Islamabad campus

Research Paper

Topic
Participative Management

Prepared By:

Ali Shan
alishanonline@gmail.com
0345-5556933

Mohammad Sajid Kiyani

sajidkiani2003@yahoo.com
0346-5042798
 ABSTRACT

This paper focuses on studying the effect of participative management style on

motivational level of the staff. The two variables were further assessed on the basis of
their sub-variables identified in the study. For research purposes four major companies of
mobile service provider industry in Pakistan were chosen. Questionnaires were used to
collect information from a random sample of 100 permanent employees of four selected
companies in Islamabad region. The results are interpreted in terms that employees
having participative managers have a high level of motivation. Implication are for
making use of these results in designing better human resource policies to keep the
employees motivated and developing participative approach among managers for
creating a powerfully motivated team of employees.
Impact of Participative Management style on Motivational level

Chapter 1
Introduction

A good quality workforce can make or break a corporation. The most essential part of a quality
workforce is its motivational level. The methodology, approach, techniques and manner of
working of a manager play a vital role in determining and enhancing their motivational level.
Managers are like leaders who have to guide their organization. While traditional management
style can accomplish impressive short-term results, the long term consequences can be
devastating. De-motivated employees may vent their frustrations by performing poorly, quitting,
or complaining to upper management. Stanton (1995)
Motivation is the key to performance improvement. There is an old saying that you can take a
horse to the water but you cannot force it to drink; it will drink only if it's thirsty – so is with
people. They will do what they want to do or otherwise motivated to do either by them or through
external stimulus.
Participative management has been useful in motivating the employees to work towards realizing
organizational goals. It’s a management’s job to keep their workforce motivated and update in
order to perform successful. If workers can be motivated and given the opportunity to participate
in the organizations decision-making, suggestion system and goal setting, their job performance
should improve. To be effective, managers need to understand what motivates employees within
the context of the roles they perform. Of all the functions a manager performs, motivating
employees is arguably the most complex. This is due, in part, to the fact that what motivates
employee’s changes constantly, David et al (1995)
RATIONALE:
The ability lead a successful workforce which is competent depends on various factors and one
major key area is motivation. What are the effects of motivation and how it enhances the
workforce’s productivity?
PROBLEM STATEMENT
The ability lead a successful workforce which is competent depends on various factors and one
major key area is motivation. What are the effects of motivation and how it enhances the
workforce’s productivity can only be found out through our research that is:
“Which management style enhances motivation among the Pakistani Cellular Companies
workforce?”

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

• What is the basic criterion to call an individual motivated?

• What factors make a person motivated intrinsically and extrinsically?

• Which management style consists of these contributing elements need to increase

motivation?

Limitations of the Study

This study was undertaken as a requirement for the course “Advance Research Methods”. Due to
availability of limited time, pressure for other course work and in sufficient knowledge of
statistical techniques for skewed populations, this report has been prepared with some limitations.
Following are the limitations of the study due to which the results cannot be generalized to the
population:

1. Small sample size

2. Convenience sampling
3. Sampling done in Islamabad only which may not be representative of the whole country
4. One of the questionnaires was not pre-tested. This may result in missing of out of some
further information that could be used in the analysis of results.
Lack of knowledge of the statistical techniques applicable to skewed distributions. Hence, the
planned association relationships could not be studied in depth.
 Chapter 2
Literature Review
After study of extensive literature available to find previous researches on the impact of
participative style of management on employee motivation we came across the following:

PARTICIPATIVE MANAGEMENT STYLE

“Participative management is a process whereby the employees are involved in the decision-
making of the organization through formal and informal means.”(Lewis & Renn, 1992)
The contingency factor plays an important role in the success or failure of participative approach.
These factors are Psychological Contingencies (values, attitudes and expectations of employees);
Organizational Contingencies (organizational complexities, organizational climate and
leadership); Environmental Contingencies (competition markets, technology, and government).
This analysis provides some principles which are helpful in designing and implementing
participative approach in the organization. Marshall Sashkin (1976). Studies have suggested the
potential of participative management. Strategy and organizational behaviour researchers have
found, for example, that involving employees with diverse perspectives can improve decision-
making Cosier, (1978); Eisenhart(1989); Schweigeret al (1989). Participation enables the
employees to exercise control over their own working environment Enid Mumford (1983). Locke
and his associates have concluded that there is much less research support for the value of
participation on quality decision-making than commonly proposed Locke et al.
(1986).Researchers have long considered employee participation in decision-making worthy of
Empirical attention and proposed that it is highly valuable for organizations and employees Heller
and Wilpert (1981); Miller and Monge (1986) Although evidence indicates that participation is
associated with positive affect, job performance, and reduced turnover Heller and Wilpert(1981);
Millerand Monge(1986); Spector(1986), findings are not uniformly supportive of participation.
Participation in decision making (PDM) is associated with different outcomes. i.e. motivation,
productivity, job satisfaction, employee behaviour and attitude etc. participation is a multi-
dimensional concept. Earlier it was considered as a Unitary Concept. John L Cotton (1988).
Participative leaders consult with employees, ask for their suggestions, and take their ideas
into consideration before making decisions. Researchers have interpreted inconsistent findings to
suggest that participation provides opportunities for employees to use their skills to contribute to
solving problems but whether they do depends upon how they and their managers use these
opportunities Tjosvold et al(1987); Glew (1995). Participative leaders meet with employees and
together they discuss issues and make decisions. Participation is typically operationalized in
terms of employee beliefs that they have an opportunity to discuss problems and influence
organizational decisions Stanton (1993); Emery (1995). Participative system has five
characteristics. Firstly; Participation is a formal intervention strategy. Secondly; it includes direct
involvement of parties. Thirdly; both the parties have he right to make the final decision.
Fourthly; participative system emphasize on important issues and lastly; participative system
involves stakeholders in their problems and the extent of their involvement depends on the
situation.

Research Paper Reviews

Employee Participation:
Different forms and Different Outcomes

John L Cotton : The Academy of management review

Vol 13, No 1(Jan 1988)

Literature Review
According to this paper different forms of participation in decision making (PDM) are associated
with different outcomes. i.e. Motivation, productivity, job satisfaction, employee behaviour and
attitude etc. A classification scheme was constructed which identifies three properties of PMD
they are formal-informal; direct-indirect; and hoe much access organizational members have in
decision making. Six forms of PDM are Participation in work decision; Consultative
participation; Short term participation; Employee ownership; Representative participation: all of
them have a different effect on the properties of PDM.
The result shows that participation is a multi-dimensional concept. Earlier it was considered as a
Unitary Concept.
Changing Participative Management Approach
A Model and Method
Marshall Sashkin, The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 1 No, 3 (July1976)

Literature Review
This research paper focuses on Participative approach which have been applied n the
organizational settings. Four types of participative approaches are, Participation in goal setting;
Participation in decision making; Participation in solving problems; Participation in development
and implementation of change in the organization. Participation may be implemented on
individual dyadic (superior’s supervisor) or group basis. The different types of methods of
participation are designed at different employees needs, function in different ways and have
different outcomes.
The contingency factor plays an important role in the success or failure of participative approach.
These factors are Psychological Contingencies (values, attitudes and expectations of employees);
Organizational Contingencies (organizational complexities, organizational climate and
leadership); Environmental Contingencies (competition markets, technology, and government).
This analysis provides some principles which are helpful in designing and implementing
participative approach in the organization.

Participative Systems Design: Practice and Theory

Enid Mumford; Journal of Occupational Behaviour; Vol. 4, No.1

Literature Review
This research paper explains participation is a significant part of system design.
Participation enables the employees to exercise control over their own working
environment. Participative method involves users at all the levels in the design process of
the new technical system. All employees enhance their skill and knowledge in design
process and take decisions at each stage of design process from defining the problem to
implementing the new system. This paper also describes that the organizations that uses
participative systems design proves fruitful results.
Affect as a Source of Motivation in the Workplace: A New Model of Labor Supply, and
New Field Evidence on Income Targeting and the Goal Gradient

Lorenz Goette (University of Zurich, CEPR and IZA Bonn), David Huffman (IZA Bonn)
Literature Review
In this research paper a new, dual-process model of labour supply, which incorporates both
cognitive and affective aspects of decision-making are proposed by the authors. With evidence
from neuroscience, the worker may experience conflicting cognitive and affective motivations
during the workday. In particular, the affective system values effort more highly as long the
worker’s performance is below a personal goal, or income target, and becomes increasingly
aroused as the goal approaches. As a result, affect can distort effort decisions relative to a fully
cognitive benchmark, in a way that is consistent with evidence on loss aversion, and with the so-
called goal-gradient effect, a tendency for animals and humans to increase effort as a goal
approaches. In contrast to a standard model of labour supply, our model can predict a goal
gradient, and predicts that workers may actually lower total daily effort in response to a
temporary increase in the wage. Also, within-day windfall gains may have an impact on a
worker's effort profile over the workday.

The Motivational Effects of Participation versus Goal Setting on Performance

Gary P. Latham; Timothy P. Steele
The Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 26, No. 3. (Sep., 1983), pp. 406-417.

In this research paper the authors after studying the work of Coch and French found that
participation at a job redesign in a manufacturing plant was effective in increasing productivity
levels or levels that occurred when employees were allowed no say in the redesigns of their jobs.
Employee participation also led to greater increases in productivity than those occurring when
employee delegates or representatives participated in the decision making on the redesign. In
short performance was directly proportional to the amount of employee participation in decision
making.
The extent to which participation would affect performance in the absence of goal setting is not
clear. Goal setting theory (Locke, 1968) states that participation can affect motivation only to the
extent that it influences a person’s goal that is acceptance/commitment). Consequently, much
subsequent research has focused on participation as a method for goal setting.
 CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH

3.1 FRAMEWORK

Participative
Management Style Employee Motivation
Supervisory guidance Work Autonomy
Importance of Opinion Timely Information
Supervisory Job Commitment
Competency Increases Job Effort
Supervisory Fairness Workplace Boredom
Respectful Treatment Work Interest
Decision Making Self Competency
Authority
Suggestion System
Goal Setting
Quality Circles
 METHODOLGY

3.2 SAMPLE SELECTION

The data used to test this model were collected from a survey of four mobile service proving
companies located in Islamabad with approximately 300 employees. Questionnaires were
completed and returned by 100 employees, with 100 percent response rate. Using these criteria,
data from a total sample size of n=100 employees were included in the analysis.

3.3 SAMPLING TECHNIQUE

Cluster sampling technique was used to collect the data. We selected a sample containing a
random selection of the elements (employees) from clusters i.e. Mobilink, Zong
, Warid and Telenor that were they selected randomly from the population (Mobile Service
Provider Industry).

3.4 INSTRUMENTS
• Questionnaires:
The questionnaires were designed in a pattern to determine the motivation levels amongst
employees and assess whether there is participative style of management being practiced. The
questionnaire asked participants to rate the importance of twelve factors that motivated them
in doing their work and nine factors to rate their supervisor’s style of management using a
Likert Scale ranging from 5= Strongly Agree to 1=Strongly Disagree. The questionnaires
provided written comprehensive form of data, which was decoded to deduce our findings.
• Internet:
Various research engines were used to find related theories and articles to help develop an
understanding of the history and literal findings on participative management style and
employee motivation.
• Data from Books and Journals:
From books and journals we gathered previous researches & theories of motivation and
participative management style to get an idea of practical implications of the two variables in
work environment.
• Descriptive study Our research study is descriptive in nature
as previous work has been done regarding this topic. We further analyzed that
participative style among managers enhances the motivational levels of employees.
 Chapter 4

DATA ANALYSIS

4.1 PARTICIPATIVE MANAGEMENT STYLE

For our research we have chosen participative management style as an independent variable. To
facilitate a comprehensive understanding of its dimension, we further classified it into nine sub-
variables each having a significant contribution in determining the participative style of
management.
Shown below are the frequencies of each sub-variable along with their interpretations:

a) Supervisory Guidance
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Strongly Disagree 5 5.0 5.0 5.0
Disagree 5 5.0 5.0 10.0
Neutral 8 8.0 8.0 18.0
Agree 28 28.0 28.0 46.0
Strongly Agree 54 54.0 54.0 100.0
Total 100 100.0 100.0

The result shows that majority employees are of the opinion that their supervisors guide and assist
them in the accomplishment of their tasks. It means that the supervisors use participative style.
Some employees disagree with this fact reason being supervisory biasness or communication gap.
The ratio of the neutral results is very low which indicates that there is lack of communication
and employees are doubtful indicating a need for better interaction between managers and
employees.

b) Importance of Opinion
 Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Strongly Disagree 7 7.0 7.0 7.0
Disagree 8 8.0 8.0 15.0
Neutral 12 12.0 12.0 27.0
Agree 21 21.0 21.0 48.0
Strongly Agree 52 52.0 52.0 100.0
Total 100 100.0 100.0

The result indicates that the majority of the employees strongly agreed that their supervisors
considered their opinion in the delivery of tasks. This ensures participative management style.
However very few employees disagreed this fact. Minority is uncertain of how their opinion is
regarded by the management.

c) Supervisory Competency
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Strongly Disagree 6 6.0 6.0 6.0
Disagree 6 6.0 6.0 12.0
Neutral 5 5.0 5.0 17.0
Agree 17 17.0 17.0 34.0
Strongly Agree 66 66.0 66.0 100.0
Total 100 100.0 100.0

The result shows that majority of the employees agreed that their supervisor is competent and he
has the ability to convey the knowledge properly, enhance full range of skills and accept variety
of challenges. Very few employees are of the opinion that their supervisors are not competent so
they are de-motivated. The neutral result indicates that the employees are uncertain so they
should communicate their problems with the supervisors.

d) Supervisor Fairness
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Strongly Disagree 5 5.0 5.0 5.0
 Disagree 6 6.0 6.0 11.0
Neutral 10 10.0 10.0 21.0
Agree 16 16.0 16.0 37.0
Strongly Agree 63 63.0 63.0 100.0
Total 100 100.0 100.0

The result indicates that employees are strongly agreed that their supervisors are fair and honest
to them. Some employees are of the opinion that their supervisors are not fair to them which
shows biasness. These employees are highly de-motivated in the workplace. However few of the
employees show neutral response due to communication gap.

e) Respectful Treatment
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Strongly Disagree 5 5.0 5.0 5.0
Disagree 5 5.0 5.0 10.0
Neutral 6 6.0 6.0 16.0
Agree 15 15.0 15.0 31.0
Strongly Agree 69 69.0 69.0 100.0
Total 100 100.0 100.0

The result shows that the employees strongly agreed with the fact that they are treated with
respect. Their supervisors allow the opportunity to receive adequate respect from them and also
from the employees in other units. Those employees who were of the opinion that they are not
treated well involve the issue of biasness and politics. Some employees who were uncertain show
neutral results are indecisive and tentative.

f) Decision Making Authority

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Strongly Disagree 20 20.0 20.0 20.0
Disagree 13 13.0 13.0 33.0
Neutral 9 9.0 9.0 42.0
Agree 29 29.0 29.0 71.0
 Strongly Agree 29 29.0 29.0 100.0
Total 100 100.0 100.0

The frequencies show that employees strongly agreed that their supervisors allow them to make
autonomous operational decision; such employees are highly motivated as their supervisors are
using participative style. However some employees disagreed with the fact as they are not
involved in decision making due to autocratic management style. Very few have vague idea due
to lack of communication.

g) Suggestion System
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Strongly Disagree 14 14.0 14.0 14.0
Disagree 9 9.0 9.0 23.0
Neutral 13 13.0 13.0 36.0
Agree 22 22.0 22.0 58.0
Strongly Agree 42 42.0 42.0 100.0
Total 100 100.0 100.0

The majority of employees strongly agreed that their supervisors allow them the opportunity to
brainstorm and bring innovative ideas and suggestions. Their suggestions are treated fairly thus
increasing their motivation level and ensuring job satisfaction. Some of the employees are of the
opinion that there is lack of suggestion system. It means that participative management style is
not adopted by the supervisor. However very few employees are indecisive of the fact due to
improper flow of communication.

h) Goal Setting
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Strongly Disagree 17 17.0 17.0 17.0
Disagree 10 10.0 10.0 27.0
Neutral 13 13.0 13.0 40.0
Agree 23 23.0 23.0 63.0
Strongly Agree 37 37.0 37.0 100.0
 Total 100 100.0 100.0

The result indicates that high ratio of employees strongly agreed their supervisors involve them in
setting goals and objectives. Their opinion is considered by the supervisors. It means that their
supervisor encourages participation. Some employees who are not involved in goal setting are de-
motivated. Some employees are however uncertain as they are not given timely information

i) Quality Circles
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Strongly Disagree 41 41.0 41.0 41.0
Disagree 11 11.0 11.0 52.0
Neutral 15 15.0 15.0 67.0
Agree 9 9.0 9.0 76.0
Strongly Agree 24 24.0 24.0 100.0
Total 100 100.0 100.0

The result shows that large number of employees is of the opinion that there is no concept of
quality circles in their organization as it is less practiced in Pakistan. However some employees
agree that the concept of quality circles is practiced in their organization and their supervisors are
supportive, although its ratio is very low. Very few employees are unsure that whether this
concept is practiced or not, as they are not aware of this concept.

4.2 EMPLOYEE MOTIVATION

In this paper employee motivation is the dependent variable. Following the similar approach, it’s
divided into twelve sub-variables.

Below are given their results along with the frequencies:

a) Work Autonomy
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Strongly Disagree 11 11.0 11.0 11.0
Disagree 11 11.0 11.0 22.0
Neutral 17 17.0 17.0 39.0
Agree 28 28.0 28.0 67.0
 Strongly Agree 33 33.0 33.0 100.0
Total 100 100.0 100.0

The frequency charts representing the working environment indicates that it encourages the
employees to make changes in their routine work to suit organizations needs as most of the
employees either agree or strongly agree with the fact. This means that their supervisor has a
participative management style which supports the employees to make suitable adjustments. Very
few employees either disagree or strongly disagree. This can be due to any kind of personal
biasness towards the supervisor. In case of the 17% neutral result, the concept of empowerment
should be properly explained to the employees so that the uncertainty could be decreased.

b) Timely Information
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid Strongly
11 11.0 11.0 11.0
Disagree
Disagree 7 7.0 7.0 18.0
Neutral 11 11.0 11.0 29.0
Agree 37 37.0 37.0 66.0
Strongly Agree 34 34.0 34.0 100.0
Total 100 100.0 100.0

This chart indicates that the supervisors are very supportive towards the employees as far as
timely information is concerned as majority of the employees gave a positive response. This is
due to the fact that the supervisors are practicing participative management style. The
disagreement level is comparatively low and this problem is present in mostly de-motivated
employees. Neutral response is due to a communication gap between the employees and
supervisors, this condition of uncertainty can be decreased by communicating properly when ever
information is delivered
c) Job Commitment
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Strongly Disagree 6 6.0 6.0 6.0
Disagree 5 5.0 5.0 11.0
Neutral 8 8.0 8.0 19.0
Agree 18 18.0 18.0 37.0
Strongly Agree 63 63.0 63.0 100.0
Total 100 100.0 100.0

This result interpret that majority of the employees strongly agree with the fact that performing
their job to the maximum level is important for them. This is because the employees are
motivated to perform the job to the best of their ability due to high level of interest in the job. A
small number of employees disagreed with the view that performing a job properly is important
for them; this is mostly the case of de-motivated employees. The neutral result by a small number
of employees indicates that these employees are unaware that at what level the job is considered
well done, this problem can be solved by proper job description and its relative importance.

d) Job Effort
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Strongly Disagree 5 5.0 5.0 5.0
Disagree 3 3.0 3.0 8.0
Neutral 10 10.0 10.0 18.0
Agree 26 26.0 26.0 44.0
Strongly Agree 56 56.0 56.0 100.0
Total 100 100.0 100.0

The result indicates that the trend is towards positive as 82% agreed that they give their best
performance at work; this is due to high interest level in their job, and motivation towards the
organization created by the supervisors. A small ratio of negative result is in the case of highly
de-motivated employees who are not properly supervised.

e) Workplace Boredom
 Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Strongly Disagree 35 35.0 35.0 35.0
Disagree 22 22.0 22.0 57.0
Neutral 20 20.0 20.0 77.0
Agree 10 10.0 10.0 87.0
Strongly Agree 13 13.0 13.0 100.0
Total 100 100.0 100.0

As far as work boredom is concerned, the frequencies show that majority of the employees are
contented with their jobs. As majority gave a positive response, the reason is that the employees
are interested in the job they perform and they are satisfied with their job. On the other hand the
employees who agreed with the statement are very few in numbers; the reason of their
disagreement is lack of interest in their jobs and lack of motivation.

f) Work Interest
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Strongly Disagree 11 11.0 11.0 11.0
Disagree 7 7.0 7.0 18.0
Neutral 12 12.0 12.0 30.0
Agree 22 22.0 22.0 52.0
Strongly Agree 48 48.0 48.0 100.0
Total 100 100.0 100.0

Majority of the employees agreed with the fact that they are interested in the job they perform.
The main reason of their agreement is that the employees are in a profession of their own choice
and they are practically contented with their job. Another reason is that jobs are challenging and
allow operational autonomy. Few number of employees also lacked work interest and this is due
to the fact that their motivation level has decreased relating to the work they perform.

g) Self Competency
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Strongly Disagree 3 3.0 3.0 3.0
Disagree 5 5.0 5.0 8.0
Neutral 5 5.0 5.0 13.0
 Agree 22 22.0 22.0 35.0
Strongly Agree 65 65.0 65.0 100.0
Total 100 100.0 100.0

More than 80% of the employees agreed that they possess the relevant skills and abilities
necessary for their respective jobs. The reason is that the employees are confident about
their skills and are highly motivated for the job. The few number of employees who
disagreed faced the problem of lack of motivation to learn more. However the problem of
the employees giving a neutral response can be solved by training them and informing
them about its objectives.

4.3 CORRELATIONS
Participative
Management
Motivation Style
Motivation Pearson Correlation 1 .848**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 100 100
Participative Management Pearson Correlation .848** 1
Style Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 100 100
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
The results show that participative management style is strongly correlated with employee
motivation. The figure of .848 show high significance level.

4.4 REGRESSION

Model Summary
 Adjusted R Std. Error of the
Model R R Square Square Estimate
1
.848(a) .718 .715 4.704

A Predictors: (Constant), Participative Management Style

The value of R should range from 0-1. Larger value of R=.848 indicates a stronger
relationship between the two variables. The larger R squared tends to optimistically
estimate how well the fits the population.

5. Recommendations
• Improvement in communication to facilitate both participative
style and employee motivation
• Better and clearly stated job description
• Share the companies’ achievement and progress with the
employees regarding the companies policies
• Supervisors should be unbiased
• Other industries should adopt the participative style of
management as well to improve their performance by enhancing
employee motivation
REFERENCES

1. Marshall Sashkin (1976).

2. (Lewis & Renn (1992)

3. Cosier (1978)

4. Eisenhart (1989)

5. Schweigeret al. (1989).

6. Locke et al. (1986).

7. Heller and Wilpert

(1981)

8. Millerand Monge (1986)

9. John L Cotton (1988)

10. Tjosvold et al (1987)

11. Stanton, 1993;

12. David et al (1995)

13. Tjosvold (1998)

14. Poon et al.(2001)

15. Kaufman (2001)

16. Glew et al (1995)

17. William James (1890)

18. Cofer & Appley (1964)

19. Robert Woodworth (1918)

20. Maslow (1939, 1943)

21. Fredrick (1959)

22. Vroom’s 'expectancy theory, Victor Vroom (1964)

23. David McClelland (1988)

24. Meyer (French et al (1966), Meyer et al. (1965)