"Perceived Consequences of Absenteeism"
by Lillie Guinell Morgan and Jeanne Brett Herman
Journal of Applied Psychology Dec. 1976

The study:  The authors conducted a detailed statistical study to determine which would be the best approach to reducing absenteeism in the work place; "the carrot or the stick." They evaluated factors which they perceived motivated workers to be absent from work and factors they felt were deterrents to absenteeism.

Conducting the study:  Information was collected from sixty blue-collar workers in an automobile-parts foundry. Workers were asked to rate the importance of motivational and deterrent factors that influenced their decisions to be absent or not.

Factors that were tested (proposed by the authors) as possibly motivating  worker absenteeism included: break from routine, family activities, personal illness, break from supervisor, family illness, time with friends, family functions, personal business, break from co-workers, transportation, leisure time, house maintenance. Most of the factors were found to be, to varying degrees, significant in motivating absenteeism except break from supervisor, and time with friends.

The factors that were tested as deterrents to absenteeism included: loss of wages, disciplinary talk, loss of co-workers, work harder, heavier work load, disciplinary time off, loss of promotion opportunities, loss of job, disciplinary probation, loss of production, and loss of benefits. The most significant of these deterrent factors were found to be: disciplinary talk, loss of promotional opportunities, and loss of benefits.

Conclusion:  The study concluded that providing positive incentives  to workers in the form of those motivational factors that normally influence workers to be absent is better than imposing penalties for discouraging absenteeism. The best reward for workers with low absenteeism is to grant additional time off for personal matters. Workers are influenced to a lesser extent by deterrents, loss of pay and benefits and loss of promotion opportunities and discharge, imposed for frequent absenteeism. Finally a combination of incentives  (additional time off) and penalties (loss of benefits or job) with the primary emphasis on motivational incentives is the most effective approach to reducing absenteeism.

 
SUPERVISORY METHODS RELATED TO PRODUCTIVITY,
ABSENTEEISM, AND LABOR TURNOVER

There have been many studies on productivity measuring supervisory methods.  The results are not always consistent.  The study done by Argyle, Gardner and Cioffi, was done on ninety foremen in eight British factories manufacturing electric motors and switch gear.
There were five dimensions of foremanship outlined.  General supervision has been found to be preferred by workers and in fact, is related to increased job satisfaction.  A foreman who exercises pressure for production is usually inversely related to productivity, and job satisfaction.  Foremen who are employee centered almost always relate to higher job satisfaction.  Democratic leadership generally leads to greater job satisfaction.  Finally, punitive leadership is typically associated with low productivity levels, however, a link to job satisfaction has not been determined.

It was expected that all the dimensions of foremanship would be related to productivity.  The most successful foreman should exercise general supervision, low pressure, in addition to being employee centered, democratic, and non-punitive.  The type of foremanship is believed to have more influence on those workers who are not paid on an incentive basis.  Assembly departments will exhibit a greater difference on productivity due to the fact that they are more people oriented.  It was also believed that trained foremen will have more favorable ratings on the dimensions of foremanship and will have more efficient departments.  In regards to absenteeism and turnover, smaller groups were expected to have lower rates.

Typically, with field research, finding departments or shops that are comparable is difficult at best.  The primary reason for there being different departments or shops is because the nature of the work is varied in type and complexity.  Therefore, it is important to find a sufficient number of similarities on which an analysis can be done effectively.  In terms of productivity, foremen who were more democratic and less punitive in nature were associated with higher productivity.  The non-punitive factor was found to have the most significant impact on the higher productivity.

Democratic leadership showed the only significance when absenteeism was analyzed.  Low absenteeism was related to democratic supervision in a majority of the departments.  Labor turnover showed  no significant results.  The analysis  of the five dimensions of foremanship showed no evidence to support the belief that trained foremen would have a greater effect on productivity.  Neither did the length of service of the foremen.

The widely-accepted premise that foremen behavior has an effect on productivity, while complicated, is generally true.  This may be true simply because of the nature of mankind.  Workers tend to work harder and more productive when they have some impact on the nature and conditions of their work.  This supports the contention that the general, democratic foreman leads to greater productivity.

This result can be interpreted in three main possibilities.  One is that workers work harder when supervised in certain ways, or secondly, the foremen supervise differently because the workers work harder, or third, there other unidentified secondary factors, i.e. job layout or equipment may cause workers to work harder.  The first conclusion, that supervision affects worker productivity is more widely held, with some consideration  for the secondary aspects of the work.  There are many distinct aspects to every individual which makes productivity analysis difficult, the results of such analysis vary with human nature.

ABSENTEEISM IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY

Absenteeism in the construction industry is a little-researched phenomenon that plagues many construction projects, particularly the "super projects."  Construction managers estimate absenteeism rates range from between 6-15% on large projects and may reach 20% at times.  Absenteeism nationwide is estimated to cost $26 billion per year.  The construction industries portion of that cost is approximately $7 billion each year.  What research has been done on construction worker absenteeism, estimates a savings of 9% in construction costs is possible with reduced absenteeism and turnover.

In early 1984, a study prepared by Jimmie Hinze, Maxwell Ugwu, and Larry Hubbard looked at several construction projects to determine the major causes of absenteeism in the construction industry.  The study centered around "voluntary absences."  Voluntary absences are those over which the worker has control and, in general, are those absences which occur when the worker is able to work but for some reason decides to miss work.  When discussing voluntary absences, one must keep in mind that some voluntary absences cannot be avoided.  These unavoidable voluntary absences are related to workers taking care of personal business which must be done during normal working hours.  Many institutions have set business hours and are not available outside of normal working hours.  It is when workers have business that cannot be done after work that time must be taken off during working hours, this is considered voluntary absenteeism but is unavoidable.  The major causes of voluntary absenteeism are discussed below:

Crew cohesion
The working crew's relationship with each other had the strongest influence on absenteeism.  An environment that fostered the mutual respect of the crew members would reduce absenteeism because workers want to remain respected members of the crew and because peer pressure would be brought to bear in the event a worker resorted to absenteeism.  Absenteeism is lowest when there is a strong "esprit de corps" in the crew.  Because of this team spirit, workers will feel that they are important and vital members of the crew.
This cohesion can be used to reduce absenteeism by maintaining consistency within the crew.  Attempts should be made to develop crews which work well together and have an "esprit de corp."  Every effort should be made to keep those crews together as much as possible.

Negative Reinforcement for Absences
There is a direct correlation between negative reinforcement for absences and the rate of absenteeism on a project.  Criticism of worker absenteeism by crew foreman reduces the incidence of absenteeism.  Management plays a big roll in how an employee perceives absenteeism.  If supervisors and foreman do not discuss absenteeism with abusers, workers will perceive that management does not consider absenteeism important.  Most company's have policies toward absenteeism, these policies must be made known to all employees.  Just like safety, absenteeism is a topic which can be discussed at lunch box meetings and during morning work assignments.  Written policy should be posted in plain sight of all employees and management needs to enforce the policy.

Positive Self-Image
The fact that crew cohesion is related to lower absenteeism rates, indicates that positive factors exist in the workplace which cause workers to want to be in attendance.  These positive factors come from work that is perceived as challenging and mentally stimulating.  High self-esteem, when derived from the work performed, reduces absenteeism.
Supervisors and managers may look to rotate job assignments on routine tasks, solicit worker input on job accomplishment, or give workers the freedom to decide how certain tasks will be completed.  Participative management is an excellent tool by which the ideas of workers can be given proper consideration. In fact, any form of recognition will be favorably received by the workers.

Job Security
If a company has a strong policy towards absenteeism, i.e. dismissing abusers, the job security for absent-prone workers is reduced.  This may be a strong influence in an area where construction jobs are in short supply.  If construction is booming in the area or workers perceive that jobs are readily available this policy will have less influence.

Travel Distance to Work
It appears intuitive that absenteeism would be greater for those workers traveling greater distances.  A long commute can be fatiguing in itself, and it can reduce the enjoyment received from working.  In addition, the effects of bad weather, may cause some workers to be absent in order to avoid the long drive to work.  Management only has a limited amount of options available in this area.  Travel distance can be considered when assigning workers to construction sites.  Absenteeism was particularly low among workers who lived within ten miles of the construction site.  Carpooling is another alternative available.  Management can encourage workers to carpool by posting or publicizing names and telephone numbers of workers interested in carpooling from a given locale.  Carpooling can also build a feeling of camaraderie among workers and dependence on each other, both of which can reduce absenteeism.

Turnover
Higher rates of absenteeism are present in work crews that have higher rates of turnover.  High turnover rates may indicate that there are other problems in the work environment.  Management needs to investigate the cause of high turnover rates in an effort to reduce absenteeism.

Management -caused Delays
Job frustrations can be related to absenteeism.  Workers want to feel productive, and factors that hinder this productivity will lead to frustrations and possibly absences.  Such frustrations are of interest if management can reduce or eliminate them.  Higher rates of absenteeism are reported where workers are subject to greater instances of management -caused delays.  Management must accept the responsibility for some of the problems in the workplace.  Managers must systematically identify all areas where delays are being encountered and work to reduce avoidable delays.  Analysis of the job cost records or delay surveys are an excellent place to start to identify delays.