Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Psychological Empowerment and Workforce Agility

  • Research in Progress
  • Published:
Psychological Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Unpredictable, dynamic, and constantly changing environments require an ‘agile organization.’ The notion of an agile workforce has been discussed as critical to creating an agile organization. Despite the increasing recognition that workforce agility is critical to achieve competitiveness, the concept of workforce agility has not yet been systematically studied. The current research has been proposed on the assumption that employee cognition can support agile attitude and behavior. The research has been conceptualized considering psychological empowerment as an important employee cognition capable of promoting workforce agility. Following the Spreitzer, psychological empowerment, in the form of meaningfulness, self-determination, competence, and impact, has been proposed as facilitators of workforce agility. Our result supports the conceptualization implicit in the literature and suggests that psychological empowerment must be considered as an important aspect of an organization’s effort to foster workforce agility. Further, from among the psychological empowerment variables, impact is the most influential variable followed by self-determination, meaning and competence on workforce agility. While the study result agrees with few cognitive theories such as self-determination theory, job characteristics theory, and sense-making theory, the result has important managerial implications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alavi, S., Abd. Wahab, D., Muhamad, N., & Arbab Shirani, B. (2014). Organic structure and organisational learning as the main antecedents of workforce agility. International Journal of Production Research, 52(21), 6273–6295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambler, S. W. (2003). Agile model driven development is good enough. IEEE Software, 20(5), 71–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angyal, A. (1941). Foundations for a science of personality. New York: Common Wealth Fund.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashforth, B. E. (1989). The experience of powerlessness in organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 43(2), 207–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, R. P., Wong, N., & Yi, Y. (1999). The role of culture and gender in the relationship between positive and negative affect. Cognition & Emotion, 13(6), 641–672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Li, N. (2013). The theory of purposeful work behavior: The role of personality, job characteristics, and experienced meaningfulness. Academy of Management, 38(1), 132–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, N. E., & Staw, B. M. (1989). People as sculptors versus sculpture. In M. B. Arthur, D. T. Hall, & B. S. Lawrence (Eds.), Handbook of career theory (pp. 232–251). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Braunscheidel, M. J., & Suresh, N. C. (2009). The organizational antecedents of a firm’s supply chain agility for risk mitigation and response. Journal of Operations Management, 27(2), 119–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breu, K., Hemingway, C. J., & Bridger, D. (2001). Workforce agility: The new employee strategy for the knowledge economy. Journal of Information Technology, 17(1), 21–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sage focus editions, 154, 136–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Condry, J., & Chambers, J. (1978). Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning. In Lepper, Mark. R. & Greene, D. (Eds.), The hidden costs of reward: New perspectives on the psychology of human motivation (pp. 61–84), Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

  • Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1988). The empowerment process: Integrating theory and practice. Academy of Management Review, 13(3), 471–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, FL.

  • Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self determination theory in human behavior. New York: Plenum.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dholakia, U. M. (2006). How customer self-determination influences relational marketing outcomes: Evidence from longitudinal field studies. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(1), 109–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Draganidis, F., & Mentzas, G. (2006). Competency based management: A review of systems and approaches. Information Management & Computer Security, 14(1), 51–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, L., & Shafer, R. (2003). Dynamic organizations: achieving market place and organizational agility with people. In R. S. Peterson & E. A. Mannix (Eds.), Leading and managing people in the dynamic organization. Mahwah, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garver, M. S., & Williams, Z. (2009). Examining a model of understanding customer value and satisfaction data. Marketing Management Journal, 19(1), 113–132.

  • Goldman, S. L., & Nagel, R. N. (1993). Management, technology and agility: The emergence of a new era in manufacturing. International Journal of Technology Management, 8(1/2), 18–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, A. M., & Parker, S. K. (2009). Redesigning work design theories: The rise of relational and proactive perspectives. The Academy of Management Annals, 3(1), 317–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, B., & Hesketh, B. (2003). Adaptable behaviours for successful work and career adjustment. Australian Journal of Psychology, 55(2), 65–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunasekaran, A. (1998). Agile manufacturing: Enablers and an implementation framework. International Journal of Production Research, 36(5), 1223–1247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair Jr, JF., Black, WC., Babin, BJ., Anderson, R., & Tathum, R.(2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th edn.). Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

  • Highsmith, J. (2001). History: The agile manifesto. Retrieved from http://agilemanifesto.org/history.html. Accessed 22 Sept 2004.

  • Hopp, W. J., & Van Oyen, M. P. (2003). Agile workforce evaluation: A framework for cross training and coordination. Working paper, IEMS Dept., Northeastern University, Evans, IL.

  • Kathuria, R., & Partovi, F. Y. (1999). Workforce management practices for manufacturing flexibility. Journal of Operations Management, 18(1), 21–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kidd, P. T. (1994). Agile manufacturing: Forging new frontiers. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kline, R. B. (2005). Methodology in the social sciences.

  • Liden, R. C., & Arad, S. (1996). A power perspective of empowerment and work groups: Implication for human resource management research. In G. R. Ferris (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 14, pp. 205–251). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Medsker, G. J., Williams, L. J., & Holahan, P. J. (1994). A review of current practices for evaluating causal models in organizational behavior and human resources management research. Journal of Management, 20(2), 439–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moller, A. C., Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2006). Self-determination theory and public policy: Improving the quality of consumer decisions without using coercion. American Marketing Association, 25(1), 104–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muduli, A. (2008). Exploring the determinants of empowerment climate in Indian industry. Management and Labour Review, 33(3), 354–372.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muduli, A. (2013). Workforce agility: A review of literature. The IUP Journal of Management Research, 12(3), 55–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muduli, A. (2015). High performance work system, HRD climate and organisational performance: An empirical study. European Journal of Training and Development, 39(3), 239–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nijssen, M., & Paauwe, J. (2012). HRM in turbulent times: How to achieve organizational agility? The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23(16), 3315–3335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plonka, F. S. (1997). Developing a lean and agile work force. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing, 7(1), 11–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 531–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68(3), 79–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ragin-Skorecka, K. (2016). Agile enterprise: A human factors perspective. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 26(1), 5–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rajan, P. V., Solairajan, A. S., & Jose, C. G. (2012). Agile product development in submersible pump through CAD modelling. International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering, 2(11), 397–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 141–166.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Saini, D. S., & Khan, S. A. (2007). Human resource management (pp. 290–307). New Delhi: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. (1994). Determinants of innovative behavior: A path model of individual innovation in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 580–607.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharifi, H., & Zhang, Z. (1999). A methodology for achieving agility in manufacturing organisations: An introduction. International Journal of Production Economics, 62(1), 7–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherehiy, B. (2008). Relationships between agility strategy, work organization and workforce agility. Ann Arbor: ProQuest.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherehiy, B., & Karwowski, W. (2014). The relationship between work organization and workforce agility in small manufacturing enterprises. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 44(3), 466–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherehiy, B., Waldemar, K., & Layer, J. K. (2007). A review of enterprise agility: Concepts, frameworks, and attributes. Louisville: University of Louisville.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sjoberg, L., Olsson, G., & Salay, F. (1983). Cathectic orientation, goal setting and mood. Journal of Personality Assessment, 47(3), 307–313.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Social structural characteristics of psychological empowerment. Academy of Management Journal, 39(2), 483–504.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sumukadas, N., & Sawhney, R. (2004). Workforce agility through employee involvement. IIE Transactions, 36(10), 1011–1021.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, K. W., & Velthouse, B. A. (1990). Cognitive elements of empowerment. Academy of Management Review, 15(4), 666–681.

    Google Scholar 

  • Unhelkar, B. (2016). The art of agile practice: A composite approach for projects and organizations. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Oyen, M. P., Gel, E. G. S., & Hopp, W. J. (2001). Performance opportunity for workforce agility in collaborative and noncollaborative work system. IIE Transactions, 33(9), 761–777.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (1993). The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(4), 628–652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weitz, B. A., Sujan, H., & Sujan, M. (1986). Knowledge, motivation, and adaptive behavior: A framework for improving selling effectiveness. The Journal of Marketing, 50(4), 174–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe, L. M., & Robertshaw, D. (1982). Effects of college attendance on the locus of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(4), 802–810.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yusuf, Y. Y., Sarhadi, M., & Gunasekaran, A. (1999). Agile manufacturing: The drivers, concepts and attributes. International Journal of Production Economics, 62(1), 33–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Z., & Sharifi, H. (2000). A methodology for achieving agility in manufacturing organizations. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 20(4), 496–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Petroleum Management, Pandit Deendayal Petroleum University, Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India

    Ashutosh Muduli

  2. T.A. Pai Management Institute, Manipal, India

    Ganes Pandya

Authors
  1. Ashutosh Muduli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ganes Pandya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ashutosh Muduli.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Muduli, A., Pandya, G. Psychological Empowerment and Workforce Agility. Psychol Stud 63, 276–285 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12646-018-0456-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12646-018-0456-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation