The Degree Of Motivation

Published Date: 02 Nov 2017

Figure -Motivation Process (Adapted from Rollinson, 2008)The greatest contribution to this industrial environment over the past century was a collection of theory that was christened "Classical Management". In terms of data collection these theories were designed and tested during the industrial boom, where the need for theories about the management of people in relation to production was greatly needed. These theories suggested a set of normative rules for structured work, where organisations were viewed as machines that operated for the soul purpose of reaching a determined objective or goal. For example- Fredrick Taylor, scientific management approach suggested that all task could be carried out in a systemized manner to increase production, i.e. maximise output with a minimum input of energy and resources. The most successful example of this method was seen in the car industry. Henry Ford was seen as a visionary in a time of industrial revolution. By studying the process and the resources need Ford found that by adopting the right skills and taking time in to consideration as a resources, cars could be constructed on a mass scale- a machine like process, leading to the creation of Fordism. Around the same time of Fordism and Taylorism- Henri Fayol suggested looking at an organisation from the Top down unlike Taylor. Fayol felt that the organisation should be viewed by its administrative processes not purely by its technical process. This theory suggested the management hierarchical pyramid where functions of the organisation were departmentalized thus linking members of the organisation to a department or group based on skill. However, over time this theory and other theories that followed were disregarded by employee’s and managers- they felt that it removed common scenes and judgement from there task leading to reduced motivation- hence the birth of Motivational Studies and Behavioural Management.

Motivational studies are a search to understand and quantify human nature. These theories in relation to organisations recognised that the human element plays a much bigger role in an organisation than classical management suggested. Vroom and Deci (1970) suggested that theorists should try and understand the concept by answering the question "of what motivates workers to perform effectively" however it "is not an easy one to answer". Many researchers such as David Mc Clelland, John Atkinson, Hertzberg and Maslow have suggested that there is a direct link between employee’s motivation and their performance.

The figure to the right shows that the degree of Motivation is at the highest when an individual feels they have a 50% chance of success. The bell Shape line also suggest that the strength of the motivation declines when the possibility of failure exceeds 50%. This is also the case when the success is increases and exceeds 50%. Researchers conclude that employees are not motivated when objectives are too difficult or unrealistic or when targets are relativity easy to reach. In relation to our case study there is evidence to suggest that the former is the case-leading to low motivation and high turnover of man power. The bell chart provides an explanation of motivation. However, human behaviour and motivation are individualistic and are linked directly to individual attitudes and the elements with in the organisation. Therefore motivation can be a difficult task for an organisation to manage.

There are a number of different theories on motivation and no one conclusive model for industry. However, researchers have agreed that there are two distinct models- inner motivation and outer motivation. Inner motivation as the name suggests is based on our needs both conscious and unconscious and can be divided further in to rational factors and irrational factors. For the purpose of this paper, we will be focusing on Expectancy theory and self-efficacy (rational) and Maslow’s need theory; and Alderfer needs theory and finally, Herzberg’s hygiene and motivation theory.

Rational

Expectancy Theory is based on a mathematical concept, it tries to give a value to each component that effects motivation such as motivation, Expectancy (the individuals belief that his/her performance will lead to a desired result), Instrumentality (assessment of the probability of different levels of rewards based on task performance), Value (the value attached to the reward and/or the value the individual perceives from receiving the reward .e.g. pay increase). According to the theory motivation will only exist if the probability of success is high, the expectation that a reward will be received e.g. bonus or commission and the value of these rewards are highly rated by the individual. In the short term, motivation is controlled by the individuals input i.e. effort, however, the theory is based on rational choices by employees and only a small fraction of employees will understand the linkage between effort equalling results leading to rewards. To counter act this behaviour, managers need to verbally reward good performance, the internal rewards structure should be designed in a way that better performance leads to better rewards and finally training and coaching are important tasks for a manger to help create success and lead to higher levels of motivation.

The second rational theory that will be discussed is self-efficacy. Bandura (1989) defines this concept as "one’s own ability to mobilize motivation, one’s cognitive resources, and one’s own ability to choose the right action in relation to the specific expectations". The root of this concept lies in area of theory called the Pygmalion or Golem effect. This concept refers to the notion that by expressing high expectations, it is possible to strength individual’s competences to complete a task and therefore improving performance. In contrast, the golem effect refers to the opposite by expressing low expectations- performance will fall, for example, if a manager states that they believe this week is going to be a bad week then by expressing this, motivation to perform will decrease leading to decrease revenue. Theorist however, have suggested that this concept may be based on previous experience and has no influence motivation and may solely linked to one’s own view of the task. However, in relation to managers, it is important that they communicate highly their expectations and what they expect from their employee’s, as negative expectations will lead to destructive motivation as employees recognise their own capabilities but it is important for managers to connect strong capabilities with new tasks to maintain a strong foundation for success. Managers can build this concept by carrying out appraisal interview which allows managers and employee’s to have free and open dialog.

Figure -Maslow Needs Based ModelIrrational or need based

Theorist in the area of need based motivation agree that needs are unobservable, internal forces, which create confusion and conflict when objectives/goals are not reached. Individuals will try and remove or reduce this conflict through actions. Therefore needs are classified as force for positive motivation because they trigger attention, action and most of all persistence.

The most recognised needs based model has to be Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. He suggested that humans primary needs can be classified in to five basic needs (figure 2). Maslow recommended a hierarchy of needs to demonstrate that a given need level must be satisfied or reached before the need on the next level becomes a trigger for action and/or attention, or as Maslow expressed "the lowest unsatisfied need will be the most dominant for human behaviour" but only unsatisfied needs can functions as motivation. Maslow’s model recommends that it is important for managers that base their motivation on needs, build the concept on their employees needs and not on what they believe are their needs.

Alderfer’s need theory builds further on Maslow’s concept of motivation, where Alderfer’s reduces the number of basic levels from five to three-

growth: the need for self development

Relatedness: the need for interaction and relationships

Existence: the basic need to survive

Unlike Maslow’s model, ERG suggests that at any given point of time more than one basic need can be in operation as a trigger for motivation. While Maslow’s models is rigid and assumes that the needs follow a logical path and order, therefore unless a lower need is satisfied, an individual is unable to progress to the next level, the ERG theory of motivation is adaptable and flexible in nature. According to Alderfer, an individual can work on growth needs even if his existence or relatedness needs remain unsatisfied. Thus, he describes his concept as a "starving artist" who can struggle for growth even if he is hungry.

For managers, the ERG model recommends that employees have a number of needs that must be fulfilled at the same time. According to the ERG theory, if the manager concentrates solely on one need at a time, this will not effectively motivate the employee.

Frederick Herzberg’s seminal work is the final motivation theory that will be discussed within this paper. According the Herzberg, motivation for individuals are related to job content and description, they are inherently related to the job itself and is not produced by the "carrot and stick incentive". According to Dartey-Baah (2011) "They comprise the physiological need for growth and recognition. The absence of these factors does not prove highly dissatisfying but when present, they build strong levels of motivation that result in good job performance. They are therefore called satisfiers or motivators. These factors include; achievement, recognition, advancement, the work itself, the possibility of personal growth and responsibility." So how do managers eliminate job dissatisfaction? Herzberg (1987) recommends that management can remove dissatisfaction by building a framework that encompasses the following factors: fix poor and disruptive organisational rules, introduce coaching and mentoring, the creation of a supportive culture built on respect and trust, ensure the reward system is competitive, guarantee job and construct a job description that provides meaningful work to all levels and positions.

The above framework suggests factors that can help reduce job dissatisfaction in an organisation; however the frame work will not work or be adopted by an organisation if employee’s issues are not addressed. Managers must be aware "that just because someone is not dissatisfied does not mean one is satisfied either" (Dartey-Baah, 2011). It is crucial for management to investigate the organisational work environment to identify conditions that lead to job satisfaction with in its work force. So how do managers build a frame work for job satisfaction? Herzberg (1987) describes the investigation of motivation factors related to motivation as "job enrichment". He recommended that every job in the organisation should be examined and a framework designed to make it better leading to higher satisfaction for the person carrying it out. Hence, the framework needs to consist of: offering opportunities for personal and job advancement, recognition of contribution, building rewarding and stimulating work, division of responsibility equally to each member of organisational teams, offer training and coaching that can lead to advancement within the organisation.

Herzberg theory is responsible for the modern concept of employee empowerment and the custom of allowing individuals responsibility "for planning and controlling their work, as a means of increasing motivation and satisfaction" (Herzberg, 1987). Hayday (2003) remarked that "Satisfaction may be viewed as a passive attribute, while more proactive measures such as motivation levels are viewed as more closely linked to behavioural change and performance".

Regardless of criticism that the hygiene and motivation theory only applies to unskilled jobs or repetitive and monotonous tasks the theory is still relevant in today’s learning organisation.

There are a number of possible downfalls in management and the theory that encompasses motivation:

Table -Adapted from Laegaard, J,Bindslev, Mille, Organisational Theory