Employee empowerment and team performance Autonomy, responsibility, information, and creativity Seung-Bum Yang Department of Public Administration, Konkuk University, Seoul, South Korea, and Sang Ok Choi Center for Public Administration and Policy, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA Abstract Purpose ��� The purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of employee empowerment on team performance in the context of municipal work teams. Four different dimensions of employee empowerment are identified: autonomy, responsibility, information, and creativity. Design/methodology/approach ��� Using a survey of 176 US municipal government employees, this study conducted an OLS multiple regression analysis. The study regressed the dependent variable, team performance, on the four independent variables: autonomy, responsibility, information, and creativity. Findings ��� The regression analysis provided empirical evidence in support of the four hypotheses proposed in this study. The study reveals that autonomy, responsibility, information, and creativity each have positive and significant effects on team performance. Practical implications ��� The study suggests that employee empowerment programs should consider different dimensions of empowerment. At least, managers need to keep in mind the four dimensions of empowerment discussed in this research. Understanding different dimensions of empowerment will enable managers to design and implement a successful empowerment program. Originality/value ��� Prior research focused on developing conceptual models of the multiple dimensions of empowerment. This paper took one step further and provided empirical evidence. Keywords Empowerment, Team performance, Employees, Managers, United States of America Paper type Research paper Introduction Researchers have defined empowerment in at least two ways: the situational approach and the psychological approach (Conger and Kanungo, 1988). On one hand, the situational approach concerns passing power from higher-level management to employees by involving them in decision making. This approach is also known as relational or management practice approach. On the other hand, the psychological approach puts less emphasis on delegation of decision-making. Instead, this approach stresses motivational processes in workers. The psychological approach views empowerment as various psychological cognitions that contribute to enhanced intrinsic motivation. The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/1352-7592.htm Empowerment and team performance 289 Received May 2008 Revised October 2008 Accepted November 2008 Team Performance Management Vol. 15 No. 5/6, 2009 pp. 289-301 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 1352-7592 DOI 10.1108/13527590910983549

Proponents of the psychological approach of empowerment have criticized that the situational approach underestimates the psychological value of employee empowerment. According to Kay et al. (2008), the situational approach is a dilemma for managers as its success depends on their ability to reconcile the loss of control with the need for goal congruence. They also point out that the situational approach failed to address the cognitive state of employees. Simply sharing or delegating power to subordinates does not necessarily ensure employees��� state of mind to work hard and increase productivity. Conger and Kanungo (1988) argue that ���delegating or resource sharing is only one set of conditions that may (but not necessarily) enable or empower subordinates��� (p. 474) and criticize that the situational approach ���does not adequately address the nature of empowerment as experienced by subordinates��� (p. 472). While the emphasis of the situational approach is to delegate powers and resources, the psychological approach more focuses on enhancing employees��� feelings. This article focuses on the psychological perspective of employee empowerment. Using a national survey of municipal government employees, the study explores empirical evidence regarding the question how different dimensions of empowerment affect team performance. This study is important in that it tests an empirical model about the relationship between employee empowerment and performance. Previous research has focused on qualitative research, not quantitative research (e.g. Olshfski and Cunningham, 1998 Peters and Pierre, 2002 Petter et al., 2002). Another important contribution is that it focuses on the study of work team. Researchers have not made previous attempts to investigate the effect of empowerment on performance in the work team context. This research will contribute understanding the effect of employee empowerment on performance in the work team context. Historical development of employee empowerment In the USA, the first formal study of empowerment dates back to Mary Parker Follett���s management ideas. She distinguished between ���power-with��� and ���power-over��� and suggested the process of integration to increase power-with while decreasing power-over. She argued that by integrating desires the necessity of gaining power could be reduced. Then, the basis of such integration could be found in circular not linear behavior. Circular behavior is an interactive influence among individuals in an organization. Follett wrote: If your business is so organized that you can influence a co-manager while he is influencing you, so organized that a workman has an opportunity of influencing you as you have of influencing him if there is an interactive influence going on all the time between you, power-with may be built up. Throughout history we see that control brings disastrous consequences whenever it outruns integration. (Tonn, 2003, p. 405). Chester Barnard (1968) followed Follett���s major themes. Barnard rejected previous management theories focused on ���individualism.��� He argued cooperation is the essence of formal organization. The survival of an organization mainly depends on cooperation. Thus, Barnard argues that the essential executive function is to maintain dynamic equilibrium between the needs of the organization and the needs of its employees. The human relations movement had a great impact on employee empowerment. The main focus of the human relations movement is on the human and social dimensions of work. While Follett (1926) was one of the first to focus on human TPM 15,5/6 290