Organizations rely on employees to perform duties and enable the organization to realize its objectives. Therefore, employee relationship policies in any organization are mandatory (Bailey, 2009). They facilitate the management of employees to ensure that all members of an organization contribute towards the same overall objective. There must be trust, dignity, fairness, and voice for employee relationships to work. In any organization, there is a psychological contract for the employee and employer relationship (Benson & Brown, 2010). Employee voice forms the major part of this report as it evaluates how employment relationship policies have features in the National Health Service (NHS).
In evaluating the employee voice in the NHS, the paper looks for different forms of employee voice that exist in the organization. First, it will seek evidence of participation and involvement. Here, the report looks at employee rights as represented by the organization’s decision-making activities. It also looks at management-led practices that present opportunities for employees to provide input and ideas for the achievement of organizational goals. The report will look at the three categories of employee voice, which are direct employee involvement and participation, indirect employee involvement and participation and financial involvement. The report presents the expectations of employee voice for the NHS and its staff.
The climate and impact of the organizational context shaping the employment relationship
The ACAS employee relationship guidelines provide as parts of codes of practice for organizations to follow provide the organizational context shaping employment relationship in the UK. Information and consultation of employees (ICE) regulations highlighted in this report also offer the basis for sustaining the employment relationship. They have a facilitating role in the initiatives taken by NHS trusts to ensure that employee voice provisions lead to better productivity and the realization of the organization’s objectives.
ACAS employee voice best practices
According to ACAS (2015), involving employee representatives is a good way for managers and employees to communicate in an organization. The involvement leads to better decision-making improves the employment relations. Employee representatives can assist in building trust and cooperation and lead to an improvement in business performance. They will encourage employees to identify closely with the organization’s performance and will ensure that input of workers is sustainable. Besides that, having employee representatives is a way for an organization to satisfy legal requirements and to develop workplace collaborations.
Employers must let employees who are officials in trade unions to attend union activities, such as conferences. Representatives must have sufficient time during working hours to do their representative duties and to get training. According to the ACAS Code of Practice 3, organizations need to provide trade union representatives with time off and this should be paid time (ACAS, 2010).
Information and consultation of employees (ICE) regulations came into effect in 2005 and they require employers to consult employees (ACAS, 2015). However, employees must request the consultation or the employee can voluntarily opt to consult. Consultation is necessary when there are more than 50 employees in an organization and there is a new set up or a change of arrangements in the workplace that will affect employees. ICE regulations encourage employers to involve employees in organizational performance, management performance and decision-making, the employee’s performance and commitment, levels of trust, job satisfaction, and work-life balance (ACAS, 2015).
Employees need to be informed and involved in business, economic situation, employment prospects, and decisions leading to significant changes in work organization or contractual relations (Freeman, Boxall & Haynes, 2007). The preferred ways of consulting employees are one-to-one meetings, company handbooks or newsletters and other publications, and an employee forum. Forums should have managers and employee representatives. They are useful for consultation. There are also joint parties that are devoted to finding solutions to the various concerns that arise at the workplace. The joint consultative meeting deals with a range of issues that are typical of most organizations, such as employee welfare and training (Van Buren & Greenwood, 2007).
The impact of the different roles controlling and managing the employment relationship
Employee management at the NHS has led to favorable outcomes in some cases. In terms of boosting productivity, Purcell (2015) explains that three beacons of employee engagement lead to increased productivity for most organizations in the UK. These beacons are ability, motivation, and opportunity. Management has to play an active role in ensuring that the right employees for particular jobs join an organization. After finding the right employees, there should be sufficient training to make sure the employees keep up with the demands of their jobs. Motivation is important too because most jobs require employees to exercise the discretion they have in their work. Therefore, line managers play a central role in providing management feedback to employees. Managers should limit their feedback to congratulations for good performance and corrective advice for below-par performance. Employees value recognition as a social reward more than they value financial incentives (Purcell, 2015).
Purcell (2015) gives a case of the NHS where formal appraisal systems have also supported the need to avail social rewards. The author notes that at the NHS, workers who saw their appraisal as a contribution to their job performance became motivated. They also became motivated when the appraisal system allowed them to set objectives for tasks handled within the organization. Meanwhile, the NHS staff who did not get involved in appraisal and those who experienced a poorly conducted appraisal ended up being less motivated. An example of a system-based appraisal is the arrangement of work performance in teams. In such arrangements within the NHS, Purcell (2015) mentions that staffs remain motivated because they do not want to let their team members down. They feel they are part of a bigger and involving goal. Therefore, the value and protect their participation and this ends up improving workplace productivity.
The last beacon evaluated by Purcell (2015) was an opportunity. The author explains that for employee relationships to bear fruits, staff must get the opportunity to apply their skills and further their competency. They need to participate in decisions and get a chance to work on the feedback of their appraisals. An organization can evaluate the way participative development is working by looking at the way staffs contribute to team briefing sessions. They should also look for the same in wider consultations and problem-solving groups. Other avenues for participation will include on-the-job and sharing of knowledge with other employees or with a line manager.
At NHS, team working reveals the way opportunity plays a huge role in fostering good employee relations. At NHS, the most effective teams are the ones with clear objectives and independent working conditions. They have regular performance reviews and have chances to discuss improvements. As a result, the team working correlated with lower levels of absenteeism and staff turnover. Consequently, there were better clinical outcomes at NHS (Purcell, 2015).
Although Purcell (2015) provides insights into productivity improvement due to employee involvement and participation at NHS, the author offers a collective overview only. It is important to look at individual employee voice also. Marsden (2007) explains that management has a zone of acceptance within which it can use its authority to direct employees. However, this zone of acceptance should periodically change to reflect overall changes in organizational needs. Elsewhere, Cañibano & Daniel Curto-Millet (2013) explain that organizations should be aware of the ability of innovations within the organizations to influence the zone of acceptance. Changes can cause employees to accept or deny additional control by management. Thus, the success of an organization in meeting its objective lies in its ability to manage intended and unintended consequences of organisation innovations in changing an employment relationship.
Marsden (2007) gives a caution that the element of employee voice may be very weak when management opts to impose new work goals or priorities one-sidedly. NHS managed a change process in performance management well, such that it did not introduce weaknesses in employee voice. As reported by Marsden (2007), performance management required the clarification of roles and setting goals. It also involved planning, personal development, and reviewing. These features highlight the potential of performance management at NHS in meeting the needs of employee relationships to sustain employee voice and meet the organization’s goals. The features meet the requirements highlighted previously on the best ways for management to undertake the duty of the employee relationship. Also, Marsden (2007) provides further reasons for success at NHS as follows. The author mentions that managers and staff were asked to discuss the purpose of the job and many other features such as its main activities, resources, and responsibilities.
The performance management at NHS embraces a partial participation of employee voice. Both management and employees can influence the final decision. However, its only top management that makes the end decision. In such an arrangement, the burden lies with management to convince employees that their partial participation is worth it. Besides that, there is a need for an employee relationship to have the right impact and on this issue; the effectiveness of employee voice depends on the degree of say, the level of impact and scope of participation.
Employee voice remains important at NHS. Based on a survey done by CIPD, employees of the NHS considered greater consultation and engagement as the most ways of improving patient care (Dromey, 2014). The conclusion was that a strong relationship existed between perceptions of employee voice and the actual employee engagement at NHS (Dromey, 2014). The NHS has three main components of employee voice. First, the workers are assured that there is space for airing their grievances. The NHS is following a recommendation of a previous survey that advised the institution to ensure that there is openness. The recommendation was for NHS to enable concerns to be raised and disclosed. It had to provide an atmosphere that is free of fear and to ensure that it answers all questions asked (Dromey, 2014).
The indications of progress at NHS are positive. Nevertheless, the organization still has to work on the details of employee voice. The report by Dromey (2014) indicates that 84 percent of the employees accept that they have enough room for reporting errors, misses, and incidents. This is a good percentage to support the claim that employee voice is important at NHS. However, only 62 percent thought that action would be taken in response to the issues raised. The number reduces to less than half of all employees thinking that the organization treats staff fairly when they report such incidents. A combination of the negative feedback and the number of staff who might have answered that they do not know casts doubt on the ability of NHS to sustain employee voice and make its employment relationship effective (Dromey, 2014).
Examples of policies and practices that have had either a positive or a negative impact on NHS organizational performance and engagement
According to the report by Dromey (2014), the staff at NHS consider whistle-blowing protection as another important measure for improving health care. However, whistle-blowing protection has to happen after great consultation with the staff. The managers of the trusts indicated that the organizations needed to establish a culture to define them, in addition to having a formal structure. They noted that the existence of procedures and sufficient awareness of these produces by staff was important. Additionally, they point out the need for the culture within the organization to remain open as a way of supporting staff as they raise concerns. The raising of concern by staff was considered a continuous improvement exercise and was respected as an adult-to-adult conversation. It was not taken as a whistle-blowing incident. The organization realized that treating workers who show concern as whistle-blowers discourages them from attempting to raise concerns in the future.
Since the trust values include the need to make patient safety a priority, several leaders have gone out of their way to praise whistle-blowers for showing a good example of staff taking responsibility (Dromey, 2014). As explained earlier by Purcell (2015) in this report, positive feedback is a good strategy that reinforces employee motivation to realize organizational goals.
The workers are also urged to come up with ideas that can improve the NHS operations. It pledges that all staff will be empowered. It adds that they will be able to put forward improvement suggestions for safer services given to patients and their families (Dromey, 2014). The provision is most critical to frontline employees who deal directly with patients. The workers who understand the needs of the clients are the best suited to formulate ideas that can lead to improvements in service delivery at the NHS. This second element in employee voice considers staff as the main source of innovation in the organization. At NHS, 75 percent of staff felt they were able to suggest improvements in the way they work. Only 59 percent of employees agree when it comes to the ability to improve happen. The other percentage left out is significant and calls for the NHS to improve.
The trusts have introduced the Dragon’s Den initiative to give the employees a chance to present their ideas for possible implementation. Line managers at various trusts under NHS receive instructions to have an everyday discussion with teams in meetings where they ask the employee whether the organization needs to improve anything.
The organization regards the workers highly because they are pivotal in the running of the organization. Staff are supposed to take part in decisions that affect them and the services that they provide (Dromey, 2014). Only about 53 percent of staff think they have a say in the decision made by their immediate managers. At the same time, only 32 percent of staff members consider top leadership as involving the staff in important decision-making (Dromey, 2014). Employee involvement in the NHS for decision-making happens individually and through trade unions (Bach, 2004). NHS is devoted to listening to the suggestions of its employees. Most trusts under NHS fed back staffs about the outcomes of the process and reported on employee involvement in final decision-making and policy formulations. The chief executive of the trusts surveyed in the Dromey (2014) report sent regular direct emails to all employees in a personal and engaging tone. They also allowed recipients to enter into dialogue by responding to the email.
The NHS has a huge trade union presence and while much of employee voice is direct, the unions play a major role in influencing perceptions of employees. The staff at the NHS saw the trade unions as additional channels that help senior leaders to understand the views of their staff. The unions provided leaders with an opportunity to address issues before they become big problems for the organization (Mcbride & Mustchin, 2007). To encourage close working relationships between senior leaders and union representatives, there was the provision of regular meetings to reinforce good relationships. Also, senior leaders pledged to maintain a solution-focused approach. In the approach, trade unions assist in identifying solutions and receiving encouragement to assist in solving problems actively. In light of disagreements and differences in opinion, both leaders and union representatives remain committed to their relationship and work together to find common solutions (Dromey, 2014). Several trusts have conducted joint programs and activities between management and staff representatives, and have used unions to rally staff’s participation in various endeavors as a way of strengthening the union-management relationship.
Critique of policies presented above
By going for direct approaches to employee engagement despite the existence of trade union representation, NHS trust risk introducing overlapping communication channels that can be a source of mistrusts and conflict in the organization. Based on the inspiration of ICE regulations, the NHS should consider carrying out joint direct engagement of employees where senior managers and union representatives are the ones sending the regular staff email on progress updates. On the other hand, as staff are encouraged to suggest improvements, they need to be directly to the setup procedures through the union to make their representation truly collective (Sablok, Bartram, Stanton, Burgess, & Mcdonnell, 2013).
The use of regular meetings between management and union representatives is a good strategy for the NHS. Regular meetings help to reduce tensions, especially at times when unions are facing election pressures and management is facing performance pressures (Public World, 2013). The NHS must recognize changing preferences in union representations among the staff. The direct engagement may provide a good workaround for employees who are not interested in engaging their employer through a union (Kaine, 2011; Heil & Thomas, 2006). Direct communication and involvement are novel ways of tackling the declining membership of trade unions in British workplaces. However, the use of a hybrid body operating alongside direct methods of communication should ensure that challenges of direct involvement and the reduced opportunity of union representation are dealt with effectively (Purcell & Hall, 2012).
The partnership theory considers mutuality as the main principle, which implies that for parties to the employment relationship to have a good working relationship, they need to focus on their common interest and goals (Avey, Wernsing, & Palanski, 2012). A problem that the NHS might be facing is the fact that its initiation of staff involvement programs has good intentions, but they arise as part of the organization’s obligation to follow government directives on its modernization (Kaufman, 2014). It is difficult for the organization to involve staff fully in its affairs when it already has a huge agenda for change that comes from government policies about its modernization (Tailby et al., 2004). This revelation lends support to the findings of this report where the initial perception of engagement is high at NHS, but actual opportunities for effective employee say in decision making diminishes when it comes to the implementation of suggestions made.
Recommendations for NHS under employee voice
As the NHS continues to pursue the goal of sustaining sufficient levels of employee voice, it needs to look at the following recommendations. For every change initiated to affect employee voice, the organization should look for high-level buy-in first before considering the tools used to undertake the task. Also, it should ensure that there is leadership buy-in and that initiatives have complete support from the top of the organization. When collecting views from staff in any way, the organization needs to listen and then do what it is told (Leat, 2007). Otherwise, it risks alienating staff such that they will not contribute in the future whenever they are asked to do so (Van Buren & Greenwood, 2007). The organization should use this strategy to ensure that there is an employee voice in place of employee silence. It will be hard for the NHS to overcome staff cynicism once it sets in. Therefore, the best solution is to tackle issues when they are raised, irrespective of their negative or positive influence on the organization’s pursuit of its objectives (Butler, 2005).
Senior managers at NHS should realize that no one way of encouraging employee voice works alone. They have to combine different ways and constantly review what is working to reinforce it. The NHS needs to focus on improving areas where it scores lowly with employee voice. For example, it has to encourage ideas and go on to act on the ideas as a way of unlocking innovation and improvement resources. Staff will remain motivated to work when they have discretion over their work. They will become more productive when they have opportunities to propose and discharge improvements in their services. The top executives of the trusts should lead by example. They should also recognize the contributions of the workers in decision-making for the betterment of the trusts. However, the biggest task lies with line managers who must provide employees with sufficient evidence to convince them to offer ideas for improvement.
The NHS must review its obligations to meet government reform objectives and its desire to provide room for employee voice. It must address the plight of its managers who face divergent targets, priorities, and interests (Wilkinson, 2014). Failure to address these issues will allow the stressing environment for management staff to persist as they try to meet both regulatory and employee-led suggestions for improvement.
References
ACAS. (2010). Code of Practice 3: Time off for trade union duties and activities. Norwich: The Stationary Office.
ACAS. (2015). Representations. Web.
Avey, J., Wernsing, T., & Palanski, M. (2012). Exploring the process of ethical leadership: The mediating role of employee voice and psychological ownership. Journal of Business Ethics, 107(1), 21-34.
Bach, S. (2004). Employee participation and union voice in the National Health Service. Human Resource Management Journal, 14(2), 3-19.
Bailey, M. (2009). Can you hear us? Employee Relations, 31(2), 197-218. Web.
Benson, J., & Brown, M. (2010). Employee voice: does union membership matter? Human Resource Management Journal, 20(1), 80-99. doi:10.1111/j.1748-8583.2009.00116.x
Butler, P. (2005). Non‐union employee representation: exploring the efficacy of the voice process. Employee Relations, 27(3), 272-288. Web.
Cañibano, A., & Daniel Curto-Millet. (2013). Balancing unintended consequences of organisational innovations on the employee relationship. Proceedings of the 2013 EU-SPRI Forum Conference. Madrid.
Dromey, J. (2014). Meeting the challenge: Successful employee engagement in the NHS. London: IPA – Involve. Web.
Freeman, R., Boxall, P., & Haynes, P. (2007). What workers say. Ithaca, NY: ILR Press/Cornell University Press.
Heil, G., & Thomas, C. (2006). Employee management and customer service in the retail industry. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Kaine, S. (2011). Employee voice and regulation in the residential aged care sector. Human Resource Management Journal, 22(3), 316-331. Web.
Kaufman, B. (2014). Theorising determinants of employee voice: an integrative model across disciplines and levels of analysis. Human Resource Management Journal, 25(1), 19-40. Web.
Leat, M. (2007). Exploring employee relations. Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Marsden, D. (2007). Individual employee voice: renegotiation and performance management. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(7), 1263-1278. Web.
Mcbride, A., & Mustchin, S. (2007). Lifelong learning, partnership and modernization in the NHS. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(9), 1608-1626.
Public World. (2013). Staff involvement to improve employee engagement, service quality and resoruce use: Lessons of international experience in healthcare. Web.
Purcell, J. (2015). What will employment relations teach us about the best way to build skills and boost productivity. In Workplace trends of 2015: What they mean for you (pp. 12-14).
Purcell, J., & Hall, M. (2012). Voice and participation in the mordern workplace: Challenges and prospects. Web.
Sablok, G., Bartram, T., Stanton, P., Burgess, J., & Mcdonnell, A. (2013). The impact of union presence and strategic human resource management on employee voice in multinational enterprises in Australia. Journal of Industrial Relations,, 55(4), 621-639.
Tailby, S., Richardson, M., Stewart, P., Danford, A., & Upchurch, M. (2004). Patnership at work and worker participation: An NHS case study. Industrial Relations, 35(5), 403-418.
Van Buren, H., & Greenwood, M. (2007). Enhancing employee voice: Are voluntary employer–employee partnerships enough? Journal of Business Ethics, 81(1), 209-221. Web.
Wilkinson, A. (2014). Handbook of research on employee voice. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.