Job Enrichment should be distinguished from enlargement job enlargement attempts to make a job more

varied by removing the dullness associated with performing repetitive operations. In job enrichment, the
attempt is to build in to jobs a higher sense of challenge and achievement. The accumulation of
achievement must lead to a felling of personal growth accompanied by a sense of responsibility.

The goal of job enrichment is not merely to make the more varied but I the words of M.Scoot myers
research for taxes investment, which has been experimenting with the techniques is to make every
employee a manager ‘ . Thus the employee job is enriched will perform the management function of
manning and controlling so far as his work is concerned.

Job enrichment should be distinguished from job enlargement. Job enlargement is about
variegating a job to divert the boredom associated with performing repetitive operations. It
means enlarging the scope of the job by adding similar tasks without enhancing responsibility.
In job enrichment, the attempt is to build into jobs a higher sense of challenge and
achievement. A job may be enriched by variety. But it also may be enriched by giving workers
more freedom in deciding about such things as work methods, sequence and pace or the
acceptance or rejection of materials.

Also encourage participation of subordinates and interaction between workers. Give workers a
feeling of personal responsibility for their tasks. Taking steps to make sure that worker can
see how their tasks contribute to a finished product and the welfare of an enterprise. Finally,
give people feedback on their job performance; preferably before their supervisors get it.

But there are certain limitations as well of job enrichment. One of these is technology. With
specialized machinery and assembly line techniques, it may not be possible to make all jobs
very meaningful. Another limitation is cost. There is also some question as to whether
workers really want job enrichment, especially of the kind that changes the basic content of
their jobs.
Job Enrichment vs. Job Enlargement

Job enrichment in organizational development, human resources management, and organizational

behavior, is the process of giving an employee more responsibility and increased decision-making
authority. This is the opposite of job enlargement, which does not give greater authority, just more
duties. [Motivation and Work Behavior by Richard M. Steers and Lyman W. Porte, 1991; pgs 215m
322m 357, 411-413, 423, 428-441 and pg 576.]

Job enlargement is often called "multi-tasking". This perhaps violates of one of the key principles of
human achievement, namely, concentration of effort. [Andrew Carnegie, 1953; How not to Raise Your
Own Salary; pp 235-244; Napoleon Hill and Annie Lou Norman Hill] One can perhaps manage and work
on a variety of projects and still practice concentrated effort [ Attorney and American Writer Napoleon
Hill, 1979; 1995; The Law of Success; Chapter XI; pp 1 to pp77 Success Unlimited: A Division of W.
Clement Stone] , but multitasking is so out of hand that it often prevents an employee from getting
anything done.

The current practice of job enrichment stemmed from the work of Frederick Herzberg in the 1950s and
1960s. [Feder 2000, Mione 2006] Herzberg's two factor theory argued that job satisfaction and job
dissatisfaction are not to be seen as one dimension, but two. Aspects of work contributed to job
satisfaction are called "motivators" and aspects that contributed to job dissatisfaction are called
"hygiene factors"; hence, the theory is also refereed to as "motivator-hygiene theory". Examples of
motivators are recognition, achievement, and advancement. Examples of hygiene factors are salary,
company policies and working conditions. According to Herzberg's theory, the existence of motivators
would lead to job satisfaction, but the lack of motivators would not lead to job dissatisfaction, and
similarly; hygiene factors affect job dissatisfaction, but not job satisfaction. In general, research has
failed to confirm these central aspects of the theory.Morgenson, Frederick P., & Campion, Michael A.
(2003). Work Design. In W. C. Borman, D. R. Ilgen, & R.J. Klimoski (Eds.), "Handbook of Psychology",
Vol. 12 (pp. 423-452). NJ: John Wiley & Sons.]

Hackman and Oldham later refined the work of Herzberg into the Job Characteristics Model [Hackman &
Oldham 1976] , which forms the basis of job enrichment today. (UTC) [Mione 2006]

I/O in Ancient Times

* Plato’s Republic
** Created a taxonomy of citizens (e.g., guardians, auxiliaries, and workers)
** Proposed ways to select and train members in each category
* The Chinese
** Developed a selection system for bureaucrats 3,000 years ago (lasted through 1905)
** Multiple hurdle system

In the United States, its origins are those of applied psychology in the early 19th Century, when the
nation was experiencing tremendous industrialization, corporatization, unionization, immigration,
urbanization and physical expansion. The field's founding fathers were Frederick W. Taylor, Hugo
Münsterberg (1863-1916), Walter Dill Scott (1869-1955), and Walter Van Dyke Bingham (1880-1952).
As in other countries, wartime necessity (e.g., World War I and World War II) led to the discipline's
substantial growth. Business demand for scientific management, selection and training also has
promoted and sustained the field's development.

For a detailed history of industrial and organizational psychology, particularly in the United States (but
with some discussion of developments in other countries), one can consult Koppes, L. L. (Ed.). (2007).
"Historical perspectives in industrial and organizational psychology". Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence
Erlbaum.

For a concise history of Industrial/Organizational Psychology please visit

[http://www.mtsu.edu/~pmccarth/io_hist.htm History]
= Milestones in industrial and organizational psychology =
* Hawthorne studies at Western Electric
* U.S. Army Project A