Motivation
All organizations are concerned with what should be done to achieve sustained high levels of performance through people. This means giving close attention to how individuals can best be motivated through such means as incentives, rewards, leadership and, importantly, the work they do and the organization context within which they carry out that work. The aim is to develop motivation processes and a work environment that will help to ensure that individuals deliver results in accordance with the expectations of management. Motivation theory examines the process of motivation. It explains why people at work behave in the way they do in terms of their efforts and the directions they are taking. It describes what organizations can do to encourage people to apply their efforts and abilities in ways that will further the achievement of the organization’s goals as well as satisfying their own needs. It is also concerned with job satisfaction the factors that create it and its impact on performance. In understanding and applying motivation theory, the aim is to obtain added value through people in the sense that the value of their output exceeds the cost of generating it. This can be achieved through discretionary effort. In most if not all roles there is scope for individuals to decide how much effort they want to exert. They can do just enough to get away with it, or they can throw themselves into their work and deliver added value. Discretionary effort can be a key component in organizational performance.
Unfortunately, approaches to motivation are too often underpinned by simplistic assumptions about how it works. The process of motivation is much more complex than many people believe. People have different needs, establish different goals to satisfy those needs and take different actions to achieve those goals. It is wrong to assume that one approach to motivation fits all. That is why the assumptions underlying belief in the virtues of performance-related pay as a means of providing a motivational incentive are simplistic. Motivational practices are most likely to function effectively if they are based on proper understanding of what is involved.
Motivation is a term that refers to a process that elicits, controls, and sustains certain behaviours. At one time, employees were considered just another input into the production of goods and services. But this changed after the Hawthorne Studies. The Hawthorne studies were conducted by Elton Mayo at Hawthorne Plant in the 1920s. The researches were studying the effect of different working environments on productivity. They used lighting as an experimental variable (the effect of bright lighting and dull lighting). Initially they noticed that employees were working harder but it was not because of the lighting. They concluded that productivity increased due to attention that the workers got from the research team and not because of changes to the experimental variable. Hawthorne studies found that employees are not motivated solely by money but motivation is linked to employee behaviour and their attitudes. The Hawthorne Studies began the human relations approach to management, so the needs and motivation of employees became the primary focus of managers.
THE PROCESS OF MOTIVATION
A motive is a reason for doing something. Motivation is concerned with the factors that influence people to behave in certain ways. The three components of motivation as listed by Arnold et al (1991) are:
v direction – what a person is trying to do;
v effort – how hard a person is trying;
v Persistence – how long a person keeps on trying?
Motivating other people is about getting them to move in the direction you want them to go in order to achieve a result. Motivating yourself is about setting the direction independently and then taking a course of action which will ensure that you get there. Motivation can be described as goal-directed behaviour. People are motivated when they expect that a course of action is likely to lead to the attainment of a goal and a valued reward – one that satisfies their needs. Well motivated people are those with clearly defined goals who take action that they expect will achieve those goals. Such people may be self-motivated, and as long as this means they are going in the right direction to achieve what they are there to achieve, then this is the best form of motivation. Most people, however, need to be motivated to a greater or lesser degree. The organization as a whole can provide the context within which high levels of motivation can be achieved by providing incentives and rewards, satisfying work, and opportunities for learning and growth. But managers still have a major part to play in using their motivating skills to get people to give of their best, and to make good use of the motivational processes provided by the organization. To do this it is necessary to understand the process of motivation –
How it works and the different types of motivation exist.
A needs-related model of the process of motivation is shown in following Figure. This suggests that motivation is initiated by the conscious or unconscious recognition of unsatisfied needs. These needs create wants, which are desires to achieve or obtain something. Goals are then established which it is believed will satisfy these needs and wants and a behaviour pathway is selected which it is expected will achieve the goal. If the goal is achieved, the need will be satisfied and the behaviour is likely to be repeated the next time a similar need emerges. If the goal is not achieved, the same action is less likely to be repeated. This process of repeating successful behaviour or actions is called reinforcement or the law of effect (Hull, 1951). It has, however, been criticised by All port (1954) as ignoring the influence of expectations and therefore constituting ‘hedonism of the past’.
| |||||
 | |||||
 | |||||
| |||||||
| |||||||
 | |||||||
 | |||||||
TYPES OF MOTIVATION
Motivation at work can take place in two ways. First, people can motivate themselves by seeking, finding and carrying out work (or being given work) that satisfies their needs or at least leads them to expect that their goals will be achieved. Secondly, people can be motivated by management through such methods as pay, promotion, praise, etc. There are two types of motivation as originally identified by Herzberg et al (1957):
v Intrinsic motivation – the self-generated factors that influence people to behave in a particular way or to move in a particular direction. These factors include responsibility (feeling that the work is important and having control over one’s own resources), autonomy (freedom to act), scope to use and develop skills and abilities, interesting and challenging work and opportunities for advancement.
v Extrinsic motivation – what is done to or for people to motivate them? This includes rewards, such as increased pay, praise, or promotion, and punishments, such as disciplinary action, withholding pay, or criticism. Extrinsic motivators can have an immediate and powerful effect, but it will not necessarily last long. The intrinsic motivators, which are concerned with the ‘quality of working life’ (a phrase and movement that emerged from this concept), are likely to have a deeper and longer-term effect because they are inherent in individuals and not imposed from outside.
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MOTIVATIONS, JOB
SATISFACTION AND MONEY
The basic requirements for job satisfaction may include comparatively higher pay, an equitable payment system, real opportunities for promotion, considerate and participative management, a reasonable degree of social interaction at work, interesting and varied tasks and a high degree of autonomy: control over work pace and work methods. The degree of satisfaction obtained by individuals, however, depends largely upon their own needs and expectations, and the working environment.
JOB SATISFACTION
The term ‘job satisfaction’ refers to the attitudes and feelings people have about their work. Positive and favourable attitudes towards the job indicate job satisfaction. Negative and unfavourable attitudes towards the job indicate job dissatisfaction. Morale is often defined as being equivalent to job satisfaction. Thus Guion (1958) defines morale as ‘the extent to which an individual’s needs are satisfied and the extent to which the individual perceives that satisfaction as stemming from his (sic) total work situation’. Other definitions stress the group aspects of morale. Gilmer (1961) suggests that morale ‘is a feeling of being accepted by and belonging to a group of employees through adherence to common goals’. He distinguishes between morale as a group variable, related to the degree to which group members feel attracted to their group and desire to remain a member of it, and job attitude as an individual variable related to the feelings employees have about their job.
Factors affecting job satisfaction
The level of job satisfaction is affected by intrinsic and extrinsic motivating factors, the quality of supervision, social relationships with the work group and the degree to which individuals succeed or fail in their work. Purcell et al (2003) believe that discretionary behaviour which helps the firm to be successful is most likely to happen when employees are well motivated and feel committed to the organization and when the job gives them high levels of satisfaction. Their research found that the key factors affecting job satisfaction were career opportunities, job influence, teamwork and job challenge.
Job satisfaction and performance
It is a commonly held and a seemingly not unreasonable belief that an increase in job satisfaction will result in improved performance. But research has not established any strongly positive connection between satisfaction and performance. A review of the extensive literature on this subject by Brayfield and Crockett (1955) concluded that there was little evidence of any simple or appreciable relationship between employee attitudes and their performance. An updated review of their analysis by Vroom (1964) covered 20 studies, in each of which one or more measures of job satisfaction or employee attitudes was correlated with one or more criteria of performance. The median correlation of all these studies was 0.14, which is not high enough to suggest a marked relationship between satisfaction and performance. Brayfield and Crockett concluded that: Productivity is seldom a goal in itself but a means to goal attainment. Therefore we might expect high satisfaction and high productivity to occur together when productivity is perceived as a path to certain important goals and when these goals are achieved. Under such conditions, satisfaction and productivity might be unrelated or even negatively related.
It can be argued that it is not job satisfaction that produces high performance but high performance that produces job satisfaction, and that a satisfied worker is not necessarily a productive worker and a high producer is not necessarily a satisfied worker. People are motivated to achieve certain goals and will be satisfied if they achieve these goals through improved performance. They may be even more satisfied if they are then rewarded by extrinsic recognition or an intrinsic sense of achievement. This suggests that performance improvements can be achieved by giving people the opportunity to perform, ensuring that they have the knowledge and skill required to perform, and rewarding them by financial or non-financial means when they do perform. It can also be argued that some people may be complacently satisfied with their job and will not be inspired to work harder or better. They may find other ways to satisfy their needs.
MOTIVATION AND MONEY
Money, in the form of pay or some other sort of remuneration, is the most obvious extrinsic reward. Money provides the carrot that most people want.
Doubts have been cast by Herzberg et al (1957) on the effectiveness of money because, they claimed, while the lack of it can cause dissatisfaction, its provision does not result in lasting satisfaction. There is something in this, especially for people on fixed salaries or rates of pay who do not benefit directly from an incentive scheme. They may feel good when they get an increase; apart from the extra money, it is a highly tangible form of recognition and an effective means of helping people to feel that they are valued. But this feeling of euphoria can rapidly die away. Other dissatisfactions from Herzberg’s list of hygiene factors, such as working conditions or the quality of management, can loom larger in some people’s minds when they fail to get the satisfaction they need from the work itself. However, it must be re-emphasized that different people have different needs and wants and Herzberg’s two-factor theory has not been validated. Some will be much more motivated by money than others. What cannot be assumed is that money motivates everyone in the same way and to the same extent. Thus it is naive to think that the introduction of a performance-related pay (PRP) scheme will miraculously transform everyone overnight into well-motivated, high-performing individuals. Nevertheless, money provides the means to achieve a number of different ends. It is a powerful force because it is linked directly or indirectly to the satisfaction of many needs. It clearly satisfies basic needs for survival and security, if it is coming in regularly. It can also satisfy the need for self-esteem (as noted above, it is a visible mark of appreciation) and status – money can set you in a grade apart from your fellows and can buy you things they cannot to build up your prestige. Money satisfies the less desirable but still prevalent drives of acquisitiveness and cupidity.
Money may in itself have no intrinsic meaning, but it acquires significant motivating power because it comes to symbolize so many intangible goals. It acts as a symbol in different ways for different people, and for the same person at different times. As noted by Goldthorpe et al (1968) from their research into the ‘affluent worker’, pay is the dominant factor in the choice of employer and considerations of pay seem most powerful in binding people to their present job.
Do financial incentives motivate people? The answer is yes, for those people who are strongly motivated by money and whose expectations that they will receive a financial reward are high. But less confident employees may not respond to incentives that they do not expect to achieve. It can also be argued that extrinsic rewards may erode intrinsic interest – people who work just for money could find their tasks less pleasurable and may not, therefore, do them so well. What we do know is that multiplicities of factors are involved in performance improvements and many of those factors are interdependent.
Money can therefore provide positive motivation in the right circumstances, not only because people need and want money but also because it serves as a highly tangible means of recognition. It can also be argued that money may be an important factor in attracting people to organizations and is one of the factors that will influence their retention. But badly designed and managed pay systems can demotivate.
Another researcher in this area was Jaques (1961), who emphasized the need for such systems to be perceived as being fair and equitable. In other words, the reward should be clearly related to effort or level of responsibility and people should not receive less money than they deserve compared with their fellow workers. Jaques called this the ‘felt-fair’ principle.
Conclusion
The aim is to develop motivation processes and a work environment that will help to ensure that individuals deliver results in accordance with the expectations of management. Motivation theory examines the process of motivation. It explains why people at work behave in the way they do in terms of their efforts and the directions they are taking. It describes what organizations can do to encourage people to apply their efforts and abilities in ways that will further the achievement of the organization’s goals as well as satisfying their own needs. It is also concerned with job satisfaction the factors that create it and its impact on performance. In understanding and applying motivation theory, the aim is to obtain added value through people in the sense that the value of their output exceeds the cost of generating it. This can be achieved through discretionary effort. In most if not all roles there is scope for individuals to decide how much effort they want to exert. They can do just enough to get away with it, or they can throw themselves into their work and deliver added value. Discretionary effort can be a key component in organizational performance.
Bibliography
v HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PRACTICE; Michael Armstrong; London and Philadelphia
v www.nisnotes.co.cc
