Statoil Case Study

This case study is related to the preceding results. Factors and determinants of success assessment on worker ingenuity were investigated using survey results from a major oil firm. Since employees are subject to the same market cycles and systemic transitions, the sorting results can be largely managed by using a case study approach. Statoil is a multinational gas and oil firm with operations in 34 countries and a workforce of 25000 people. In 1972, the company was established in Norway to explore for oil deposits on the country’s continental shelf (International Directory of Company Histories,2004). Statoil is currently ranking among the top 10 oil conglomerates in the OECD region (International Directory of Company Histories,2004). Organizational culture of the company deserves attention, as the company’s policy on feedback, reward and remuneration is geared at improving staff creativity. They are of high priority. The company’s premium concept is connected with tangible and intangible rewards. Tangible rewards include employment benefits depending on the level of creativity, rank and performance. At the same time, Avey, Richmond and Nixon (2012, 101-3) postulated that individual performance appraisal is not only based on specific delivery, but also on the worker’s social performance. As part of the organization’s corporate management system, the slogan “People@Statoil” has been designed to inspire better performance, motivate people and their personal and professional development.

This process has been adopted in the organization and is evaluated annually. Goals are connected with individual performance and behavior is tied to the company’s strategic objectives. The feedback improves staff creativity and sets the direction for career plans and personal development. The company’s reward packages are designed at competitive rates in the relevant market segments and include bonus rewards, remuneration and other forms of compensation. Leaders, team and separate team players are subject to an all-round evaluation process. The feedback and assessments of the evaluation process positively affect creativity among employees (Podsakoff & Farh, 1989, p. 11).

Based on the survey data, this case study provides reliable empirical explanations on the influence of feedback on creativity. This is best illustrated by perceptions of feedback and career opportunities among leaders and staff, which in turn leads to improved creativity in a global oil company. Managers of the company find that for staff without leadership opportunities, there are perceived discrepancies between feedback and creativity.. At the same time, creativity and career opportunities in the company tend to be negatively affected by restructuring and change as well as negative feedback from top-level management (Podsakoff & Farh, 1989, p. 12).

Case study of Pakistani Electric Supply Company (Water and Power Development Authority-WAPDA)

This case study explores the relationship between job involvement and feedback on the creativity and productivity of employees in a Pakistan Electric Supply Company under the Water and Power Development Authority. Founded in 1958, the WAPDA deals with the distribution of electricity in the region. As the environment and industry structure experienced dramatic change, the authority moved from monopoly status to privatization, as several oil companies had been privatized to keep up with the new changes. The movement from integration to disintegration also resulted in profound changes in productivity and creativity of staff working for these companies (Ashford & Cummings, 1983, p. 45).

Among the other performance variables, feedback was considered to have the strongest relationship with creativity and productivity. At the same time, the degree of productivity was likely to increase with high levels of positive feedback and vice versa. The findings of the research indicate that together with the increased productivity, reinforcing performance through positive feedback, there is a proportional increase in creativity due to this positive reinforcement. The research findings of Kuvaas (2006, p.510-4) indicate that job involvement, compensation and feedback are particularly vital ingredients for creativity among employees. Apart from the type of compensation, staff indicated that positive feedback is the most contributing factor to improved performance for Pakistani WAPDA oil companies.

Reference

Anon, 2017. [online] Available at: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/importance-creativity-innovation-business-siyana-sokolova [Accessed 29 Jan. 2017].

Ashford, S. J. & L. L. Cummings(1983), ”Feedback as an individual resource: Personal strategies of creating information,“ Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 32, 370-398.

Ashforth, B.(1997), ”Petty tyranny in organizations: A preliminary examination of antecedents and consequences,“ Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 14, 126-140

Anderson, N., Potočnik, K., & Zhou, J. 2014. ”Innovation and Creativity in Organizations A State-of-the-Science Review, Prospective Commentary, and Guiding Framework”. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1297-1333.

Avey, J. B., Richmond, F. L., & Nixon. D. R. 2012. ”Leader positivity and follower

creativity: An experimental analysis”. The journal of Creative Behavior, 46(2), 99-118.

Carson, P. P. & K. D. Carson 1993, ”Managing creativity enhancement through goalsetting and feedback,“ The Journal of Creative Behavior, 27, 36-45

Cianci, A. M., J. M. Schaubroeck, & G. A. McGill 2010, ”Achievement goals, feedback, and task performance,“ Human Performance, 23, 131-154.

Chua, R. Y. J., and Iyengar, S. S. 2008. ”Creativity as a matter of choice: Prior experience and task instruction as boundary conditions for the positive effect of choice on creativity”. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 42(3), 164-180

Deci, E. L. & R. M. Ryan 1985, Intrinsic motivation and self determination in human behavior, New York: Plenum Press.

Hon, A. H. Y. & T. Y. Kim 2007, ”Work overload and employee creativity: The roles of goal commitment, task feedback from supervisor, and reward for competence,“ In: Rahim, M. A. (Ed.), Current Topics In Management, 12(193-211), Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick and London

International Directory of Company Histories,2004Vol.61. St. James Press,

Leadbeater C.,(1999). ’Living on Thin Air. 1st ed. London: Viking

Kuvaas, B. 2006. Performance appraisal satisfaction and employee outcomes: mediating and moderating roles of work motivation. International Journal of Human Resource Management 17 (3), 504-522

Shalley, C. E. & L. L. Gilson 2004, ”What leaders need to know: A review of social and contextual factors that can foster or hinder creativity,“ The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 33-53.

Podsakoff, P. M. & J. L. Farh1989, ”Effects of feedback sign and credibility on goal setting and task performance,“ Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 44, 45-67

Zhou, J.2003, ”When the presence of creative coworkers is related to creativity: Role of supervisor close monitoring, developmental feedback, and creative personality,“ Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 413-422