Human Resource Work Design Pilot At CERA Essay


Discuss about the Human Resource Work Design Pilot at CERA.



Human resource management is the recruitment and proper utilisation of the available workforce to optimise the performance of any company. The director of Human Resources has the responsibility of hiring and supervising the employees, and providing consultation to the managers of any organisation regarding training and development, plans related to the staff, and the company’s budget and labour fields. The human resource manager also has the responsibility of ensuring the safety of the employees, in addition to taking care of their welfare and performing their induction and orientation (Tang, Pee & Iijima, 2013).

The foundation of any organisation lies solely on its employees; the results that are attained are because of the numerous human minds that are working to produce the outcome. It can be said that technology is replacing or reducing the involvement of humans, but it should not be forgotten that humans only are making the machines, and they also need to be operated or at least supervised by one. Stephen Hawking has stated that a day might come when artificial intelligence would replace the involvement of humans, and only the people at the top of the organisation in the supervisory roles would remain functional.

Work design pilot at CERA

CERA was looking to hire new employees to its team of educational professionals, practitioners and researchers. The Director of Learning Analytics would be responsible for conducting research and demonstrating the newly available tools and systems for the purpose of assessing and directing instructional processes. The Director of Instructional Impact makes and conducts research on the individual performance of the students by collecting data and form cooperatives with educators to assess efficiency.

The ideal qualifications would be to have a strong knowledge and a preferably formal training regarding assessment and analysis, while being able to work as a flexible and independent leader.

For any organisation, the strategy it follows while running the business has a direct impact on the way the job roles are designed and allocated together. Therefore, the tactics that a cost-oriented company will employ will be different from that of a company that wants to lay more emphasis on innovation or differentiation. Work design is therefore dependent on the strategies and policies, in which the organisation is functioning, and also on how it sees itself in the environment (Hogan & Coote, 2014).

For any work design, there are four basic approaches: Motivational, Mechanistic, Biological, and Perpetual motor approaches.

Motivational job design approach


Task identity

Intrinsic job feedback

Ability/skill requirements

Extrinsic job feedback

Ability/skill variety

Social interaction

Task significance

Task/goal clarity


Mechanistic job design approach

Job specialisation

Single activities

Specialisation of tools and procedures

Task simplification


Spare time


Perpetual motor job design approach


Information-output requirements


Information-processing requirements


Memory requirements

Other equipment


Printed job materials


Workplace layout

Information input requirements

Biological job design approach


Size difference



Wrist movement



Work breaks


Shift work

Jobs that support innovative behaviour

In a dynamic business environment, it is essential that the employees implement innovative behaviour to ensure the success of an organisation. This is because innovation is given importance all over the world. There are important factors that affect an individual’s behaviour, like the relationship they have with the management, the overall cultural climate of the company, their job description, and also, their individual differences. Psychological factors such as the worker’s level of interest and dedication towards their work will affect their individual creativity, since innovation is nothing but the ability to generate ideas that are more creative (Paterson, Luthans & Jeung, 2014). The innovation is affected by how the worker perceives the climate of the organisation. An individual will behave in accordance with the consequences as outlined in the expectancy theory of motivation. This is also influenced by the expectations that the employee has from their organisation, and it differs from individual to individual.

Explaining innovative behaviour using performance and image outcome expectations

Innovative behaviour can be defined as the implementation of new ideas, processes or procedures to increase the performance and outcome. This can be done by using new processes of work, improved methods of investigation and application, and by keeping track of newer technological processes. Innovation is therefore the conception and the implementation of newer and more creative ideas, which are useful for the success of the organisation (Wallace, 2016).

For improved employee behaviour and performance, it is important that the organisations employ the best and the most skilled workers. Years of research has concluded, that innovative behaviour is not one-dimensional. It is more than just the implementation of creative ideas; it is the identification of the problem, the development of the solution, and the required support for it (Madrid et al., 2014). The importance of innovation in the workplace is a developing idea; however, there have been insufficient studies to actually examine employee behaviour. Some studies that had been conducted assessed the behaviour of only those sectors that had workers that were empowered, or were transformational leaders.

It has been suggested by theorists of social exchange that there is a whole series of interactions that give rise to the commitment and the freedom over time, in any workplace. It is assumed that a good deed done by any of the workers will get reciprocated at some point by the person who benefits from or receives it.

This implies that when workers are able to have a high-quality relationship with the employers and are satisfied with the output of their workplace input, they are more willing to invest and respond with better performances, while also fulfilling the obligations they might have to the management or the supervisor. These workplace relationships develop and can be maintained if both the involved parties understand its importance and can provide for it (Hsu & Chen, 2015).

Social exchange theory: The background to workplace relationships

A key factor of this Social Exchange Theory is that the trust, loyalty and commitment in any relationship take time to develop. In addition to time, the situations also need to be ideal. This means, that the workers need to keep in mind the rules of the workplace, and in the process, help to foster mutually helpful workplace relationships. Even the organisation needs to implement a mechanism that aids its workers in solving work-based issues. In other words, the supervising body needs to be supportive, and the employees should be able to understand that. However, there are no firm rules regarding this; an employee will undertake a social exchange only when the benefit is greater than the investment –– this is similar to any economic exchange.

Innovative behaviour models

The innovative behaviour of individuals are affected by a total of twelve factors, which can be categorised into four groups:

  • Characteristics of the organisation –– the expressed strategies and the size of the organisation
  • Characteristics of the intersection between employee and employer –– the hierarchy, the work culture, and the aims outlined by the organisation
  • Characteristics of the actual individuals –– eagerness to learn, an ambitious personality
  • Characteristics of the innovation itself –– the potential and goals of the organisational policies

Job satisfaction and innovation

Here, the relationship between performance and job satisfaction is to be addressed. The foundation of this idea is in the fact that a worker with high job satisfaction will be more willing to perform their duties in a better manner (De Clercq, Dimov & Belausteguigoitia, 2016). The leadership gets affected in the same way; a team of employees that perform well will result in a happier and more satisfied manager or supervisor. Innovation might get limited when employees have a job satisfaction –– they may support decisions that might not be beneficial for the company, as employees with a secure job are less likely to consider the financial shortcomings that the governing body is facing. A more relaxed structure of pay and leaves make workers appreciate their job security, but this cannot make up for the lack of a future vision encompassing the past and future performance and success rates.

Promoting innovative behaviour

When it comes to the challenges that the management faces while governing any organisation, it is no surprise that human capital tops the list ("Forbes Welcome", 2017). It is followed suit by the challenge of innovation, and it is one of the top five concerns all over the world. Human capital and innovation are interlinked; a good attempt at innovation is dependent on the strength of the leadership in the organisation. At CERA, it is essential that the management have a strong role in the administration, and the following nine aspects can be said to drive innovation:

  • A joint vision by the leaders and their colleagues –– One cannot just give directives or orders and expect their employees to follow them blindly, no matter how grand the strategy might be. A better outcome is guaranteed when the leader consults with his employees before making any decisions; a partnership is better than a commanding approach (Yoshida et al., 2014).
  • Building trust –– It is absolutely important for the leader to have trust for their employees (Agarwal, 2014). CERA needs to incorporate the idea that their employees are trusted and therefore valued to ensure that their visions are realised. A leader who trusts their workers earns the trust of the employees as well. Moreover, one needs to feel safe in order to take the risks that could be necessary for the organisation.
  • Willingness to change the status quo –– Leaders should know the difference between the right and the politically correct in order to be innovative (Mutlu, 2014). It does not matter if such leaders are said to be contrary to the environment as they are the ones who are, in the long run, successful and efficient in innovation.
  • Expertise –– The leaders who have a profound knowledge of their field and what their workers are working on are more likely to be innovators. They are intellectually curious, but are equally aware of the core functioning of their group.
  • Goals are set high –– The benchmark for success should be set high, and the workers should be encouraged to reach those goals. They should believe that they can reach that target, no matter how challenging it might be.
  • Speed –– A leader who is innovative moves fast, as they hold the belief that a task can be finished in a better manner much more quickly than by delaying it. Leaders who work slowly have reduced results than those who are fast and therefore more productive.
  • The need for information –– Maintaining transparency and being communicative with the team is one of the main characteristics of an innovative leader. Asking and answering relevant questions is also important, and it helps to be successful in innovation.
  • Teamwork –– It should always be about about the team, never about the individual. Co-operation is the key to the success of any innovative idea (Schippers, West & Dawson, 2015).
  • Diversity and inclusion –– It is necessary for innovation that the team takes into consideration all points of view and the opinions of all the members. The blending of different creative processes and experiences gives rise to innovative solutions.


Innovative behaviour is dependent on a number of factors, especially on the leader and how their relationship is with the other members of the team. It is important for them to trust and motivate the other workers to ensure the realisation of newer and better ideas, all the while keeping the goals sky-high to make it a challenging experience as well. The human resource management has probably the most critical of tasks when it comes to managing an organisation, as any company is defined by the efficiency of its workforce.

In the present world, innovation is an ever-evolving issue. Human capital is the most important factor to innovative performance, and a high level of innovation can be achieved by effective functioning of the Human Resource Management. Effectively designed and synchronised human resource management encourages people to initiate innovation, as it is important for achieving the necessary goals.


CERA should keep in mind that the expectation from leaders by the workers directly affects innovative behaviour. The exchanges between the leaders and members, the style of solving problems, and the atmosphere for innovation are among the less complex factors that are involved.

The creativeness and the attitude towards innovation are affected by four factors –– characteristics of any group task, the knowledge diversity or the skills of the members of that group, the integrating group processes, and external demands. On further analysis, it can be said that innovative behaviour is explained by different variables, because of which the models are nearly impossible to compare (Anderson, Poto?nik & Zhou, 2014).

Human resources management aims to encourage innovation by assigning employees to work in teams. Outlining the necessary roles in teamwork is a necessity in organisational development. The importance of teamwork has not attracted much attention; it is a relationship between the degree to participation and innovation and the technical aspects of the organisation. Also, when employees undergo a range of experiences, they will become more open and willing to changes and implementation of newer ideas, and also to consider their own ideas and the requirements for skill development (Battistelli, Montani & Odoardi, 2013). People who are exposed to more variety are undoubtedly better at solving problems than those who have a narrow scope of work.


Agarwal, U. (2014). Linking justice, trust and innovative work behaviour to work engagement. Personnel Review, 43(1), 41-73.

Anderson, N., Poto?nik, K., & Zhou, J. (2014). Innovation and creativity in organizations: A state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1297-1333.

Battistelli, A., Montani, F., & Odoardi, C. (2013). The impact of feedback from job and task autonomy in the relationship between dispositional resistance to change and innovative work behaviour. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 22(1), 26-41.

Boudreau, K. J., & Lakhani, K. R. (2016). Innovation Experiments: Researching Technical Advance, Knowledge Production, and the Design of Supporting Institutions. Innovation Policy and the Economy, 16(1), 135-167.

De Clercq, D., Dimov, D., & Belausteguigoitia, I. (2016). Perceptions of adverse work conditions and innovative behavior: The buffering roles of relational resources. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 40(3), 515-542.

Forbes Welcome. (2017). Retrieved 16 May 2017, from

Hogan, S. J., & Coote, L. V. (2014). Organizational culture, innovation, and performance: A test of Schein's model. Journal of Business Research, 67(8), 1609-1621.

Hsu, M. L., & Chen, F. H. (2015). The Cross?Level Mediating Effect of Psychological Capital on the Organizational Innovation Climate–Employee Innovative Behavior Relationship. The Journal of Creative Behavior.

Litchfield, R. C., Ford, C. M., & Gentry, R. J. (2015). Linking individual creativity to organizational innovation. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 49(4), 279-294.

Madrid, H. P., Patterson, M. G., Birdi, K. S., Leiva, P. I., & Kausel, E. E. (2014). The role of weekly high?activated positive mood, context, and personality in innovative work behavior: A multilevel and interactional model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(2), 234-256.

Mutlu, M. (2014). Line managers’ influence on innovative behavior of employees (Bachelor's thesis, University of Twente).

Paterson, T. A., Luthans, F., & Jeung, W. (2014). Thriving at work: Impact of psychological capital and supervisor support. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(3), 434-446.

Schippers, M. C., West, M. A., & Dawson, J. F. (2015). Team reflexivity and innovation: The moderating role of team context. Journal of Management, 41(3), 769-788.

Tang, J., Pee, L. G., & Iijima, J. (2013). Investigating the effects of business process orientation on organizational innovation performance. Information & Management, 50(8), 650-660.

Wallace, J. C., Butts, M. M., Johnson, P. D., Stevens, F. G., & Smith, M. B. (2016). A multilevel model of employee innovation understanding the effects of regulatory focus, thriving, and employee involvement climate. Journal of Management, 42(4), 982-1004.

Wu, C. H., Parker, S. K., & De Jong, J. P. (2014). Need for cognition as an antecedent of individual innovation behavior. Journal of Management, 40(6), 1511-1534.

Yoshida, D. T., Sendjaya, S., Hirst, G., & Cooper, B. (2014). Does servant leadership foster creativity and innovation? A multi-level mediation study of identification and prototypicality. Journal of Business Research, 67(7), 1395-1404.

Yu, C., Yu, T. F., & Yu, C. C. (2013). Knowledge sharing, organizational climate, and innovative behavior: A cross-level analysis of effects. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 41(1), 143-156.

How to cite this essay: