Anywhere you look in today's corporate structure you will find those who are authorized to make the final decisions and those who aren't. The authority to act is generally reserved for those in management positions. This authority is power, and power is the ability to make things happen.
Since the 60's a revolution of corporate structure has been developing. Many ideas and theories have been tossed around to increase productivity, create happy employees, and distribute the power to make decisions. One of these ideas is the concept of Empowerment.
Cameron and Whetten define empowerment as a means to provide freedom for people to do successfully what they want to do. Russ Forrestor defines it as a more exacting involvement that implies the freedom and ability to make decisions and commitments, not just suggesting them or being a part of making them. Both of these definitions require distributing power from one source (those who have it) and empowering another (those who don't).
In theory, empowering the front-line seems legit. The producers who are making the wheels turn in an organization know what's good for the company right? They should know how much things cost and be able to just buy them. They should decide who gets hired and fired, right? I mean they are working next to these people... who would know better than them? Give the power to the people and we all live in a Utopia.
Wrong!
Empowering only works when power is EARNED. It is about enhancing the responsibilities associated with power. It would take a great deal of training to prepare someone to accept empowerment effectively. Without proper preparations, knowledge, skills, and/or ability empowerment simply does not work. It can not be just a social concept.
Let's consider this... would Dale Earnhardt Jr. empower his pit crew to drive his car in the Daytona 500 just because they can change a tire, or overhaul an engine? No Way! Would they let Dale jump behind the Pit Crew and run out there with a fuel can on a pit stop? Probably not? Why? Because without the knowledge, training, and skill levels required to be effective the results will probably not be what was intended, or expected (and probably down right disastrous!)
The bottom line is this: Competence is Power. To achieve empowerment there has to be a certain level of competency. Forrestor makes a great point with this thought, "those who establish a surer expertise gravitate toward greater responsibility, and it gravitates towards them". Obviously, there is much work to be done to truly fine-tune this entire concept. However, in theory... power should be attainable as long as the knowledge, skill, and general know-how are there to wield it once it is attained.
JP
Since the 60's a revolution of corporate structure has been developing. Many ideas and theories have been tossed around to increase productivity, create happy employees, and distribute the power to make decisions. One of these ideas is the concept of Empowerment.
Cameron and Whetten define empowerment as a means to provide freedom for people to do successfully what they want to do. Russ Forrestor defines it as a more exacting involvement that implies the freedom and ability to make decisions and commitments, not just suggesting them or being a part of making them. Both of these definitions require distributing power from one source (those who have it) and empowering another (those who don't).
In theory, empowering the front-line seems legit. The producers who are making the wheels turn in an organization know what's good for the company right? They should know how much things cost and be able to just buy them. They should decide who gets hired and fired, right? I mean they are working next to these people... who would know better than them? Give the power to the people and we all live in a Utopia.
Wrong!
Empowering only works when power is EARNED. It is about enhancing the responsibilities associated with power. It would take a great deal of training to prepare someone to accept empowerment effectively. Without proper preparations, knowledge, skills, and/or ability empowerment simply does not work. It can not be just a social concept.
Let's consider this... would Dale Earnhardt Jr. empower his pit crew to drive his car in the Daytona 500 just because they can change a tire, or overhaul an engine? No Way! Would they let Dale jump behind the Pit Crew and run out there with a fuel can on a pit stop? Probably not? Why? Because without the knowledge, training, and skill levels required to be effective the results will probably not be what was intended, or expected (and probably down right disastrous!)
The bottom line is this: Competence is Power. To achieve empowerment there has to be a certain level of competency. Forrestor makes a great point with this thought, "those who establish a surer expertise gravitate toward greater responsibility, and it gravitates towards them". Obviously, there is much work to be done to truly fine-tune this entire concept. However, in theory... power should be attainable as long as the knowledge, skill, and general know-how are there to wield it once it is attained.
JP
Cameron, K., & Whetten, D. (2012). Developing management skills. (8 ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc.
Forrestor, R. (2000). Empowerment: Rejuvinating a potent idea. The Academy of Management Executive, 14(3), 67-80.
No comments:
Post a Comment