditional means Camp (1993). It is also important to note that in a service organization, employees are directly responsible for determining customer service quality since they are the ones who deal with the customers directly on behalf of the top management. As a result, the top management should ensure that the employees are granted sufficient authority as well as the much needed support in order to ensure that they offer appropriate and satisfactory services to customers (Shulagna, 2009). The process of doing so is what constitutes employees’ empowerment in organizational context.
In order to draw a clear picture of this situation, this section reviews a study that was conducted by Silvia Peters and Elham Mazdarani of marladen University, Vasteras in 2008 to assess the impact of empowering employees on the quality of service and customer satisfaction. They conducted a case study on Lansforsakringar Bank AB to find out the extent to which the bank empowers its employees and its impact on overall performance of the bank in terms of service quality and consumer satisfaction (Silvia and Elham, 2005). Silvia and Elham made use of primary as well as secondary data to conduct a qualitative study and analysis of the bank targeting the bank’s top management. This study was prompted by the need to give an insight of empowerment both to students as well as the general public.
The bank under study offers retail banking services to its customers. This is a banking service whereby the bank engages in direct transactions such as savings, mortgages, personal banking, debit and credit cards as well as personal loans with the customers Camp (1993). Service quality, in such a setting, is extremely important. It can be viewed in terms of customers’ attitudes that represent a long-term overall evaluation of received services. This if fully dependent on the customers’ perception of the quality of services they receive from the bank (Silvia and Elham, 2005). However, it is important to note that the customers’ perceptions, at times, may not reflect the true picture of actual services offered. Managers therefore define service quality in terms of the inherent discrepancies between the quality of actual services offered and the consumers’ expectations (Kemal &Erbas, 2010). They noted that other than the factors determined in this research, it is possible that other factors such as customer attitude and atmosphere may also influence their perception on service quality Camp (1993).
Customer satisfaction, on the other hand, is defined by the overall contentment of customers with their perceived service quality (John, 2004).This is highly dependent on in how much the service offered meets customer expectations. Other researchers have attempted to distinguish between service quality and customer satisfaction on the basis that customer satisfaction is the result of the customer’s expectations being met by the quality of transaction (Silvia and Elham, 2005). They noted that customer satisfaction could be assessed by such parameters as: contentment, delight, relief, and pleasure all of which are influenced by the need of the customer that prompted them to seek the service. Most people tend to measure customer satisfaction as a static parameter. However, it is important to note that it is dynamic since it can change over time with change in attitudes and perception (John, 2004).
Silvia and Elham (2008) pointed out that customer satisfaction plays a key role in customer retention. In order to retain and even increase the customer base of a service organization, there must be a high sense of satisfaction among customers with the services they receive from an organization An analysis of the LF bank indicated that since the time they improved their customer relations and the quality of their transactions such as time of service, customer care services as well as public relations with customers, a trend characterized with great customer satisfaction was noted among the customers. In fact, with this wave of satisfaction, the bank recorded a significant increase in its customer base (Silvia and Elham, 2005). The bank therefore learnt that in order to widen its customer base, the most important asset was customer satisfaction which is highly dependent on service quality. Improving service quality therefore meant more customers which in turn translate into overall growth of the organization.
Silvia and Elham further pointed out that empowerment was therefore necessary for employees’ to maintain a high quality of services in order to enhance customer satisfaction. They agreed to the fact that for service organizations, employees could be empowered though a given level of autonomy with which they can be able to attend to most of the issues, complaints and concerns of their customers (Silvia and Elham, 2005). As a result of the autonomy, the employees will assume a reasonable sense of self-sufficiency and this will increase their involvement in working towards the common goals of the organization. The top management must therefore design an organizational structure that will enhance empowerment. In addition, employees dealing with customers directly should be well motivated, for instance by way of remuneration and incentives, in order to boost their morale and personal attitude while at work.
In summary, employee empowerment in service organizations plays the following role: boosts customer care services, enhances customer recovery for unsatisfied customers, improves job satisfaction and positive feeling among employees, fosters idea innovativeness amongst employees and enhances customer retention for the organization (Silvia and Elham, 2005). In their study, Silvia and Elham have rightly demonstrated the relationship between service quality and customer satisfaction as well as the fact that employee empowerment is a fundamental way of improving their service quality. However, the study may be limited on grounds that it was only based on a single-case scenario of a bank. More holistic studies should put into account many organizations and also diversify the range of organizations. It would also be of great interest to know whether their results would apply in a non-service organization.
Conclusion
Employee empowerment be considered in two broad ways namely, delegation of decision making power by top management to their junior staff and motivation of the employees i.e. the situational and psychological approach respectively. Historically, the concept has evolved over time from the period of the 1st World War to the present day. The pioneering forms of employee empowerment in the period of the world war included workers’ militancy and the demand by workers to be given certain authority over their organizations’ operations in return for their increased productivity to meet the vast demand of World War II. Despite the collapse of the pioneer workers’ committees and consultative forums in the 1950s, considerable gain was experienced in the 1970s with the Bullock Committee report laying the foundations for the birth of present-day schemes of employee empowerment.
Researchers have narrowed down to four basic element of employee empowerment in an organization as autonomy, responsibility, creativity and information. Apart from the fact the organizational structures with strong designs of employee involvement has enhanced and eased the decision making process in organizations, remarkable increase in performance of organizations is also attributed largely to employee empowerment. This paper has reviewed various studies indicating that employee empowerment has a great impact in improving communication in the work place, a concept the has come with considerable boost to performance. It has also been noted that empowering employees plays a key role in enhancing their workplace commitment and hence efforts and time towards increasing productivity. This could be achieved by exercising the four basic principles of empowerment with an aim of motivating the employees. In service organizations, where the workers majorly deal with customers directly on behalf of top management, employee empowerment helps to increase service quality and enhance customer satisfaction. This is important for customer attraction as well as retention
References
Camp, S. D. (1993). Assessing the Effects of Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction onturnover: An event history approach, The Prison Journal, 74(3), 279-305.
Chandan, K.S. &Sitaram, D. (2011). Employee empowerment: a strategy towards workplace commitment. European Journal of Business and Management, 3(11), 89-123.
Fornes, S. L., Rocco, T. &Wollard, K. (2008), Workplace Commitment: A Conceptual model developedfrom Integrative Review of the Research, Human Resource Development Review, 7(3), 339-357.
Hasan, T., Mehnet, A. &Demet, C. (2011).The effects of employee empowerment on achievement motivation and the contextual performance of employees.African Journal of Business Management, 5(15), 6318-6329.
Holden, L. (2005). HRM and Employee Involvement in Britain and Sweden: a comparative study. International Journal of Human Resource Studies, 7(1), 59-81.
John, V.R. (2004). Designing Organization Structures.International Journal of Management studies, 67(4), 67-89.
Kay, G., et al. (2008). Understandingempowerment from an employee perspective: what does it mean and do they want it?Team Performance Management, 14(1/2), 39-55.
Kemal, M.B. &Erbas, A. (2010).Employee empowerment and its effect on organizational performance.2nd International Symposium on Sustainable Development, June 8-9. 2010.
Kotler, et al. (2006).Marketing management.Prentice Hall: Pearson education.
Parick, B., & Chris, N. (2012). Employee empowerment: towards greater workplace democracy. Journal of human resource management, 6(23), 23-56.
Sergio, F. &Tima, M. (2010). Empowering Public Sector Employees to improve Performance: Does it work? The American review of Public Adninistration, 41(1), 23-47.
Seung-Bum, Y. & Sang, O.C. (2009). Employee empowerment and team performance: autonomy, responsibility, information and creativity. Journal of team performance management, 15(5-6), 289-301.
Shulagna, S. (2009).Employee Empowerment in the Banking Sector, IUP.Journal of Management Research.,8(9), 48-67.
Silvia, C.P. &Elham, M. (2005). The impact of employee empowerment on service quality and customer satisfaction in service organizations: a case study of Lanforsakringar Bank AB. International Journal of human resource management, 34(2), 578-634.
Sofoklis, S. (2010). The implementation of information and consultation of employees’ regulations in Great Britain. Britain: Oxford University Press.
Wooddell, V. (2009). Employee Empowerment, Action Research and Organizational Change: A Case Study. OrganizationManagement Journal, 6(1), 15-18.
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|