Discussion (Hint look the response one)
Please describe the major theoretical components of TWA. What do you like about this theory, and what do you think it might be missing? How you would use it in career counseling?
Response one
The major theoretical components of the theory of work adjustment stem from person-environment fit and person-environment interaction. The person is the employee and worker and environment refers to the work environment.
The person has needs and values such as survival and well-being. These are derived from genetics and influenced by the environment. The person also has skills or abilities such as cognitive, motor, and physical that originate from genetics and are shaped by learning.
The environment consists of abilities and skill requirements, as well as reinforcers. In other words, what does the person offer to the environment in order to function well. The environment provides the person with reinforcers such as money and prestige.
I like the TWA theory from the perspective of determining if a person is a good fit for a particular work environment. I think it is important for a person to enjoy where they are working and to feel appreciated by what they do. I also feel that an employer should provide a good fit for the person in the sense of keeping the employee motivated and striving to do well for the company/organization.
I feel like the TWA theory does not take into account the relationships between employees and their differing styles of performance and interactions. I am not really sure if this is true, but it seems solely focused on the person and the environment. I have been in jobs that I loved the environment, however, there were people that I worked with that were difficult (to put it politely).
If I were to use this theory in my counseling of clients, I would use it as a starting point to help the client determine if the job in question seems like an environment that would suit them well. As a reference, if someone placed me in a trade such as electrician, plumber, etc., I would not be happy. I dislike working with tools and I am extremely sensitive to extreme heat and extreme cold.
Response two
The major focuses that I drew from TWA was a focus on how needs and values of individuals contribute to the overall person-environment fit in their workplace. This theory, originally conceptualized by Dawis and Lofquist, takes into account a person’s skills and abilities and how that matches the ability requirements of their work as well as their values and how that matches up to the rewards given by the workplace as well. These two major interactions contribute to the level of correspondence (or, in some cases, discorrespondence) perceived by both the individual and the workplace.
As Ashley mentioned in her post, values and skills are both influenced by genetic factors in a person, but they differentiate in that values are shaped by a person’s environment, whereas skills are shaped more by skill development and learning. Generally speaking, if a person has values that correspond with the reinforcers provided by their workplace (i.e. adequate pay, comprehensive benefits, etc.) and if the employees skills align with the skill requirements of the workplace, then there is a much higher chance of correspondence, which can thus predict the satisfaction of an employee, their satisfactoriness to their workplace, and the tenure of the employee in the workplace. Oh the other hand, if the employee’s values do not align with the rewards offered by the workplace and/or their skills do not align with the skill requirements of the job, then they are more likely to experience discorrespondence in their work environment, have lower levels of satisfaction with their work, and be less satisfactory to their employer. Feelings of discorrespondence can lead to an individual taking an active approach, such as attempting to be more flexible or to change the rewards of the workplace so that they align more with their own values, or one can take a reactive approach, which might entail things such as trying to work on being more flexible so that the feelings of discorrespondence will decrease.
I personally do like the emphasis on needs and values in this theory, as I think that basing work satisfaction on these two factors can encompass a fairly wide range of issues that a person might experience in their workplace. However, I do think that, as Law mentioned in class today, that sometimes people don’t necessarily have the luxury of exploring most of these needs and values because they may be experiencing issues in the workplace that lead to a high sense of discorrespondence that may not be able to be resolved, but they can’t necessarily afford to leave their job. If I were to use this theory in counseling, I think it would be great to use in the exploration phase to find out what a person wants and needs from their job, both intrinsically and extrinsically, to help them start to determine whether their workplace does fit with them and, if not, then what might be the underlying issues that are causing this sense of discorrespondence for the individual. I agree with the emphasis on person-environment fit, as I think that sometimes people forget that there is more than just them being satisfactory to their employer and that the individual’s satisfaction and fit is also important. I have been involved with hiring and training extensively in my retail career and it has made me a firm believer that a company has to sell itself to an employee during an interview just as much as the employee is attempting to sell themselves. This can help both parties determine if the P-E fit is right and can help, with greater accuracy, if there will be correspondence or discorrespondence between the two down the road.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
