CONTROLLING ABSENTEEISM

Controlling Absenteeism

Controlling Absenteeism

1. Introduction

Allotment of study has been done on the question of how to reduce absenteeism inside work organisations. Of all the distinct components analyzed, for instance sick-leave pay (Skatun, 2003), former nonattendance (Gellatly and Luchak, 1998), return-to-work policies (Cunningham and James, 2000), work-family policies (Schwatz, 1996), business wellness programmes (Ho, 1997), demographic components, such as age, learning and gender (for a review, glimpse Cuelenaere et al., 1996), and job characteristics (Pousette and Johansson Hanse, 2002), as well as firm pledge (Levin and Kleiner, 1992), personality (Ones et al., 1996) and work ethics (Martocci and Jimeno, 2003; referee and Martocchi, 1996), all appear to have an leverage on absenteeism.

The above-mentioned investigations share a inclination to aim on the one-by-one or the organisational grade, while disregarding means of the assembly level. The absence of written test of means at the group level appears a serious limitation in this locality, because research on intra-group relationships has shown that dissimilarities in insight, mind-set and attitude within a assembly are one of the major sources of intra-group troubles and confrontations (Rubin et al., 1994), and these troubles can be presumed to be associated to absenteeism. Also, in the administration publications, regardless of the boost of organisations with self-managing groups, insufficient vigilance has been granted to the consequences of the assembly on the behaviour of workers (Griffin and Hofmann, 1997; dwelling et al., 1995; Mowday and Sutton, 1993; Rousseau and deep-fried, 2001).

There are, although, some investigations on the connections between characteristics of teams and absenteeism. For example, Van Yperen et al. (1994) discovered evidence for the connection between assembly norms of a group and the absenteeism: the more intolerant these group norms (that is, the more workers within a group share powerful work ethics), the smaller the absenteeism. Gellatly and Luchak (1998) found clues for the relative between (individual) absenteeism and the average grade of nonattendance inside both the direct work assembly and the nonattendance heritage to which they belonged. Results of study by Geurts et al. (1991) on coach drivers display that members of strong cohesive employed assemblies glimpse leaving their colleagues solely as highly undesirable and will, because of this, bypass absenteeism.

Given the above-mentioned study, informal connections between employees inside a group and the group norm of a group appear to have an leverage on absenteeism. The assumption can be made that the casual connections and the assembly norm are associated: the more workers inside a group are informally related to each other, the more powerful the assembly norm will be. The effects of the connection between assembly norm and informal relativeships have not been analyzed in relative to absenteeism; neither has the means by which the casual mesh and group norms lead to a high or reduced absentee rate been analyzed. In this item, we try to improve this situation by connecting the casual connections between workers within a group and the group norm to the absenteeism of workers within an organisation. The research difficulty addressed in this item is formulated ...