In the labor market, employers have different expectations from the organisational strategy about their employees and the employees have different expectations from their employer. Employers have expectations in reference to their vision of the future of their business and creating a competitive edge in the marketplace for their business through their employees. Employees have changing expectation in reference to the current labor market which is looking at employment levels and rates and wages being awarded. These expectations from the employer’s point of view and the employee’s point of view differ in different communities. This leads to a psychological contract where the employer and employee are able to reach a consensus on their mutual expectations regarding the type and level of input and type of outcome expected. This is only possible with the understanding from both sides.
Employers also expect to have intuitively motivated employees who can use their talents and seek opportunities to advance themselves so as to be more skilled to better their performance ensuring the achievement of their organizational goals. It is also in the employer’s expectation an employee with the capability to individually solve any arising problem in their field of performance without letting them affect their effectiveness and work efficiency so as to reduce the number of excuses that can arise as to why the goals were not achieved. Strategically employers also expect to have a highly technically savvy taskforce and technologically informed employees to counter attack the highly changing market and world. Employers would expect the employees to communicate clearly on matters affecting them so as to enhance quick problem solving and clarity in reliable communication channels. Another expectation of the employer is that his employees be flexible enabling them to blend with the governance structure the employer chooses to use in the organization. Employees are expected to be flexible to be able to work with different levels of pressure (Hawk 119).
The Boomers can also be described as hardworking, committed to their work as well as loyal employees to their organization. Also, they look up on their managers to guide them towards achieving organizational goals. It has also been observed that they are good team players and respect and obey the hierarchy of commands being used at the work setting but are not so technologically informed and are reluctant to embrace change.
Xers and Yers on the other hand seek personal satisfaction and opportunities to advance their skills and knowledge. This category of employees is more self-centered than the Baby Boomers. They are also noted to be flexible when it comes to work and life matters so there is little need for leadership. These people are technologically as well as technically savvy and willingly apply this newly acquired knowledge in their work (McCoy 96).
These differences have been brought about by the different values the two generations went through as they grew up. For the Xers and Yers, they were raised in a society of rapidly changing technology and a lot of information availability unlike the Boomers therefore explaining their different approaches, attitudes and work expectations in the work places
The emerging expectations from employee are changing from the Boomers point of view to the Yers and Xers point of view. The boomers look at the labor market seeking self-entitlement and employment while Yers and Xers seek entrepreneurial opportunities and ownership, the Boomers also seek step by step promotion and money and recognition form of rewards while the Xers and Yers are now seeking quick promotions and later educational rewards. Another emerging difference in expectation is the Boomers look at work advancing opportunities from an authoritative angle so it’s highly competitive but for the Xers and Yers they look for flexibility and therefore it is totally individual. As the boomers look for job security the Xers and Yers are always looking for more challenging jobs to attain their satisfaction.
The expectations from the employers and employees may differ between communities. A study comparing the American and Japanese companies and their expectations is founded on individual behavior and factors boosting job satisfaction being mentally challenging work, awarding staff equally, supportive colleagues and working conditions (Bodie, Mitchell, & Turner 201).
Looking at the type of reward system and which supportive working conditions the employees in America expected from their employers and also what the companies in America expect from their employees. The reward system based rewarding system on merit and is based on some variables like individuals ability on communication skills, individual’s level of creativity, availability or attendance on duty and the capacity to complete the responsibilities on time. The companies compared these variables among coworkers of the same group leading to a completion and award the best performing employee in the previous year. On the other hand job satisfaction was brought about by employees’ expectations being met in different ways. Salary increment was not one of them but in a variety of other factors like performing more mentally challenging jobs, being given the freedom to make individual decisions in the work setting concerning your responsibility and having to work flexibly. The promotion opportunities were easily available but only for those who were found aggressive, and were also talented in their areas of performance and very skillful technically. It is easy for them to climb up the corporate ladder. It is also easy for a company to let go of employees who are not enjoying their work and can easily find other employees to fill the vacancy.
When it comes for the Japanese companies they conducted their reward systems differently from the way the American companies did since it was not based on personal performances but to the overall corporate performance. They did not recognize individual expertise or skillfulness. It also did not matter how much contribution one made into the course, how highly visible the project or how smart they were they were all treated the same way and were recognized equally. No special awards or recognition is given to any individual for their action but it was awarded to the whole group in the same level. The Japanese companies were only focusing wholly on the organisational success while promotions were only based on individual seniority in the companies. The Japanese companies did not appreciate valuable qualities by individuals i.e. being ambitious, a risk taker, and independent especially in the companies which strictly used the Japanese culture decision making as well as group cooperation. It is considered so disappointing when one works hard and then his colleagues receive his pay and recognition from his sacrifice unlike the American.
Another observation is that the Japanese employees were not sensitive towards the fact that some would work less than others and others working harder. They seemed to be very committed to the companies since the companies provided lifetime employment to them and all the employees were equally important. The companies also was put ahead of family needs and so in turn the companies extended its gratitude by taking care of the staff families hence employees were not distracted from their responsibilities due to family issues. This has raised the standards of the society and the country at large hence earning the country a competitive advantage. Individuals in Japan focus their success on a vertical intergration setting from the country downwards instead of individual achievement. The Japanese companies pay attention to team success while the American companies paid attention to the individual success and reward and their employees had more expectations like salary increment, promotions over their coworkers if they do better but when the company fails to recognize them accordingly they look for a company that will appreciate them accordingly.
The difference in the two countries is in the reward systems. American companies reward for individual performances while the Japanese companies reward for teams success. Coming from an American company one would really find it hard to work in a Japanese company since they would never find the same level of satisfaction in an American company (McCoy 105).
The Japanese companies embrace the Equity theory where they ensure that its employees perceive that job satisfaction is from the equal level of input into the job and what is being received in the workplace. The Japanese employees perceive the companies as more than just mere employers but are more loyal and committed. The equity theory is still applicable but it is the employees’ social expectation that differs.
Another big difference in the American and Japanese companies is their bussiness philosophies of management. The Japanese philosophy is built in the Japanese culture which brings out another philosophy that looks at living same as management. The passive Japanese mannerism and attitude was attributed to Buddhism. Confucianism is the basis for the philosophy pledging loyalty to the superior that managed and controlled the companies and structures in the society. This philosophy gave rise to the contemporary Japan (Amar 89).
Things have been changing in both communities Japan and America. The Japanese employees have increased mobility since the world competition has also increased and so for the Japanese to remain at a competitive advantage they have to move to some third world countries. The Yen has also fluctuated greatly and the employees’ wages have been raised. This is greatly challenging since they cannot guarantee lifelong employment and cater for the losses during the low peak seasons in the growth periods.
The American economy is also facing several changes and they companies cannot offer job securities and are downsizing so as to remain competitive. It is better to get and remain educated and continually improve technical skills since just hardworking, skilled and intelligent employee is no longer enough. Employees need portable and flexible skills and a lot of hard works since the employees are expected to adjust as the companies do but they are not guaranteed of the future (Amar 91).
In conclusion the psychological contract is based on the communities’ values, believes and culture since employees from different communities have different expectation from their employers and employers from different communities have different expectations from their employees pertaining the achievement of the objectives in the organisational strategy. However it’s advised for the employers to base recognition on work well performed and however employees also need to keep improving their skills to match up the rapidly changing labor market.
WORKS CITED
Barbara, Hawk. What Employers Really Want. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1998. Print.
Zvi, Bodie , Mitchell,Olivia & Turner, John. Security Employer-Based Pensions: An
International
Perspective (Pension Research council Publications).Philadelphia:
University of
Pennsylvania, 1996. Print
Thomas, McCoy. Creating an “Open Book” Organization: Where employees Think & Act Like
Business partners. New York: AMACOM, 1996. Print
A.D , Amar. Japan v. USA: Ability to make tough decisions.(Editorial):An Article
from:Mid-Atlantic Journal of Business. New Jersey: Stillman School of Business, 2005.
Print.
