The Design Technology and Psychological Issues at Work
Technology can have a significant impact on a worker’s psychological well-being. For example, social media platforms have transformed the way people connect with each other at the work place. Whereas technology is very important in the modern workplace and enables workers to communicate instantly, it can also leave en employee feeling cut-off from co-workers, friends and clients. Technology brings forth isolation that stems from lack of personal interaction and eye to eye contact. In other words, the longer a worker stares at the screen, the less time he/she has to make meaningful connections, develop sustainable social networks, and interact in ways the helps with the development of the human brain.
Also, technology brings forth the pressure to finish work faster. The notion that technology should make employees work faster means that some companies start to anticipate higher and a typically unrealistic output from workers. This means that employers fail to factor in the drawbacks of technology. Consequently, this leads to extra pressure, which is a significant risk factor for dissatisfaction and burn out both in the employees’ personal and professional life. Another psychological effect of technology is fatigue and problem focusing. The manner by which workers read on screen leaves one more likely to engage in multitasking and distracted. Further, it has been established that the way a person reads on screens can lead to fatigue and stress in comparison to reading on paper. Finally technology leads to worker impulsivity and concerns about losing the job. Since innovations are used to streamline business processes, human beings are being replaced by machines in some sectors. Therefore, this has ushered in the fear amongst many workers that they will lose they job as technology will make them redundant.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Role of Learning and Training on Work Life
Learning and training plays a big role in increasing workers’ motivation and dedication towards a job. Learning and training are non-monetary incentives that workers thrive upon. It enables employees to feel a unique sense of recognition. Many employees take recognition personally, and it overly contributes to an increase in morale ( Gustavsen, 2011) . Consequently, it leads to higher efficiency in an organization. Non-monetary rewards like training are described as a better cost-effective way of driving productivity in the company as well as gaining a competitive edge over competitors. Employees have different motivations, needs, characteristics and perception that vary from one individual to the other. This may result in individuals reacting differently to non-monetary or monetary rewards depending on their motivators ( Gustavsen, 2011) . Therefore, it is important to understand the psychological motivators in context to clearly distinguish circumstances when non-monetary rewards may be acceptable as opposed to monetary incentives and select the system that would lead to more employee engagement and retention.
Besides, training and development is secret to ensuring that employees realize their full potential and improve on their service delivery. In turn, such improvements would equally translate into organizational profitability in the long run. One of the benefits of improving staff capabilities pertains to its effect in building stronger relationships between managers and operational staff. Moreover, this intervention would improve the employees’ professional knowledge and skills, which would enable them meet the needs of the clients with a higher level of service quality. Further, improving staff capabilities helps in strengthening competitive advantage, which also leads to improvements in business performance. Finally, improving staff capabilities is ideal for the purposes of developing individual characters and professional abilities that enable them to serve customers better.
Reference
Gustavsen, B. (2011). The Nordic model of work organization. Journal of the Knowledge Economy , 2 (4), 463-480.
