(11022720-074)
Motivation
The term motivation is derived from the Latin word movere, meaning "to move."
Motivation can be broadly defined as the forces acting on or within a person that cause the arousal,
direction, and persistence of goal-directed, voluntary effort. Motivation theory is thus concerned with the
processes that explain why and how human behavior is activated.
The broad rubric of motivation and motivation theory is one of the most frequently studied and writtenabout topics in the organizational sciences, and is considered one of the most important areas of study in
the field of organizational behavior. Despite the magnitude of the effort that has been devoted to the study
of motivation, there is no single theory of motivation that is universally accepted. The lack of a unified
theory of motivation reflects both the complexity of the construct and the diverse backgrounds and aims
of those who study it. To delineate these crucial points, it is illuminating to consider the development of
motivation and motivation theory as the objects of scientific inquiry.
HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT
Early explanations of motivation focused on
instincts. Psychologists writing in the late 19th and early twentieth century have suggested that
human beings were basically programmed to behave in certain ways, depending upon the
behavioral cues to which they were exposed. Sigmund Freud, for example, argued that the most
powerful determinants of individual behavior were those of which the individual was not
consciously aware.
According to Motivation and Leadership at Work (Steers, Porter, and Bigley, 1996), in the early
twentieth century researchers began to examine other possible explanations for differences in
individual motivation. Some researchers focused on internal drives as an explanation for
motivated behavior. Others studied the effect of learning and how individuals base current
behavior on the consequences of past behavior. Still others examined the influence of
individuals' cognitive processes, such as the beliefs they have about future events. Over time,
these major theoretical streams of research in motivation were classified into two major schools:
the content theories of motivation and the process theories of motivation.
Although more valid explanations of motivation have been developed, these early theories are important
because they represent the foundation from which contemporary motivation theories were developed and
because many practicing managers still use them.
Abraham Maslow
Hierarchy
Maslow's hierarchy of needs is often portrayed in the shape of a pyramid, with the largest and
most fundamental levels of needs at the bottom, and the need for self-actualization at the top.
The most fundamental and basic four layers of the pyramid contain what Maslow called
"deficiency needs" or "d-needs": esteem, friendship and love, security, and physical needs. With
the exception of the most fundamental (physiological) needs, if these "deficiency needs" are not
met, the body gives no physical indication but the individual feels anxious and tense. Maslow's
theory suggests that the most basic level of needs must be met before the individual will strongly
desire (or focus motivation upon) the secondary or higher level needs. Maslow also coined the
term Met motivation to describe the motivation of people who go beyond the scope of the basic
needs and strive for constant betterment. Met motivated people are driven by B-needs (Being
Needs), instead of deficiency needs (D-Needs).
The human mind and brain is complex and have parallel processes running at the same time, so many
different motivations from different levels of Maslow's pyramid usually occur at the same time. Maslow
was clear about speaking of these levels and their satisfaction in terms such as "relative" and "general"
and "primarily", and says that the human organism is "dominated" by a certain need, rather than saying
that the individual is "only" focused on a certain need at any given time. So Maslow acknowledges that
many different levels of motivation are likely to be going on in a human all at once. His focus in
discussing the hierarchy was to identify the basic types of motivations, and the order that they generally
progress as lower needs are reasonably well met.
1. Physiological needs
For the most part, physiological needs are obvious they are the literal requirements for human
survival. If these requirements are not met, the human body simply cannot continue to function.
Air, water, and food are metabolic requirements for survival in all animals, including humans.
Clothing and shelter provide necessary protection from the elements. The intensity of the human
sexual instinct is shaped more by sexual competition than maintaining a birth rate adequate to
survival of the species.
2. Safety needs
With their physical needs relatively satisfied, the individual's safety needs take precedence and
dominate behavior. In the absence of physical safety due to war, natural disaster, or, in cases of
family violence, childhood abuse, etc. people (re-)experience post-traumatic stress disorder and
trans-generational trauma transfer. In the absence of economic safety due to economic crisis
and lack of work opportunities these safety needs manifest themselves in such things as a
preference for job security, grievance procedures for protecting the individual from unilateral
authority, savings accounts, insurance policies, reasonable disability accommodations, and the
like.
Safety and Security needs include:
Personal security
Financial security
Friendship
Intimacy
Family
Humans need to feel a sense of belonging and acceptance, whether it comes from a large social
group, such as clubs, office culture, religious groups, professional organizations, sports teams,
gangs, or small social connections (family members, intimate partners, mentors, close
colleagues, confidants). They need to love and be loved (sexually and non-sexually) by others. In
the absence of these elements, many people become susceptible to loneliness, social anxiety, and
clinical depression. This need for belonging can often overcome the physiological and security
needs, depending on the strength of the peer pressure; an anorexic, for example, may ignore the
need to eat and the security of health for a feeling of control and belonging.[citation needed]
4. Self- Esteem
All humans have a need to be respected and to have self-esteem and self-respect. Esteem
presents the normal human desire to be accepted and valued by others. People need to engage
themselves to gain recognition and have an activity or activities that give the person a sense of
contribution, to feel self-valued, be it in a profession or hobby. Imbalances at this level can result
in low self-esteem or an inferiority complex. People with low self-esteem need respect from
others. They may seek fame or glory, which again depends on others. Note, however, that many
people with low self-esteem will not be able to improve their view of themselves simply by
receiving fame, respect, and glory externally, but must first accept themselves internally.
Psychological imbalances such as depression can also prevent one from obtaining self-esteem on
both levels.
Most people have a need for a stable self-respect and self-esteem. Maslow noted two versions of
esteem needs, a lower one and a higher one. The lower one is the need for the respect of others,
the need for status, recognition, fame, prestige, and attention. The higher one is the need for selfrespect, the need for strength, competence, mastery, self-confidence, independence and freedom.
The latter one ranks higher because it rests more on inner competence won through experience.
Deprivation of these needs can lead to an inferiority complex, weakness and helplessness.
Maslow also states that even though these are examples of how the quest for knowledge is
separate from basic needs he warns that these two hierarchies are interrelated rather than
sharply separated (Maslow 97). This means that this level of need, as well as the next and
highest level, is not strict, separate levels but closely related to others, and this is possibly the
reason that these two levels of need are left out of most textbooks.
5. Self-actualization
What a man can be, he must be. This forms the basis of the perceived need for selfactualization. This level of need pertains to what a person's full potential is and realizing that
potential. Maslow describes this desire as the desire to become more and more what one is, to
become everything that one is capable of becoming. This is a broad definition of the need for
self-actualization, but when applied to individuals the need is specific. For example one
individual may have the strong desire to become an ideal parent, in another it may be expressed
athletically, and in another it may be expressed in painting, pictures, or inventions. As mentioned
before, in order to reach a clear understanding of this level of need one must first not only
achieve the previous needs, physiological, safety, love, and esteem, but master these needs.
Douglas McGregor
Theory X
In this theory, which has been proven counter-effective in most
modern practice, management assumes employees are inherently lazy and will avoid work if they
can and that they inherently dislike work. As a result of this, management believes that workers
need to be closely supervised and comprehensive systems of controls developed. A hierarchical
structure is needed with narrow span of control at each and every level. According to this theory,
employees will show little ambition without an enticing incentive program and will avoid
responsibility whenever they can. According to Michael J. Papa, if the organizational goals are to
be met, theory X managers rely heavily on threat and coercion to gain their employees'
compliance. Beliefs of this theory lead to mistrust, highly restrictive supervision, and a punitive
atmosphere. The Theory X manager tends to believe that everything must end in blaming
someone. He or she thinks all prospective employees are only out for themselves. Usually these
managers feel the sole purpose of the employee's interest in the job is money. They will blame
the person first in most situations, without questioning whether it may be the system, policy, or
lack of training that deserves the blame. A Theory X manager believes that his or her employees
do not really want to work, that they would rather avoid responsibility and that it is the manager's
job to structure the work and energize the employee. One major flaw of this management style is
it is much more likely to cause diseconomies of scale in large businesses.
Theory Y
In this theory, management assumes employees may be ambitious and
self-motivated and exercise self-control. It is believed that employees enjoy their mental and
physical work duties. According to Papa, to them work is as natural as play. They possess the
ability for creative problem solving, but their talents are underused in most organizations. Given
the proper conditions, theory Y managers believe that employees will learn to seek out and
accept responsibility and to exercise self-control and self-direction in accomplishing objectives
to which they are committed. A Theory Y manager believes that, given the right conditions, most
people will want to do well at work. They believe that the satisfaction of doing a good job is a
strong motivation. Many people interpret Theory Y as a positive set of beliefs about workers. A
close reading of The Human Side of Enterprise reveals that McGregor simply argues for
managers to be open to a more positive view of workers and the possibilities that this creates. He
thinks that Theory Y managers are more likely than Theory X managers to develop the climate of
trust with employees that are required for human resource development. It's human resource
development that is a crucial aspect of any organization. This would include managers
communicating openly with subordinates, minimizing the difference between superiorsubordinate relationships, creating a comfortable environment in which subordinates can develop
and use their abilities. This climate would include the sharing of decision making so that
subordinates have say in decisions that influence them.
Briefly, we asked our respondents to describe periods in their lives when they were exceedingly happy
and unhappy with their jobs. Each respondent gave as many "sequences of events" as he could that met
certain criteriaincluding a marked change in feeling, a beginning and an end, and contained some
substantive description other than feelings and interpretations
The proposed hypothesis appears verified. The factors on the right that led to satisfaction (achievement,
intrinsic interest in the work, responsibility, and advancement) are mostly unipolar; that is, they contribute
very little to job dissatisfaction. Conversely, the dis-satisfiers (company policy and administrative
practices, supervision, interpersonal relationships, working conditions, and salary) contribute very little to
job satisfaction.
Two-factor theory distinguishes between:
Motivators (e.g., challenging work, recognition, responsibility) that give positive satisfaction, arising
from intrinsic conditions of the job itself, such as recognition, achievement, or personal growth, and
Hygiene factors (e.g. status, job security, salary, fringe benefits, work conditions) that do not give
positive satisfaction, though dissatisfaction results from their absence. These are extrinsic to the work
itself, and include aspects such as company policies, supervisory practices, or wages/salary.
Essentially, hygiene factors are needed to ensure an employee is not dissatisfied. Motivation factors are
needed to motivate an employee to higher performance. Herzberg also further classified our actions and
how and why we do them, for example, if you perform a work related action because you have to then
that is classed as movement, but if you perform a work related action because you want to then that is
classed as motivation.
Unlike Maslow, who offered little data to support his ideas, Herzberg and others have presented
considerable empirical evidence to confirm the motivation-hygiene theory, although their work has been
criticized on methodological grounds.
First, unlike Maslow's and Herzberg's theories, it is capable of handling individual differences.
Second, its focus is toward the present and the future, in contrast to drive theory, which emphasizes past
learning,
Third, it specifically correlates behavior to a goal and thus eliminates the problem of assumed
relationships, such as between motivation and performance.
Fourth, it relates motivation to ability:
Performance = Motivation*Ability.
That said, a study by the Gallup Organization, as detailed in the book First, Break All the Rules: What the
World's Greatest Managers Do by Marcus Buckingham and Curt Coffman, appears to provide strong
support for Herzberg's division of satisfaction and dissatisfaction onto two separate scales. In this book,
the authors discuss how the study identified twelve questions that provide a framework for determining
high-performing individuals and organizations. These twelve questions align squarely with Herzberg's
motivation factors, while hygiene factors were determined to have little effect on motivating high
performance.
To better understand employee attitudes and motivation, Frederick Herzberg performed studies to
determine which factors in an employee's work environment caused satisfaction or dissatisfaction. He
published his findings in the 1959 book The Motivation to Work.
The studies included interviews in which employees where asked what pleased and displeased them about
their work. Herzberg found that the factors causing job satisfaction (and presumably motivation) were
different from that causing job dissatisfaction. He developed the motivation-hygiene theory to explain
these results. He called the satisfiers motivators and the dissatisfies hygiene factors, using the term
"hygiene" in the sense that they are considered maintenance factors that are necessary to avoid
dissatisfaction but that by themselves do not provide satisfaction.
The following table presents the top seven factors causing dissatisfaction and the top six factors causing
satisfaction, listed in the order of higher to lower importance.
Leading to dissatisfaction
Company policy
Supervision
Relationship with boss
Work conditions
Salary
Relationship with peers
Security
Herzberg reasoned that because the factors causing satisfaction are different from those causing
dissatisfaction, the two feelings cannot simply be treated as opposites of one another. The opposite of
satisfaction is not dissatisfaction, but rather, no satisfaction. Similarly, the opposite of dissatisfaction is no
dissatisfaction.
While at first glance this distinction between the two opposites may sound like a play on words, Herzberg
argued that there are two distinct human needs portrayed. First, there are physiological needs that can be
fulfilled by money, for example, to purchase food and shelter. Second, there is the psychological need to
achieve and grow, and this need is fulfilled by activities that cause one to grow.
From the above table of results, one observes that the factors that determine whether there is
dissatisfaction or no dissatisfaction are not part of the work itself, but rather, are external factors.
Herzberg often referred to these hygiene factors as "KITA" factors, where KITA is an acronym for Kick in
the Ass, the process of providing incentives or a threat of punishment to cause someone to do something.
Herzberg argues that these provide only short-run success because the motivator factors that determine
whether there is satisfaction or no satisfaction are intrinsic to the job itself, and do not result from carrot
and stick incentives.
Leading to satisfaction
Achievement
Recognition
Work itself
Responsibility
Advancement
Growth
In a survey of 80 teaching staff at Egyptian private universities, Mohamed Hossam El-Din Khalifa and
Quang Truong (2009) found that perception of equity was directly related to job satisfaction when the
outcome in the equity comparison was one of Herzberg's motivators. On the contrary, perceptions of
equity and job satisfaction were not related when the outcome in the equity comparison was one of
Herzberg's hygiene factors. The findings of this study provide a kind of an indirect support to Herzberg's
findings that improving hygiene factors would not lead to improvement in an employee's job satisfaction.
Implications for management
If the motivation-hygiene theory holds, management not only must provide hygiene factors to avoid
employee dissatisfaction, but also must provide factors intrinsic to the work itself for employees to be
satisfied with their jobs.
Herzberg argued that job enrichment is required for intrinsic motivation, and that it is a continuous
management process. According to Herzberg:
"The job should have sufficient challenge to utilize the full ability of the employee."
"Employees who demonstrate increasing levels of ability should be given increasing levels of
responsibility."
"If a job cannot be designed to use an employee's full abilities, then the firm should consider automating
the task or replacing the employee with one who has a lower level of skill. If a person cannot be fully
utilized, then there will be a motivation problem."
Critics of Herzberg's theory argue that the two-factor result is observed because it is natural for people to
take credit for satisfaction and to blame dissatisfaction on external factors. Furthermore, job satisfaction
does not necessarily imply a high level of motivation or productivity.
Herzberg's theory has been broadly read and despite its weaknesses its enduring value is that it recognizes
that true motivation comes from within a person and not from KITA factors. (French, 2008)
2. Reinforcement theory.
4. Equity theory.
A few years after Locke published his article, another researcher, Dr Gary Latham, studied the
effect of goal setting in the workplace. His results supported exactly what Locke had found, and
the inseparable link between goal setting and workplace performance was formed.
In 1990, Locke and Latham published their seminal work, "A Theory of Goal Setting and Task
Performance." In this book, they reinforced the need to set specific and difficult goals, and they
outlined three other characteristics of successful goal setting.
1. Clarity
Clear goals are measurable and unambiguous. When a goal is clear and specific,
with a definite time set for completion, there is less misunderstanding about what behaviors will
be rewarded. You know what's expected, and you can use the specific result as a source of
motivation. When a goal is vague or when it's expressed as a general instruction, like "Take
initiative" it has limited motivational value.
To improve your or your team's performance, set clear goals that use specific and measurable
standards. "Reduce job turnover by 15%" or "Respond to employee suggestions within 48 hours"
are examples of clear goals.
When you use the SMART acronym to help you set goals, you ensure the clarity of the goal by
making it Specific, Measurable and Time-bound.
2. Challenge
One of the most important characteristics of goals is the level of challenge.
People are often motivated by achievement, and they'll judge a goal based on the significance of
the anticipated accomplishment. When you know that what you do will be well received, there's
a natural motivation to do a good job.
Rewards typically increase for more difficult goals. If you believe you'll be well compensated or
otherwise rewarded for achieving a challenging goal, that will boost your enthusiasm and your
drive to get it done.
Setting SMART goals that are Relevant links them closely to the rewards given for achieving
challenging goals. Relevant goals will further the aims of your organization, and these are the
kinds of goals that most employers will be happy to reward.
When setting goals, make each goal a challenge. If an assignment is easy and not viewed as very
important and if you or your employee doesn't expect the accomplishment to be significant
then the effort may not be impressive.
Note:
It's important to strike an appropriate balance between a challenging goal and a realistic goal.
Setting a goal that you'll fail to achieve is possibly more de-motivating than setting a goal that's
too easy. The need for success and achievement is strong, therefore people are best motivated by
challenging, but realistic, goals. Ensuring that goals are Achievable or Attainable is one of the
elements of SMART.
3. Commitment
Goals must be understood and agreed upon if they are to be effective.
Employees are more likely to "buy into" a goal if they feel they were part of creating that goal.
The notion of participative management rests on this idea of involving employees in setting goals
and making decisions.
One version of SMART for use when you are working with someone else to set their goals
has A and R stand for Agreed and Realistic instead of Attainable and Relevant. Agreed goals lead
to commitment.
This doesn't mean that every goal has to be negotiated with and approved by employees. It does
mean that goals should be consistent and in line with previous expectations and organizational
concerns. As long as the employee believes that the goal is consistent with the goals of the
company, and believes the person assigning the goal is credible, then the commitment should be
there.
Interestingly, goal commitment and difficulty often work together. The harder the goal, the more
commitment is required. If you have an easy goal, you don't need a lot of motivation to get it
done. When you're working on a difficult assignment, you will likely encounter challenges that
require a deeper source of inspiration and incentive.
As you use goal setting in your workplace, make an appropriate effort to include people in their
own goal setting. Encourage employees to develop their own goals, and keep them informed
about what's happening elsewhere in the organization. This way, they can be sure that their goals
are consistent with the overall vision and purpose that the company seeks.
4. Feedback
In addition to selecting the right type of goal, an effective goal program must also
include feedback. Feedback provides opportunities to clarify expectations, adjust goal difficulty,
and gain recognition. It's important to provide benchmark opportunities or targets, so individuals
can determine for themselves how they're doing.
These regular progress reports, which measure specific success along the way, are particularly
important where it's going to take a long time to reach a goal. In these cases, break down the
goals into smaller chunks, and link feedback to these intermediate milestones.
SMART goals are Measurable, and this ensures that clear feedback can be provided.
With all your goal setting efforts, make sure that you build in time for providing formal
feedback. Certainly, informal check-ins are important, and they provide a means of giving
regular encouragement and recognition. However, taking the time to sit down and discuss goal
performance is a necessary factor in long-term performance improvement. See our article on
Delegation for more on this.
5. Task Complexity
The last factor in goal setting theory introduces two more requirements
for success. For goals or assignments that are highly complex, take special care to ensure that the
work doesn't become too overwhelming.
People who work in complicated and demanding roles probably have a high level of motivation
already. However, they can often push themselves too hard if measures aren't built into the goal
expectations to account for the complexity of the task. It's therefore important to do the
following:
Give the person sufficient time to meet the goal or improve performance.
Provide enough time for the person to practice or learn what is expected and required for
success.
The whole point of goal setting is to facilitate success. Therefore, you want to make sure that the
conditions surrounding the goals don't frustrate or inhibit people from accomplishing their
objectives. This reinforces the "Attainable" part of SMART.
Key Points
Goal setting is something most of us recognize as necessary for our success.
By understanding goal setting theory, you can effectively apply the principles to goals that you or
your team members set. Locke and Latham's research confirms the usefulness of SMART goal
setting, and their theory continues to influence the way we measure performance today.
Use clear, challenging goals, and commit yourself to achieving them. Provide feedback on goal
performance. Take into consideration the complexity of the task. If you follow these simple rules,
your goal setting process will be much more successful, and your overall performance will
improve.
2. Reinforcement Theory
Reinforcement theory is the
process of shaping behavior by controlling the consequences of the behavior. In reinforcement theory a
combination of rewards and/or punishments is used to reinforce desired behavior or extinguish unwanted
behavior. Any behavior that elicits a consequence is called operant behavior, because the individual
operates on his or her environment. Reinforcement theory concentrates on the relationship between the
operant behavior and the associated consequences, and is sometimes referred to as operant conditioning.
months for such behavior, his desirable behaviors may diminish. Thus, to avoid unwanted extinction,
managers may have to continue to offer positive behavioral consequences.
SCHEDULES OF REINFORCEMENT
The timing of the behavioral consequences that
follow a given behavior is called the reinforcement schedule. Basically, there are two broad types of
reinforcement schedules: continuous and intermittent. If a behavior is reinforced each time it occurs, it is
called continuous reinforcement. Research suggests that continuous reinforcement is the fastest way to
establish new behaviors or to eliminate undesired behaviors. However, this type of reinforcement is
generally not practical in an organizational setting. Therefore, intermittent schedules are usually
employed. Intermittent reinforcement means that each instance of a desired behavior is not reinforced.
There are at least four types of intermittent reinforcement schedules: fixed interval, fixed ratio, variable
interval, and variable ratio.
Fixed interval schedules of reinforcement occur when desired behaviors are reinforced after set periods of
time. The simplest example of a fixed interval schedule is a weekly paycheck. A fixed interval schedule of
reinforcement does not appear to be a particularly strong way to elicit desired behavior, and behavior
learned in this way may be subject to rapid extinction. The fixed ratio schedule of reinforcement applies
the reinforcer after a set number of occurrences of the desired behaviors. One organizational example of
this schedule is a sales commission based on number of units sold. Like the fixed interval schedule, the
fixed ratio schedule may not produce consistent, long-lasting, behavioral change.
Variable interval reinforcement schedules are employed when desired behaviors are reinforced after
varying periods of time. Examples of variable interval schedules would be special recognition for
successful performance and promotions to higher-level positions. This reinforcement schedule appears to
elicit desired behavioral change that is resistant to extinction.
Finally, the variable ratio reinforcement schedule applies the reinforcer after a number of desired
behaviors have occurred, with the number changing from situation to situation. The most common
example of this reinforcement schedule is the slot machine in a casino, in which a different and unknown
number of desired behaviors (i.e., feeding a quarter into the machine) is required before the reward (i.e., a
jackpot) is realized. Organizational examples of variable ratio schedules are bonuses or special awards
that are applied after varying numbers of desired behaviors occur. Variable ratio schedules appear to
produce desired behavioral change that is consistent and very resistant to extinction.
Reinforcement theory is an important explanation of how people learn behavior. It is often applied to
organizational settings in the context of a behavioral modification program. Although the assumptions of
reinforcement theory are often criticized, its principles continue to offer important insights into individual
learning and motivation.
2. Job Theory
Work arrangement (or rearrangement) aimed at reducing or
overcoming job dissatisfaction
and employee alienation arising
from
repetitive
and mechanistic tasks. Through job design, organizations try to raise productivity levels by
offering non-monetary rewards such as greater satisfaction from a sense of personal achievement
in meeting the increased challenge and responsibility of one's work. Job enlargement, job
enrichment, job rotation, and job simplification are the various techniques used in a job
design exercise.
Job enlargement
Job enlargement means increasing the scope of a job through
extending the range of its job duties and responsibilities generally within the same level and
periphery. This contradicts the principles of specialization and the division of labor whereby
work is divided into small units, each of which is performed repetitively by an individual worker.
Some motivational theories suggest that the boredom and alienation caused by the division of
labour can actually cause efficiency to fall. Thus, job enlargement seeks to motivate workers
through reversing the process of specialization. A typical approach might be to replace assembly
lines with modular work; instead of an employee repeating the same step on each product, they
perform several tasks on a single item. In order for employees to be provided with Job
Enlargement they will need to be retrained in new fields which can prove to be a lengthy process.
However results have shown that this process can see its effects diminish after a period of time,
as even the enlarged job role become the mundane, this in turn can lead to similar levels of
demotivation and job dissatisfaction at the expense of increased training levels and costs. The
continual enlargement of a job over time is also known as 'job creep,' which can lead to an
unmanageable workload.
Job enrichment
Job enrichment is an attempt to motivate employees by giving them the opportunity to use the
range of their abilities. It is an idea that was developed by the American psychologist Frederick
Herzberg in the 1950s. It can be contrasted to job enlargement which simply increases the
number of tasks without changing the challenge. As such job enrichment has been described as
'vertical loading' of a job, while job enlargement is 'horizontal loading'. An enriched job should
ideally contain:
Techniques
Job enrichment, as a managerial activity includes a three steps technique:
1. Turn employees' effort into performance:
Ensuring that objectives are well-defined and understood by everyone. The overall
corporate mission statement should be communicated to all. Individual's goals should also be
clear. Each employee should know exactly how he/she fits into the overall process and be aware
of how important their contributions are to the organization and its customers.
Providing adequate resources for each employee to perform well. This includes support functions
like information technology, communication technology, and personnel training and
development.Creating a supportive corporate culture. This includes peer support networks,
supportive management, and removing elements that foster mistrust and politicking.
Free flow of information. Eliminate secrecy. Provide enough freedom to facilitate job excellence.
Encourage and reward employee initiative. Flextime or compressed hours could be offered.
Provide adequate recognition, appreciation, and other motivators.
Provide skill improvement opportunities. This could include paid education at universities or on
the job training.
Provide job variety. This can be done by job sharing or job rotation programmes.
It may be necessary to re-engineer the job process. This could involve redesigning the physical
facility, redesign processes, change technologies, simplification of procedures, elimination of
repetitiveness, redesigning authority structures.
2. Link employees performance directly to reward;
Clear definition of the reward is a must
Explanation of the link between performance and reward is important
Make sure the employee gets the right reward if performs well
If reward is not given, explanation is needed
3. Make sure the employee wants the reward. How to find out?
Ask them
Use surveys (checklist, listing, questions)
Skill
variety
Doing different things; using different valued skills, abilities, and talents.
- The degree to which a job requires a variety of challenging skills and abilities.
-
2.
Task
identity
- Doing a complete job from beginning to end, the whole job rather than bits and pieces.
- The degree to which a job requires completion of a whole and identifiable piece of work.
3.
Task
significance
- The degree of meaningful impact the job has on others; the importance of the job.
- The degree to which the job has a perceivable impact on the lives of others, either within the
organization
or
the
world
at
large.
4.
Autonomy
- Freedom to do the work as one sees fit; discretion in scheduling, decision-making, and means
for
accomplishing
a
job.
- The degree to which the job gives the worker freedom and independence in scheduling work
and
determining
how
the
work
will
be
carried
out.
5.
Feedback
- Clear and direct information about job outcomes or performance.
- The degree to which the worker gets information about the effectiveness of his or her efforts,
either directly from the work itself or from others.
Equity Theory
Equity theory is a theory that attempts to explain relational
satisfaction in terms of perceptions of fair/unfair distributions of resources within interpersonal
relationships. Considered one of the justice theories, equity theory was first developed in 1963
by John Stacey Adams, a workplace and behavioral psychologist, who asserted that employees
seek to maintain equity between the inputs that they bring to a job and the outcomes that they
receive from it against the perceived inputs and outcomes of others (Adams, 1965). The belief is
that people value fair treatment which causes them to be motivated to keep the fairness
maintained within the relationships of their co-workers and the organization. The structure of
equity in the workplace is based on the ratio of inputs to outcomes. Inputs are the contributions
made by the employee for the organization.
Definition of equity
An individual will consider that he is treated fairly if he perceives the ratio of his inputs to his
outcomes to be equivalent to those around him. Thus, all else being equal, it would be acceptable
for a more senior colleague to receive higher compensation, since the value of his experience
(and input) is higher. The way people base their experience with satisfaction for their job is to
make comparisons with themselves to people they work with. If an employee notices that
another person is getting more recognition and rewards for their contributions, even when both
have done the same amount and quality of work, it would persuade the employee to be
dissatisfied. This dissatisfaction would result in the employee feeling underappreciated and
perhaps worthless. This is in direct contrast with the idea of equity theory, the idea is to have the
rewards (outcomes) be directly related with the quality and quantity of the employees
contributions (inputs). If both employees were perhaps rewarded the same, it would help the
workforce realize that the organization is fair, observant, and appreciative.
This can be illustrated by the following equation:
Outcomes
Outputs are defined as the positive and negative consequences that an individual perceives a
participant has incurred as a consequence of his/her relationship with another. When the ratio of
inputs to outcomes is close, than the employee should have much satisfaction with their job.
Outputs can be both tangible and intangible (Walster, Traupmann & Walster, 1978). Typical
outcomes include any of the following:
Job security, Salary, Employee benefit, Expenses, Recognition, Reputation, Responsibility
Sense of achievement, Praise, Thanks, Stimuli.
Propositions
Equity theory consists of four propositions:
1.
Individuals seek to maximize their outcomes (where outcomes are defined as rewards
minus costs).
2.
Groups can maximize collective rewards by developing accepted systems for equitably
apportioning rewards and costs among members. Systems of equity will evolve within
groups, and members will attempt to induce other members to accept and adhere to these
systems. The only way groups can induce members to equitably behave is by making it
more profitable to behave equitably than inequitably. Thus, groups will generally reward
members who treat others equitably and generally punish (increase the cost for) members
who treat others inequitably.
3.
4.
Individuals who perceive that they are in an inequitable relationship attempt to eliminate
their distress by restoring equity. The greater the inequity, the more distress people feel
and the more they try to restore equity. (Walster, Traupmann and Walster, 1978)
Expectancy Theory
Expectancy Theory proposes that a person will decide to
behave or act in a certain way because they are motivated to
select a specific behavior over other behaviors due to what they
expect the result of that selected behavior will be. In essence,
the motivation of the behavior selection is determined by the
desirability of the outcome. However, at the core of the theory
is the cognitive process of how an individual processes the different
motivational elements. This is done before making the ultimate choice.
The outcome is not the sole determining factor in making the
decision of how to behave.
Victor Vroom
Expectancy theory is about the mental processes regarding choice, or choosing. It explains the
processes that an individual undergoes to make choices. In the study of organizational behavior,
expectancy theory is a motivation theory first proposed by Victor Vroom of the Yale School of
Management.
"This theory emphasizes the needs for organizations to relate rewards directly to performance
and to ensure that the rewards provided are those rewards deserved and wanted by the
recipients."
Victor H. Vroom (1964) defines motivation as a process governing choices among alternative
forms of voluntary activities, a process controlled by the individual. The individual makes
choices based on estimates of how well the expected results of a given behavior are going to
match up with or eventually lead to the desired results. Motivation is a product of the
individuals expectancy that a certain effort will lead to the intended performance, the
instrumentality of this performance to achieving a certain result, and the desirability of this result
for the individual, known as valence.
Key Elements
The Expectancy Theory of Motivation explains the behavioral process of why individuals choose
one behavioral option over another. It also explains how they make decisions to achieve the end
they value. Vroom introduces three variables within the expectancy theory which are valence
(V), expectancy (E) and instrumentality (I). The three elements are important behind choosing
one element over another because they are clearly defined: effort-performance expectancy (E>P
expectancy), performance-outcome expectancy (P>O expectancy).
1.
Expectancy:
2.
Instrumentality:
3. Valence- V(R).
Effort
Performance
Performance
Outcome
(EP).
(PO).
likely to lead to low expectancy perceptions. Control is one's perceived control over
performance. In order for expectancy to be high, individuals must believe that they have some
degree of control over the expected outcome.
Valence- V(R)
Valence: the value the individual places on the rewards based on their
needs, goals, values and Sources of Motivation. Factors associated with the individual's valence
for outcomes are values, needs, goals, preferences and Sources of Motivation Strength of an
individuals preference for a particular outcome.
The valence refers the value the individual personally places on the rewards. -1 0 +1
-1= avoiding the outcome 0= indifferent to the outcome +1=welcomes the outcome
In order for the valence to be positive, the person must prefer attaining the outcome to not
attaining it.
Expectancy Theory of motivation can help managers understand how individuals make decisions
regarding various behavioral alternatives. The model below shows the direction of motivation,
when behavior is energized:
Integrating
Motivation
contemporary
Theories
of
Many of the ideas underline the contemporary motivation theories are complementary and youll
understand better how to motivate. People if you see how the theories fit to gather. Its basic
foundation is the expectancy model. Lets works through the model starting on the left.
The individual effort box has an arrow reading into it. This arrow flow from the individual goals.
Consistent with goal setting theory .this goal effort link is meant to illustrate that goal direct
behavior. Expectancy theory predict that an employee will exert a high level of effort If he or she
perceived that there is a strong relationship between effort and performance, performance and
reward, and reward and satisfaction of personal goals.
Pay-for-Performance Programs
Why do most people work? Although there may be many reasons why people work, most of us
do so because it pays us an amount of money that allows us to satisfy our needs and wants.
Because monetary compensation is an important type of reward, how can managers use pay to
motivate high levels of employee performance? The relation between pay and motivation
explains the intent and logic behind pay-for-performance programs.
Pay-for-performance programs are compensation plans that pay employees on the basis of
some performance measure. Piece-rate pay plans, wage incentive plans, profit sharing, and
lump-sum bonuses are examples. What differentiates these forms of pay from more traditional
compensation plans is that instead of paying a person for time on the job, pay is adjusted to
reflect some performance measure. These performance measures might include such things as
individual productivity, team or work group productivity, departmental productivity, or the
overall organization's profit performance. For instance, employee teams at ExxonMobil
Corporation are eligible for team-performance-based incentives of as much as 30 percent of base
pay. And employees at Comfort Shoe Specialists, a retail store located in a shopping center
outside St.
Louis, each get a weekly $50 bonus if sales for the week exceed those of the previous week.
Pay-for-performance compensation is probably most compatible with expectancy theory.
Specifically, individuals should perceive a strong relationship between their performance and the
rewards they receive for motivation to be maximized. If rewards are allocated only on nonperformance factorssuch as seniority, job title, or across-the-board pay raises then employees
are likely to reduce their efforts. From a motivation perspective, making some or all of
employee's pay conditional on some performance measure focuses his or her attention and
effort toward that measure and then reinforces the continuation of the effort with a reward. If the
employee, team, or organization's performance declines, so does the reward. Thus, there's an
Incentive to keep efforts and motivation strong.
Open-Book Management
Many organizations of various sizes are involving their
employees in workplace decisions by opening up the financial statements (the "books"). They
share that information so that employees will be motivated to make better decisions about their
work and better able to understand the implications of what they do, how they do it, and the
ultimate impact on the bottom line. This approach is called open-book management. According
to a study by Ernst & Young LLP, workers who are treated as business partners are more likely to
be productive and motivated to contribute to their company's profitability.
The goal of open-book management is to get employees to think like an owner by seeing the
impact their decisions and actions have on financial results. But most employees don't have the
knowledge or background to understand the financials, so they have to be taught how to read and
understand the organization's financial statements. And once employees have this knowledge,
managers need to share the numbers regularly with them.
Some organizations take open-book management a step further. For instance, at Springfield
Remanufacturing Company in Springfield, Missouri, employees not only get financial
information but also receive bonuses and incentive pay based on profit improvements. Through
this type of sharing arrangement, employees begin to see the link between their efforts, level of
performance, and operational results. Most firms that have introduced open-book management
say that it has significantly helped the business. For instance, Allstate's Business Insurance
Group used open-book management to boost return on equity from 2.9 percent to 16.5 percent
in just three years. The unit's president said, "It got employees involved and committed, and it
gave them some ownership. They understood they had an impact on the bottom line."
Motivating Professionals
In contrast to a generation ago, the typical employee today is
more likely to be a highly trained professional with a college degree than a blue-collar factory
worker. These professionals receive a great deal of intrinsic satisfaction from their work. They
tend to be well paid. What special concerns should managers be aware of when trying to
motivate a team of engineers at Intel, software designers at SAS Institute, or a group of
consultants at Accenture? Professionals are typically different from nonprofessionals. They have
a strong and long-term commitment to their field of expertise. Their loyalty is more often to their
profession than to their employer. To keep current in their field, they need to regularly update
their knowledge, and because of their commitment to their profession they rarely define their
workweek as 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. five days a week.
What motivates professionals? Money and promotions typically are low on their priority list.
Why? They tend to be well paid and they enjoy what they do. In contrast, job challenge tends to
be ranked high. They like to tackle problems and find solutions. Their chief reward in their job is
the work itself. Professionals also value support. They want others to think that what they are
working on is important. That may be true for all employees, but professionals tend to be focused
on their work as their central life interest, whereas nonprofessionals typically have other interests
outside of work that can compensate for needs not met on the job.
The preceding description implies a few guidelines to keep in mind when motivating
professionals. Provide them with ongoing, challenging projects. Give them autonomy to follow
their interests, and allow them to structure their work in ways they find productive. Reward them
with educational opportunitiesadditional training, workshops, attending conferencesthat
allow them to keep current in their field. Also reward them with recognition, and ask questions
and use other actions that demonstrate to them that you're sincerely interested in what they're
doing and value it.
managers also recognize the power of praise. However, you need to be sure that these "pats on
the back" are sincere and given for the right reasons.
What else can managers do to motivate high levels of performance from minimum-wage
employees? Again, we can look to job design and expectancy theories for some answers. In
service industries such as travel and hospitality, retail sales, child care, and maintenance in which
pay for frontline employees generally does not exceed the minimum-wage level, successful
companies are empowering these frontline employees with more authority to address customers'
problems. If we use the JCM to examine this change, we can see that this type of job redesign
provides enhanced motivation because employees now experience increased skill variety, task
identity, task significance, autonomy, and feedback. For instance, almost every job at Marriott
International has been redesigned to place more workers in contact with more guests more of the
time. These employees are now able to take care of customer complaints and requests that
formerly were referred to a manager or another department. In addition, employees have at least
part of their pay tied to customer satisfaction, so there's a clear link between level of performance
and reward (instrumentality linkage from expectancy theory). So, even though motivating
minimum-wage workers may be a challenge, we can still use what we know about employee
motivation to help us find some answers.
Individualize rewards. Because employees have different needs, what acts as a reinforcer for
one may not for another. Managers should use their knowledge of employee differences to
individualize the rewards they control, such as pay, promotions, recognition, desirable work
assignments, autonomy, and participation.
Link rewards to performance. Managers need to make rewards contingent on performance.
Rewarding factors other than performance will only reinforce those other factors. Important
rewards such as pay increases and promotions should be given for the attainment of specific
goals. Managers should also look for ways to increase the visibility of rewards, making them
potentially more motivating.
Check the system for equity. Employees should perceive that rewards or outcomes are equal to
the inputs. On a simple level, experience, ability, effort, and other obvious inputs should explain
differences in pay, responsibility, and other obvious outcomes. And remember that one person's
equity is another's inequity, so an ideal reward system should probably weigh inputs differently
in arriving at the proper rewards for each job.
Don't ignore money. It's easy to get so caught up in setting goals, creating interesting jobs, and
providing opportunities for participation that you forget that money is a major reason why most
people work. Thus, the allocation of performance-based wage increases, piecework bonuses, and
other pay incentives is important in determining employee motivation. A review of 80 studies
evaluating motivational methods and their impact on employee productivity supports this
point. Goal setting alone produced, on average, a 16 percent increase in productivity; job
redesign efforts to enrich jobs yielded 8 to 16 percent increases; employee participation in
decision making produced a median increase of less than 1 percent; and monetary incentives led
to an average increase of 30 percent. We're not saying that managers should focus solely on
money as a motivational tool. Rather, we're simply stating the obviousthat is, if money is
removed as an incentive, people aren't going to show up for work. The same can't be said for
removing goals, enriched work, or participation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------