ABSTRACT

The purpose of this research is to test a theoretical model of relations between job design (eg: completeness, demand of responsibility, demand of cooperation, cognitive demand, and learning opportunities) and the reflexivity and learning process within natural group works in industry. The methodology used in this research are based on the detailed task analyses and questionnaires from 40 work groups at the shop-floor level in manufacturing industry in Sweden. From this research, it is found that in a group work, reflexivity and learning processes is strongly affected by job design and work routines. The four dimensions on job design which are completeness, demand of cooperation, cognitive demand and learning opportunities has positively related with reflexivity and learning process. Job design also correlates with social routines and social routines with work routines.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Sweden is a country where the group forms of working in industry is well established and has a strong tendency to emerge in order to reorganize into conventional line-production. The researchers before concluded that work in partly autonomous groups in industry leads to an increase in productivity but this does not convince managers that the investment in group-work is worthwhile. Learning in groups, and related effects such as innovation and work development requires group processes characterized by reflexivity and learning.

2.0 REVIEW OF LITERATURES
2.1 Effects of Group Work in Industry

Job design, interdependence, group composition, organizational context, and process are dimensions that impact outcomes such as effectiveness, productivity and job satisfaction. As a previous research stated that there are a few factors that contributes to the job design such as autonomy, control, influence, task complexity, task identity, task significance and task feedback that will affect the group processes and performance such as productivity, innovation and creativity.

2.2 Reflexivity and Learning in Groups

The interaction process of group learning can be characterized as habitual work and social routines while Meta routines involve reflexivity and the discussion of hoe habits might delay effectiveness, creativity and change.

The habitual social routines can be described in terms of potency, social support, workload sharing and communication or cooperation. This routines that predict team learning are informal interactions, interpersonal understanding, proactive in problem-solving and creating clear work procedures. Therefore, it can be seen that collective reflexivity can be assigned to meta-routines and it is an essential part of team learning.

2.3 Job Design and Task Analysis
2.3.1 Completeness of work

Completeness refers to hierarchical completeness in terms of cognitive demand (work tasks that varies in cognitive demand and also put challenging demands on the individual) and sequential completeness (planning, executing and feedback). The completeness of work factors including autonomy, task variety, participation, task significance and task identity and etc. The first hypothesis made by the researcher is completeness correlates positively with Reflexivity and Learning Process, as constrained work activities offer little freedom of choice and hence provide little input to discussions about how to perform or change and develop the work.

2.3.2 Demand of Cooperation

It is already known that in industry, the production line will be divided into segments where the task done by the groups can be done individually and the work itself does not require cooperation. Campion et al. (1996) showed that the degree of dependency between group members affects group processes. The other researcher proved that demand on cooperation in terms of cooperation, amount of cooperation and the content of communication are important factors of the job’s inherent learning opportunities. The second hypothesis is demand of cooperation is positively correlated with reflexivity and learning processes as more close cooperation will provide more themes that have to be solved in the group.

2.3.3 Demand of Responsibility

Responsibility in the production line including the responsibility of fulfillment of quantity targets, target dates or for the adherence to quality parameters of the individual’s own tasks. A well-designed job gives opportunities to decide autonomously, in connection with acceptance of individual and common responsibility for areas of work. The third hypothesis is demand of responsibility is positively correlated with reflexivity and learning processes as the individual and common responsibilities need to be clarified within the groups.

2.3.4 Cognitive Demand

A well-designed job provides opportunities to deal with the demanding tasks i.e tasks that mentally stimulating and require creativity. A challenging task has shown to be and importance factor in a development of an innovation groups. Cognitive regulation requirements are measured by means of a careful analysis of the relation between work activity and the goals of that specific activity. The scale’s lowest point describes a task that requires only sensory motor regulation i.e. is purely routine. The forth hypothesis form that can be made is cognitive demand is positively related with reflexivity and learning process as a mentally challenging task should stimulate reflexivity in itself.

2.3.5 Learning Opportunities

Preservation and enlargement of qualification and abilities are related to the extent that tasks put demand on continuous learning and whether previous training and experience are used. Well-designed jobs give opportunities for further training and learning during work as well as application of acquire knowledge and abilities.

The last hypothesis is learning an opportunity is positively related to the reflexivity and learning process in order to be able to carry out the work activities. Job Design * Completeness * Demand on Cooperation * Demand on Responsibility * Cognitive Demand * Learning Opportunities

Reflexivity & Learning Process
Work
Routines
Social Routines
Meta
Routines
Habitual
Routines

Figure 1: Hypothetical model of the causal relation between job design, work routines, social routines and reflexivity and learning process.

3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

There are two methodologies that involves in this study which are detailed work task analysis (REBA) and a survey conducted by distributing a set of questionnaires to members of 40 work groups in Swedish industry. Working conditions are an important input to work group processes and performance within the input-process-output framework of teams. Work task analysis is regarded as more valid tool than subjective measurements and some variables cannot be captured with interviews or questionnaires. To test the theoretical model in Figure 1, a structural modeling (SEM) analysis was conducted through LISREL analysis which is to determine the extent to which the theoretical model is supported by sample data.

The data was gathered in four manufacturing industries within the same regions in Sweden and the companies were chosen with control of main task in production (assembly work), production technology, organizational support to the groups in the form of opportunities for training and competence development, overall work organization, concept of group working, selection criteria for group composition and production planning.

4.0 RESULTS

It is expected that job design (completeness, demand of cooperation, demand of responsibility, cognitive demand and learning opportunities) should be positively related with reflexivity and learning processes in groups. However, the result showed that the third hypothesis did not supported in this research where the demand of responsibility is negatively related to the reflexivity and learning processes. In addition, none of these variables of job design are related to the habitual work routines in intra-group processes measured as work routines.

Only two of the variables (temporal degree of freedom and learning potential are significantly related to the social routines. The result also showed that there is no significant relation between group composition in terms of work experience, company occupancy, and reflexivity and learning processes. Mental demand can be regarded as crucial factors in reflexivity and learning processes.

5.0 DISCUSSIONS

The model in Figure 1 was tested by using LISREL analysis where it showed that job design and work routines has strong effects on reflexivity and learning processes with coefficient 0.5 and 0.63 respectively. Job design correlates with social and work routines.

The contribution to research has two-fold which are the methodology of detailed work task analysis for capturing aspects of human-centered job design is worthwhile as it provides data that cannot be captured with questionnaires or interviews. Besides that, work task analysis give input to model-building in group research as aspects of job design previously not studies in relation to group processes contribute to reflexivity and learning processes. According to management in the four companies, decision of the group composition is not taken based on the individual differences in reflexivity.

There are basically two entries to enhance the effects of group works which are to provide the group with preconditions that will impact on group effectiveness or to stimulate group processes. When preconditions are changed to raise productivity, this change will affect the long term outcomes of group work and decision-makers need to be aware of this. In the process of designing the job, all functions in charge of and affected by production planning need to be involved to balance long and short term goal conflicts, and conflicts between demands on productivity and demand on innovation and change.

6.0 CONCLUSION

As a conclusion, the completeness, demand of cooperation, cognitive demand and learning opportunities of job design is positively correlated with the reflexivity and learning process in a group works while demand of responsibility is negatively related with the reflexivity and learning processes.