PurposeWhat is required of job design and production planning, if they are to result in a work group taking a self‐starting approach and going beyond what is formally required of it? This paper aims to contribute to group research by testing a theoretical model of relations between job design on the one hand (captured as completeness, demand on responsibility, demand on cooperation, cognitive demand, and learning opportunities), and reflexivity and learning processes within natural work groups in industry on the other hand.Design/methodology/approachThe results are based on detailed task analyses and questionnaires from 40 work groups at the shop‐floor level in manufacturing industry in Sweden.FindingsJob design and work routines show strong effects on reflexivity and learning processes. Four dimensions of job design – completeness, demand on cooperation, cognitive demand and learning opportunities – impact on reflexivity and learning processes. Job design correlates with social routines, and social routines with work routines.Practical implicationsIt is crucial to create a job design that puts challenging demands on the group if group processes are to be characterized by reflexivity and learning. Managers have a challenging task to provide both a space and a climate that supports reflexivity and learning. All functions affected by production planning need to be involved in job design to balance conflicts between productivity and innovation.Originality/valueDetailed task analysis is worthwhile as it captures aspects that are prerequisites for innovative groups not previously accounted for.

No abstract

Purpose-Employees' work in innovation processes generates ideas, but more often it serves to create conditions so that new products or services can be effectively produced or delivered. Self-organizational activities involve proactively handling new possibilities, unexpected situations, problems or tasks. The aim of this paper is to provide support for a previously proposed model of the determinants of self-organizational activities in work groups. Design/methodology/approach-Three studies were conducted in organizations where self-organizational activities are welcomed, and in a nuclear plant where such can endanger safety. The results are based on work analysis (two studies) and questionnaires (all studies) administered to, in total, 104 work groups. The model was tested using LISREL. Findings-The model received substantial support. Dimensions of job design, group processes and group initiative are interrelated and connected to self-organizational activities. Job design captured by work analysis gives a better model fit and has a larger effect on self-organizational activities than self-assessed autonomy. Research limitations/implications-Five different studies with a relatively small number of groups is not a large sample, but the data could be merged. Practical implications-Teamwork can benefit the innovation process and give a return on the investment that it takes, providing that groups have a complex task, considerable freedom, and group processes that are characterized by reflectivity. A good argument for investing in teamwork is that it can promote self-organization. Employees learn to think outside the box and participate in processes that are important for innovation. Work analysis can give input as to how work conditions might be altered to enhance innovation processes. Job design has an effect on group processes that are crucial for learning the competence to handle change. Social implications-Detailed work analysis is worthwhile as it provides data regardless of how work conditions are perceived, and gives a solid base for proposing how the work should be designed if it is to support self-organization. Further, group processes that enhance group initiative and self-organizational activities are identified. Originality/value-The study gives further evidence that teamwork can benefit the innovation process and give a return on the investment that it takes, providing that groups have a complex work task, considerable freedom, and group processes that are characterized by reflexivity.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore job design mechanisms that enhance team proactivity within a lean production system where autonomy is uttermost restricted. We propose and test a model where the team learning process of building shared meaning of work mediates the relationship between team participative decision-making, inter team relations and team proactive behaviour. Design/methodology/approach – The results are based on questionnaires to 417 employees within manufacturing industry (response rate 86 per cent) and managers’ ratings of team proactivity. The research model was tested by mediation analysis on aggregated data (56 teams). Findings – Team learning mediates the relationship between participative decision-making and inter team collaboration on team proactive behaviour. Input from stakeholders in the work flow and partaking in decisions about work, rather than autonomy in carrying out the work, enhance the teams’ proactivity through learning processes. Research limitations/implications – An investigation of the effects of different leadership styles and management policy on proactivity through team-learning processes might shed light on how leadership promotes proactivity, as results support the effects of team participative decision-making – reflecting management policy – on proactivity. Practical implications – Lean production stresses continuous improvements for enhancing efficiency, and such processes rely on individuals and teams that are proactive. Participation in forming the standardization of work is linked to managerial style, which can be changed and developed also within a lean concept. Based on our experiences of implementing the results in the production plant, we discuss what it takes to create and manage participative processes and close collaboration between teams on the shop floor, and other stakeholders such as production support, based on a shared understanding of the work and work processes. Social implications – Learning at the workplace is essential for long-term employability, and for job satisfaction and health. The lean concept is widely spread to both public bodies and enterprises, and it has been shown that it can be linked to increased stress and an increase in workload. Finding the potential for learning within lean production is essential for balancing the need of efficient production and employees’ health and well-being at work. Originality/value – Very few studies have investigated the paradox between lean and teamwork, yet many lean-inspired productions systems have teamwork as a pillar for enhancing effectiveness. A clear distinction between autonomy and participation contributes to the understanding of the links between job design, learning processes and team proactivity.

Purpose -Learning at work generalises through socialisation into behaviours away from the workplace. The aim of this study is to give empirical evidence of a positive relationship between job design, self-efficacy, competence efficacy and personal initiative at work, and proactive job search while under notice of redundancy and in unemployment. Design/methodology/approach -The results are based on a detailed work task analysis and self-reported data by individuals who had been made redundant (n ¼ 176). Findings -The paper finds that the theoretical model received substantial, but not full support. Job design has impact on personal initiative through self-efficacy and competence-efficacy as mediating variables between job design and personal initiative. Personal initiative at work affects proactive job search when facing unemployment. Research limitations/implications -A limitation is that the respondents in general had jobs that were low-skilled and routine. It is likely that a research group with larger differences in job design would show stronger relations between job design and personal initiative. Practical implications -Work task analysis identifies conditions at work that minimise and mitigate individual initiative and makes it possible to correct them in order both to enhance organisational effectiveness and the individuals' long-term employability. Originality/value -The paper proposes that autonomy and complexity, which are the aspects most predominant in the study of how job design affects personal initiative and self-efficacy, are too limited. The sequential completeness provides a broader or narrower scope of work tasks and more or less feed back which is crucial for learning and mastery-experiences. Demand on cooperation, demand on responsibility, cognitive demand and learning opportunities affect initiative-taking as well.