Structure Please; Continuous Improvement and Employee Consequences in a Dynamic Task Environment

Abstract

Whilst continuous improvement (CI) programs have had an enduring appeal for several decades, their sustainability has been a concern for almost as long. Sustaining a CI program requires permanent support of all its stakeholders, particularly of the most important ones—employees. Some authors argue that continuous improvement programs are beneficial for employee wellbeing, while others contest this. We contribute to the small empirical basis for such claims by presenting results from research among care workers in Flemish nursing homes. Questionnaires from 553 care workers in a nursing home applying continuous improvement and in a reference group of nine comparable homes were analyzed to study differences in job demands, job resources, burnout risk, and work engagement. In addition, we have drawn on interviews, site visits, and other qualitative data to assess the extent to which the differences found may be attributed to the CI program used. Overall, the care workers in the nursing home with the CI program evaluated their jobs as better than their colleagues in the reference group. These differences are at least partly caused by the continuous improvement program. We argue that the main effect is that over time, daily work processes become more structured. The work pressure decreases as work becomes less hectic.

Not so different altogether: Putting Lean and sociotechnical design into practice in a process industry

“…It is noteworthy that all three issues relate directly to the most contested topic in the LP-STD debates: LP's effects on the quality of working life (QWL) (Benders, Bal & Vermeerbergen, 2019;Carter, Danford, Howcroft, Richardson, Smith & Taylor, 2017;Hasle, 2014;Marin-Garcia & Bonavia, 2015;Neirotti, 2020;Procter & Radnor, 2017). In conventional models for QWL, autonomy is seen as a predictor of worker well-being (Schouteten & Benders, 2004;De Treville & Antonakis, 2006).…”

Back through the back door? On removing supervisors to reduce hierarchy

“…It shows how different groups of stakeholders (top managers, middle managers, workers, organizational designers and possibly others) experience and approach the basic contradiction differently, making outcomes structurally conditioned yet not structurally determined. In addition to hierarchy, the approach may be applied to several organizational phenomena that reflect the dual nature of control and coordination; for example, formalization/red-tape (Bozeman and Feeny, 2011), teamworking (Procter and Radnor, 2014), continuous improvement (Benders et al, 2019a) or rationalization programmes (Kilskar et al, 2018).…”

Predicting Job Burnout and Its Antecedents: Evidence from Financial Information Technology Firms

“…The third category uses job-related stresses as antecedents of JB to predict JB [16,17]. Studies in the Sustainability 2021, 13, 4680 2 of 10 fourth category employ the job demand-resource/control model to predict JB [18,19]. To this list, the first goal of this study is therefore to present a fifth category that predicts JB through Kahn's JE theory [20].…”