field review

Improving employee
performance by
developing empowering
leaders & companies
Bradley Kirkman, Gilad Chen, & John Mathieu

abstract 1

Empowerment has been a buzzword in many companies for decades,

and research shows that empowerment enhances individual, team,
and company performance. In practice, though, empowerment
programs often fail. People who institute the programs frequently have
a narrow understanding of what empowerment is, and this limited view
probably helps to account for the failures. Drawing on several decades
of organizational-science research, we provide a more useful, robust
definition of empowerment and describe obstacles that company leaders
and other employees can throw in the path of empowerment initiatives.
We then provide empirically driven, practical recommendations for
overcoming the obstacles and for otherwise enhancing employee
empowerment, such as having leaders model empowerment and
changing the company climate to align with more empowering policies
and procedures.

Kirkman, B., Chen, G., & Mathieu, J. (2020). Improving employee performance by devel-
oping empowering leaders & companies. Behavioral Science & Policy, 6(1), 23–36.

a publication of the behavioral science & policy association 23

 I
t would be difficult, if not impossible, to wanted to empower the company’s sewing
be in any organization today and not hear plant employees in Texas and Tennessee in
references to the importance of empower- the 1990s. Their intentions were good: They
ment. Indeed, many employees expect to be wanted to reduce the monotony of doing
empowered. 1 In essence, employees are said the same tasks every day and to decrease
to be empowered when they believe that they repetitive-stress injuries. In the new scheme,
can exercise great control over work that they employees would be able to choose different
consider worthwhile. 2,3 Imagine, for example, tasks to do on their own in their team, made
w a woman we will call Anna, who works for a possible by the training they received to do a
tech firm and is responsible for making sure greater variety of tasks compared with what
Core Findings her clients are satisfied with their software they received in the old system. The results
purchases. As an empowered employee, she were disastrous: Productivity plummeted
What is the issue? would have a lot of discretion in handling this and costs increased. Consultants brought
While empowerment task: For example, she might have the authority in to remedy the situation told the company
has become increasingly
to bring in additional resources to troubleshoot it would need to build a new empower-
important to an
organization’s goals and software problems without having to consult ment program from scratch. In our view, the
effectiveness, programs any higher level managers. As a result of Anna company made the common mistake of not
that are designed to being able to do her job efficiently, she would taking the necessary steps to change from a
produce empowered
individuals, teams, likely get repeat business from her clients, which traditional structure to an empowered one. For
and firms often fail to would be good for the company and would example, supervisors were not trained on how
yield expected results. reinforce Anna’s sense of being capable and to be coaches and facilitators rather than just
Translating empowerment
skilled. She would also feel good about making bosses. When employees reached out for help,
into practicable and
effective interventions her customers happy. they were reportedly told by their supervisors,
is therefore critical to “Y’all are empowered, y’all decide.” 7
organizational success.
More than 30 years of organizational science
research supports the value of empowerment Another reason empowerment programs often
How can you act?
Selected recommendations for individual employees, teams, and organiza- fail may be that the concept of empowerment
include: tions overall.4 The more empowered employees means different things to different people.
1) Focusing on all four are, the more likely it is that they will be satisfied Because the word power is embedded within
of the dimensions of
empowerment—autonomy, with their jobs, freer from stress, committed to empowerment, many managers and employees
impact, competence, their companies, effective in performing their alike assume that it simply means transferring
and meaningfulness— responsibilities, helpful to other coworkers, and power—that employees take on some aspects
when preparing
employees for change
able to contribute creative and innovative ideas of their managers’ responsibilities and control.
2) Providing direct feedback to their teams and organizations. These benefits Yet programs based on this narrow definition
to employees about how occur across a variety of industries, occupa- seem unlikely to produce the desired effects.
their ideas and suggestions
tions, and geographic regions.
were received by higher
level managers and Empowerment is much more than simply dele-
how their ideas actually Research has also shown that when leaders gating or transferring power from management
got implemented. empower entire teams rather than just individ- to employees.8 In this article, we spell out the
uals, teams perform better and team members more comprehensive definition of empower-
Who should take
are more satisfied.4–6 These effects hold up ment that behavioral scientists have adopted,
the lead?
Researchers and across various types of teams—such as produc- and we explain why knowing this definition is
organizational leaders tion teams, project teams, and management important for designing effective programs.
teams. The larger and more complex the team We point out various obstacles to successfully
is, the stronger the empowerment effect is. implementing empowerment programs, provide
suggestions for overcoming those obstacles,
The evidence for these effects is over- and lay out concrete steps that organizations
whelming. And yet programs that aim to and supervisors can take to build a climate that
produce empowerment often fail to achieve promotes empowerment and trust. We also
the expected benefits. For example, execu- offer advice on how companies can reinvigo-
tives at Levi Strauss & Co., the clothing maker, rate their empowerment programs over time

24 behavioral science & policy | volume 6 issue 1 2020

for sustained success and avoid the many issues reluctant to take the risks to achieve the stretch
that plagued Levi Strauss. goals that many organizations value today.

The last dimension is meaningfulness, or the

Employee Empowerment Is extent to which people personally care about
Actually Four Things, Not One the work they do. 3 Clearly, different people
Behavioral scientists consider empowerment find various tasks more or less meaningful, and
to be an umbrella term that contains four one could say that meaning at work is in the
distinct but related dimensions. One is the eye of the beholder. A good example of mean-
power-transfer aspect that everyone thinks of ingful work might be that done by a pediatric
first: autonomy, or the extent to which people cardiac surgeon, as saving the lives of children
have control over carrying out their work. 3 every day would provide the type of transcen-
A customer service representative with low dent meaning most of us could only dream
autonomy would have little authority over how about. Whatever the case, individuals who
he or she handled complaints. In contrast, find what they do to be personally meaningful
a customer service representative with high will often have a very high level of dedication
autonomy, like Anna, would have great latitude and persistence because of the fulfillment that
in making sure customers are satisfied, such as comes with performing tasks that are important
by being able to issue credits or provide an addi- to them. In fact, research has shown that mean-
tional product or service within reason.9 ingfulness is a powerful driver of employee
motivation and performance.10
The second dimension is impact, or the extent
to which an individual’s work is perceived as In summary, employees are said to be empow-
making a difference in a company. 3 A soft- ered when they believe that they have autonomy
ware engineer who does low-impact work may in their day-to-day work, think their work has
handle a very small piece of code and never fully an impact on an organization, feel competent
realize how this code allows a software product at handling their responsibilities, and find their
to function more effectively. An engineer who job to be personally meaningful.4 Of course, a
does high-impact work might be responsible for person could conceivably experience the four
introducing code at various points in a software dimensions to different degrees, but research
product’s life cycle, thereby easily grasping how suggests that most individuals, when surveyed,
his or her work ultimately has a significant influ- score equally high or low across all the
ence on the overall functioning of the product. dimensions.4
When people see how the tasks they perform
actually matter to the larger organizational The view of empowerment we have described
mission and to people inside or outside the borrows heavily from research on motiva-
company, they tend to be much more motivated tion. For example, the importance of impact
to go the extra mile. and meaningfulness is described in research
on the influential job-characteristics model,
The third dimension is competence, or the which posits that redesigning jobs in certain
extent to which people believe they can carry ways—for example, by giving people greater
out their work skillfully.3 A medical technician in variety in the tasks they perform—helps people
a hospital might be given additional responsibil- feel more motivated, which in turn leads to
ities for various aspects of patient care without better job performance and greater job satis-
the requisite training and development critical faction.11 The competence dimension is based
to successfully completing the assigned tasks. largely on Albert Bandura’s classic research
Conversely, another technician might spend six on self-­e fficacy, which proposed that when
months shadowing a more seasoned colleague people feel more confident about the tasks
and then be given responsibility for a broader they are doing, they will perform better than
array of patient-care tasks. If people do not feel those who feel less confident. 12 However, the
competent at what they do, they will likely be forest is as important as the trees here. Using

a publication of the behavioral science & policy association 25

“we showed that autonomy is partnerships with outside companies, hiring
consultants, or restructuring their organiza-

a necessary but not sufficient tions. Also, empowerment can be a powerful

tool for organizations, but it requires employees

condition for empowerment”

to be ready and willing to take on more
authority and responsibility and organizations
to be ready and willing to support them.

several statistical analyses, researchers have We next describe common barriers to

consistently demonstrated that overall unitary successful empowerment and then offer advice
empowerment (a measure assessing all four for overcoming the obstacles. See Figure 1
dimensions together) explains organizationally for an overview of the benefits of empow-
valued outcomes much more powerfully than ering employees and how to achieve such
do any of the dimensions alone.4 That finding empowerment.
means that rather than studying the dimensions
in isolation, researchers interested in empower-
ment should bring all four dimensions together Obstacles to Successful
to explain the factors that enhance individual Empowerment Programs
and collective performance. Thus, the explana-
tory power of empowerment requires thinking Barriers Posed by Employees
of the concept as a gestalt: all four dimensions Sometimes the employees themselves are the
are intertwined and feed off of one another reason that empowerment efforts do not work
to achieve their effects on organizational well. They may resist taking on a broader set of
outcomes. responsibilities because they lack the needed
knowledge and skills or do not want to handle
The importance of these interactions helps to increased demands and stress. Also, employees
explain why a focus on autonomy alone—and may object to assuming greater responsibility
use of the terms autonomy and empower- if the change does not come with a corre-
ment interchangeably—is misguided. 8 Giving sponding increase in salary or a promotion.
people complete control over a job that they Although doing more with less has become a
find boring, routine, and meaningless is not mantra in today’s hypercompetitive business
empowering. Indeed, empowered teams are world, employees will likely view such increases
more likely to enhance their productivity when in responsibility without a commensurate
they are performing complex tasks, because increases in compensation or status as unfair.15
this type of work is more likely to result in There are, however, cultural differences in
feelings of competence and a sense of mean- employees’ reactions to empowerment efforts.
ingfulness and impact. 13 When we compared In countries where citizens place less emphasis
the effects of autonomy alone against the on status and hierarchy in society and orga-
effects of multidimensional empowerment nizations, such as the United States and other
on a variety of team outcomes (such as team Western countries, employees often are more
productivity and customer service), we found motivated by empowerment programs.16
that multidimensional empowerment resulted
in better outcomes. In other words, we showed Barriers Posed by Leaders
that autonomy is a necessary but not sufficient Too often leaders (that is, managers at
condition for empowerment.14 various levels) sabotage their own efforts at
empowering those around them, in some
Empowerment should not be viewed as a cases because they do not know how to be
panacea for all organizational needs, and it is empowering. A sweet spot exists for empow-
not the only intervention that produces desired erment initiatives, and missing that target, by
outcomes. In specific situations, compa- either underempowering or overempowering
nies may achieve better results by forming employees, is a common mistake.

26 behavioral science & policy | volume 6 issue 1 2020

Figure 1. Barriers to empowerment, actions that promote it, & potential benefits

Leader Barriers to Empowering Actions Positive Effects on

Empowerment Employees
• Micromanagement/ By leaders: • Greater job satisfaction
macromanagement • Role model empowerment • Higher company
• Leaders are • Encourage participative commitment
threatened by their decisionmaking • Lower job strain
empowered • Provide effective coaching • Better job performance
employees
• Share important and strategic • More helpful to coworkers
• Leaders do not fully EMPOWERMENT
information • Increased creativity
understand how to Employee/teams believe
empower • Display a high level of concern they have • Enhanced innovation
and caring
• Autonomy
• Impact
By company:
• Competence
• Create a supportive
• Meaningfulness
Company Barriers to organizational climate for
Empowerment empowerment Positive Effects on Teams
• Bureaucratic • Provide a high level of • Greater team member job
obstacles organizational support satisfaction
Employee Barriers to
• Constraints of the • Make sure employees feel that Empowerment • Higher team performance
job or role their company trusts them
• Not equipped to
handle increased
responsibility
• Will resist if not paid
more
• Some countries'
cultures discourage
empowerment

Note. The actions recommended for leaders and companies are meant to overcome barriers to empowerment as well as promote it in other ways. Failure to
overcome the barriers will lessen employee empowerment.

A prime example of underempowering One of the most significant impediments to

employees is micromanagement: After employees’ reaching high levels of empower-
encouraging subordinates to take on more ment occurs when leaders fear losing power
responsibility, leaders sometimes end up closely and control and thus do not engage in the
monitoring the employees and making them process enthusiastically. Managers might feel
feel overly constrained.8 Instead, leaders have to threatened by empowered employees, believing
delegate appropriately and trust their employees that power is a zero-sum game.18 If they fear
to behave in ways that are beneficial to the that empowering their employees means losing
organization. Conversely, leaders may delegate power themselves, they may be reluctant to
responsibility and authority without providing engage. Or they may not want their employees
needed coaching or guidance. (Remember the to outshine them in performing their newfound
Levi Strauss supervisors’ response to employee responsibilities. 8,19 In truth, empowerment
questions: “Y’all are empowered, y’all decide.” 7) programs help maintain and increase the pipe-
This mistake is sometimes referred to as macro- line of leaders in companies, because low-level
management17 and is just as bad as retaining too employees have a chance to prove themselves
much control. by taking on greater responsibility.

Empowerment does not mean relinquishing In a related worry, leaders may reason that if
all leadership responsibilities; employees need low-level employees are doing manager-level
to know the limits of their authority. When work, then upper management might conclude
leaders fail to set clear expectations for what that midlevel managers are unnecessary. Yet
employees are supposed to take on, the results managers who give more power, responsi-
can be disastrous for both leaders and their bility, and authority to their employees can
subordinates. focus on more appropriate leadership tasks

a publication of the behavioral science & policy association 27

 and actually gain more power. In many compa- Thus far, we have argued that empowerment,
nies, managers’ demonstrating the ability to when effectively implemented, helps indi-
empower their employees effectively is viewed viduals, teams, and organizations be more
as a critical stepping stone toward promotion. successful. And we have identified a number of
challenges that companies face when trying to
The science–practice gap, as behavioral scien- implement or expand empowerment programs.
tists call it, is another barrier to successful How can managers overcome these barriers? In
empowerment programs. Managers may not general, leaders need to ensure that employees
be aware of the research on empowerment in are ready, willing, and able to fully engage in
organizations, or they may not keep up with an empowerment program. Further, organi-
recent findings. They also may not have any zations should teach managers how to model
exposure to or experience with empowerment empowerment4,21 and establish empowering
practices. 20 As noted above, some managers organizational structures.4 Fuller advice follows.
still believe that empowerment means only one
thing: giving power away. They do not recognize
that increased autonomy needs to be accom- Recommended
panied by greater impact, competence, and Practices for Enhancing
$8 billion is spent on
diversity training annually
meaningfulness, which collectively can enable Empowerment Programs
employees to create more value for themselves,
their leaders, and their company as a whole. Guidelines for Preparing Employees
Empowerment programs should focus on
Barriers Posed by Organizations all four of the dimensions of empower-
Empowerment programs should be aligned ment—autonomy, impact, competence, and
with the overall mission and culture of the meaningfulness—when preparing employees
organization and with the specifics of a job’s for change. These components have value:
requirements. Achieving this alignment can be A study published in Harvard Business Review
Over 30 years
tricky in organizations that have bureaucratic reported that 90% of workers would take a pay
empowerment has been
recognized as a positive obstacles or when specific jobs come with rigid cut to do more meaningful work. 22 As noted,
for organizations protocols, such as those that ensure safety. For employees will need additional training and
instance, restrictive policies, procedures, and development to take on increased authority
rules may pose limits on employees, acting and responsibility. This might mean internal
freely and relying on their own discretion. We training for expanded jobs or external lead-
saw this effect firsthand when working with a ership development programs that focus on
U.S. government court system. Bureaucratic and enhancing the skills needed to influence others.
legal constraints, which could not be bypassed, Some employees may find empowerment
50% of US organizations impeded our attempts to help managers fully intellectually taxing and emotionally stressful,
are expected to offer empower their employees. Employees who particularly in the beginning. Ensuring that
implicit bias training
in the future were promised more decisionmaking lati- coaching and counseling are provided can help
tude and responsibility found themselves support employees through the transition. And,
thwarted by restrictive policies and rules, and if the transition occurs without an immediate
they actually experienced more frustration and increase in pay or a title change for employees,
disappointment than they would have if they employees need to hear from their managers
were never promised any empowerment at about how their new roles will lead to long-term
all. Indeed, researchers have shown that using gains in visibility and impact, which should, in
empowerment-­ related practices for highly turn, lead to future job advancement.
constrained jobs can backfire, resulting in lower
employee motivation: employees whose tasks Effective models of organizational change have
do not require problem solving actually become some common themes, such as making sure
less satisfied when they are given responsibility employees recognize the need for change,
for managing their own work.13 being specific about what the change will entail,

28 behavioral science & policy | volume 6 issue 1 2020

“leaders must let go of any fears they have about losing control
over the decisionmaking process”

encouraging buy-in for the change, and having How Leaders Can Facilitate Empowerment
the appropriate structures and resources in Be a Role Model. The conventional manage-
place to sustain and reinforce the change. 23 At ment wisdom to “walk the talk” is supported
the onset of the transition, as we noted earlier, by research on leader behavior that fosters
leaders and employees alike need to be ready, empowerment.4,29 Leaders who are themselves
willing, and able to implement empowerment empowered and who show dedication and
programs. What can be done to prepare people diligence can inspire their employees to make
for the programs? similarly strong efforts and to feel good about
being empowered. For example, if managers
• Ready. It is critical to communicate the model empowerment by taking on more
reasons why empowerment is needed. 24 responsibility without expecting or receiving a
new title and a higher salary, they may inspire
• Willing. Research has shown that employees’ employees to do the same without resentment.
willingness to commit to organizational There is also tremendous power in leaders,
changes that increase empowerment—which sharing their own empowerment journeys
they may view as threatening—depends on with their employees. Indeed, storytelling is an
being convinced that the change is neces- important way that managers can instill a sense
sary and legitimate and that the employees of confidence in their employees. Employees
will be supported. 25 can see empowerment in action and trust that
their leader really does want them to undertake
• Able. Quite often, empowerment is part of a similar journey.8
a larger suite of human resource programs
referred to as high-performance work Encourage Participative Decisionmaking.
systems (HPWS). HPWS are designed to staff Most leaders have probably heard about the
the organization with capable employees advantages of letting employees have a say in
that fit the organization’s mission and culture decisions that managers ultimately make. In
and to provide employees with the informa- this case, conventional wisdom lines up nicely
tion and discretion necessary to capitalize on with the behavioral science research. When
their capabilities and commitment.26 Because employees have input; when they feel listened
empowered employees will take on new and to, respected, and valued; and when they believe
additional duties, they require training and they have a voice, they will experience higher
support. 27 levels of empowerment and, in turn, will perform
better and have higher job satisfaction. 30,31 The
In one example of the importance of enabling most important thing about employee partici-
employees to take on new responsibilities, John pation in decisionmaking, however, is to make
Mathieu (one of the authors of this article) and sure that employee input is truly heard, consid-
his colleagues in 2006 described a successful ered, and, when appropriate, acted on. Little is
empowerment program that involved a large more demotivating to employees than a leader’s
network of service technicians. The organization going through the motions of taking sugges-
moved from a model in which individual techni- tions or holding employee roundtables and then
cians completed work orders assigned to them not implementing any employee-­ g enerated
by their supervisors to one in which geograph- ideas. Leaders can enhance the process of
ically assigned teams managed their own work participative decisionmaking by providing direct
assignments. In addition, team technicians were feedback to employees about how their ideas
collectively responsible for outcomes. 28 and suggestions were received by higher-­level

a publication of the behavioral science & policy association 29

 managers and how their ideas actually got because it allows people to see the big picture
implemented. 32 Further, leaders must let go and the struggles of an organization and clar-
of any fears they have about losing control ifies how individual efforts connect to the
over the decisionmaking process; otherwise, greater whole.
such concerns could short-circuit employee
participation. Display Concern & Caring. Leaders must attend
to their relationships with empowered workers.
Provide Coaching. To be able to take respon- Solid evidence shows that high-quality rela-
sibility for making good decisions on their tionships between managers and employees
own, employees will need coaching and clear correlate with a host of positive outcomes for
communication from their leaders. How do the organizations, such as better job performance,
employees’ roles and responsibilities contribute greater organizational commitment, and higher
to the larger purpose of the group or company? job satisfaction, as well as lower intentions
What does a successful result look like? How to quit. 34 And when employees feel that their
can they get help with their expanded responsi- leaders have their best interests at heart and will
bilities? How much should they keep the leader take the time to understand their individual situ-
in the loop? And how much authority do they ations, they are much more likely to experience
actually have?8 Leaders who add responsibilities high levels of empowerment.8 Such behavior
without providing such coaching and support— could also help to offset some of the discomfort
that is, leaders who macromanage—can cause employees feel when they are taking on new
empowerment programs to dissolve into mass responsibilities. Of course, relationship building
confusion and failure. Likewise, leaders who are takes time, and the process and duration will
heavy-handed and end up coaching by micro- vary with the personalities of the individuals
managing also diminish any true employee involved. Nevertheless, managers who are
empowerment experiences. Thus, establishing inclined to eschew small talk with employees
expectations very early in the empower- as a waste of time would do well to reconsider
ment process is key for long-term success.18,33 that view, because small talk can be a valuable
Effective coaching can also help to overcome component of relationship building.
employee resistance, especially for those who
feel uncomfortable taking on unfamiliar roles. Summary. These five leadership behaviors might
Leaders may need to provide extra coaching be viewed simply as good overall leadership
when difficult assignments and challenges arise, practices. We do not disagree. All these actions
but they must do so without taking over. would be expected to advance employees’ well-
being irrespective of empowerment. Even so,
Share Strategic Information. Expanded the practices are critical for enabling employees
employee responsibilities should come with to become empowered and for empowerment
greater access to big-picture information. When programs to be successful. Leaders who fail to
employees know more about how their role undertake any of these behaviors can hamper
fits in with the overall goals of their organiza- the success of their companies’ empowerment
tion, they are more likely to feel that their work efforts. As noted, plenty of research supports
has impact and is meaningful. Remember that the view that leaders who exhibit the five behav-
many employees would trade a higher salary iors described in this section increase employee
for greater meaningfulness at work;22 this fact empowerment, and we encourage leaders to
underscores the value of sharing strategic infor- stay abreast of this research so as to continue to
mation. Leaders should be as open as possible close the science–practice gap.8
about where the company is headed, how its
strategy is working (or not working), and how How Organizations Can Increase
employee efforts contribute to these high- Employee Empowerment
level objectives.8 Having open forums in which In addition to steps that individual leaders can
employees get a chance to ask questions is key, take to enhance employee empowerment,

30 behavioral science & policy | volume 6 issue 1 2020

actions at higher levels of the organization are practices and providing employees with the
needed as well, to reinforce leader behavior. freedom to innovate.37,38

Create a Supportive Climate. Every organi- Provide High-Level Organizational Support.

zation has a culture—shared norms, values, For employees to feel truly empowered, they
and beliefs—that create an overall climate in must believe that their company wants them
which employees function. Organizational to be empowered, cares about their well-
climates may need to be modified to promote being, and has their best interests at heart.4 This
empowerment company-wide.4 Make sure that kind of support is particularly important when
empowering leadership practices are instituted employees are expected to take risks or when
as broadly as possible throughout the company.8 they are asked to accomplish objectives and
Although some work has shown that managers tasks that they have not handled before or that
who excel at empowering employees can they are trying to do in a new way. They need
compensate for less-empowering managers, 35 to feel safe enough to think outside of the box
we still advocate for trying to avoid isolated without fear that their ideas will be summarily
pockets of poor practice. Employees often dismissed.8,39 The organization must have struc-
move between different teams or divisions of a tures in place to support employees’ risk-taking
company, and ideally they would feel supported behaviors. The HPWS mentioned earlier are an
everywhere. Achieving an organization-­wide example of such a structure. They emphasize
empowering climate takes more effort than just recruitment and selection of employees and
making sure all managers individually display leaders who are ready and willing to be empow-
appropriate leadership behavior. The leaders ered, and they provide appropriate training
must work together collectively to promote for those employees. In addition, HPWS offer
empowerment for all employees.8 Supportive rewards for engaging in empowerment prac-
organizational climates will also help to over- tices. Indeed, research on HPWS has described
come the barriers to empowerment that are a climate of support and shown that employees
associated with bureaucratic obstacles, poli- feel that their firms empower them.32,40
cies, and procedures. If leaders have the leeway
to break down burdensome practices—for Cultivate Trust. Employees also need to know
example, a multilevel approval process—then that their company trusts them with having the
employees can exercise their judgment and take authority and responsibility to act in empow-
more responsibility for their actions. Likewise, ered ways.4 We distinguish trust from support
overly restrictive rules can constrain employees’ because simply wanting one’s employees to
decisionmaking and thus their autonomy. be empowered and giving them more freedom
and discretion is not a strong enough emotional
A popular case study in the organizational foundation. It is when employees truly know
research literature describes an empower- that their company is going to trust them to do
ment program in an oil refinery, where both the right thing that they can exercise their newly
organizational policies and job requirements empowered status.4 Trust should help to create
did not, at first glance, appear to be a good fit positive gain spirals or feed-forward loops of
for employee empowerment because of the empowerment, because each time an employee
constraints posed by safety protocols. 36 The takes a higher level action and receives positive
case study features a manager who taught feedback, the employee will feel more empow-
employees the steps required for solving prob- ered to take on the next challenge. Employee
lems and then expected them to make good empowerment improves performance; in turn,
decisions, which they eventually did. Health better performance allows for higher levels
care is another tightly regulated and high-­ of empowerment. 8 Such positive spirals can
consequence work environment. In these have exponentially more positive effects for
settings, empowerment programs must strike employees and their organizations. A high level
a balance between adhering to standardized of trust from companies is necessary to make

a publication of the behavioral science & policy association 31

“employees who feel that they to aspects that are not working, it will stagnate
and become less relevant. Building in planned

are not empowered are likely reviews and expected revisions helps to instill a
continuous improvement culture and paves the
way for revitalization efforts.
to be less productive and
A flexible, successful empowerment program
less satisfied” can have benefits beyond improved operation
of a company: It can serve as a foundation for
other human resource programs. For instance,
sure employees know that they can indeed use empowered employees are well suited for
discretion in the workplace to generate new participating in systems that encourage
ideas and innovate. the sharing of leadership across a team
(shared-leadership systems),41 taking the initia-
Summary. In general, leaders need to ensure tive to change their own jobs to make them
that employees are ready, willing, and able to more intrinsically motivating (job crafting) ,42 and
be empowered, and organizations should teach setting priorities when they belong to multiple
managers how to lead employees,4,21 in addi- teams simultaneously (orchestrating multiple
tion to instituting empowering organizational team membership arrangements).43
practices. 4 The empowering organizational
practices we have discussed represent good
company-wide approaches to motivating and Policy Implications of
leading employees. These practices have also Empowered Employees
been shown by research to increase employee & Organizations
satisfaction with their empowerment. If the people who set policies for organizations
have doubts about the benefits of encouraging
employee empowerment, the study reporting
How Do Companies Prevent that 90% of people would take a cut in pay in
Empowerment Programs exchange for having meaningful work should
From Losing Steam? put their concerns to rest. That study, conducted
An empowerment initiative should not be seen in 2017 by BetterUp Labs, a leadership develop-
as a one-time change but rather as an ongoing ment platform based in San Francisco, asked
process that will require periodic reinvigora- 2,000 employees from various companies
tion, given that the basics of sustenance are about aspects of empowerment. The investi-
review, revise, and refresh. For example, one gators found that nine of out 10 respondents
study contrasted two empowerment interven- “would sacrifice 23 percent of their future earn-
tions that started out equally well, with one ings—an average of $21,000 a year—for ‘work
sustaining its effectiveness and the other losing that is always meaningful,’” but unfortunately
its momentum. 24 In the successful effort, after most respondents felt their current work was
individual employee goals were set and action only “about half as meaningful as it could be.”44
plans were developed, managers reviewed Other work has shown that employees who
progress with employees frequently. In the feel that they are not empowered are likely to
unsuccessful effort, managers lost focus and be less productive and less satisfied; in addi-
failed to review progress, and empowerment tion, they may experience burnout along with
efforts fizzled. poor emotional and mental health. Empowered
employees and organizations serve the public
Regular review offers a chance to revise action interest because of the many tangible and
plans and goals. The study on the two empow- intangible benefits associated with employees’
erment interventions demonstrates that if an experiencing higher levels of autonomy, impact,
empowerment program is not flexible enough competence, and meaningfulness in their work.
to adjust in response to changing conditions or Empowered employees who experience all

32 behavioral science & policy | volume 6 issue 1 2020

four of these dimensions end up being happier need not be costly. Indeed, simple feedback and
overall (that is, they are more satisfied with their acknowledgement go a long way in reinforcing
lives than less empowered employees are),45 employees’ behaviors.47
because these benefits spill over into their
personal lives.
Conclusion
When building an empowerment program, In summary, there has been a disconnect
organizations should take both a bottom-up between disappointing real-life experiences
approach (selecting employees who are with empowerment programs and the empir-
predisposed to responding to empowerment ical research that overwhelmingly demonstrates
positively) and a top-down one (selecting positive effects for both individuals and organi-
leaders who are motivated and comfortable zations. We maintain that the biggest source of
with empowering those around them). This the disconnect is the flawed way in which many
strategy will properly align the “empowerers” empowerment programs are implemented. As
with the “to-be-empowered.” in most areas of management, the devil really
is in the details. We hope to help remedy the
Organizations also should attend to other policy disconnect by raising three key points.
implications. For example, David Lepak and
Scott Snell have argued that to most effectively First, empowerment is often mistakenly viewed
motivate employees, an organization should as consisting of only one dimension; that is,
have a set of human resource practices that are it is misunderstood as meaning simply the
aligned with one another rather than practices transfer of power from managers to employees.
that are used independently.46 These aligned However, empirical behavioral science research
practices might include not only ones specific shows that basing empowerment initiatives
to employee empowerment but also those on this simplistic understanding is unlikely to
focused on promotion from within, compre- improve performance. Employees will truly
hensive and continuous training opportunities, and completely experience the positive impact
performance appraisals that highlight learning of empowerment only when increased power
and development, and compensation programs (referred to here as autonomy) is accompanied
that incentivize new ideas and innovation. by their feeling competent and having the sense
that their work is meaningful and impactful.
Human resources policies should also
hold organizational leaders and employees Second, to facilitate the effective implemen-
accountable for the amount of empow- tation of empowerment programs, leaders
ering leadership and the empowerment they need to be trained and rewarded for (a) being
demonstrate, respectively. For job performance role models who demonstrate the hard work
appraisals of organizational leaders, human and empowerment they expect to see from
resources appraisal systems should be modified their employees; (b) encouraging employees
to include measures of specific empowering to actively participate in decisionmaking; (c)
leadership behaviors, such as serving as a role providing coaching so that employees feel
model, coaching effectively, and displaying care more confident about being empowered; (d)
and concern for employees. Multirater feed- when possible, sharing important and strategic
back can then be used to assess the extent to information with employees so that they can
which leaders actually exhibited the behav- see how their work fits into the big picture; and
iors. Much the same approach—that is, with (e) displaying a high level of concern and caring
a modified appraisal system and multirater so that employees know that their leaders have
feedback—could be used to assess the level of their best interests at heart.
empowerment employees are demonstrating.
In addition, reward systems should be modified Finally, organizations can help smooth the way
to encourage leaders and employees to exhibit to effective empowerment program imple-
relevant behaviors. These reward programs mentation by making sure that they (a) create

a publication of the behavioral science & policy association 33

 a supportive organizational climate for empow- author affiliation
erment by ensuring that managers collectively
support empowerment initiatives throughout Kirkman: North Carolina State University. Chen:
entire companies; (b) provide a high level of University of Maryland. Mathieu: University of
practical organizational support to ensure that Connecticut. Corresponding author’s e-mail:
empowering leadership is practiced as widely as [email protected].
possible throughout a company; and (c) display
a high level of trust in employees so that the
employees know companies have their back
when they take the kinds of risks and initiatives
expected when empowerment programs are
in place. We believe that by instituting these
important data-driven policies, companies
will be much better positioned to power up
their employees, teams, and organizations for
maximum success.48

34 behavioral science & policy | volume 6 issue 1 2020

references
1. Levy, A. (2017). Millennials aren’t 13. Wright, B. M., & Cordery, J. L. (1999). literatures. Academy of Management
entitled, they’re empowered. Forbes. Production uncertainty as a contextual Annals, 12, 752–788.
Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/ moderator of employee reactions to job 24. Silver, S., Randolph, W. A., & Seibert, S.
sites/forbescoachescouncil/2017/04/13/ design. Journal of Applied Psychology, (2006). Implementing and sustaining
millennials-arent-entitled-theyre- 84, 456–463. empowerment: Lessons learned
empowered/#113156be4289 14. Kirkman, B. L., & Rosen, B. (1999). from comparison of a for-profit and
2. Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological Beyond self-management: a nonprofit organization. Journal of
empowerment in the workplace: Antecedents and consequences of Management Inquiry, 15, 47–58.
Dimensions, measurement, and team empowerment. Academy of 25. Morin, A. J. S., Meyer, J. P., Bélanger,
validation. Academy of Management Management Journal, 42, 58–74. É., Boudrias, J.-S., Gagné, M., & Parker,
Journal, 38, 1442–1465. https://doi.org/10.5465/256874 P. D. (2016). Longitudinal associations
3. Thomas, K. W., & Velthouse, B. A. (1990). 15. Kirkman, B. L., Jones, R. G., & Shapiro, between employees’ beliefs about the
Cognitive elements of empowerment: D. L. (2000). Why do employees resist quality of the change management
An “interpretive” model of intrinsic task teams? Examining the “resistance process, affective commitment
motivation. Academy of Management barrier” to work team effectiveness. to change and psychological
Review, 15, 666–681. The International Journal of Conflict empowerment. Human Relations, 69,
Management, 11, 74–92. 839–867.
4. Seibert, S. E., Wang, G., & Courtright,
S. H. (2011). Antecedents and 16. Sharma, P., & Kirkman, B. L. (2015). 26. Delaney, J. T., & Huselid, M. A. (1996).
consequences of psychological and Leveraging leaders: A literature The impact of human resource
team empowerment in organizations: A review and future lines of inquiry for management practices on perceptions
meta-analytic review. Journal of Applied empowering leadership research. of organizational performance.
Psychology, 96, 981–1003. Group & Organization Management, 40, Academy of Management Journal, 39,
193–237. 949–969.
5. Chen, G., Kirkman, B. L., Kanfer, R.,
Allen, D., & Rosen, B. (2007). A multilevel 17. Menon, T., & Thompson, L. (2016). Stop 27. Voegtlin, C., Boehm, S. A., & Bruch, H.
study of leadership, empowerment, spending, start managing: Strategies to (2015). How to empower employees:
and performance in teams. Journal of transform wasteful habits. Boston, MA: Using training to enhance work units’
Applied Psychology, 92, 331–346. Harvard Business Review Press. collective empowerment. International
Journal of Manpower, 36, 354–373.
6. Maynard, M. T., Mathieu, J. E., Gilson, 18. Rapp, T. L., Gilson, L. L., Mathieu, J. E.,
L. L., O’Boyle, E. H., Jr., & Cigularov, & Ruddy, T. (2016). Leading empowered 28. Mathieu, J. E., Gilson, L. L., & Ruddy,
K. P. (2012). Drivers and outcomes of teams: An examination of the role T. M. (2006). Empowerment and team
team psychological empowerment: A of external team leaders and team effectiveness: An empirical test of an
meta-analytic review and model test. coaches. The Leadership Quarterly, 27, integrated model. Journal of Applied
Organizational Psychology Review, 3, 109–123. Psychology, 91, 97–108.
101–137. 19. Argyris, C. (1998). Empowerment: 29. Arnold, J. A., Arad, S., Rhoades, J. A., &
7. King, R. T., Jr. (1998, May 20). Jeans The emperor’s new clothes. Harvard Drasgow, F. (2000). The empowering
therapy: Levi’s factory workers assigned Business Review, 76(3), 98–105. leadership questionnaire: The
to teams, and morale takes a hit. The construction and validation of a new
20. Banks, G. C., Pollack, J. M., Bochantin,
Wall Street Journal, p. A1. scale for measuring leader behavior.
J., Kirkman, B. L., Whelpley, C. E., &
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21,
8. Kirkman, B. L., & Harris, T. B. (2017). 3D O’Boyle, E. H. (2016). Management’s
249–269.
team leadership: A new approach for science–practice gap: A grand
complex teams. Stanford, CA: Stanford challenge for all stakeholders. Academy 30. Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E.,
University Press. of Management Journal, 59, Wesson, M. J., Porter, C., & Ng, K. Y.
2205–2231. (2001). Justice at the millennium: A
9. Aguinis, H., Davis, G. F., Detert, J. R.,
meta-analytic review of 25 years of
Glynn, M. A., Jackson, S. E., Kochan, 21. Lee, A., Willis, S., & Tian, A. W. (2017).
organizational justice research. Journal
T., . . . Sutcliffe, K. M. (2016). Using Empowering leadership: A meta-
of Applied Psychology, 86, 425–445.
organizational science research analytic examination of incremental
to address U.S. federal agencies’ contribution, mediation, and 31. Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2012).
management & labor needs. Behavioral moderation. Journal of Organizational Employee voice behavior: A meta-
Science & Policy, 2(2), 67–76. Behavior, 39, 306–325. analytic test of the conservation of
resources framework. Journal of
10. Humphrey, S. E., Nahrgang, J. D., & 22. Achor, S., Reece, A., Kellerman, G. R.,
Organizational Behavior, 33, 216–234.
Morgeson, F. P. (2007). Integrating & Robichaux, A. (2018, November 6). 9
motivational, social, and contextual out of 10 people are willing to earn less 32. Chen, G., & Tesluk, P. E. (2012). Team
work design features: A meta-analytic money to do more-meaningful work. participation and empowerment:
summary and theoretical extension of Harvard Business Review. Retrieved A multilevel perspective. In S. W. J.
the work design literature. Journal of from https://hbr.org/2018/11/9-out-of- Kozlowski (Ed.), The Oxford handbook
Applied Psychology, 92, 1332–1356. 10-people-are-willing-to-earn-less- of organizational psychology (Vol. 2,
money-to-do-more-meaningful-work pp. 767–788). New York, NY: Oxford
11. Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R.
University Press.
(1980). Work redesign. Reading, MA: 23. Stouten, J., Rousseau, D. M., &
Addison-Wesley. De Cremer, D. (2018). Successful 33. Hackman, J. R., & Wageman, R. (2005).
organizational change: Integrating the A theory of team coaching. Academy of
12. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The
management practice and scholarly Management Review, 30, 269–287.
exercise of control. New York, NY:
Freeman.

a publication of the behavioral science & policy association 35

34. Rockstuhl, T., Dulebohn, J. H., Ang, S., 45. Nel, T., Stander, M. W., & Latif, J. (2015).
& Shore, L. M. (2012). Leader–member Investigating positive leadership,
exchange (LMX) and culture: A meta- psychological empowerment, work
analysis of correlates of LMX across engagement and satisfaction with
23 countries. Journal of Applied life in a chemical industry. Journal of
Psychology, 97, 1097–1130. Industrial Psychology, 41, 1–13.
35. Chen, G., Smith. T. A., Kirkman, B. L., 46. Lepak, D. P., & Snell, S. A. (2002).
Zhang, P., & Farh, J.-L. (2019). Multiple Examining the human resource
team membership and empowerment architecture: The relationships among
spillover effects: Can empowerment human capital, employment, and
processes cross team boundaries? human resource configurations. Journal
Journal of Applied Psychology, 104, of Management, 28, 517–543.
321–340. 47. Yukl, G. A., & Becker, W. S.
36. Carlisle, A. E. (1995, Autumn). (2006). Effective empowerment
MacGregor. Organizational Dynamics, in organizations. Organization
24(2), 68–79. (Original work published Management Journal, 3, 210–231.
1976) 48. Kirkman, B. L., & Rosen, B. (2000).
37. D’Innocenzo, L., Luciano, M., Mathieu, Powering up teams. Organizational
J. E., Maynard, M. T., & Chen, G. (2016). Dynamics, 28, 48–66.
Empowered to perform: A multi-
level investigation of the influence of
empowerment on performance in
hospital units. Academy of Management
Journal, 59, 1290–1307.
38. Maynard, M. T., Luciano, M. M.,
D’Innocenzo, L., Mathieu, J. E., &
Dean, M. (2014). Modeling time-
lagged reciprocal psychological
empowerment–performance
relationships. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 99, 1244–1253.
39. Edmondson, A. C. (2012). Teamwork
on the fly. Harvard Business Review.
Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2012/04/
teamwork-on-the-fly-2
40. Takeuchi, R., Chen, G., & Lepak, D. P.
(2009). Through the looking glass of
a social system: Cross-level effects
of high performance work systems
on employees’ attitudes. Personnel
Psychology, 62, 1–29.
41. Perry, M. L., Pearce, C. L., & Sims, H. P.,
Jr. (1999). Empowered selling teams:
How shared leadership can contribute
to selling team outcomes. Journal of
Personal Selling & Sales Management,
19, 35–51.
42. Kanten, P. (2014). The antecedents of
job crafting: Perceived organizational
support, job characteristics and self-
efficacy. European Journal of Business
and Social Sciences, 3, 113–128.
43. Tannenbaum, S. I., Mathieu, J. E.,
Salas, E., & Cohen, D. (2012). Teams are
changing: Are research and practice
evolving fast enough? Industrial and
Organizational Psychology, 5, 2–24.
44. O’Connell, B. (2019, March 23). The
search for meaning. Retrieved from
https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/news/
all-things-work/pages/the-search-for-
meaning.aspx

36 behavioral science & policy | volume 6 issue 1 2020