Proposed Research Paper
The proposed research paper will be devoted to the study of the psychological processes that affect the effectiveness of various employee empowerment (EE) techniques and approaches as seen through the lens of humanistic psychology (HP).
Need for the Study
EE is a very popular and rapidly developing topic of scientific study, but it is primarily regarded as such in the field of human resource management (HR), which is reasonable, but results in the underdevelopment of its psychological aspects (Maynard, Luciano, D’Innocenzo, Mathieu, & Dean, 2014). Admittedly, it is accepted that EE is meant for affecting employee’s psychological state and behavioral pattern and leads to behavioral and psychological outcomes, which is illustrated, for example, by Boudrias, Gaudreau, Savoie, and Morin (2009) and Boudrias, Morin, and Lajoie (2014). Still, the attempts of connecting HR and psychology are relatively scarce: an example is a paper by Wilson and Madsen (2008) that describes the concepts of HR and HP and connects them. Besides, most EE works do not appear to be aimed at explaining the reasons for its methods’ effectiveness or ineffectiveness.
For example, the works by Orgambídez-Ramos, and Borrego-Alés (2014) and Voegtlin, Boehm, and Bruch, H. (2015) are devoted to proving the effectiveness of certain EE techniques but do not explain it. The attempts at defining the cause-and-effect relationships of EE include the paper by Boudrias et al. (2009), which indicates that psychological outcomes of EE influence behavioral ones. Similarly, Fock, Hui, Au, and Bond, M. (2012) endeavor to link the level of power distance in culture to various EE approaches. Still, most of the reviewed works do not attempt to explain the effectiveness and ineffectiveness of varied EE methods with the help of psychological concepts. The work by Wilson and Madsen (2008) can be regarded as an exception and the evidence to the idea that not just the point of view of general psychology but that of HP is capable of improving the understanding of HR. Since such studies appear to be scarce, further research is required. The proposed paper, therefore, can contribute to the advancement of EE research.
Advancing Scientific Knowledge
My specialization is general psychology, which can be defined as “relatively a large area or field of psychology which deals with the fundamental rules, principles, and theories of psychology in relation to the study of the behaviour of normal adult human beings” (Mangal, 2013, p. 6). The topic of EE, as it was pointed out, is rarely connected to psychological theory and studies; therefore, the understanding of the psychological processes that define the successfulness of EE methods is an underdeveloped area of research. By theorizing the EE psychological background, the research can contribute to the understanding of human psychology, which makes it useful from the point of view of general psychology as well.
Theoretical Foundations: Humanistic Psychology
The humanistic school of psychology (HP) is a suitable ground for the understanding of EE since the concept of EE is closely related to the key ideas of HP. In particular, the notions of self-concept (especially self-esteem), motivation, and learning are of interest for EE and HP (DeRobertis, 2013; Mruk, 2008; Wilson & Madsen, 2008). Apart from that, both the school of thought and EE are centered on the individual, which makes HP suitable for the explanation of psychological processes behind EE. The bulk of literature that connects EE and HP does not appear to be too extensive, but an example is a paper by Wilson and Madsen (2008). The article describes the way HR benefits from the humanistic psychology approach, which appears to prove the idea that HP is capable of explaining HR practice, in particular, EE. Apart from the theoretical perspective, HP offers a methodology that is likely to suit the proposed study: the qualitative methods and especially the phenomenology approach (Ellis et al., 2009, p. 316).
References
Boudrias, J., Gaudreau, P., Savoie, A., & Morin, A. (2009). Employee Empowerment. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 30(7), 625-638. Web.
Boudrias, J., Morin, A. S., & Lajoie, D. (2014). Directionality of the Associations Between Psychological Empowerment and Behavioral Involvement: A Longitudinal Autoregressive Cross-Lagged Analysis. Journal Of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 87(3), 437-463. Web.
DeRobertis, E. (2013). Humanistic Psychology: Alive in the 21st Century? Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 53(4), 419-437. Web.
Ellis, A., Abrams, M., & Abrams, L. (2009). Personality theories. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.
Fock, H., Hui, M., Au, K., & Bond, M. (2012). Moderation Effects of Power Distance on the Relationship Between Types of Empowerment and Employee Satisfaction. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 44(2), 281-298. Web.
Mangal, S. (2013). General psychology. New Delhi, India: Sterling Publishers Private Ltd.
Maynard, M., Luciano, M., D’Innocenzo, L., Mathieu, J., & Dean, M. (2014). Modeling Time-Lagged Reciprocal Psychological Empowerment–Performance Relationships. Journal Of Applied Psychology, 99(6), 1244-1253. Web.
Mruk, C. (2008). The Psychology of Self-Esteem: A Potential Common Ground for Humanistic Positive Psychology and Positivistic Positive Psychology. The Humanistic Psychologist, 36(2), 143-158. Web.
Orgambídez-Ramos, A., & Borrego-Alés, Y. (2014). Empowering Employees: Structural Empowerment as Antecedent of Job Satisfaction in University Settings. Psychological Thought, 7(1), 28-36. Web.
Voegtlin, C., Boehm, S., & Bruch, H. (2015). How to Empower Employees: Using Training to Enhance Work Units’ Collective Empowerment. International Journal of Manpower, 36(3), 354-373. Web.
Wilson, I., & Madsen, S. R. (2008). The Influence of Maslow’s Humanistic Views on an Employee’s Motivation to Learn. Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 13(2), 46-62. Web.