Samenvatting
Abstract
Purpose – This paper aims to investigate Belgian HR-professionals’ views on the obstacles to not applying demotion and the opportunities to practice demotion in the workplace.
Design/methodology/approach – This study acquires qualitative data through ten focus group interviews. The focus groups were kept small due to the taboo subject. A moderator and an observer conducted the interviews using the same detailed interview guide for each interview. They analyzed the data separately and compared results, this in order to meet trustworthiness. Where possible the focus group findings were compared with literature.
Findings – The data analysis result in four topics: dimensions of demotion, obstacles, possible solutions for these obstacles and opportunities. The perceived obstacles are a lack of vacancies, demotivation, salary issues and the taboo on demotion. Possible solutions to these obstacles are walking the talk, a change of culture, carefully selected vocabulary and transparent communication. Potential opportunities are employer branding and career possibilities which lead to a win-win situation.
Research limitations/implications – The HR-professionals’ views on demotion are their own views, not necessarily their company’s views. These views can be socially-desirable.
Practical implications – The focus group interviews give insights into the views and motivations of HR-professionals. The research highlights some opportunities which could give an impulse towards practicing demotion in the organization.
Originality/value – Focus group techniques are particularly suitable to gather views, motivations attitudes and opinions. Small focus groups are especially appropriate for taboo subjects as demotion. Nevertheless focus group interviews are rare in demotion studies.
Purpose – This paper aims to investigate Belgian HR-professionals’ views on the obstacles to not applying demotion and the opportunities to practice demotion in the workplace.
Design/methodology/approach – This study acquires qualitative data through ten focus group interviews. The focus groups were kept small due to the taboo subject. A moderator and an observer conducted the interviews using the same detailed interview guide for each interview. They analyzed the data separately and compared results, this in order to meet trustworthiness. Where possible the focus group findings were compared with literature.
Findings – The data analysis result in four topics: dimensions of demotion, obstacles, possible solutions for these obstacles and opportunities. The perceived obstacles are a lack of vacancies, demotivation, salary issues and the taboo on demotion. Possible solutions to these obstacles are walking the talk, a change of culture, carefully selected vocabulary and transparent communication. Potential opportunities are employer branding and career possibilities which lead to a win-win situation.
Research limitations/implications – The HR-professionals’ views on demotion are their own views, not necessarily their company’s views. These views can be socially-desirable.
Practical implications – The focus group interviews give insights into the views and motivations of HR-professionals. The research highlights some opportunities which could give an impulse towards practicing demotion in the organization.
Originality/value – Focus group techniques are particularly suitable to gather views, motivations attitudes and opinions. Small focus groups are especially appropriate for taboo subjects as demotion. Nevertheless focus group interviews are rare in demotion studies.
| Originele taal-2 | English |
|---|---|
| Aantal pagina's | 30 |
| Status | Published - 2014 |
Publicatie series
| Naam | Buto Working Papers |
|---|---|
| Volume | 61 |