Mployee Manipulation and Employee Uniformity

One page
Respond to at least one of your colleagues postings in one or more of the following ways:
i?? a?Ask a probing question.
i?? a?Share an insight from having read your colleagues posting.
i?? a?Offer and support an opinion.
i?? a?Validate an idea with your own experience.
i?? a?Make a suggestion.
i?? a?Expand on your colleagues posting.

Topic: Employee Manipulation and Employee Uniformity
The word manipulation has developed a negative connotation. It is normally seen as a word used to describe unfair behavior towards others. However the definition of Positive Manipulation Theory is a?skillful handling or operation, artful management or controla? (Merriam-Webster, 2013).
According to Zivaljevic (2011) positive manipulation is to facilitate and maintain productive employees, which will benefit both the employee and the organization. It is to assist in developing the can do attitude regardless of the task or situation. Positive manipulation is not about taking advantage or exploiting people for your advantage. Herzbergas Two Factor Theory outlines individualas self-esteem and self-actualization as motivational factors. Manipulation is when we think of a reason why others should do something, then we convince them how right we are. This sometime time goes against the value systems of what people have in place and they disengage.
Manageras today struggle with keeping employees motivated constantly. Gupta (2007) states that human needs are unlimited whereas the means for satisfying them are limited. This suggests that motivation is continuous and dependent on human needs, which comes with limits. We live and work in a diverse society where people from backgrounds, beliefs, values and communication and there is not a one size fit all approach that will be effective. Employees are also at different stages in their lives and they are all motivated by different things depending on where they are in life.
References
Webster, M. (2013). MerriamWebster Dictionary. Retrieved Feb 6, 2014
Zivaljevic, A. (2011). Positive manipulation theory: A Base for Continous Motivation. Management Exchange.

Benito,
Do you agree with this?
(The difference between motivation and manipulation is completely subjective?)
I ask because you bring up the idea that employee motivation is positive but manipulation is not. Arent they really the same thing but with different connotations? Manipulation comes with stigma, but motivation is encouraged. I may not want to complete my homework, but I am motivated to do so because I want to graduate and have a career. Or have I been manipulated by society that I need to have a degree in order to get a worthwhile career?
One page topic: motivation and manipulation
Employee Manipulation and Employee Uniformity

As more managers seek to steer their organizations towards realizing their goals, they tend to require more efforts to be put in by their employees. Employee engagement is the best way in which the management can get the best out of their employees as engaged employees work harder to improve their performance (Dean, 2009). Usually, employee engagement leads to employee motivation since it drives the employees more in to their work and as the results become better, they get motivated to work much harder (Langton, & Robbins, 2007). In some cases however, there is a thin line between employee motivation and manipulation with regard to employee engagement (Dean, 2009). The employees may feel that despite working hard for the organization, their efforts are not being recognized appropriately and they may feel as if they are being manipulated. Managers have to find out how they prevent manipulation in as much as they try to ensure uniformity in their management style.

Langton and Robbins, in their book organizational behavior looked at the issue of employee manipulation in management and stated that a?We should be opposed to the manipulation of individuals for organizational purposes (change), but a degree of social uniformity enables organizations to work better (Langton, & Robbins, 2007).a? I agree with these sentiments because manipulation of employee makes them less motivated in their work and their performance is likely to go down. In as much as employers want their employees to change the way they work from time to time, there has to be a conducive environment for this to take place, where the efforts of each employee are recognized and that each employee is adequately motivated. Employee manipulation is the process of over-engaging employees in their roles and responsibilities so that they work harder to steer the organization forward at the expense of their own motivation, desires and wishes (Levin, 2012). Employers should instead move from manipulating their employees to strategies that ensure employee uniformity in terms of their social nature of the organization. Social uniformity implies that the organization takes in to consideration a lot of things that encourage the social livelihoods of the employees in as much as they strive to give their input in to their tasks as required. The employers should also treat all employees equally and give each of them a chance to be involved in the decision making process by having their views heard and considered (Levin, 2012).

Both employee manipulation and employee uniformity have many implications on the business and its future. Employee manipulation for instance implies that the management does not care about its staff and it is more inclined to the triumph of the organization. Another implication of this is that the employees are being exploited. Employee uniformity on the other hand implies that the organization is ready to invest in its workforce and that it considers its workforce as a resource as opposed to a challenge (Dean, 2009).

Dean, C. (2009). RIMER Managing Successful Change. Australia: Uniforte Pty Ltd.

Langton, N., & Robbins, S. P. (2007). Organizational behavior (4th ed.) Ontario, Canada:

Pearson Canada.
Levin, G. (2012). Embrace and Exploit Change as a Program Manager: Guidelines for Success”.

Project Management Institute.