From Theory to Action

WHAT do employees want in their jobs? Most Air Force people seem to be looking for meaningful, interesting, challenging jobs. A recent Air Force Quality of Working Life Survey supports this assertion--most people who were dissatisfied with their jobs found them to be boring and unchallenging. How, then, can we improve these boring jobs? One workable strategy is through job enrichment, a management process that focuses on the job itself with the goals of making it more interesting and meaningful and increasing job challenge and responsibility. This article presents some new developments in job enrichment theory and then moves from theory to action, describing several alternative processes for implementing job enrichment in Air Force organizations, including a "self-help" strategy for managers.

Job enrichment certainly is not new; it was first used back in the 1940s at IBM. During the '50s there was a slow growth in the number of industrial organizations interested in applying job enrichment. However, the impetus that really generated widespread interest and acceptance was Frederick Herzberg's Motivation-Hygiene theory.¹ Herzberg's theory provided a relatively easy to understand, intuitively appealing approach to redesigning jobs. Several successful and widely publicized experiments using Herzberg's approach led to increased interest in job enrichment in both the private and public sector.²

Job enrichment in the Air Force began in 1974 with a series of pilot projects at the Ogden Air Logistics Center under Herzberg's guidance. Results of these projects were so successful that job enrichment was expanded to all air logistics centers.³ As of early 1979 Air Force Logistics Command (AFLC) had 376 job enrichment projects under way.

Job enrichment in the Air Force has not been limited to the civilian work force of AFLC. In 1975, a job enrichment project was completed with security specialists at a northern Strategic Air Command base. Results were encouraging--job satisfaction, satisfaction with supervision, and attendance improved when compared to a group that did not receive job enrichment. In 1976, another set of enrichment projects was initiated in a Tactical Air Command transportation squadron; the jobs of vehicle maintenance mechanics, vehicle operations specialists, and air freight personnel were enriched. Again, the results showed some significant morale improvements although the gains were not spectacular.⁴ Based on these experiments, a decision was made in August 1977 to develop a program that would make a job enrichment capability available to commanders and managers throughout the Air Force. During 1978, 17 job enrichment managers (six from the major commands and eleven from the Air Training Command Leadership and Management Development Center) were trained by the authors. By late 1978, a trained cadre of Air Force job enrichment managers was available to assist major command, job enrichment managers who wanted to conduct projects.

Although Herzberg's Motivation-Hygiene theory is very useful as a framework for job enrichment, a more recent model developed by J. Richard Hackman and Greg Oldham⁵ may be even more useful to Air Force managers. Whereas Herzberg focuses on such general factors as achievement, recognition for achievement, responsibility, advancement, and growth, Hackman and Oldham concentrate on specific factors that are an integral part of the job itself. Although Herzberg's theory is more general than Hackman and Oldham's, the implementing concepts or "ingredients of a good job" tend to make the actual application of on the job enrichment quite specific. In fact, the implementing concepts are similar regardless of which theory is used.⁶ They assert that an enriched job is relatively high in skill variety, task identity (a whole and complete piece of work), task significance, autonomy, and feedback from the job. (See Table I for definitions of these terms.) They also predict that when jobs are high in these characteristics most people will experience a sense of meaningfulness, responsibility for work outcomes, and knowledge of results of their work activities. Thus, the end result is predicted to be higher job satisfaction, lower absenteeism, lower turnover, and higher internal work motivation.

Skill variety	Doing different things; using different valued skills, abilities, and talents.
Task identity	Doing a complete job from beginning to end, the whole job rather than bits and pieces.
Task significance	The degree of meaningful impact the job has on others; the importance of the job.
Autonomy	Freedom to do the work as one sees fit; discretion in scheduling, decision-making, and means for accomplishing a job
Feedback	Clear and direct information about job outcomes or performance.
Goal clarity	Knowing and understanding what specific objectives or goals apply to the job and their relative priorities.

An additional characteristic that we added to the model is goal clarity. When people have clear, moderately difficult goals, they experience a clarity of expectations and sense of challenge that result in both higher performance and improved a1titudes.⁷ Figure 1 illustrates the model of job enrichment that is being used for Air Force combat support enrichment efforts.

How do we put the theory into action? A fault of many management theories is that although they sound good on paper they seldom get implemented. There are a number of concepts or ideas that should be considered when jobs are redesigned. Not all of these concepts are required to redesign a job successfully, but when they are all optimally balanced, the result will be a truly enriched job.

Remove unnecessary controls. In military organizations one often finds a proliferation of reporting, control, and inspection systems. A close inspection of these systems often reveals duplication or obsolete controls that frustrate employees and hamper performance. A philosophy of standardization contradicts this implementing concept. Managers who demand standard, detailed procedures often find they must also have control systems to ensure that those procedures are followed, thus frustrating the employee and causing unnecessary organizational overhead. On the other hand, decentralization provides personnel with a sense of responsibility for the work outcomes rather than compliance with procedures. Removing unnecessary controls facilitates a feeling of autonomy on the part of an individual performing a job.

An example of this implementing concept occurred in a security police squadron when it was decided that it was not necessary for an NCO to observe patrolmen or security specialists clear their weapons--anyone qualified on the weapon would be allowed to fulfill that safety requirement. Another simple but powerful strategy is to let people sign their own correspondence. It not only provides the employee with more responsibility, autonomy, and direct feedback but also frees higher level managers from the task of checking and signing mundane correspondence.

Combine tasks. If tasks are combined in a logical and meaningful manner, task identity and skill variety will be improved. Thus, people performing the work will experience a feeling of doing a whole, complete, and meaningful job. An example of this concept occurred in a vehicle maintenance organization when mechanics were allowed to complete an entire work order on a vehicle rather than doing just one task and passing it on to another mechanic. The major thrust of combining tasks should be to put all meaningful functions or tasks together into one job so that a person does a complete job from beginning to end and has responsibility for all the work activities associated with the job. Managers should avoid the all-too-common strategy of fragmenting responsibility into specialized subfunctions.

Establish client relationships. The goal of this concept it to form a direct personal contact between the employee and the customer, user, or client for his or her product or service. If work activities are organized around customers rather than functions, employees will experience a sense of ownership and responsibility for the well-being of the client. In addition, feedback and improved communication are facilitated, responsibilities are pinpointed, and employees feel a sense of identity with the user's mission. An example of establishing client relationships occurred in an Air Force word processing center. Machine operators were not allowed to deal directly with authors whose correspondence they were typing; all communications were routed through the supervisor. In addition, operators never seemed to work for the same author twice, for when work arrived, it was assigned to the first available operator. After the job enrichment project was begun, operators were assigned total responsibility for taking care of a division's word processing needs. Operators dealt directly with clients and developed a sense of ownership and responsibility for the clients' work.

Schedule own work. This concept allows workers to control their own schedules for doing their work. It includes ordering the sequence of their work, determining when to take breaks, selecting shift assignments, and even choosing their own starting and quitting times on a day-to-day basis within certain constraints using flexitime concepts.⁸ Air Force organizations that have adopted flexitime report positive results. Allowing employees to schedule their own work improves autonomy and individual responsibility. By making individual workers responsible for their schedules, people become more concerned with getting the job done and less concerned with watching the clock.

Plan and control own work. This concept focuses on allowing workers to plan their own work activities. If possible, they should be allowed to plan for and control their own resources (funds, supplies, and equipment). Employees should also be encouraged to provide input to all decisions that affect their jobs; after all, they are usually in the best position to provide meaningful input. Control over activities associated with their jobs creates a sense of individual responsibility and provides meaningful feedback. Examples of this implementing concept are providing individuals with their own budgets for supplies on TDY or allowing people to order and store their own supplies. Another frequently used technique is to allow workers to be responsible for their own quality control. A final strategy is to establish clear goals and expectations and then let the individual employee plan and control the means to reach the goal or objective.

The cornerstone of the job enrichment process is that it is the client's program. All activities are directed by the principle that the client owns and controls the effort. The job enrichment manager is an expert in the process of gathering data, conducting workshops, problem--solving techniques, goal setting, etc.; however, the job enrichment manager is not an expert in the client's job or organization. A diagram of the job enrichment process is shown in Figure 2. Rather than explain the diagram in detail, perhaps a more meaningful way to understand it is to relate a hypothetical example of how job enrichment might proceed in a typical Air Force unit.

The commander of the 999th Security Police Squadron at Coldwater AFB had heard of job enrichment in Squadron Officer School and Air Command and Staff College, but only recently did he realize that he could actually do a job enrichment project in his own organization, His first step in initiating the project was to call the major command job enrichment manager⁹ to find out if job enrichment might help solve some of his rather considerable morale problems, After lengthy telephone discussions, they jointly agreed that it looks as if job enrichment might be appropriate. The major command job enrichment manager schedules a visit to the base for a face-to-face meeting and discussion with the client -and, if jointly agreed, administers a job attitude questionnaire to aid in diagnosis, The job enrichment manager, who may be accompanied by one or two additional job enrichment managers from the Leadership and Management Development Center (LMDC),* administers the questionnaire, conducts interviews, and provides briefings about what job enrichment is and what it takes to implement it. The diagnostic phase is completed when the data have been analyzed by computers at LMDC and returned to the major command job enrichment manager, who makes a determination if job enrichment is appropriate for the 999th. If the diagnosis shows that job enrichment has potential, the job enrichment manager calls the client, provides preliminary diagnostic information, and, if the client still wants job enrichment, sets up a tentative schedule for the workshops.

The first step after the job enrichment team arrives is to brief the commander and his key staff on the results of the survey. Although the commander has probably made up his mind to proceed, the project can still be canceled at this point. In addition, a goal-setting exercise is conducted to help the client formalize what is wanted and expected from job enrichment. The next step is to conduct one three-hour workshop with the commander and his key supervisors and another workshop with about 20 working level people. The workshops provide about one hour on theory and implementing concepts. The supervisory group also develops a workflow diagram if that seems appropriate. The purpose of the theory and concepts training is to prepare people to participate in a structured, one-hour brainstorming session that seeks to find out "ways in which we might enrich the jobs of 999th security specialists."

After the brainstorming, the job enrichment managers take the ideas (perhaps as many as 400) that have been generated from the two sessions and sort them into job enrichment-related ideas and nonjob enrichment-related ideas. The managers then meet with the commander and his key staff (implementing group) for from 6 to 12 hours during a two-day period, to evaluate the ideas and determine which ones are worth studying for possible implementation. At this meeting each job enrichment idea is discussed, and, if warranted, an action person and due date are assigned by the commander for reporting to the implementing group. The job enrichment manager's role during the evaluation session is that of a facilitator to the commander: assistance in recording, consensus-reaching, conflict resolution, and communications mayor may not be needed. Typically the commander takes over and leads the session after the first few hours. When all promising job enrichment ideas have been evaluated and assigned to someone for research and possible action, the job enrichment manager’s work is mostly done; however, the commander must continue to monitor the idea evaluation and implementation until every idea has been researched and a decision made on implementation. This may take two to three hours a week for over several months.

The final stage of job enrichment is evaluation. The job enrichment managers return to the unit about six months later, administer a post-test questionnaire, and provide feedback to the commander about changes in attitudes. In addition, the commander's goals for the job enrichment project will be jointly examined to see if job enrichment accomplished what was wanted. A final report is then prepared by the client and the job enrichment manager through normal command channels. This report provides the client's evaluation of the job enrichment effort and the measurable outcome of the project.

Micro vs. macro job enrichment. The process we have been describing is aimed at the functional supervisor or unit commander as the client-it is a micro approach. Bigger payoffs and leverage may be gained by taking a macro approach. In the macro approach a whole functional area (such as missile crews, aerial ports, C-141 aircrews, etc.) would be tackled with the major command or Air Staff functional managers as the client. The same basic process could be used by getting key supervisors' and workers' ideas from base level as input into the evaluation process. Macro job enrichment is more difficult than micro job enrichment because of the politics and systems interdependencies, but if it is carefully done, there is potential for large payoffs with very low costs.

The manager as the job enrichment initiator. All managers are job designers. Every time a supervisor assigns work, gives instructions, or checks to make sure a job is being done, job redesign is happening. Part of the reason for educating- our work force is to give people an understanding of basic managerial concepts, such as job enrichment, so they will change their everyday management techniques. Unfortunately, most academic programs provide too little information about how to perform job enrichment or any other management strategy. Managers who want to effect job enrichment in their organizations will find Table II useful.

Learn all you can about job enrichment. Read all the reference cited in this article. Talk to the major command job enrichment manager or Leadership and Management Development Center. Become an expert in the concepts.

Is job design a problem? Look carefully at the jobs. Are they enriched already? Ask people how they feel about the job itself--perhaps they like it the way it is. Do not rock the boat unnecessarily.

Is there some other problem besides job enrichment? Perhaps supervision, communication, or lack of planning are the real problems.

Ask the employees if they want job enrichment. If it looks like job enrichment is appropriate, then teach them what job enrichment is, what it can do for them and you, and see if they are interested in pursuing it. If not, do not begin an effort until they are ready. One aid to overcoming initial resistance is to make the job enrichment program an "experiment" done on a trial basis. Establish the goals that you want job enrichment to accomplish. Be sure they are specific and that the end results desired are measurable and time-phased.

Hold a concept workshop with key supervisors and workers away from your unit. Get a room at the NCO club or wing education office or elsewhere so that you will not be interrupted during the workshop. Be sure that everyone understands job enrichment theory and the implementing concepts.

Brainstorm job enrichment ideas during the workshop. Allow one hour for brainstorming ideas. The purpose of brainstorming is only to generate ideas, not to evaluate.¹⁰ The rule against any form of evaluation or criticism of any idea should be strictly enforced. Another key rule is to avoid "war stories"-- you are looking for ideas, large numbers of ideas. Try to use two recorders, preferably people who are not part of the group, to write the ideas on flipcharts and post the completed pages on the wall.

Pick out the top ten ideas. Have each participant pick his top ten ideas and put them on 3 x 5 cards so that a preliminary cut of the important ideas has been made. (Number all the ideas on the flipcharts to make the process easier.)

Sort and categorize the ideas into some meaningful sets for discussion and analysis.

Analyze the ideas. If they have merit, study and implement them. If not, discard them. (Be sure to provide feedback to the participants of the session about the ideas that were discarded or disapproved.

Implement the ideas.

Evaluate the job enrichment effort. Did the jobs change? Were your goals met? What improvements resulted?

It would be unrealistic to assert that job enrichment is easy and simple or a cure for all organizational ills. There is a good deal of hard work involved. Extensive time commitments are needed to evaluate job enrichment ideas and develop implementing plans. It takes a really committed manager to do job enrichment in the midst of the day-to-day organizational crises that seem to abound. Another issue is that unrealistically high expectations on the part of workers can be created. It is best to use a relatively low-key approach and not promise major improvements or changes. Another consideration is the nature of your people. Are they interested in job enrichment? Are they motivated to support organizational goals? Can you trust them? The receptiveness of your employees is another important consideration. A final caution seems in order. If you are a manager who wants to be in complete control, to make autocratic decisions, shun consensus, etc., then it is unlikely that a job enrichment strategy aimed at giving people more autonomy and feedback will work. If job enrichment goes against your managerial style or seems inappropriate in your organization, do not use it just to get on the bandwagon.

JOB enrichment consistently improves morale in terms of job satisfaction, organizational climate, satisfaction with supervisors, and other measures. Performance, in terms of improvements in quality and cost saving, may also result. Retention of officer and enlisted personnel who possess critical skills can be expected to improve. Thus, the result will be a better motivated, more committed work force that will translate directly into increased organizational effectiveness and readiness.

1. Frederick I. Herzberg, Work and the Nature of Man (New York World Publishing, 1966).

2. See Robert N. Ford, Motivation through the Work Itself (New York American Management Association, 1969); and W.J. Paul, K. B. Robertson and Frederick Herzberg, "Job Enrichment Pays Off," Harvard Business Review, March-April 1969, pp 61-78.

3. Frederick I. Herzberg, "Orthodox Job Enrichment A Common Sense Approach to People at Work," Defense Management Journal, April 1977, pp 21-27.

4. The results of these experiments are available from the author The series of experiments in the transportation squadron were funded by the Life Sciences Directorate of the Air Force Office of Scientific Research.

5. For a good summary of the Hackman-Oldham approach to job enrichment, see Richard J. Hackman, Greg Oldham, G. R, Janson and K. Purdy, "A New Strategy for Job Enrichment," California Management Review, Summer l975, pp 57-71.

6. For further information on the approach used by AFLC, see Frederick Herzberg, "The Wise Old Turk," Harvard Business Review, September-October 1974.

7. Denis D Umstot, "MBO + Job Enrichment: How to Have Your Cake and Eat It Too," Management Review, February 1977, pp 21.26.

8. See A. O. Elbing, Harmon Gadon, John R. M. Gordon, "Flexible Working Hours: It's about Time," Harvard Business Review, January-February 1974.

9. As of early 1979 six commands had job enrichment managers SAC T AC, MAC, AFSC, PACAF, and AFCS (in addition to the AFLC program outlined in this article).

10. For detailed information on how to conduct brainstorming sessions see A. F. Osborn, Applied Imagination: Principles and Procedures of Creative Thinking, revised edition (New York Scribner, 1957).

Lieutenant Colonel Denis D. Umstot (Ph.D., University of Washington) is Director of Institutional Research for the U.S. Air Force Academy, Colorado. He has been assigned to a variety of line and staff jobs including based supply officer, military assistance plans officer, advisor to the Vietnamese Air Force Depot, and logistics plans officer. He was formerly an associate professor of management at the Air Force Institute of Technology, where he taught courses in organizational behavior and organization development.

Lieutenant Colonel William E. Rosenbach (Ph.D., University of Colorado) is Associate Professor of Organizational Behavior and Leadership and Director, Organizational Behavior and Leadership Division, Department of Behavioral Sciences and Leadership, USAFA, Colorado. His assignments have included duty as missile systems instructor, C-130 navigator, and management analyst at the Air Staff.

The conclusions and opinions expressed in this document are those of the author cultivated in the freedom of expression, academic environment of Air University. They do not reflect the official position of the U.S. Government, Department of Defense, the United States Air Force or the Air University.