Symptoms of withdrawal behaviors are not very visible at my workplace. However, I have observed some of the symptoms highlighted by Colquitt, et al, (2009) including burn-out and stress-related behavior. There are also occasions and complaints of job apathy and depersonalization among some workers, which might pass as withdrawal behaviors. Some of these behaviors can be looked at through the reflections on justice perceptions (Colquitt, et al, 2009). This has mainly been reflected through some of these workers’ attitudes, and demeanor which hints strongly at a possible existence of psychological distress. From what I have observed, I might guess that matters to do with remuneration and interpersonal justice are involved in the apparent withdrawal behaviors observed.
My workplace has a functional human resource department and a separate welfare system that is charged with overseeing the comfort of employees. The structure of the operation is such that a private desk was established where sensitive matters that might affect the operation of workers are handled. The human resource and welfare work together to search and rescue cases of discomfort and withdrawal. Cascio, (2005) has argued that this is one way through which retention of the workforce might be guaranteed.
Retention of the workforce he added lessens the organization’s hassle of hiring for replacement while at the same time promoting the growth of skill, excellence, and leadership. This is sometimes done through monthly questionnaires which require the workers to appraise the work environment. This appraisal process includes the evaluation of the management so that quick adjustments are done to guarantee comfort and performance. Routine bonding parties are also organized occasionally with the intention of promoting healthy interpersonal relationships within the organization.
I feel that the withdrawal behaviors might benefit from diversity and generational differences. An environment of diversity has the psychological import of lowering mental congestion. This system of differences works by reducing monotony, which studies have blamed for the rise of mental tensions that result from stress, tension, and burnout (Cascio, 2005). Workers who appreciate variety will most likely develop a personal attachment at the workplace because the effect of diversity will work through psychology by uniting them to the environment, (Pless, 2004). When this happens a homely environment is created and the attitude towards work will adjust automatically to more productive levels.
My workplace has encouraged an open-door policy where the concerns and welfare of the workers are supreme. The recent past has also seen reviews in the administrative structures where the management team is sourced from within the organization instead of being sought from outside. This system has had the effect of hastening upward mobility in the company’s ranks. Besides, the system has also increased performance since promotions are more predictable and based purely on merit.
Systems in which promotional structures and rewards of excellence exist are more likely to retain their staff than systems that operate a closed policy of rewards, (Tetteh, 2008). Another effect of the implementation of this transparent reward system is that it solves the problem of psychological distress. Studies have found that the transparency in rewards and the promotional system has a direct proportion to stress mitigation. The functioning of such a system is anchored on the promotion of the interpersonal and informational justice systems.
References
Cascio, F. W. (2005). Managing human resources: production, quality of work life. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Colquitt et al, (2009). Organizational Behavior: Essentials for Improving Performance and Commitment. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Pless, N.M., & Maak, T. (2004). Building an inclusive diversity culture: Principles, processes and practices. Journal of Business Ethics, 54(2), 129 – 147. Web.
Tetteh, V.A. (2008). Diversity in the workplace. Research Starters, 1-15. (B). Web.