Job satisfaction tends to be higher the further one progresses up the hierarchy. This is partly because at this level there is more scope for adjusting the job to suit personal preference, e.g. by delegation, although it does not necessarily follow that this results in the job being done most effectively for the organization.
Lower down the hierarchy this flexibility is usually absent and the effects of being in an unsuitable job are more apparent. Some jobs are of such a routine and mechanistic nature the their quantitative content is greater than scores found for any human being, even those with the highest quantitative preference. If this sort of work really is unavoidable, then developing employees who do it has to begin with ways of reorganizing the method of work, so that each job is designed to come within the normal range of preferences and recruitment is made on that basis.
Awareness of decision preferences can enable you to get a better match between job and post-holder, and to re-examine the effectiveness of some standard development procedures:
1. If the only significant reward for success is promotion, then a good performer working within his/her preference may be moved into an area of work for which he / she is basically unsuited.
2. A subordinate who is performing less well than expected may develop more successfully if moved to a different job, by lateral transfer, or even promotion.
3. Recruitment decisions based too heavily on the candidate's educational achievements or past performance in a different position may result in a is match between the basic characteristics of the job and the preference of the candidate. There are far fewer poor employees than there are bad selectors.
4. Group performance and problem-solving, in project teams for example, are likely to improve if individual decision preferences are known and understood, and if some matching of preferences within work groups is possible.
5. Selecting the most appropriate training course for a particular subordinate should include knowledge of whether the methods of tuition are qualitatively or quantitatively based, and which best suits the subordinate.
6. Decision preferences have a strong influence in determining an individual's frame of reference, and an awareness of them can make coaching and career counseling more effective.
7. Rather than lose or discard square pegs, it might be of benefit to your organization to create a few square holes, theirs may be the skills you least tolerate and most need.
One of the most challenging features of staff development is also one of the most rewarding. Because it is about improving the performance not only of the individual, but ultimately of the whole organization, the boss has to think beyond the person to the job, and belong the work content to the objectives of the company, i.e. not just at the pegs and the holes, but the board as well.***
Lower down the hierarchy this flexibility is usually absent and the effects of being in an unsuitable job are more apparent. Some jobs are of such a routine and mechanistic nature the their quantitative content is greater than scores found for any human being, even those with the highest quantitative preference. If this sort of work really is unavoidable, then developing employees who do it has to begin with ways of reorganizing the method of work, so that each job is designed to come within the normal range of preferences and recruitment is made on that basis.
Awareness of decision preferences can enable you to get a better match between job and post-holder, and to re-examine the effectiveness of some standard development procedures:
1. If the only significant reward for success is promotion, then a good performer working within his/her preference may be moved into an area of work for which he / she is basically unsuited.
2. A subordinate who is performing less well than expected may develop more successfully if moved to a different job, by lateral transfer, or even promotion.
3. Recruitment decisions based too heavily on the candidate's educational achievements or past performance in a different position may result in a is match between the basic characteristics of the job and the preference of the candidate. There are far fewer poor employees than there are bad selectors.
4. Group performance and problem-solving, in project teams for example, are likely to improve if individual decision preferences are known and understood, and if some matching of preferences within work groups is possible.
5. Selecting the most appropriate training course for a particular subordinate should include knowledge of whether the methods of tuition are qualitatively or quantitatively based, and which best suits the subordinate.
6. Decision preferences have a strong influence in determining an individual's frame of reference, and an awareness of them can make coaching and career counseling more effective.
7. Rather than lose or discard square pegs, it might be of benefit to your organization to create a few square holes, theirs may be the skills you least tolerate and most need.
One of the most challenging features of staff development is also one of the most rewarding. Because it is about improving the performance not only of the individual, but ultimately of the whole organization, the boss has to think beyond the person to the job, and belong the work content to the objectives of the company, i.e. not just at the pegs and the holes, but the board as well.***
