Leadership

In order to identify the differences between management and leadership, defining both terms is the best start. A manager is a "person or persons who control or direct a business or other enterprise" [Anon 2.] [n.d.]. A leader meanwhile is a person who rules, guides and or inspires others [Anon 2.] [n.d.].

To be a successful manager, an individual needs to have good leadership skills. The main fundamental difference between Management and Leadership is therefore the fact that Leadership is just one aspect of Management. However, “a manager cannot just be a leader, he also needs formal authority to be effective" [Anon. 2] [n.d.].

Another difference between Leadership and Management is that Managers control and solve problems e.g. a manager would employ someone that the business is in need of while Leaders do not control or solve problems generally. Instead, Leaders motivate and inspire people. For example, Leaders may carry out speeches that inspire a group or motivate a group by recognising their abilities or achievements. This shows that the roles of Managers and Leaders are different.

In addition, another difference between Leadership and Management is that Managers plan and budget e.g. cut costs by changing suppliers or cutting staff and a Leader establishes a direction e.g. introduces a new aim or objective for a group to focus on. This is another example that shows that the roles of Managers and Leaders are different.

Furthermore, another difference between Leadership and Management is that Managers organise things e.g. arrange meetings in the workplace and Leaders give people a vision e.g. by giving people in a group an idea of what they can accomplish. This is another difference between Management and Leadership. Additionally, another difference between Management and Leadership is that Managers encourage predictability and order e.g. make sure all employees are punctual and are working to an expected standard while Leaders encourage change e.g. input new ideas and or experiment with new ideas to a group. This is a further difference between Management and Leadership.

The 'Managerial Grid' is a straightforward framework that defines seven basic styles that describes workplace behaviour and the resulting relationships [Anon. 6] [n.d.]. The seven managerial grid styles are centred on how two fundamental interests (interest for people and interest for results) are exhibited at varying stages whenever people interact [Anon. 6] [n.d.].

The seven management grid styles are Controlling, Accommodating, Status Quo, Indifferent, Paternalistic, Opportunistic and Sound.

9,1 Controlling and Dominate (Direct and Dominate) - Managers with this style take control of the situation and expect great results. However, they aren't concerned at all for the people they are working with e.g. employees. These managers are authoritative.

1,9 Accommodating (Yield and Comply) - Managers with this style are concerned most about the people within the business. This type of Manager therefore do everything in their power to make tasks as pleasing to complete as possible for employees. They aren't concerned about the results at all however.

5,5 Status Quo (Balance and Compromise) - Managers with this style are both concerned about the well being of the people in the workplace and the results. This type of Manager don't like taking unnecessary risk but expect decent results all the same. They also take into account the views of others so they are accepted amongst the workforce.

1,1 Indifferent (Evade and Elude) - Managers with this style aren't interested in the results or the well being of the people in the work environment. They therefore distance themselves from the workers and from the responsibility / expectation of generating great results.

PAT Paternalistic (Prescribe and Guide) - Managers with this style define initiatives for themselves and others. They also support the workforce by offering appreciation and praise to those deserving of it. In addition, they dislike and discourage ideas that are the opposite or very different from their own ideas.

OPP Opportunistic (Exploit and Manipulate) - Managers with this style do there very best to convince others to their way of thinking if it privately benefits the Managers themselves. They tend to take an approach that works best in fulfilling their private needs.

9,9 Sound (Contribute and Commit) - Managers with this style take up team working that invites commitment and involvement. They also take into account all of the alternative views and facts to reach a shared understanding of the best solution [Anon. 6.] [n.d.].

Someone that I have worked for is the owner of FMY Chemist as work experience. I feel that the owner of FMY Chemist's leadership style is Authoritarian (Autocratic). I think that the owner of FMY Chemist would fit in the Controlling (9,1) style on Blake and Mouton's grid. This is because the owner of FMY Chemist took control of every decision that needed to be made and made decisions based on whether it would generate good results i.e. be good for business than if the employees would be most satisfied. For example, he would purchase products in bulk in order to get the advantage of 'economies of scale' to reduce the cost per unit because he would be reducing costs, not because it would satisfy the needs of the employees.

This is how he went about business in general, with results coming first and the needs of the employees coming second. This is why the owner of FMY Chemist fits in the Controlling (9,1) style on Blake and Mouton's grid rather than another style e.g. the Accommodating (1,9) style as the Accommodating style takes into consideration the people's needs opting to make decisions based on the needs of the workers rather than the results (which is the complete opposite with the owner of FMY Chemist).

Martin Luther King is a strong leader that was discussed in the lecture. Martin Luther King was a strong leader for many reasons. One of the main reasons why Martin Luther King was a strong leader was King’s ability to inspire people through his great orator skills. Not only did King inspire black people with his powerful speeches such as his “I have a dream” speech, he inspired people of all ethnic backgrounds e.g. European and Asian people. Even though lots of leaders have the skill of being able to inspire people, their aren’t many people that are or were able to inspire people on the same level as King whether we are talking about the sheer number of people or the different types of people inspired by him. In almost all of King’s speeches, he displayed a degree of confidence that I feel lots of different people felt inspired by to make a statement and a vital change in racial policy. King also wasn’t afraid to take charge when it was necessary as it seemed like King was one of the few to really stand up for what is right and wrong showing his mental and physical endurance during speeches. This is one of the reasons why I feel King wasn’t just a “quite strong” leader but a “very strong” leader.

Another reason why I think that King was a strong leader was the fact that King was very forward looking. Instead of dwelling on the past and being nostalgic, King was always setting aims and looking into the future. The best example of this was King’s “I have a dream” speech. I personally feel King’s forward looking approach motivated people in getting behind King and change the future (which they did) because the people knew that change wasn’t going to happen if the past was being constantly looked into. The people needed someone that took seriously the need for change and King filled that role flawlessly. This shows that King was a strong leader.

Additionally, a further reason why I feel King was a strong leader is because King was competent enough to be a leader. For example, King wasn’t childish and acted like an adult at all times. His emotional feelings for example could have gotten the better of him at various times bearing in mind the seriousness of the racial situation at this point, but he never showed any form of weakness as a leader and was highly professional at all times. I think that this is one of the reasons why he got support early in his career as people began to recognise that this is someone that should be representing them as a race. This also shows that King was a strong leader.

Furthermore, another reason why I believe that King was a strong leader is because King was an honest man. At the moment in the UK, there is a strong perception that people in government are dishonest because many of them are claiming expenses on things they shouldn’t be. I’m sure there was a strong sense of corruption as well in politics during King’s time; however there is no doubt that King was brutally honest. Despite the fact that honesty may sometimes work against people in politics and people in general, there is no question that King displayed integrity and sincerity in all of his actions with deceptive behaviour not being one of King’s attributes. I believe that people recognised King as a “what you see is what you get” type person because they could have easily seen through someone that was dishonest. King on the other hand wasn’t one of these people and was true to himself always. I think that this shows that King was a strong leader because it helped keep his supporters united with the same goals.

In addition, a further reason why I consider King to be a strong leader is because King was fair-minded. Despite the fact that King could have taken a more extremist viewpoint on the subject of racial inequality, using violence if he felt necessary, King was always fair to everyone including white people (who you could argue were the main obstacles to change at that point). In spite of the fact that Black people were being prejudice against, King never responded by being prejudice to white people. King could have easily risen to the bait, but he was always strong enough not to get caught up in the moment. I think that this shows that King was a strong leader because if he was being unfair, his stance on equality and his campaign in general would have lost credibility, which would have lost him much needed support. If he were losing support, he would be failing as a leader. King however was fair at all times, which kept his established support and increased his support to new people. This is an additional reason why I think that King was a strong leader.

A further reason why I think that King was a strong leader is the fact that he was very courageous. It’s difficult to imagine racial inequality on a legal basis today, but back when King was campaigning, all the odds were against him. King was extremely courageous not only because King and his supporters were the minority but the fact that King was taking a non-violent peaceful approach which may have been more risky than if he took a violent approach. It’s common knowledge that it’s more difficult to make a statement without violence than with violence so it took King a lot of courage too not only make a significant change successfully, but also make a significant change peacefully. This is a reason why I think that King was a strong leader.

In Conclusion and Evaluation, one of the main findings that I got from this topic is learning the difference between leadership and management. Although I was already aware of some of the similarities between leadership and management, I never knew the difference between a Manager and a Leader until I finished the topic.

Another finding that I got from this topic is learning what the ‘managerial grid’ is and where my former boss (at FMY Chemist) would fit on the ‘managerial grid’. This is something that I’ve learned from this topic.

In addition, another finding that I got from this topic is learning about who are examples of strong leaders. The main leader of which I have found out information about regarding his leadership is Martin Luther King. I have learnt a great deal of information about King’s leadership, a lot of which is mentioned in this blog.

Even though I was already aware of a lot of things regarding Leadership before I took this topic (as I did Business Studies as one of my A levels), I feel I have learnt quite a lot of new information regarding Leadership as a whole. I am therefore very pleased with what I've learnt from this topic overall.

References:

[Anon. 1] [n.d.] Leadership [online]. [s.n.] Available from:http://www.businessballs.com/leadership.htm [Accessed 27 October 2009].

[Anon. 2] [1997] The Difference Between Management and Leadership [online]. [s.n.] Available from: http://www.see.ed.ac.uk/~gerard/MENG/ME96/index.html?http://www.ee.ed.ac.uk/~gerard/MENG/ME96/index.html [Accessed 27 October 2009].

[Anon. 3] [n.d.] [n.k.] [online]. [s.n.] Available from:http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=management [Accessed 27 October 2009].

[Anon. 4] [n.d.] [n.k.] [online]. [s.n.] Available from:http://www.answers.com/topic/management [Accessed 29 October 2009].

[Anon. 5] [n.d.] [n.k.] [online]. [s.n.] Available from:http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=leader [Accessed 29 October 2009].

[Anon. 6] [n.d.] [n.k.] [online]. [s.n.] Available from:http://www.gridinternational.com/gridtheory.html [ Accessed 30 October 2009].

Image round table - http://i.zdnet.com/blogs/bad-leadership-causes-failed-it.jpg [Accessed 27 October 2009].

Managerial Grid image. Available from: http://www.gridinternational.com/gridtheory.html [Accessed 30 October 2009].

Organisation Culture

An example of a 'visible' aspect of culture in FMY Chemist (a organisation that I worked in for two weeks as work experience) is the way in which employees dress. When I was working temporarily at FMY Chemist, I noticed that the workers there dressed very smart which is something that is very 'visible' from mine and the customer's point of view. For example, most of the employees working at FMY Chemist were wearing shirts and trousers (applies to both men and women) which I feel is very smart, especially in comparison with other businesses that aren't strict about what employees are allowed / not allowed to wear e.g. dance clubs and gyms.


Another example of a 'visible' aspect of culture in FMY Chemist is the unwritten rules of the business. While I was working there, I noticed the way in which the employees at the tills were treating their customers. Needless to say, they treated the customers very well. Almost every time when a customer bought something, the person at the till would say 'that's £ please" before a transaction and "thanks for coming" after a transaction. Their were no rules about being polite to the customers, but clearly it was expected that employees should be polite to customers at all times. This is something that I feel was very 'visible' and I'm sure the customers felt that it was very 'visible' too.


In addition, another example of a 'visible' aspect of culture in FMY Chemist is the atmosphere. While I was there, I personally felt that their was a very relaxed atmosphere at the Chemist. I think that this is largely attributed to the fact that the owner of FMY Chemist was quite a laid back individual. Even though he would tell you what you should or shouldn't be doing, he very rarely raised his voice, and only did when it was absolutely necessary. I think his laid back attitude rubbed off on the employees at the Chemist as they were equally as laid back as him. I also feel that the atmosphere was very positive as it seemed like the business was constantly about moving forwards even with occasional setbacks such as supplies arriving late.


An example of a 'hidden' aspect of culture in FMY Chemist is the way in which employees are valued. Even though I feel I wasn't given the authority that I deserved during my time at FMY Chemist, I feel that me and all of the employees working at the Chemist were valued a lot as individuals. I really liked the way in which the owner of the business consulted us privately about our performance as it felt like he was going out of his way to keep things private that were private. I felt that this avoided creating resentment as he wasn't lecturing us if any of us were doing something wrong or incorrect out in the open. Instead, he would do things privately which I felt was a extremely positive aspect of the culture in FMY Chemist and clearly showed that he values his employees.


Another example of a 'hidden' aspect of culture in FMY Chemist is the importance of customers to the business. Even though I was working there for only two weeks, it was very clear to me that the customers were the highest priority to the business. This is interesting as FMY Chemist is a private company, so you would expect that the business's priority would be maximising it's profits. However, during my time there, I never felt as though maximising profits were a bigger priority than to provide customer's the best quality service possible. This is therefore clearly a aspect that is 'hidden' from people outside the business.




Power Culture:

In my own words, Power Culture is a business culture in which few (and in some cases just one person) makes most if not all decisions in the business. The few that make the decisions are fair but strict and decisions that are made are done quickly with very little red tape generally. An example of a business that would have a Power Culture is a small independent Chemist. This is because in a small Chemist (an example of one would be the FMY Chemist in Chesham that I done my work experience in) the owner of the Chemist would make most of the decisions in the business. For example, the owners would make the decision about the employees wages, how much time employees are allowed for their holidays, who gets employed, who is made redundent, what products are sold in the Chemist, the prices of the products sold in the Chemist and so on.

Role Culture:

In my own words, Role Culture is a business culture in which the business operates in a hierarchial fashion. For example, in a typical business that has a Role Culture, their would be several different departments and each employee from one of the departments would consult one of the managers from each department about any decisions that need to be made or issues that they have generally. An example of a business that would have a Role Culture would be a big supermarket such as Tesco. A supermarket such as Tesco would have a Role Culture because in a supermarket like Tesco, their would be several different departments with each department having a manager that is in charge of that respective department. For example, in Tesco's Human Resources department, their would be a manager that controls the department and most if not all the employees below the manager in that department.

Task Culture:

In my own words, Task Culture is a business culture in which teams are created in order to complete a certain task or activity. For example, teams will work together to meet specific goals rather than work on their own as individuals. The principle behind Task Culture is therefore about being united. An example of a business that would have a Task Culture is a sports team such as a Football team. An example of a Football team that would have a Task Culture is Manchester United. Manchester United would have a Task Culture because each of the 11 players on the football pitch at any time would need to work together in order to defend properly and score goals. As a result, the team of players at Manchester United would need to work together in order to perform well and win trophies.

Person Culture:

In my own words, Person Culture is a business culture in which individuals have the authority to make all decisions regarding specific tasks and or activities. The theory behind Person Culture is therefore about working on your own, calling all the shots. An example of a business that would have a Person Culture would be a Architect business. Architects would have a Person Culture because Architects make all decisions regarding their jobs. For example, Architects would have the authority to make all the decisions regarding the designing and constructing of all the projects that they are involved in e.g. such as deciding when to prepare construction drawings and specifications as well as other technical documents. An example of a Architect organisation that would have a Person Culture would be Kees Christiaanse Architects & Planners (KCAP) with Kees Christiaanse being the main Architect of the organisation.

I think that the main problem of trying to classify culture into one of the four types as described above (Power Culture, Role Culture, Task Culture and Person Culture) is that some businesses might have different aspects of different cultures inside the business. For example, a company like Tesco might have one department that has a Role Culture (e.g. Marketing department), another department that has a Power Culture (e.g. Accounts department), another department that has a Task Culture (e.g. Human Resources) and another department that has a Person Culture (e.g. Production department). As a result, for a business that has several different cultures in one organisation, it would be very difficult to reach the conclusion that an entire organisation has a [insert specific culture]. This applies mainly to large organisations that have several different departments and operate in many different markets e.g. Tesco.

Another problem of trying to classify culture into one of the four types is that some businesses may have a culture that is entirely different to each of the four types (Power, Role, Task and Person). As a result, they would have a culture that could not be classified as Power, Role, Task or Person because it would be neither of these cultures. For example, a business may have a culture that doesn't have one person making most if not all the decisions (Power Culture), a business that operates in a hierarchical fashion (Role Culture), a culture in which teams are created in order to complete a certain task or activity (Task Culture) or a business culture in which individuals have the authority to make all decisions regarding specific tasks (Person Culture).

http://www.apple.com/uk/

I think that Apple has a strong culture. I feel that Apple has a strong culture because Apple have a reputation of generally selling more reliable products than their competition (with the exception of the iPods that are well known to brick and for their screens to scratch easily.) The best example of this is the line of Mac OS X operating systems. Mac OS X operating systems are well known to be more stable and secure than Microsoft's Windows e.g. XP. For example, Mac OS X users are much less likely to get viruses or hacked into than Windows users. This has built Apple a reputation for making reliable and secure operating systems in comparison to their competitors e.g. Microsoft with Windows despite the fact that Microsoft are the market leaders in the operating systems market. It is therefore clear that Apple quality control their products extensively so they satisfy their customers demands.

Another reason why I think that Apple has a strong culture is because Apple's products are almost always associated with being fashionable. The best example of this is the iPod. Despite the fact that their are many MP3 Players on the market that are both technically superior and cheaper than many of the types of iPods sold, iPod's are still by far the most popular MP3 Player brand. This is largely because of Apple's extremely effective marketing campaign. I feel that this shows that Apple have a strong culture because Apple often sell technically inferior products at uncompetitive prices to their competitors yet still manage to be the #1 brand in the MP3 Player market. This shows just how effective Apple are at Marketing their products in comparison with their competitors. It is therefore clear that Apple value Marketing in order to sell their products.

In addition, another reason why I think that Apple have a strong culture is because Apple have a big reputation of making their employees work extremely hard. For example, Apple have a history of employing as few people as possible in order to make the currently employed employees work as efficiently as possible. In fact, Apple employees work "sixty to seventy hours a week".

[Anon. 1] (2005)

I think that this shows that Apple have a strong culture as even though it may be a stretch to say that Apple's employees are being exploited, clearly Apple want their employees working as hard and as efficient as possible. Their therefore must be a strong sense of work ethic in Apple's working environments.

In Conclusion and Evaluation, one of the main findings I got from this topic is knowing that each business has a culture depending on the market in which they operate. For example, it is likely that an Architect that owns a business would have a Person Culture because that is the nature of the Architect industry.

Another finding that I got from this topic is that businesses can have aspects of all four types of culture (Power, Role, Task and Person). For example, a company like Asda may have a Accounts department that has a Power Culture, a Human Resources department that has a Role Culture, a Production department that has a Task Culture and a Marketing department that has a Person Culture. As a result, a company like Asda may not have a clearly defined overall culture. This usually applies to large organisations however.

In addition, another finding that I got from this topic is that some businesses have stronger cultures than others. For example, a company like Google would have a stronger culture than an average supermarket such as Morrisons. This is largely because organisations with stronger culture's have generally more unique cultural aspects (Google is no exception to this). These are the findings that I got from this topic.

References:

[Anon.] (2005) The Apple Corporate Culture [online]. [n.k.] [s.n.] Available from:http://viewfromthemountain.typepad.com/applepeels/2005/07/the_apple_corpo.html[Accessed 24 October 2009].

Organisational Culture Image - http://www.solutions4training.com/www.solutions4training.com/images/t0/89 [Accessed 24 October 2009].

Improving Staff Performance

In the context of Motivation, Content theories assume people have a set of needs which they pursue. So in other words, what is it exactly that motivates the workers. Process theories meanwhile assume that people choose their goals and select how to get them by a "process of calculation". So in short, how does this motivate the workers. In essence, the difference between a Content and Process theory is that a Content theory is "what" motivates workers and a Process theory is "how" workers are motivated.

Examples of Content theories include Maslow's hierarchy of needs, Aldefer's ERG theory, Herzberg's two factor theory and McClelland's achievement motivation theory. Examples of Process theories include the Expectancy theory, Equity theory and Goal theory. This shows that the Content theories and Process theories are different.


Let's take into account Maslow's hierarchy of needs (a Content theory) and the Goal setting theory (Process theory). Maslow's hierarchy of needs shows what worker's are motivated by e.g. their social needs being met. In this case, the "what" is the "social needs". The Goal setting theory however shows that setting challenging and specific goals can be very motivating. The "how" in this case is the "goals" themselves e.g. "how" are the workers going to achieve the goals set. This shows clearly that the difference between Content and Process theories are "what" and "how".


John Lewis Primary Research:


I carried out a short Questionnaire over the phone with one of the managers at High Wycombe's John Lewis branch to see how and what motivates the workers at John Lewis and if John Lewis effectively motivates their workers.


1. Do you think that John Lewis effectively motivates it's workers in the work environment?


Yes


No


Answer: Yes


2. If so, how does John Lewis motivate it's workers?


Answer: John Lewis motivates it's workers by treating employees in the company as individuals rather than collectively. We do this so we feel we can meet the social needs of each worker. For example, the social needs of one worker may be different from another. Examples of some ways that we motivate employees include delegating responsibility to hard working employees, creating different teams in the workplace in order to meet worker's social needs as well as on the spot praise for their performance/s if they have been working hard. From a financial perspective, we motivate our employees by offering reduced air fare travel as well as travel discounts, offering what we consider a very generous holiday entitlement, contributory pension and private healthcare schemes, a profit share scheme as well as a employee share scheme. You can find more information about this on our website.


Me: Thanks for your time.


John Lewis Secondary Research:

According to Anon 1. (n.d.):

"Your remuneration package will be determined by your individual contract of employment. Whilst this varies from business to business, typical benefits include:

• Opportunities for reduced air fare travel and travel discounts*
• Generous holiday entitlement
• Contributory pension and private healthcare schemes
• Profit share scheme*
• Bonus*
• Employee share scheme*
• Superb sports and social amenities & opportunity to join BA Clubs
• Subsidised staff restaurants

*at the company's discretion."

Robertson (2007) states that:

"Although relatively few firms now operate standalone profit-sharing schemes, some employers still see a value in doing so. At the John Lewis Partnership, which employs 64,000 staff, for example, profit sharing remains central to its partnership ethos.

Chris Charman, a senior consultant in executive compensation and rewards at Towers Perrin, believes the John Lewis Partnership is an ideal type of organisation to offer a profit-sharing scheme because it enables front-line retail staff to identify how they impact on the business' profitability.

"You can see it when you walk in the door, with [workers'] level of product knowledge and service. Even in terms of its procurement and wastage, [staff] will [realise the] impact on the bottom line."

Last year, John Lewis Partnership paid out £106m through its scheme, which equated to a 14% supplement to workers' annual salaries.

For the past 10 years, John Lewis Partnership has paid an annual partnership bonus of between 9% and 22% of annual salary.The bonus is based on profits for the trading year beginning each February, and is determined by the organisation's partnership board. After any capital is held back for reinvestment, the remaining profit is distributed among its 64,000 employees.

Sam Hinton-Smith, a spokesman for John Lewis Partnership, claims employees place a high value on the scheme because the organisation also ensures it also pays market-rate wages."

Kmietowicz (2009) maintains that:

“Adopting principles from employee owned organisations, such as the major UK retail group the John Lewis Partnership, may help the NHS engage staff and deliver better services, says a report from the Nuffield Trust.

The Trust, which carries out research in healthcare services, looked at the international evidence on the effects of employee ownership on performance, including the operation of four such organisations: the John Lewis Partnership; Kaiser Permanente, a US healthcare provider; Circle, a European private healthcare provider; and Central Surrey Health, a provider of nursing and community healthcare services.

It found that employee owned companies that allow staff to participate in making decisions on how the workplace is run can deliver a range of benefits, such as better productivity and performance, less staff turnover and sickness absence, greater innovation, and higher levels of motivation and commitment among the staff.”

Game Primary Research:


I carried out a short Questionnaire over the phone with one of the managers at Hemel Hempstead's Game branch to see how and what motivates the workers at Game and if Game effectively motivates their workers.


1. Do you think that Game motivates it's workers in the work environment?


Yes


No


Answer: Yes


2. If so, how does Game motivate it's workers?


Answer: Game motivates it's workers by placing a great emphasis on training. In total, we have 5 different training schemes all of which are / will be extremely important and motivating to our workers. These include Excellence in Practise (EIP), Deputy Manager Finishing School, Excellence in Leadership, Apprenticeship/NVQ and Conference. We have found that these training schemes are very motivating to workers who like to expand their knowledge, skills and performance in the workplace (which is a lot of them!). You can find more information about this on our website. We also offer financial means to motivate our workers such as offering Employee Discounts and Pension Schemes. From our own research, we have found that these are also very successful in motivating our workers as contrary to popular belief, money does motivate. These are the ways in which we motivate our workers in Game.


Me: Thanks for your time.







Game Secondary Research:


"Our success at GAME is underpinned by a comprehensive suite of training programmes which are in place at all levels of the business. We have written about a few below to give you a taster of what you can expect if you join GAME.

Excellence in Practice (EIP)

This programme is the foundation of our stores training and doubles up as a reference and training tool for our store staff. The programme equips all staff to effectively operate all aspects of a GAME store. 80% of the training is on the job and it takes up to three months to complete. Every member of staff and management will go through this programme when they start and will then go through regular refresher training.

Deputy Manager Finishing School

At GAME we've identified that good Deputy Managers need some help and guidance before they will become good Store Managers. The finishing school allows individuals to identify their own personal skills gaps with their mentor and work on these areas drawing on the network of resource around them.

Excellence in Leadership

A course aimed at the select few, those at the top of their game at store level. This course was set up to deliver Regional Managers of the future. It opens doors for these individuals, encourages them to drive their own development and challenges them to stretch out of their comfort zones. It gets managers to think at a higher level, to think like leaders and develop the potential that we have seen in them. The course involves theory, self learning, exams, secondments, project work and presentations.

Apprenticeship/NVQ

Whether you have just finished EIP or you are a new deputy Manager the Apprenticeship programme can help to take your career to the next level. Apprenticeships are available to all staff who have worked at GAME for 6 months. They combine practical on-the-job coaching with structured training to give you a nationally recognised qualification and the experience you need to progress.

Conference

Conference lets you join up with all the other managers in the business once a year to be the first in the country and often the world to see new technology and preview new releases of hardware and software that will drive our business at Christmas. This action packed three day event lets our managers network and talk directly with our suppliers, Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft being just a few of the big names.

And it isn't all work, interactive entertainment nights that we lay on for our managers ensure you are thoroughly spoilt and thanked for the work that you do in our stores. Once you've experienced a GAME conference you'll understand why people say they are second to none."

[Anon 2.] (2007)

• "Training Programmes
• Employee Discount
• Pension Scheme
• Save As You Earn
• Life Assurance
• Service Awards"

[Anon 3.] (2007)

Answer: John Lewis motivates it's workers by treating employees in the company as individuals rather than collectively. We do this so we feel we can meet the social needs of each worker. For example, the social needs of one worker may be different from another. Examples of some ways that we motivate employees include delegating responsibility to hard working employees, creating different teams in the workplace in order to meet worker's social needs as well as on the spot praise for their performance/s if they have been working hard. From a financial perspective, we motivate our employees by offering reduced air fare travel as well as travel discounts, offering what we consider a very generous holiday entitlement, contributory pension and private healthcare schemes, a profit share scheme as well as a employee share scheme. You can find more information about this on our website.


The main motivation model that John Lewis appears to use in practise is Mayo's two way theory. This is because the emphasis is on meeting the worker's social needs. For example, as quoted from the Questionnaire, the workers are treated "as individuals rather than collectively". Some examples of the ways in which John Lewis attempt to meet these social needs include delegating responsibility to employees that are working hard, creating teams in order to make the workplace more social as well as on the spot praise for worker's that are working very hard currently. These examples show clearly that John Lewis uses Mayo's social needs theory in practise as they directly correspond to Mayo's theory of meeting the worker's social needs for motivation.


In addition, John Lewis appears to use Mayo's two way theory in practise from a financial perspective too (as Mayo takes into account that workers are also motivated by financial means). For example, John Lewis offers workers reduced air fare travel, travel discounts, a "very generous" holiday entitlement, contributory pension and private healthcare schemes, a profit share scheme as well as a employee share scheme. This shows that not only does John Lewis appear to use Mayo's theory from a social perspective, it also shows that John Lewis uses Mayo's theory from a financial perspective. As a result, John Lewis appears to use both the social and financial side of Mayo's motivation theory without any gaps.


In conclusion, I found out that huge business's like Game and John Lewis put a large amount of time and effort into motivating their workers, more so than I had imagined. I found out this information by carrying out both primary and secondary research. I also found out that business's genuinely do try and motivate their worker's from a social perspective, as I originally believed that it was a myth that business's try and motivate their worker's socially in practise. I also found out this information from the primary and secondary research that I carried out.


References:


[Anon 1.] [n.d.] Rewards and Benefits. [online]. [n.k.] [s.n.] Available from: http://www.britishairwaysjobs.com/baweb1/?newms=info3, [Accessed 16 October 2009].

[Anon 2.] (2007) Store Management Training Programmes [online]. [n.k.] [s.n.] Available from: http://retailjobs.game.co.uk/Training-Programmes/ [Accessed 16 October 2009]

[Anon 3.] (2007) Employee Benefits [online]. [n.k.] [s.n.] Available from:http://retailjobs.game.co.uk/Employee-Benefits/ [Accessed 16 October 2009].

John Lewis image from http://lbc.audioagain.com/shared/imagestore/johnlewis.jpg, Date accessed 16/10/09

Kmietowicz, Z. (2009) NHS could learn from John Lewis about motivating staff, says Nuffield[online]. [n.k.] [s.n.] Available from: http://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/media/detail.aspx?id=48&PRid=616 [Accessed 16 October 2009].

Robertson, J (2007) Profit sharing - how it works. [online]. [n.k.] [s.n.] Available from: http://www.employeebenefits.co.uk/item/2029/23/320/3 [Accessed 16 October 2009].

The motivation theory that is relevant to me

The motivation theorist / theory that I feel is relevant the most to me is Mayo / Mayo's theory of social needs. I think that Mayo's theory is most relevant to me out of all the other motivation theories (such as Maslow and Taylor) because Mayo takes into account both the social needs of the worker's and money which the other motivation theorist's don't take into account. I find that this is most relevant to me because while I feel that money is a motivator, I don't think it is enough to motivate me in the world of work or anywhere in general on it's own. For example, if I had a job that's only benefit was financial security, I wouldn't necessarily feel "part of the team" or feel particularly valued in the business as a person. However, if both my financial needs and social needs were met (Mayo's theory) I would feel like I'm both an asset to the business and valued as a human being. This is why I think that Mayo is the motivation theorist most relevant to me.

I have many different reasons for selecting this Accounting and Finance degree. One of the main reasons why I was motivated into choosing this degree was the prospect of setting up my own business and working for myself after completing the degree. This is something I am very interested in doing because I would be able to make my own decisons regarding the business, giving me the authority to make decisions regarding working hours and such. I also wouldn't have to answer to a manager or boss which is also very appealing. This is therefore one of the reasons why I am at the Bucks New University.


Since the prospect of working for myself after the degree has finished is something that is motivating me currently to study this Accounting and Finance degree, I think that this will be the same reason why I will be motivated for the next 2-3 years, as I will still be doing the degree during this time. Mayo's theory of social needs relates to my motivation of working for myself because I will be able to call all the shots both financially and socially. For example, if I set up my own business I will be able to make the decision of what I charge people for my services. Mayo's theory takes into account the motivation of money (although not on it's own) therefore the prospect of not being limited of what money I make is very motivating, unlike if I take up a job working for someone else who makes the decision of what exactly I earn. Another example of why Mayo's theory relates to my motivation of being able to work for myself is that from a social standpoint, I wouldn't be limited. For example, if I set up my own business I would have the authority to employ who I want which might be a personal friend of mine or someone I work well with. I would also have to power to decide just how intimate I can be with my employees which may fulfill my social needs better than in a workplace that I have no control or power over e.g. such as who I work with. This shows that Mayo's theory of social needs relates to my personal motivation of being able to work for myself.


When I was working in the FMY Chemist in Chesham for work experience for two weeks, I felt demotivated. Their are a few different reasons why I felt demotivated working in FMY Chemist for work experience. The main reason was that their wasn't much of an incentive for me to be working in the Chemist as work experience was compulsory, with the employers calling all the shots regarding what tasks you should and shouldn't be doing. To be quite honest, I wasn't expecting to be given the authority throughout the whole two weeks about what tasks I could decide to take on but it would have been nice for a day or two to have the freedom of choosing a task I feel most like doing at a certain point in time. This is so that I would have the option of doing a variety of tasks (if I decided to do so) making the work experience feel more like a nice change of scenery from school at the time.


I personally feel that Taylor's motivation theory that worker's are motivated mainly by pay doesn't relate to my de-motivation in FMY Chemist in this case because the reason why I was demotivated in this instance was that I wasn't given the authority to choose which tasks I wanted to carry out during the two weeks that I was there, which therefore has nothing to do with Taylor's theory that worker's are motivated mainly by money.


On the other hand, I think that Mayo's social needs motivation theory is relevant to my de-motivation in FMY Chemist because I personally feel that my social needs weren't being met bearing in mind that I wasn't given the option to choose which task I wanted to perform. If I was given the opportunity to choose which task I wanted to carry out, I don't think I would have been as demotivated as I was at FMY Chemist. This shows that Mayo's social needs motivation theory is relevant to my de-motivation in FMY Chemist.


To a large extent, I think that Maslow's hierarchy of needs relates to my de-motivation at FMY Chemist because the top three needs in the hierarchy relate to the fact that I personally feel that my social needs weren't being met. These top three in the hierarchy are Social Needs, Esteem Needs and Self Actualisation. For example, if FMY Chemist gave me the power to choose which tasks that I wanted to do, it would make me feel cared for in the business which therefore relates to the social needs layer in the hierarchy of needs. In addition, if I was given the authority to choose which task I wanted to carry out the task I wanted, I would personally feel that I contribute a lot to the business enough to warrant the option of choosing which task I wanted to carry out which therefore relates to the Esteem Needs and Self Actualisation layers in the hierarchy of needs. This shows that Maslow's hierarchy of needs relates to the lack of authority given to me in the FMY Chemist.


I think to a large degree that Herzberg's theory relates to my de-motivation at FMY Chemist because Herzberg believed that Job Enlargement and Job Enrichment would motivate workers. Job Enlargement is the process of giving workers more variety in tasks which I felt definitely wasn't happening at FMY Chemist because I didn't have any choice about what tasks I could carry out. Job Enrichment is the process of giving workers a greater range of different tasks to carry out that are more complicated or complex as well as more challenging in order to make the workers more interested in the job. I personally feel that this (Job Enrichment) was also not being met as I was given basic tasks to do such as serving customers on the checkout and stocking shelves which weren't interesting and certainly not complex. I think that my time in FMY Chemist would of been more interesting if I was given the opportunity of carrying out more complicated tasks such as ordering supplies from a supplier via a telephone.


I think that Aldefer's ERG theory (Existence, Relatedness and Growth) relates to my experience at FMY Chemist because the Relatedness needs include Social Needs and Internal Esteem Needs both of which were needs that I don't feel were met during my time at FMY Chemist. For example, if I was given the authority to pick which tasks that I wanted to carry out, it would have made me feel cared for in the business which therefore relates to the social needs layer in the ERG hierarchy. This is a similar thing I stated about Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Also, if I was given the power to choose which task I wanted to select, I would personally feel that I'm enough of an asset to the business to warrant the option of selecting which task I wanted to carry out which therefore relates to the Esteem Needs. This is also a similar thing I said about Maslow's hierarchy of needs.


Unfortunately, FMY Chemist didn't do anything directly to get me more motivated in the workplace. My only motivation was knowing that I would only be working there for two weeks so I should work as hard as possible in order to get good feedback from my employer and possibly a permanent job in the future. To this day however, I have not been contacted by my former employer about any jobs that are going that I may be interested in.


The only thing I would do differently working in FMY Chemist is being more open about my views and opinions in the workplace. For example, part of me thinks that the Chemist weren't aware that I was being de-motivated because my social and self esteem needs weren't being met due to the fact that they weren't giving me the option of choosing which tasks I wanted to carry out. Had I made it perfectly clear that this was bothering me, they may have granted my wish and given me the chance to select which I task I wanted to carry out. As a result, I may not have been de-motivated working in FMY Chemist for the two weeks that I was working there.


In Conclusion, I think that the main finding that I got from this topic was knowing that I was de-motivated in the workplace during my time in FMY Chemist. Even though while I was working there I knew that I was demotivated, I don't think I exactly knew the reason why I was de-motivated. It wasn't until I started researching into the different motivation theorists that I realised that I was being de-motivated in the Chemist because my social and self esteem needs weren't being met. I feel that this finding will be very important in the future when I start to seek full time employment after University because I will know for sure if my social and self esteem needs are being met in the workplace.


Another finding that I got from this topic is the importance of communication. Had I made it perfectly clear that I was being de-motivated in the workplace, I think that my employer may have taken note of this and made sure I had options about which tasks I could choose or refuse. I also think that this is an important finding for the future when I start a full time job because I will be more concious of making my opinions heard if it is the difference between being motivated and being de-motivated.

I think I have learnt quite a lot from this topic overall. This is because I found out that I was being de-motivated while I was working at FMY Chemist but I also found out about the importance of communication in the work environment.


References:


[Anon.] [n.d.] People, Motivation - theories [online]. [n.k.] [s.n.] Available from: http://tutor2u.net/business/gcse/people_motivation_theories.htm, [Accessed 14 October 2009].


Elton Mayo Image http://www.nndb.com/people/043/000119683/elton-mayo-1.jpg, [Accessed 14 October 2009].


Thompson, R and Machin, D (2003) AS Business Studies, Hammersmith: HyperCollins Publishers Limited