Effects of working environment on the performance of executives.

Ganapathi, R. ; Prasad, M. Balaji

Introduction

The economic growth of a country depends on its rate of industrialization. But, excellence of industrialization may not be achieved in the absence of any one of the factors namely, land, labour, capital and organization. Though all the four factors of production seem to be equally important, yet the progress of an industry mainly depends on the productive efficiency of the labour force i.e. human resources. Hence the human resources should be considered as the most important resource for the growth of an industry. Organizations are facing tough challenge to manage the human resources. Traditionally, organization was considered to be mechanistic and more task--oriented, and people at work were considered as machines shifted and altered like a template in a room lay out. But the thoughts have rapidly changed in the present era of globalization.

There are numerous studies undertaken on factors affecting the working environment in organizations. Roelofsen, Paul, (2008) discussed that how the performance of personnel can be negatively affected by conversations, adjacent to the working space in an open-plan office environment. He noted that noise especially in enclosed space is an important aspect which affects both the feeling of well-being and concentration in regard to functional performance. He concluded that performance loss can be related to speech intelligibility in a space, that makes it possible to design on the basis of productivity improvement resulting in a comfortable acoustic working environment and a consistent financial advantage for the organization. Woolfson et al., (2008), examined employee 'voice' in workplace health and safety in three Baltic New Member States by means of a cross-national survey. The data point to unresolved problems of voice in the context of rather poor working environments. Johnson et al., (2007) have explored that how people share and construct similar mental models in teams. They have claimed that successful team performance depends on a shared mental model of team members about task, team, equipment and situation.

According to Bloom et al., (2006), increasing product-market competition is believed to be a driving force behind higher productivity. However, even those critics of globalization who accept this argument claim that there is a hard trade-off because tougher competition comes at the price of reducing work-life balance (WLB). Stellman (1987) argues that Physical factors can contribute strongly to the individual's psychological well-being and stress on the job promotes poor lifestyles. Massimiliano Mazzanti and Roberto Zoboli (2006), conducted two surveys on a sample of manufacturing firms in Emilia Romagna region--Northern Italy--in 2002 and 2004, to study the influence of (i) firm structural variables (ii) environmental R&D (iii) environmental policy pressure and regulatory costs (iv) past firm performances (v) networking activities (vi) other non-environmental techno-organizational innovations (vii) quality/nature of industrial relations. The applied investigation shows that environmental innovation drivers, both at input and output level, are found within exogenous factors and endogenous elements concerning the firm and its activities/strategies within and outside its natural boundaries. Bonnie S O'Neill and Lucy A Arendt (2008), explored how choosing one context over another influences both research results and implications. Using both quantitative and qualitative data, the authors examine context from both an organizational and a business-unit perspective by studying relationships between five psychological climate variables and outcomes of job satisfaction, affective commitment, and intent to leave. Results show different contextual influences between the organization and two business units, suggesting that different bundles of psychological climate variables yield similar outcomes depending on the context studied. These results bolster the contention that researchers need to identify the right context in field research.

Though the productivity of an organization is determined by various factors, still it is highly dependent on the performance of the individuals, who contribute by their physical and mental efforts and energies for enhanced performance of the organization. Among the various factors that are contributing for better and effective performance of the human resource, the working environment plays a crucial role. Motivation and frustration can be considered as the two poles of the individual performance. Motivation makes an individual move towards positive direction where as frustration make him move towards a negative direction which generally may have a negative impact on his productive ability and efficiency. Kartz and Lehner (1935) and Selve (1956) have pointed out four types of frustration as: (i) Frustration of Function, (ii) Frustration of Function of Conviction (iii) Frustration of Ambition (iv) Frustration of Response. Frustration arises in conflict over the use of tools and materials or it can be related to feelings that one's superior is unjust and unfair to him in evaluation and makes negative remarks or gestures. As is well known, the performance of the workers in an organization is greatly influenced by the working environment, which may be natural or man-made. Also it is known that providing a better working environment will result in increased job satisfaction that would in turn contribute significantly towards improved performance and efficiency of the human resources.

The ever-changing business processes and technological advancements affect the social as well as economic environment and the same results in adoption of a defective or inadequate organization structure by the business firms. As per Rogers (1995) model of Innovation Decision Process, innovations that are perceived by firms as having greater relative advantages, compatibility, absorbability and less complexity will be adopted more rapidly rather than other innovations. Although there is a little control over the building where the organization functions, it is possible to take simple innovative counter measures to create stimulating and nurturing working environment. The present study has the main objective to find out the level of satisfaction of the executives at various levels on the prevailing working environment in their organization and to offer constructive suggestion for the betterment of the same.

Methodology

200 executives working in various organizations constitute the sample. Among them, 25 are from top-level management, 75 from middle level management and the remaining from the low level management. The executives were selected on the basis of convenient sampling method. In order to collect the required data from the selected executives, an inventory was formulated. The inventory contained questions relating to the level of satisfaction of the respondents on various factors concerned working environment, that is , size of work space, personalized space, and comfortable room temperature, adequacy of lighting, the noise level of the work place, furniture comfortability, and storage security.

The inventory was put to pilot study and it was found that the satisfaction level ranged from 20% to 100%. With an equal interval of 20%, the satisfaction percentage is classified into five ratings with up to 20% given rating 1 with 1 being 'Very Low Satisfaction'; 21-40% given rating 2 with 2 being 'Low Satisfaction'; 41-60% given rating 3 with 3 being 'Moderate Satisfaction'; 61-80% given rating 4 with 4 being 'High Satisfaction'; 81-100% given rating 5 with 5 being 'Very High Satisfaction'. The scores obtained were put to Cronbach Alpha test and found to have internal consistency, based on the average inter-item correlation. The results of the study showing the variation in the level of satisfaction of the respondents on the various components of working environment has also been presented by using c-plot or radar diagram (Exhibit I, II and III).

Results and Discussion

The satisfaction was measured over a fire point scale ranging from 1 to 5 with satisfaction levels very low, low, moderate, high and very high. The distribution of the respondents on the basis of their level of satisfaction towards various components which were considered as the factors that contribute towards the creation of better work environment are presented in Table 1. With regard to the top level executives, their level of satisfaction appears very high on personalized space and have also shown higher level of satisfaction with regard to size of the work space, temperature comfortability, adequacy of light, disturbance and noise free environment, furniture comfortability and storage security. Their level of satisfaction is moderate on breaks. The level of satisfaction derived by the middle level executives is moderate on the factors such as size of workspace, personalized space, adequacy of light and breaks. Their level of satisfaction is lower on the factors viz., temperature comfortability, disturbance and noise free and furniture comfortability. The level of satisfaction of the lower level executives is moderate with regard to the factors such as adequacy of light and breaks. They have shown lower level of satisfaction on the factors viz., size of the work space, temperature comfortability, disturbance and noise free and storage security and their level of satisfaction is very low with regard to the factors like personalized space and furniture comfortability. To sum up, the top-level executives are satisfied with almost all the components than their lower level counterparts except the breaks. A diagrammatic representation of the level of satisfaction of executives of various levels in the form of c-plot or radar diagram is presented in exhibits I, II & III respectively. The figures 1 to 5 are the satisfaction levels, whereas the alphabets A,B,C--H represents the environmental factors given in Table 1.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Measures for Creating and Sustaining a Better Work Environment

The existence of better working environment in an organization encourages creativity, reduces anxiety and builds a positive attitude among the human resources in the work place. The following are some of the common aspects that can be implemented and followed to create more satisfactory working environment.

Lighting

On an average eighty to eighty five percent of our impression of the world are visually perceived, which affects the people psychologically and physiologically. Poor lighting creates problems to the eyes resulting in eye strain, eye irritation, blurred vision, headache etc. Poor lighting also affects the ocular system and contributes to stiff neck and aches in the shoulder areas. These problems occur when people adopt wrong or awkward postures while trying to read or do things under poor lighting conditions. The continuous physical strain caused by the poor lighting will contribute towards the psychological stress in the minds of the executives. In order to avoid such problems and to enhance the overall working conditions, antiquated fluorescent tubes can be replaced with full spectrum tubes. The adoption of this measure will reduce the eyestrains working.

Inside Climate

The physical comfort that exists at the place of work will improve the satisfaction of the executives on the work which in turn improves their productive and creative ability. It is preferred to have air conditionering system to maintain optimal thermal comfort. Most of us think only of cooling, when air conditioning is mentioned, but, in addition to cooling, it balances heat, humidity, ventilation and circulates air in a controlled and healthier manner. Although temperature is a personal preference, most of the people are comfortable in temperature ranging between 68 and 75 degree Fahrenheit (20--25 degree C) with humidity of 40 to 50 percent.

Colour

Selection of colours in very important in creating pleasant working environment. Painting an appropriate colour in the work place will contribute to reduced stress leading to a pleasant working environment. At the same time, wrong combination of colours will have a negative effect on the working environment. As people are sensitive to a wide spectrum of colours, using the right hue can help in better appetite, soothing of nerves and stimulate the brain. A wrong selection of colour in the work place will lead to aggressiveness in the human behaviour or create drowsiness and make employees feel sick. Applying the right colours thus will result in creation of a conducive working environment.

Indoor Gardening

Gardening, inside the work place, enhances not only the beauty of the office surroundings but also helps in clearing the pollutants out of the air as they add oxygen and balance the humidity of the indoor environment. A number of studies have revealed that plants have the capability of removing several pollutions such as formaldehydes, ozone, xylene, benzene etc. Office furniture's, carpets, equipments etc normally emit these types of pollutions in the work place. The presence of interior planting plays a role in human psychological well being because:

(a) The perception of an interior is more positive due to indoor planting.

(b) The indoor planting makes the presence of a cool and relaxed atmosphere in the place of work; the quantum of stress may be lowered.

(c) It may enrich the building structure and can contribute towards the enhancement of the feeling of well being among the employees.

Furniture

The provision of necessary furniture to the executives will create a sense of comfort in them. It will, at the same time, dramatically improve their creativity and performance, and help in avoiding the unnecessary physical movements during execution of their work. The provision of unsuitable or inadequate furniture affects posture, blood circulation, pressure on the spine etc.

Dress Code

The way in which an individuals dress, reveals the position of a person It identifies the uniqueness of the individual. In general, executives prefer to wear formal cloth at the place of work. As they are expected to spend a lengthy hours of time, the selection of dresses should be given due weightage. Hence, the type of cloth used by the executives in the place of work should be appropriate for the work, which they perform and it has to make them feel comfortable in performing the work.

Breaks

The term 'work over load' can be expressed in two ways i.e., required to perform too many things or not having enough time to do the work. The work overload contributes positively towards the stress as well as conflicts. The work accuracy and performance of an executive are highly influenced by the presence of an optimum schedule for the work and rest periods. Studies on the effects of frequent "Micro breaks" have found to be beneficial in many ways including the improvement in performance, creativity and efficiency.

Conclusion

All business operations are all around the three words --People, Product and Profit. Attention must focus on providing comfortable and motivating work environment to bring out the best of creativity, skills and talents among the working persons in achieving the organizational excellence. The Onus of responsibility for improving the working environment falls on the leadership and the organizations. Organization should ensure a positive work environment failure to follow the needs and wants of the people would lead to frustration in the employees. This will certainly lead to poor production.

References

Abbasi, Sami M.; Hollman, Kenneth W.; Hayes, Robert D. (2008), Bad Bosses and How Not to Be One. Information Management Journal, Vol. 42 (1), pp. 52-56.

Bloom, Nick; Van Reenan, John (2006), A management practices, work-life balance, and productivity: a review of some recent evidence. Oxford review of economic policy, Vol. 22 (4), pp. 457-482.

Bonnie S O'Neill and Lucy (2008), A Arendt Psychological Climate and Work Attitudes: The Importance of Telling the Right Study, Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, Vol. 14 (4), pp. 353.

Contract management, Nov. 2007 supplement, Vol. 47, pp. 73-73.

Johnson, Tristan E.; Lee, Youngmin; Lee, Miyoung; O'Connor, Debra L.; Khalil, Mohammed K.; Huang, Xiaoxia (2007), Measuring Sharedness of Team-Related Knowledge: Design and Validation of a Shared Mental Model Instrument, Human Resource Development International, Vol. 10 (4), pp. 437-454.

Massimiliano Mazzanti (2006), University of Ferrara Department of Economics Institutions and Territory; National Research Council (NRC) (CERIS-CNR) and Roberto Zoboli CERIS-CNR Italian National Research Council; Catholic University of Milan, January 2006. FEEM Working Paper No. 20. 2006

Roelofsen, Paul (2008), Performance loss in open-plan offices due to noise by speech. Journal of Facilities Management, Vol. 6 (3), pp. 202-211.

Sandy Smith (2008), Leadership's Effects on Employee Health, Well-Being, Occupational Hazards. Cleveland: Vol. 70 (8), pp. 18.

Stellman, Jeanne Mager (1987), Environmental Factors Affecting Job Stress, Business and Health. Montvale: Vol. 4 (12), pp. 16.

Woolfson, Charles; Calite, Dace; Kallaste (2008), Epp Employee 'voice' and working environment in post-communist New Member States: an empirical analysis of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, Industrial Relations Journal, Vol. 39 (4), pp. 314-334.

R. Ganapathi * and M. Balaji Prasad

S. N. R. Sons College, Coimbatore--641 006, Tamilnadu, India

* E-mail: [email protected]

Table 1: Level of Satisfaction of Various Levels of Executives

 Satisfactory Ratings
Factor Factors
 Code Bottom Middle Top
 Level Level Level

 A Size of the work space 2 3 4

 B Personalized space 1 3 5

 C Temperature comfortability 2 2 4

 D Adequate light 3 3 4

 E Disturbance and noise free 2 2 4

 F Furniture comfortability 1 2 4

 G Storage security 2 1 4

 H Breaks 3 3 2

Source: Survey Data