Riding on firm-based self-esteem for success

Many of us go through periods in life where our opinions about ourselves fluctuate. If we land a big new client, secure a long meaningful grant, or pass a difficult audit, our self-esteem will usually go up.

Alternatively, if a boss berates our efforts, our department loses money, or we lose key personnel to a competing firm, then often our self-esteem might drop. Self-esteem entails how we view our worth.

But beyond personal self-esteem that might be influenced by our perceived attractiveness, our family structures, or interpersonal relationships, people also hold self-esteem through their workplaces. John Pierce and a team of researchers developed the concept of organisation-based self-esteem. It encompasses the sense of self-worth people feel from their jobs and doing them well.

Much attention has gone into alerting employees when to know that their organisation-based self-esteem is too low and when a new position should be sought.

However, less of a spotlight in the popular business media gets shone on how executives can boost their employees’ organisation-based self-esteem. Executives should care about workers’ feelings of self-worth generated from their jobs.

Social scientists Zhen Chen, Samuel, Aryee, and Cynthia Lee’s research highlights some of the numerous benefits of retaining employees that feel high organisation-based self-esteem.

Employees with high organisation-based self-esteem tend to be more committed to their companies, perform better, boost fellow employees by helping out in extra tasks when needed, and become more conscientious and aware of other employees’ needs on the team.

So, how can managers increase organisation-based self-esteem on their teams?

Bosses should enhance two critical factors: perceived organisation support and team cohesiveness. Primarily, staff need to feel adequately supported by their companies. In employee perception surveys across Kenya, many workers claim that their key performance indicators are not attainable because their organisations do not provide the financial budget, time resources and team staffing to achieve the goals.

A simple example stands as a mountain climber who might be expected to climb steep cliffs, but their employer fails to provide sufficient climbing and safety gear. Receiving tasks and goals without adequate support sinks employees’ organisation-based self-esteem.

Secondary, executives must create cohesive teams to maximise organisation-based self-esteem among their staff. Research shows six steps towards building team cohesiveness. First, teams become more cohesive if they feel that it is difficult to gain entry onto the team. If employees know that for every job opening, over 100 applicants vie for each post, then they will feel better and more unified knowing that it was difficult to get the job.

Universities also try to feel exclusive in an attempt to make their students feel special, unique, and cohesive. Harvard University famously encourages over 37,000 students to apply for only 2,000 spots each year.

Many accuse Harvard of reassuring hopeful prospective students to apply even when the admissions staff know those with lower test scores do not have a chance of admittance. But Harvard’s perceived exclusivity is key to its brand and holding a low 5.3 percent acceptance rate boosts student cohesion. Selectivity works the same way with employees in a firm.

Second, team cohesion increases when the group faces external pressures from outside the team. If other teams in the firm, regulatory attacks, or other challenges come at the team, then groups will see themselves as more of a tight unit and feel more cohesive and dependent on each other.

Higher cohesiveness

Third, when a team feels a sense of success in its performance, then employees experience higher cohesiveness and therefore greater organisation-based self-esteem. So, managers should celebrate successes on a team.

Do not just complain about failures and nitpick trying to find faults with your staff because constantly pointing out errors actually lowers performance instead of enhancing it. Instead look for positive behaviours, attitudes, and outcomes and champion them.

Fourth, managers should remain cognisant of team sizes. Large teams where employees feel lost amongst a crowd of other staff have lower team cohesion. Alternatively, tiny teams where staff feel overworked with no hope of relief also hold lower team cohesion. Executives should ensure medium team sizes and break large groups into sub-teams.

Fifth, the level of member interactions ties in directly with heights of team cohesion. Employees need opportunities to share, interact, and raise opinions beyond simply while undertaking their regular tasks. However, Kenyan employees uniquely do not like forced socialisation. Managers should create spaces and times for organic natural interactions between team members.

Sixth, sadly, groups more similar with each other become more cohesive. However, in today’s modern business environment, we proclaim the effects of team diversity. But, a group of all one ethnicity, religion, age, personality, socio-economic ranking, etc. makes a group work better together because of more similar cultural understanding and more of a feeling of “us” verses “them”. In such situations though, team performance results will be less creative when teams are more similar.

In summary, executives can build more supported and cohesive teams to build great organisation-based self-esteem among its employees that leads to superior company performance outcomes.