Team Empowerment
Employee empowerment happens in different forms. Most commonly, empowerment is concerned with accountability and trust. Teamwork depends on the feeling of empowerment for the achievement of preset goals. Empowerment does not always give positive results, and thus a debate exists on its effectiveness. The primary belief is that empowered members are stronger and work harder than unempowered members. In the case of an employment sector, empowerment may include giving employees more responsibilities and powers in terms of decision-making. Besides, employers require their employees to be more productive, and empowerment has been viewed as the best way of increasing productivity. However, empowerment may overlook the risks associated with trusting team members with decision making freedom. The organization may end up losing significantly if the team members misuse the empowerment privileges given to them. Empowerment of teams comes along with benefits and risks as well although the positives should be considered where production is the primary goal of the organization.
Empowerment unleashes the unexploited potential in the members of a team. The main goal of empowerment is always to improve production (Jiang, Flores, Leelawong & Manz, 2016). Organizations that have realized the benefits of empowerment have done away with restrictions that could hinder the freedom of decision making by employees. Besides, having several layers of bureaucracy in an organization serves to limit the potential for innovation and invention. Team members try to give their best, but restrictions on decision-making make the innovation process difficult. Therefore, empowering team members ensures that members are allowed to give their best without worrying about limitations. Also, the decision-making process is left open, and members are in a position to make decisions on behalf of the whole team. Therefore, empowerment is beneficial in that the potential of the members of an organization undergoes full exploitation. However, concentrating on the positive side of empowerment has the risk of overlooking the harm that could come with empowerment.
Supporters of team empowerment overlook the harm that comes along with empowerment. When too much decision-making power is given to the employees, a risk of misuse occurs (Cartwright, 2017). First, the position of leaders may become irrelevant to some members because the authority has been delegated to them. Also, confusion may occur where the team leader is not in a position to control the team because everyone is making their own decisions. Generally, the loss of leadership authority due to team empowerment could quickly occur and cost the organization dearly. Team empowerment should therefore not be taken as an alternative for improving productivity without looking at the risks involved. However, empowerment cannot be ruled out by the few negativities since different approaches can be used to have fruitful empowerment.
Empowerment can be done without intimidating the leaders in a team. Generally, empowerment can be done in two ways: structurally and psychologically. The structural empowerment involves transferring the decision-making responsibilities from the leaders to the team members (Rubin, & Babbie, 2016). The team members are allowed to come up with strategies that work to the benefit of the organization. Psychological empowerment involves enhancing the team member’s beliefs on their position in the organization. Although the legitimate power remains with the leaders, the team members are made to believe that they have the ability to make decisions on behalf of the organization. When empowerment is done strategically using both ways, the organization is assured of getting the best in terms of team members’ services. However, empowerment has been misused by organizations to delegate responsibilities without accompanying tangible benefits.
People in leadership positions receive higher pay compared to other members of a team. Therefore, one would expect anyone who is given the responsibility of making decisions to have some additional benefits as well (Andrade, 2016). However, empowerment has been used severally as an excuse for delegating duties without incurring the expected cost. Team members have been subjected to exploitation by organizations under the pretext of empowerment. The leadership positions that would be in existence in case decision making did not become delegated are done away with. The benefits that would have been enjoyed by individuals in the dissolved offices do not go to the new decision-makers. Generally, empowerment has not served the primary purpose of several organizations. Organizations have found an escape path for reducing the number of offices. However, other benefits outdo the negativities of misuse of empowerment.
Members in empowered teams enjoy several benefits and reflect their joy in the service to the organization. When members feel motivated, their commitment to the team and the organization grows (Hanaysha, 2016). The performance of the members is improved whereas the loyalty to the organization becomes real. The signal sent to the team members by empowerment is that the organization trusts them and needs the best from the team. Besides, the delegation of decision-making roles to the team members makes them willing to accept more responsibilities. Also, the members become more accountable for both the bad and good experiences that occur during service. Therefore, empowerment works for the benefit of both the team members and the organization. Advocates of team empowerment, however, fail to accept the fact that empowerment could lead to unachieved goals.
Managers are mostly the ones to know the goals of an organization. The making known of the aims of every member in the teams may become impossible in most cases. Leaving teams to make decisions on behalf of the manager could have severe consequences (Kim & Fernandez, 2017). For example, the goals of the managers may not be accomplished. Also, empowered teams may deliberately ignore the purposes of the organization and come up with unrealistic goals. Ideally, effective leadership is witnessed through leaders who have the responsibility of directing the team members. Unfortunately, empowerment comes to destroy the organization of effective leadership. Generally, team empowerment does not encourage effective leadership, and the position of managers faces the risk of becoming ineffective. An argument with more weight by advocates of team empowerment is that empowered teams are self-sufficient.
The question that critics of team empowerment have is on whether empowered teams have a specific direction to follow. The most realistic answer is that empowered teams choose their course and follow it (Fernandez & Moldogaziev, 2015). Everyone in an empowered team is a leader and does not need to be led. Also, the decisions made by members of an empowered team are respected by all members because everyone is a leader, and no one is viewed as an inferior. Besides, the empowerment of a team reduces the processes caused by the need to listen to middle-layer managers every time. Therefore, decisions are made and implemented immediately in the workplace. Team members do not have to wait for information from a particular office before going on with their work. However, leaving power to everyone could create confusion.
An unfortunate issue with empowerment is the risk of creating confusion. Empowerment literally gives everyone in a team equal power (Laschinger, Read, & Zhu, 2016). However, the authority may cause a fuzzy when everyone decides to make a personal decision. Besides, no one is available for advice because power has already been delegated to everyone. Also, the individual teams may easily be disconnected from the organizations’ goal and start pursuing different goals. Therefore, empowerment does not have a certainty of giving positive outcomes and should be handled with care. Also, power should be left to remain with people who can use it wisely. The decision to empower teams should only be made after the organization is totally aware of the risks involved.
In sum, empowerment of teams comes along with benefits and risks as well, although the positives should be considered where production is the primary goal of the organization. When too much decision-making power is given to the employees, a risk of misuse is posed. Advocates of team empowerment fail to accept the fact that empowerment could lead to unachieved goals. For example, empowerment has been misused by organizations to delegate responsibilities without accompanying tangible benefits. Generally, organizations should let the power to remain with responsible people until empowerment is essential.
References
Andrade, M. S. (2016). Effective organizational structures and processes: Addressing issues of change. New directions for higher education, 2016(173), 31-42.
Appelbaum, S. H., Karasek, R., Lapointe, F., & Quelch, K. (2015). Employee empowerment: factors affecting the consequent success or failure (Part II). Industrial and commercial training, 47(1), 23-30.
Cartwright, R. (2017). Mastering team leadership. Macmillan International Higher Education.
Fernandez, S., & Moldogaziev, T. (2015). Employee empowerment and job satisfaction in the US Federal Bureaucracy: A self-determination theory perspective. The American review of public administration, 45(4), 375-401.
Hanaysha, J. (2016). Examining the effects of employee empowerment, teamwork, and employee training on organizational commitment. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 229, 298-306.
Jiang, X., Flores, H. R., Leelawong, R., & Manz, C. C. (2016). The effect of team empowerment on team performance: A cross-cultural perspective on the mediating roles of knowledge sharing and intra-group conflict. International Journal of Conflict Management, 27(1), 62-87.
Kim, S. Y., & Fernandez, S. (2017). Employee empowerment and turnover intention in the US federal bureaucracy. The American Review of Public Administration, 47(1), 4-22.
Laschinger, H. K., Read, E., & Zhu, J. (2016). Employee empowerment and organizational commitment. In Handbook of Employee Commitment. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Rubin, A., & Babbie, E. R. (2016). Empowerment series: Research methods for social work. Cengage Learning.