Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Performance is a measure of the results achieved. Performance efficiency is the ratio between effort expended and results achieved. The difference between current performance and the theoretical performance limit is the performance improvement zone. Another way to think of performance improvement is to see it as improvement in four potential areas:
Positive organizational behavior (POB) is defined as "the study and application of positively oriented human resource strengths and psychological capacities that can be measured, developed, and effectively managed for performance improvement in today's workplace" (Luthans, 2002a, p. 59). [1]
While virtually all major improvement paradigms in use in the West incorporate some element of visuality, the entire codified set of visual principles and practices, from the foundation of 5S through to visual guarantees (poka-yoke), rests on this definition: "The visual workplace is a self-ordering, self-explaining, self-regulating, and self ...
Performance Metrics and KPIs Performance metrics and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are quantifiable measures used to assess and track productivity. Setting and monitoring these indicators help organizations evaluate their progress toward goals, identify areas for improvement, and make data-driven decisions to enhance productivity.
Work groups – Drawing on the sociotechnical theory and team effectiveness literature, some authors argue that key characteristics of work groups (i.e. composition, interdependence, autonomy, and leadership) can influence the work design of individual team members, although it is acknowledged that evidence on this particular topic is limited.
Reengineering assumes that the factor that limits an organization's performance is the ineffectiveness of its processes (which may or may not be true) and offers no means of validating that assumption. Reengineering assumes the need to start the process of performance improvement with a "clean slate," i.e. totally disregard the status quo.
Affective events theory model Research model. Affective events theory (AET) is an industrial and organizational psychology model developed by organizational psychologists Howard M. Weiss (Georgia Institute of Technology) and Russell Cropanzano (University of Colorado) to explain how emotions and moods influence job performance and job satisfaction. [1]
The first is in relation to the electronic monitoring of performance, which affords the ability to record a huge amount of data on multiple dimensions of work performance. [117] Not only does it facilitate a more continuous and detailed collection of performance data in some jobs, e.g. call centres, but it has the capacity to do so in a non ...