How to improve the work environment

In work organizations, the motivation of individuals is an important part of the performance of the subjects and to achieve the goals that are proposed in the productive activity. One aspect that contributes to motivation and productivity is the perception that we have individuals from the treatment provided by the organization within which we develop our activity.

In this area, the construct of organizational (or organizational) justice is used, which plays a mediating role between how the person feels. own worker with respect to the company and its members and (in many cases linked to the well-being of the workers and their self-perception in terms of health, well-being and prestige), the results of the company and the job being performed (in terms of productivity). Therefore, in this Psychology-Online article, we will see how to improve the work environment in a company and how to motivate workers through fair treatment.

Index

1. Work motivation
2. Factors that influence the work environment and motivate employees
3. Actions to promote the work environment and motivate employees
4. Benefits of justice at work
5. Workers' needs based on age

It is plausible to think that as time passes, people change our perception of the contribution to the group and of the rewards we receive for our contribution (Too often, we think that they are out of balance, the former being greater than the latter - we put in more than we receive, or that bias we tend to perceive -). This social dimension of work, in terms of reward and its balance, is what we will try to analyze below.

Work has a social dimension, since in the performance of our work we have to participate in groups and, sometimes we get Identify ourselves with the work and the rest of the people who participate in the task that is carried out or various problems may arise, both individual, as collectives.

What's more, group members need to be motivated and, finally, there must be an organizational justice or recognition that goes beyond the agreed economic remuneration. This last factor, that of distributive justice, is what occupies us and worries us, in moments as delicate as those that are lived in a process of change such as the one we are experiencing today. Next we will see how this justice should be to promote a good work environment and motivate workers.

According to Nordhall et als. (2018) the psychological construct of organizational justice, throughout the literature, is associated with results, both individual and organizational, insofar as it affects various dimensions. Among the organizational, it affects aspects such as: job performance, work satisfaction, organizational commitment, counterproductive behavior, intention to rotate or leave the organization, behavior in accordance with the organization.

The individual repercussions have included, among others: health-related factors such as sick leave, health-related problems, work stress, cardiovascular problems, burnout and emotional exhaustion, anxiety and depression. At an experimental level, factors related to trust in the supervisor or organization, equity and equality perceived within the organization have been considered as predictors of organizational justice. organization, needs, job security, complexity and status within the group, moral and ethical standards, perceived organizational support and expectations generated.

Let's look at some strategies and activities to improve the work environment and promote worker motivation through justice.

• A procedural justice or the internal procedures of the group at the time of functioning (rewarding or correcting behaviors). It requires a broad perception of fairness. This requires that there be the opportunity to "express" each other's opinions and concerns, when you need to. This is not possible if there is no consistency, correctness, absence of bias and precision when assessing a given behavior.
• A distributive justice that supposes the perception of fairness regarding the distribution of money, rewards and time. This is fostered when the results are consistent with respect to equity and equality and when the results are personal effort-result relationships coincide and are comparable with the same dimensions of other people important.
• An interpersonal justice that entails perception of supervisors' behaviors adequate in terms of courtesy. It assumes that decisions can sometimes have negative consequences for the recipient, which is not that cannot be perceived as fair if the individual acknowledges that the supervisor is treating him or her properly I respect.
• An informative justice that implies that the quantity, quality and timeliness of information received by the employee. It should be accompanied by regular opportunities to receive relevant and appropriate explanations and arguments (eg compensation decisions).

Commonly, and understandably, we encounter constant comparisons of perceptions of organizational justice between individuals (for example, by looking at and compare ourselves with people of the same category, seniority in the company, or with diversity in these circumstances, especially if we are harmed in said comparison). A particularly relevant aspect is that of absence from work and, specifically, that related to sick leave medical, subject to greater legal control (by the company, the mutual, social security and services doctors). Part of this aspect is what we will try to illustrate below, closely linked to absenteeism.

In consequence of the above, it seems clear that people are sensitive to the decisions made in an organization and, in addition, to the procedures that lead to its adoption and the way in which they are treated by those who adopt them (Bies et als., 1986).

In conclusion, to improve the work environment and motivate workers, it is necessary to apply organizational justice: allow expression, offer information, practice fairness and courtesy.

Ybema et als. (2016) observed that greater distributive and procedural justice, in terms of greater worker appreciation, had an impact on productivity, improving it, while at the same time decreased productivity loss and sick leave; while, on the contrary, an unfair treatment of the employee increases the loss of productivity and absences due to medical problems (depression, lower well-being, among others), especially among older workers. If employees appreciate that the efforts invested are not rewarded, the balance tends to be restored in terms of productivity (lower performance in the job and with its reflection in a lower appreciation by the organization, leaving both harmed).

An absence due to illness is even more detrimental to the company, since relationships are further eroded of work (that is, less recognition, greater incidence in the organization of the task and greater absence of employee). Added to the loss of productivity is the fact that colleagues observe that the illness is resorted to as an unnecessary absence from work, resulting in the worst absentee seen that when he is present, and he reaffirms himself in the fairness of his reaction since he is impelled by the repercussions on his health and this fact further erodes the appreciation of him among his classmates.

This effect is especially pronounced among older and older workers. Although there are experiences that showed how despite the perception of fairness of interaction, employees with sick leave returned to work after an event important, allowing a longer period to elapse if they perceived that the perceived interactional justice was low, compared to those who perceived the interactional justice was medium or high.

The group of older workers, constitutes a very relevant group, inasmuch as they have a greater need to remain at work, as they see their retirement approaching, which makes them more sensitive to organizational justice.

Conversely, the youngest, although they are also sensitive to this aspect, however compared to the most veteran who value the possibility of a definitive sick leave and the retirement, the former, may choose to leave the organization, desisting from a greater effort to achieve recognition that is not provides.

This article is merely informative, in Psychology-Online we do not have the power to make a diagnosis or recommend a treatment. We invite you to go to a psychologist to treat your particular case.

If you want to read more articles similar to How to improve the work environment, we recommend that you enter our category of Human Resources.

• Bies RJ, Moag JF. (1986): Interactional justice: communication criteria of fairness. In R. J. Lewicki, B. H. Sheppard, & M. H. Bazerman (Eds.): Research in negotiations in organizations. USA: Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. 1986.
• Colquitt JA, Conlon DE, Wesson MJ, et al. Justice at the millennium: a meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2001; 86: pp: 425–45.
• Elovainio M, Kivimäki M, Helkama K. (2001): Organization justice evaluations, job control, and occupational strain. Journal of Applied Psychology, Jun 85 (3), pp. 418-424.
• Elovainio M, Kivimäki M, Vahtera J. (2002): Organizational justice: evidence of a new psychosocial predictor of health. American Journal of Public Health 2002 Jan; 92(1):105–8.
• Ybema, J.F., van der Meer, L. & Leijten, F.R.M. (2016): Longitudinal Relationships Between Organizational Justice, Productivity Loss, and Sickness Absence Among Older Employees. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 23, 645–654 (2016).
• Tyler TR, Lind EA. (1992): A relational model of authority in groups. In: Zanna MP, editor: Advances in experimental social psychology, vol. 25. San Diego: Academic Press; 1992. p. 115–91.
• Nordhall, O and Knez, I. (2018): Motivation and Justice at Work: The Role of Emotion and Cognition Components of Personal and Collective Work Identity. Frontiers in Psychology. 15 Jan 2018,