Abstract
The business case for investment in training and development is typically hard to make when using a strict return-on-investment approach. When coupled with less quantifiable elements such as job satisfaction and employee commitment, a less obvious but equally vital distinction can be noted as efficiencies improve resulting in a more profitable operation. A recent study of leadership development program outcomes indicated significant changes in the efficacy of participants including, but not limited to, improved job satisfaction and employee commitment. Presented in this chapter, the findings of this phenomenological study indicate the sampled participants reflected significant changes in their connectivity to the organization as a whole and their ability to meet the expectations the company leaders have of participants. Finally, retention rates of participants remained constant and favorable. This chapter concludes with estimations of cost savings incurred by improved organizational culture and retention.
TopBackground
Connections between job satisfaction, commitment to the organization and organizational strategic success have long been purported. Yet the ability to directly link these constructs to one another is challenging enough that few substantial studies of success (or failure) at the firm level exist. Furthermore, studies of success or failure at the work-unit level – while more plentiful – are still not abundant. Nonetheless researchers must push forward to understand and hence articulate the need for organizational leaders to execute plans which engage followers and as such increase employee satisfaction with their roles thus bolstering their organizational commitment. Becker, Huselid, Pickus and Spratt (1997) posited that human resource management practices shaped employees’ attitudes and behaviors which collectively drive operation and financial outcomes. The roles of the leaders – when transformative rather than transactional – become symbiotic with the roles of the followers, the employees. To that theme, leaders are endowed with a sort of responsibility to the individuals whose charge they are given.
Kleinrichert (2007) defines social responsibility, “as a collective moral practice that is a precondition for sustainable business” (p. 4). Kleinrichert acknowledged a number of theories and definitions of social responsibility existed but added “theories include considerations of economic, legal, social, and environmental notions of what a corporation ought to take responsibility and accountability” (2007, p. 4). Additionally, Kleinrichert (2007) suggested human choice as a collective endeavor and corporate community involvement is necessary for a corporation to be successful in the modern economic market place.
As most citizen leaders will work for organizations or corporations, the conception of social responsible dimensions are necessary to determine the totality of a citizen leader. These citizens will practice business in a moral concept of sustainable business; this is a commitment of doing no harm to people, animals, and the environment (Kleinrichert, 2007). Many theories have been developed to define a social responsible organization. The dimensions that define a social responsible organization are:
- 1.
Economic,
- 2.
Legal,
- 3.
Social, and
- 4.
Environmental.
A corporation will take appropriate measures to ensure these dimensions work for the greater good of the local and global community, and will be accountable for the result they incur. Kleinrichert posited that human choice is a collective endeavor, and corporate community involvement is necessary for the multinational corporation to be successful in the global economic market place (2007).
Key Terms in this Chapter
Retention: In employment, the rate at which the currently workforce remains employed with the organization.
Leadership Development: Formal development programs intended to provide theory and application training to individuals whose basic contribution role within an organization is shifting from follower to leader.
Social Responsibility: A collective moral practice that is a precondition for sustainable business”, ( Kleinrichert, 2007 , p. 4).
Organizational Commitment: The degree to which a member identified with and was involved with the organization ( Chun, Shin, Choi & Kim, 2013 ).
Job Satisfaction: “A pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job and job experience” (Locke, 1974 AU46: The in-text citation "Locke, 1974" is not in the reference list. Please correct the citation, add the reference to the list, or delete the citation. ).