In his attempt to infuse corporate governance ‘best practices’ in the Public Sector to achieve outcomes efficiently and effectively, the sector minister, Dr Paa Kwesi Induom is introducing performance measurement, job evaluation vis-à-vis salary progression, time management etc into the public service. (Ref: www.ghanaweb.com: General News of Thursday, 16 November 2006). Bravo! Minister. Had Ghana had these ‘dynamic measures’ (as opposed to policies that were shelved and collected dust) in place 50 years ago, Ghana would be in a better shape – socially, economically, politically, environmentally, industrially – what else would readers want to add?
Apparently, the minister is continuing to build a team of exceptional leaders, managers and operatives to drive change and lead the new Ghana Public Service (GPS) to new levels of excellence in the areas of quality, quantity, timeliness, risk and resource (financial and non-financial) management. The GPS, as I see it, is undertaking a significant change management program and the minister will need all the assistance that he requires to achieve this objective particularly in relation to reviews, audits, reporting, transparency, accountability and related management tools to achieve the required results.
A critical mechanism in this regard is to have in place a simple and workable performance management framework by utilising an Employee Performance Agreement (EPA) form to record performance exchanges between supervisors and subordinates. Typical variables on this form are: Performance Objectives i.e. Critical Success Factors, Key Result Areas and Expected Results and Performance Achievement i.e. Mid-Cycle Review and End-Cycle Assessment. These exchanges normally take place half-yearly. And these of course will highlight any training and development programs that some individuals may require to make up any gaps in their knowledge and skill base.
It should be noted, at this juncture, that in most jurisdictions within the Australian Public Service (APS) the above performance management mechanism is mandatory and failure to participate in it renders one ineligible for any salary progression and/or pay rise. And failure to obey a lawful direction can also lead to disciplinary action the consequences of which may be serious. Undoubtedly, this is the only practical way to measure the rhetorical ‘transparency and accountability’ within the Ghana Public Service and any public sector for that matter.
The above-mentioned practices come under the purview of organisational behaviour (OB) in the field of management studies. OB is a management and operational mechanism that can make or break an organisation (public or private).
The main objective of any organisation is to achieve results/outcomes effectively and efficiently. By effectiveness in this context, one means producing the intended or expected result. Efficiency on the other hand borders on competency in performance and use of resources. Both effectiveness and efficiency, to some degree, hinge on organisational behaviour of a given entity.
According to the literature organisational behaviour is the study of the individual, the group and the organisation systems level. In light of this organisational behaviour needs to be studied holistically. By holistic approach one should consider all the three components of OB, namely, the individual, the group and the organisation. To study any one or two of the three perspectives only will produce just a ‘half-baked’ product that will be ineffective and inefficient within an organisation.
Whenever people interact in organisations, many factors (constructive, destructive, positive, negative etc) come into play. Hence this paper attempts to explore the range of practices that define human resource management within an organisation – particularly the employment relationship from an organisational behaviour perspective. This field of study, according to literature, looks at work behaviour, i.e. what people do in an organisation, and how that behaviour affects the performance of the organisation. As a science, organisational behaviour is interested in ‘understanding, predicting and controlling/influencing’ overt behaviour at work. Generally, our success is measured by our ability to do this at the workplace.
The three levels of analysis: individual, group and organisation tend to correspond closely to the levels of a manager’s responsibility.
Individuals bring a complex set of characteristics, experiences, skills, values and attitudes to the workplace and these have an impact on their level of performance. In some instances managers can do little to alter some of these basic characteristics. However, managers can have a real impact on employee behaviour, especially through motivation, counselling, training, communication, vision sharing, job satisfaction and related management tools and ingredients of learning organisation.
The two familiar sayings ‘two heads are better than one’ and ‘too many cooks spoil the broth’ are used to illustrate the point that groups can have advantages and disadvantages for the members and for the organisation. Work groups are created within organisations to enable individuals to interact and contribute to an organisation’s production purpose. However, the study of organisational behaviour acknowledges that people behave differently when working in a group. In particular, communication patterns and levels of conflict will affect group behaviour.
Communication refers to the way in which information is transmitted between the individual and the group and is therefore an essential link between these levels. The group and the organisation are in turn linked through leadership and the authority conveyed through the organisational structure.
Changing and developing employee behaviour is a key factor in OB, and therefore the organisation’s human resource practices (such as selection processes, training programs, and performance appraisals) influence employee productivity, absenteeism, turnover and job satisfaction.
At the workplace, a manager is responsible for the performance of one or more subordinates. As such, management’s work focuses on the behaviour of individuals and groups and on the processes and structures of organisations. The manager’s immediate concerns are:
- Task performance (quality and quantity of work produced) - Human resource maintenance (the attraction and continuation of a viable workforce; for example job satisfaction, job involvement, grievances, absenteeism, turnover, performance, etc.).
In summary, it can be said that we study organisational behaviour to develop our ability to solve problems, and prevent problems from occurring. As you may be aware, good managers are problem solvers. Hence it is important that you have some idea of why people do what they do in organisations. Some examples of problem indicators are: absenteeism, turnover, tardiness, negative attitudes, poor quality of work, declining work quantity. High turnover and absenteeism disrupt the productive processes of an organisation and reduce efficiency.
In this era of Public Sector Reforms it is recommended (if not imperative) for its managers and operatives to take cognisance of the above management tools to enhance the productivity of the sector.
Assistant Director, Professional Development, Australian Public Service.
Member, National Institute for Governance, Australia
Views expressed by the author(s) do not necessarily reflect those of GhanaHomePage.
