High Performance Working and Culture at Johnson & Johnson

Defining High Performance Working and High Performance Culture

High performance working (HPW) is defined as an overall approach to managing organizations that aims to arouse employee participation and commitment so as to achieve high levels of performance — specifically, to improve the discretionary effort employees invest in their work and to fully utilize the skills and competencies they possess (Belt and Giles, 2009). HPW is also described as a term used to outline a distinct approach to management in the work environment, with the main objective of maximizing organizational performance by investing in the skills and capabilities of employees (Belanger et al., 2002). Ashton and Sung (2002) note that HPW takes into account the effective and efficient utilization of the workforce, with a significant focus on generating good-quality work rather than simply making employees work harder. Giles et al. (2002) similarly point out that the high-performance working approach is distinctively intended to improve the discretionary effort employees place into their work and to fully develop and augment the skills and competencies they possess. Guest (2002) argues that high performance working is potentially an organizational innovation from which every stakeholder — ranging from the employee to the employer and the broader economy — can benefit.

Noe, Hollenbeck, and Gerhert (2003) point out that high performance working is a system whereby an organization achieves the best possible fit between its people and their interactions (the social system) and its technical system (the equipment and processes). Yalabik et al. (2008) assert that high performance working is a system that increases employee productivity when employees are motivated, engaged, and given autonomy. The authors further note that high performance working generally comprises hiring practices, extensive training and education, performance-based pay, workplace empowerment, and the sharing of organizational knowledge.

Mkamwa (2010) conducted a review of widely used terminologies encompassing high performance working systems and found that there is no universally agreed definition for the term "high performance working," owing to its wide-ranging and varied usage. Despite this, Mkamwa (2010) argues that HPW can be defined as a distinct combination of human resource management practices, work-setting structures, and procedures that maximize employee knowledge, competencies, commitment, and flexibility. The concept of high performance working integrates practices that facilitate and encourage employees to make the most of this greater empowerment, affording them opportunities to participate in significant decisions, promoting the development of worker competencies, and providing incentives to engage in decision-making.

Culture determines the manner in which an organization conducts its everyday operations. A high-performance culture is a set of behaviors and norms that enables an organization to achieve superior outcomes by setting clear business objectives, defining employees' accountabilities, creating an environment of trust, and motivating employees to continually grow and reinvest in themselves. In essence, it is an organizational culture that drives a high-performance organization — one that achieves better financial and non-financial results compared to its peers over an extended period (Den Hartog and Verburg, 2004). Jones et al. (2009) define high-performance culture as encompassing four key constituents: leadership, performance enablers, people, and sub-components such as achievement, well-being, innovation, and internal processes. Finney (2008) asserts that a high-performance culture is centered on three components. First, there is a clear and compelling corporate mission that is inspirational enough to facilitate employee engagement. Second, there are shared organizational values — core values that guide employee behavior and influence business practices as the organization delivers on its commitments to consumers, personnel, and other stakeholders. Third, there is shared accountability. High-performance cultures require a setting that encourages employee ownership of not only bottom-line results but also the cultural foundation of the organization (Finney, 2008).

Johnson & Johnson: Company Overview and HR Philosophy

Every corporation that is able to establish, survive, and maintain a reputable name — one that produces consumer trust and confidence — is typically committed to doing more than simply generating revenues and profits. Such a corporation takes care to build and cultivate long-term relationships with all of its stakeholders, becoming a dependable and socially responsible organization capable of earning the confidence of investors, consumers, and personnel alike. Johnson & Johnson is one company that has remarkably achieved this. The corporation has emerged as one of the most iconic and reliable companies in the world, building its brand into a household name within the pharmaceutical and consumer packaged goods sector, and particularly within the baby care products market (Sengupta, Bhattacharya, and Sengupta, 2006).

Johnson & Johnson is an American multinational corporation founded in 1886. The parent company, together with its subsidiaries, is engaged in the research, development, manufacturing, and retailing of a wide range of products in the healthcare sector. The corporation's business operations are classified into three segments: Medical Devices, Consumer, and Pharmaceutical. Its primary focus is the creation of products associated with human health and wellbeing. Johnson & Johnson believes that good health for all individuals is the foundation of thriving communities and advancement. For this reason, over the past 13 decades, the corporation has aimed to support individuals' health at every age and every phase of life. Today, Johnson & Johnson has grown to become the world's largest and most broadly based healthcare corporation, continuing to strive to improve accessibility and affordability, create healthier communities, and make a healthy mind, body, and environment accessible to people across the world (Johnson and Johnson, 2018).

The company's vision statement reads: "Our vision at Johnson & Johnson is for every person to use their unique experiences and backgrounds — together — to spark solutions that create a better, healthier world." Its mission statement reads: "Our mission is to make diversity & inclusion our way of doing business. We will advance our culture of belonging where open hearts and minds combine to unleash the potential of the brilliant mix of people in every corner of Johnson & Johnson" (Johnson and Johnson, 2018). Both statements are directly linked to high performance working: the increased use of workforce diversity, higher labor productivity, workforce innovation, and reduced employee turnover all support high performance systems.

The human resource practices at Johnson & Johnson are similarly aligned with the corporation's high-performance working environment. The company's HRM practices are designed to provide employees with a safe environment, with close attention paid to their career paths, a sense of security, and a setting in which their careers can thrive. Johnson & Johnson adheres to a range of policies to ensure that employees are treated fairly and equally, including an equal employment opportunity policy, a policy on the employment of young persons, a policy for resolving employee disagreements, and a harassment policy (Johnson and Johnson, 2018). Among the most significant practices at J&J are work design practices related to the processes that generate the desired behaviors. A strong example is the company's decentralized management structure. Innovation, flexibility, inventiveness, and diversity-associated, value-based behaviors all support this highly decentralized model, increasing employee engagement and commitment and thereby improving organizational productivity (Johnson and Johnson, 2018).

Importance of HPW and HPC for Johnson & Johnson

High performance working and high-performance culture play a significant role at Johnson & Johnson. One of the most important aspects is that they provide the company with a competitive advantage. Given that Johnson & Johnson faces competition both locally and from global corporations, HPW and HPC facilitate differentiation from market rivals. In the contemporary environment, where information is easily accessible and companies can quickly imitate successful competitors, a genuine high-performance culture remains one of the most difficult characteristics to replicate. These aspects also play a key role in driving innovation at J&J. Through its high-performance culture, the company does not remain stagnant or default to past practices. This has been critical to its continued relevance over many decades. Furthermore, its high-performance working environment has enabled nimble leadership that embraces new ideas rather than settling for the status quo (Kotter, 2008).

HPW and HPC have also been important for Johnson & Johnson in terms of customer focus. Consumers are the focal point of business, and J&J not only understands this but makes it the central emphasis of its operations. The company is committed, from the top down, to ensuring that it delivers exceptional products to consumers, embedding this commitment into everyday operations. In addition, HPW and HPC have contributed to transparency and accountability at Johnson & Johnson. Beginning at the leadership level, because personnel are managed effectively and clearly understand what is expected of them, positive outcomes follow. Employee engagement levels and overall productivity have increased as a result. Employees at all levels of the organization understand the company's strategic direction, and different perspectives are incorporated to facilitate improvement and success (Bustin, 2014).

High performance working and high-performance culture are also evident in the company's approach to measurement and assessment. Johnson & Johnson has a robust system of measurement and evaluation that has demonstrated positive trends in health and healthcare expenses over the life of its programs. In an effort to conduct in-depth analyses and share learning, the corporation has published outcomes of some of its assessments in scientific journals. The company's programs are also guided by standards, benchmarks, and policies that establish minimum expectations globally. On an annual basis, programs at all key sites complete a self-evaluation against these standards, and every three years, an external group of auditors verifies these evaluations and assigns an ultimate scorecard (Johns Hopkins University, 2015).

References

Adler, R. W. (2011). Performance management and organizational strategy: How to design systems that meet the needs of confrontation strategy firms. The British Accounting Review, 43(4), 251–263.

Armstrong, M., & Baron, A. (2005). Managing performance: Performance management in action. CIPD Publishing.

Ashton, D. N., & Sung, J. (2002). Supporting workplace learning for high performance working. International Labour Organization.

Bélanger, J., Giles, A., & Murray, G. (2002). Towards a new production model: Potentialities, tensions and contradictions. In Work and Employment Relations in the High Performance Workplace (pp. 15–71). Continuum.

Belt, V., & Giles, L. (2009). High performance working: A synthesis of key literature. UK Commission for Employment and Skills.

Bititci, U. S., Carrie, A. S., & McDevitt, L. (1997). Integrated performance measurement systems: A development guide. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 17(5), 522–534.

Briscoe, D. R., & Claus, L. M. (2008). Employee performance management: Policies and practices in multinational enterprises. In Performance Management Systems: A Global Perspective (pp. 15–39).

Bustin, G. (2014). Accountability: The key to driving a high-performance culture. McGraw Hill Professional.

Daft, R. L., & Marcic, D. (2016). Understanding management. Nelson Education.

Den Hartog, D. N., & Verburg, R. M. (2004). High performance work systems, organisational culture and firm effectiveness. Human Resource Management Journal, 14(1), 55–78.

Federman, B. (2009). Employee engagement: A roadmap for creating profits, optimizing performance, and increasing loyalty. John Wiley & Sons.

Finney, M. I. (Ed.). (2008). Building high-performance people and organizations. ABC-CLIO.

Giles, A., Murray, G., & Bélanger, J. (2002). Introduction: Assessing the prospects for the high performance workplace. In Work and Employment Relations in the High Performance Workplace. Continuum.

Guest, D. (2006). Smarter ways of working. SSDA Catalyst. Sector Skills Development Agency.

Johns Hopkins University. (2015). Johnson and Johnson. Institute for Health and Productivity Studies.

Johnson and Johnson. (2018). About Johnson and Johnson. Retrieved from https://www.jnj.com/about-jnj

Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (2006). The wisdom of teams: Creating the high-performance organization. HarperCollins.

Kotter, J. P. (2008). A sense of urgency. Harvard Business Press.

Mkamwa, T. F. (2010). The impact of high performance work systems in Irish companies: An examination of company and employee outcomes (Doctoral dissertation, Dublin City University).

Noe, R., Hollenbeck, J., & Gerhert, W. (2003). Acquiring and preparing human resources: Planning for and recruiting human resources. Routledge.

Richardson, F. W. (2014). Enhancing strategies to improve workplace performance. Walden University.

Sengupta, N., Bhattacharya, M. S., & Sengupta, R. N. (2006). Managing change in organizations. PHI Learning.

Silcox, S. (2016). Johnson & Johnson leads the way on holistic employee wellbeing. Personnel Today. Retrieved from https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/johnson-johnson-leads-way-holistic-employee-wellbeing/

Trammell, J. (2014). 10 practical ways to promote a high-performance culture. Entrepreneur. Retrieved from https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/237648

Truss, C., Alfes, K., Delbridge, R., Shantz, A., & Soane, E. (Eds.). (2013). Employee engagement in theory and practice. Routledge.

Yalabik, Z. Y., Chen, S. J., Lawler, J., & Kim, K. (2008). High-performance work system and organizational turnover in East and Southeast Asian countries. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 47(1), 145–152.