Whereas climate is mainly associated with the environmental conditions of a particular place, the word ‘climate’ could also mean much more. Climate could also mean the general attitude or feeling about an issue, a circumstance or a place. This is why we can have a climate of political unrest in a country or a climate of corporate mistrust in an organisation. In these instances, the word “climate” means the prevailing feeling people have of the conditions within a particular place, such as the country or organisation.
Then there is psychological climate.
This generally refers to the perceptions an employee has of the work environment. It is the mind-set employees develop concerning their place of work. Others have described psychological climate as the meaning employees attach to the events, policies, practices, and procedures in the organisation. Defined by others still as an “employees’ cognitive appraisal of work environment”, the psychological climate has been found to be very important to the performance of employees. Important job-related metrics such as job satisfaction, job involvement and job performance have all been related to the psychological climate the employee operates in.
According to a 2009 study titled “Psychological climate: A comparison of organizational and individual level referents,” there are two types of psychological climates. There is the psychological climate with regards to the organisational environment in general and there is the psychological climate with regards to the employee’s own experiences within that organisation. In other words, an individual employee might have the perception that the organisation might be a great place to work. However, the one might not have very fond memories of working in that particular workplace.
There is another key difference between the two. The collective climate is one that a majority of, if not all, employees might agree on. The psychological climate, because it is a subjective construct, will not be a perception that everyone will agree with. Two individuals can be in the same department or unit and live in divergent psychological climates. They might even share the same desk and they may not agree on the psychological climate they find themselves in.
It is instructive to note that according to that study, which was published in the May 2009 online edition of Human Relations journal, both types of psychological climate predict job satisfaction. Because job satisfaction has an effect on job performance, one can easily see how the psychological climate affects the performance of employees. That is how important the psychological climate really is.
There is yet another study that brought to the fore the importance of the psychological climate to the job of front line employees. The study was titled, “Multiple psychological climates and employee self-regulatory focus: Implications for frontline employee work behavior and service performance.” The study was published in the June 2023 edition of Journal of Retailing.
It is important to note that different customer-facing employees will do well or will not do as well under different psychological climates. According to this particular study, because different front line employees perform differently under different psychological climates, it is important to find out how different psychological climates affected employees, especially those whose duties involve interfacing between the organisation and its customers.
This study took a look at two different kinds of work climates—a quality-focused work climate and an initiative-focused work climate. The former is the kind of work environment where Management’s focus is on the strict adherence to laid-down rules and regulations that ensures that service delivery is consistently of the highest level. With the latter kind of psychological climate, the focus is on how staff can be empowered enough for them to innovate and go above the call of duty to satisfy customers.
The study found out that front line employees who were risk-averseprospered within the quality-focused work climate. These are individuals who love to follow the rules to the letter. As expected, front line employees who are willing to take risks and innovate are those who thrive within the initiative-focused work climate. This is the domain of those who will go to great lengths, albeit within the limits of what is legally permissible, just to ensure that customers have great experiences.
If you place an employee who loves to take initiative in a company that is solely focused on following the rules, you are setting the one up for failure. This individual will come across as a troublemaker. The one would be frustrated and this will show in the one’s actions. Such an employee would be living in a state of constant agitation. She would not understand why she is not being allowed to do things that would make customers happy. She would not understand why the rules cannot be bent, just a little, to make customers happy.
Management, on the other hand, would also wonder what the problem is with that particular employee. Management would wonder why that particular employee cannot follow simple rules. If the one supervising this employee has no idea about psychological climates and its effect on the performance of employees, that supervisor would constantly be at odds with the employee. However, take that employee and put them in the right psychological climate and they will take to the job like a fish in water. In other words, it is entirely possible that the quality of customer service in a particular company is suffering because the wrong individuals have been placed in the wrong psychological climates.
The study also touched on a very important psychological concept—the self-regulatory focus theory. According to this theory, individuals operate with two main self-regulatory systems. There are those with the promotion focus regulatory system and then there are those with the prevention focus regulatory system.
Individuals with promotion-focused regulation are motivated by growth and development. They seek growth opportunities and strive to achieve pleasure or gain in their lives. These individuals are more influenced by initiative-focused psychological climates.
Individuals who are prevention-focused respond to their needs by trying to prevent any loss or negative outcomes. They are those who prefer to not to get into trouble. It was determined by the study that such individuals were more influenced by the quality-focused climate.
The above-mentioned study was however quick to point out that one psychological climate was necessarily not better than the other. Both psychological climates can lead to great customer experiences. It all depends on the particular employees operating within the climate. The challenge that the leadership of any business has to manage is how to ensure that good employees are not placed under the wrong psychological climate.
The importance of the work of front line employees to the fortunes of any organisation can never be overstated. Their actions and inactions, their attitudes and behaviour, can go a long way in determining the experience customers have. This is why any condition that affects the performance of customer-facing employees has to be thoroughly investigated.
As seen from this discussion, the way front line employees perceive the general business environment and their roles within that environment is crucial to the way they interact with customers. Businesses must ensure that it creates the right work climate for the right employees. Management must see to it that it places the right motivation before the right employees, to ensure that it gets the best out of those employees.
However to achieve this requires managers to really know the customer service employee. It is not enough to employ the one for the front line. Managers must know the kind of employee they have on their hand. They must know what the one thinks of the workplace and what they think of their roles within that workplace. This is why it is of importance that HR managers and administrators institute regular interactions with employees. In my opinion, some of the questions that are asked at exit interviews should have been asked regularly, during the time the exiting employee was with the organisation.
Beyond the work of those in charge of human capital and development, it is also important that immediate supervisors also engage employees regularly to find out their state of mind. Due to the close working relations with the supervisor, an employee might feel more comfortable sharing his or her views to the supervisor than with somebody “from Head Office”. By regularly engaging those within their team, supervisors are able to pick up on issues that those way up the corporate ladder may never notice.
Another angle this discussion throws up is in the area of employee rewards and appraisals. A system of rewards which fails to take the employee’s psychological climate into consideration might actually be unfair to certain employees. If the employee is placed in a psychological climate that is not right for the one, it becomes difficult for the one to perform as well as the one should. Therefore, judging the one according to the expectations of that climate might not be fair to the one.
We are in a time of climate upheaval, with all its attendant challenges. However, it is possible that the greatest challenge facing the survival of an organisation might not be from outside forces but from within the organisation. The greatest threat to the survival of that business might be from employees operating in an organisation with the wrong psychological climate.
