Traditionally, job rotation is usually addressed at an
organizational level. From the employers’ point of view, organizational
theorists have advocated frequent rotation as a means of reducing fatigue and
boredom on jobs so as to maintain productivity (Miller, et al 1973) and fairly frequent
rotation after the initial hiring as a means of orientation and placement
(Wexley and Latham, 1981). Job rotation enables the training of workers to be
backups for other workers so that managers have a more flexible work force and
a ready supply of trained workers (Rothwell et al, 1994). When rotation occurs
at longer intervals, it has been thought as a practice of progressive human
resource development or a means of enhancing the value of work experience for
career development (Campion, et al, 1994). Also from the employers’ standpoint,
however, the practice of job rotation may be very costly. As pointed out by
Yoder, et al (1958), while job rotation may encourage generalization, it
prevents job specialization so that the optimal level of performance cannot be
reached. Although this problem may be negligible for many jobs, it can be very
serious for those jobs where high specialization is needed so that the costs in
terms of training and supervision are prohibitive. One should not be surprised
by the fact that only 42.5% of the companies in Taiwan are practising job
rotation and that they carry out their job-rotation policy selectively and
cautiously (Huang, 1997). Thus, for a job-rotation study at individual level,
the focused question is whether the individuals perceive there is a
job-rotation practice that they actually participate with, rather than whether
the companies have allegedly adopted a policy of job rotation.
Ortega (2001) interestingly states that job rotation was
rarely viewed from the perspective of the employees themselves. Through a
nation-wide survey, this study addresses the following question: How seriously
do employees regard job rotation? Specifically, the researcher wanted to
measure the relationship between job rotation and job satisfaction and,
secondly, wanted to know whether those employees with job rotation and those
without job rotation would judge their companies differently in terms of
training effectiveness.
According to Ortega (2001), there are different reasons an
organisation may choose to utilize job rotation such as using job rotation as a
learning Mechanism. Ortega (2001) research suggests that there are significant
benefits that may outweigh the costs involved with training employees for
diversified positions. As a learning mechanism, employees are given the
opportunity to learn necessary skills which can help them to advance within a
company. This employment opportunity also has the effect of boosting morale and
self efficacy. The company may benefit from using job rotation by having the
ability to staff key positions within a company. This practice may allow a
company to run more efficiently, and as a result, become more productive and
profitable. Rothwell et al, (1994) states that organizations use job rotation
to alleviate the physical and mental stresses endured by employees when working
the same position, year after year. By allowing employees to rotate to other
positions, the risk factors for some types of musculoskeletal disorders may be
reduced. Job Rotation is also believed to have the ability to decrease the amount
of boredom and monotony experienced by employees who work the same position for
extended periods of time.
Ortega (2001) emphasis that job rotation improve employer
brand image in a tight economy, everyone is likely to be heavily focused on job
security. If you provide and publicize your focus on inside hiring preferences,
it will bolster the firm's external brand image of offering long time
employment security and a good place to work because you focus on the needs of
your current employees. The increased security that you offer may also increase
the retention rate of your current employees. Excellent internal movement
programs are frequently praised by employees and the business press. If you
have an excellent program, it will help you build your external image as an
employer of choice and a "best place to work". Campion et al, (1994)
states that job rotation allows for more entry level hiring by filling most
jobs internally through transfers or promotions you allow the firm to do to do
almost all of its external hiring at the "entry level". This is a
good thing because entry-level jobs are cheaper to fill, have a larger
candidate pool and give the firm more time to train and assess
"unknown" external hires while they are in jobs where they can do
less damage. Higher retention rates rapid movement minimizes frustration and
burnout. People working in their "ideal job" are unlikely to find a
superior opportunity outside the firm. In the opinion of Eriksson and Ortega
(2001), multiple on-the-job learning opportunities are likely to develop
leaders faster and more effectively because the development assignments will
include opportunities to lead more teams under a variety of circumstances.
Comments
Post a Comment