Home⇛International Journal of Research in Advanced Studies and Graduate Education⇛vol. 1 no. 1 (2025)

Organizational Empowerment Of Government Employees And It’S Relation To Their Work Performance

Margie Resurrecion

Discipline: human resource management

 

Abstract:

In the competitive landscape of public administration, organizational empowerment is pivotal in fostering proactive, efficient, and high-performing employees. This study examines the relationship between organizational empowerment and work performance among government employees in the Local Government Unit (LGU) of Gonzaga, Cagayan. Utilizing a descriptive-correlational research design, data were gathered from 60 government employees through an Organizational Empowerment Questionnaire and their Individual Performance Commitment and Review Form (IPCRF). The study evaluates three dimensions of empowerment: Dynamic Structural Framework, Control of Workplace Decisions, and Fluidity in Information Sharing. Findings indicate that employees exhibit a high level of empowerment in structural framework and information sharing but only moderate empowerment in workplace decision-making. The analysis further reveals a significant positive correlation between organizational empowerment and work performance (r = 0.650, p < 0.05), suggesting that enhanced empowerment fosters better performance and productivity.



References:

  1. Atkinson, E. (2004). Thinking outside the box: An exercise in heresy. Qualitative inquiry, 10(1), 111-129.
  2. Avolio, B. J., Zhu, W., Koh, W., & Bhatia, P. (2004). Transformational leadership and organizational commitment: Mediating role of psychological empowerment and moderating role of structural distance. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 25(8), 951-968.
  3. Chow, I. H. S., Lo, T. W. C., Sha, Z., & Hong, J. (2006). The impact of developmental experience, empowerment, and organizational support on catering service staff performance. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 25(3), 478-495.
  4. Daniels, K., Beesley, N., Cheyne, A., & Wimalasiri, V. (2008). Coping processes linking the demands-control-support model, affect and risky decisions at work. Human Relations, 61(6), 845-874.
  5. Ghosh, D. (2008). Corporate values, workplace decisions and ethical standards of employees. Journal of Managerial Issues, 68-87.
  6. Kazlauskaite, R., Buciuniene, I., & Turauskas, L. (2012). Organisational and psychological empowerment in the HRM‐performance linkage. Employee Relations.
  7. Lord, R. G., & Emrich, C. G. (2000). Thinking outside the box by looking inside the box: Extending the cognitive revolution in leadership research. The Leadership Quarterly, 11(4), 551-579.
  8. Lutters, W. G., Ackerman, M. S., & Zhou, X. (2007). Group information management. Jones et Teevan (2007b), chapitre, 14, 236-248.
  9. Manzoor, Q. A. (2012). Impact of employees motivation on organizational effectiveness. Business management and strategy, 3(1), 1-12.
  10. Matthews, R. A., Michelle Diaz, W., & Cole, S. G. (2003). The organizational empowerment scale. Personnel Review, 32(3), 297-318.
  11. Renkl, A., & Atkinson, R. K. (2003). Structuring the transition from example study to problem solving in cognitive skill acquisition: A cognitive load perspective. Educational psychologist, 38(1), 15-22.
  12. Riggs, S. A., & Bretz, K. M. (2006). Attachment processes in the supervisory relationship: An exploratory investigation. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 37(5), 558.
  13. Spence Laschinger, H. K., Finegan, J., & Shamian, J. (2002). The impact of workplace empowerment, organizational trust on staff nurses' work satisfaction and organizational commitment. In Advances in health care management (pp. 59-85). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
  14. Ulrich, D., & Smallwood, N. (2004). Capitalizing on capabilities. Harvard business review, 119-128.
  15. Wang, C. L., & Ahmed, P. K. (2003). Structure and structural dimensions for knowledge-based organizations. Measuring Business Excellence, 7(1), 51-62.
  16. Widen-Wulff, G., & Davenport, E. (2007). Activity systems, information sharing and the development of organizational knowledge in two Finnish firms: an exploratory study using Activity Theory. Information Research: An International Electronic Journal, 12(3), n3.
  17. Worley, C. G., & Lawler, E. E. (2010). Agility and organization design: A diagnostic framework. Organizational Dynamics, 39(2), 194-204.

Tools


Copyright © 2025  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic