Human motivation - Research Paper Example

Human motivation Abstract Human Resource Management is becoming more and more essential for the business these days, because individuals and their understanding are the most vital features influencing the productivity of the organization. One of the basic features of HRM is the assessment of employee satisfaction. Organizations have to ensure that employee satisfaction is high because it is a necessity for enhancing productivity. High productivity is a continuing advantage of employee motivation and it helps the business in maintaining as well as strengthening its revenue growth. MOTIVATIONAL THEORIES Introduction Human motivation intrigues psychologists and a number of the motivational theories formed during the previous century. Application of the theories has facilitated individuals to recognize the connection amid motivation and career satisfaction, productivity, management approaches and personal traits. People commonly consider humans with the innate tendency to be sluggish with respect to job and he is being compelled by situation to work. This thought regarding humans has been generating issues for the growth procedure of the organization regardless of plentiful human as well as material capital causing to lesser productivity. Low productivity is a setback that increases within a number of organizations mainly in the developing nations despite continuous attempts. Huge amount of capital, power and time are used, which if appropriately consumed will give better productivity and as such better capital for the organizations involved (Bruce, 2002, p. 31). Human is the cause that exploits resources presented within the environment for the creation of merchandise and services with the intention of satisfying individual requirements. Therefore, when employees are marginally utilized and a highest productivity is realized, it causes the recognition of the objectives of the systems linked with this prolific behavior. The behavioral scientists have mainly confirmed that raised productivity is a task of the level of human wellbeing. This notion surpasses awareness being focused on instruments only since at the core of the company and its complete structure, the employees enabled with proficiency, knowledge, mind-sets and intellect is the most important in factor grouping of capital generation and creation procedure. Companies, regardless of their nature, always target at attaining their commercial objectives, or else, the endurance of such venture will be more of a delusion and not a reality. The achievement of any company is mostly calculated by the level of its productivity. Even though, this can be considered autonomous on the mind-set as well as self-esteem of the personnel in form of their level of job dedication. No corporation can consequently afford to overlook any of the factors that may contribute to the improving of the dedication levels of its employees, which is motivation. During every productive activity, the fundamental components and factors incorporate property, funds, labor, and the capitalist (Bruce, 2002, p. 56). The laborers and the capitalists are human and as such extremely significant within any productive venture. They make use of the other aspects for the understanding for the objective of the venture. It can then be adduced that human beings have a very significant position within any system and especially in organizations. Therefore, they should be considered with a high concern so that they can chip in successfully and competently throughout productive activities. Effect of Motivational Theories A simple meaning of motivation is what makes individuals put actual effort as well as energy into what they perform. One may anticipate the motivational theories to be the ideal place to search for a normally agreed upon meaning. However, the field of motivation is described by a large quantity of various theoretical frameworks and models that make it tricky, if not impractical, to recognize similarities and differences (Bruce, 2002, p. 49). Psychologists have been investigating how to motivate workers from the start of the last century and a lot of information on human motivation has been generated and extensively used. It should be taken into consideration that job satisfaction is directly linked with motivation. The extraordinary level of consideration from supervisors as well as researchers motivated employees to high performance as it satisfied the employees formerly unmet group requirements. It is determined that performance comment and pay-for-performance (Davis et al, 2010, p. 40) were the particular situations that improved as well as retained the high levels of productivity. The accomplishment of communal requirements is not considered necessary to clarify the performance alterations. Hierarchy of needs devises a helpful theory of motivation (Naime pp. 23-25); humans have instinctive hierarchical needs, lower-order needs - air, water, food, and shelter - control human behavior until they are fulfilled. Unfulfilled needs cause mental stress that invigorates and motivates behavior that will satisfy those needs. No realistic tools forecast and manage behavior. Individuals do not intrinsically have an aversion towards work. Individuals apply self-direction as well as self-discipline. Human beings learn to understand and take responsibility (Jarvis & Watts, pp. 499). Management’s techniques of control have to recheck, set up interim as well as continuing objectives, offer regular advice on growth, evaluation and alterations of objectives, review outcomes. Other consecutively powerful needs for security, love and recognition, regard and self-actualization (Naime pp. 23-25) pursue with growing levels of motivation once basic needs are fulfilled. In industrialized as well as work situations, the need hierarchy is pertinent to management systems, worker plans in addition to rewards and remuneration. Maslow's hierarchy of need theory asserts that the more contented and more satisfied workers are in their job and job settings, the more productive as well as flourishing they will be, bringing in additional revenues for the business. “Frederick W. Taylor believed management's role was to motivate workers through supervision to avoid the natural human tendency to take it easy as much as possible at work. He redesigned work to increase productivity by performing time and motion studies, and he believed in scientifically studying work to better understand not just work but the employees performing it” (Davis et al, 2010, p. 41). Theory of behavioral analysis foresees and manages individual’s record and existing situation. Behavior is function of “environmental contingency of reinforcement, establishing operations such as deprivation or satiation” (Sember & Sember, 2009, p. 102). Ascertaining functions as well as earlier outcomes find out the direction, effort, and determination of performance. Individual should think that there is a link between motivation and productivity. The “apparent results, valence, instrumentality and expectancy” (Sember & Sember, 2009, p. 102) create a force to apply various levels of effort in productivity. Intrinsic motivation (Sember & Sember, 2009, p. 128) reinforced the link between pro-social motivation and employee outcomes, for instance, diligence, productivity, and performance. Grant’s theory claimed that employees experience pro-social motivation as more independent when intrinsic motivation is high because “intrinsically motivated employees feel that performing well is beneficial to their own self-selected goals, as they enjoy their work and value the outcome of helping others” (Sember & Sember, 2009, p. 128). Drawing on concepts from theories of pro-social qualities, pro-social motivation should be satisfaction based instead of stress based, because workers feel preference, self-sufficiency, and free selection within their attempts to do well to others by way of in-role as well as extra-role work performance when pro-social motivation is accompanied by intrinsic motivation (Sember & Sember, 2009, p. 125-9). On the other hand, cognitive theories of motivation imply that the experiences produce inner cognitions, for instance, requirements and values. These cognitions, consecutively, decide existing productivity level. These cognitions are the outcomes of earlier interactions of individuals with their environment. For these cognitions to be constructive, they should be connected with the individual’s surroundings. Individuals whose cognitions are not linked with their surroundings are called disturbed, irrational, or schizophrenic. Employees learn from their experiences that they can productively perform in some situations and not so effective in others. Behavior analysis (Pierce & Cheney, pp. 30-49) assumes that the critical sources of the activities, together with oral accounts, for instance, values, needs, or requirements, can eventually be traced to the outcomes of behavior. Cognitions are nothing more than a person’s capability to explain some specific strengthening contingencies of his own behavior based on personal experiences. Latest models of work motivation are focusing on the part of surroundings as one determinant of productivity. Productivity factors model incorporates antecedents and results as controls on productivity. Locke and Latham’s (1990) goal setting theory considers objectives as antecedents and reaction as outcomes of productivity. This concentration on pragmatic occurrences makes goal-setting theory among the more useful cognitive theories of motivation that is present today. Conceptualizing motivation (Shah & Gardner, pp. 242) as an inner construct puts the reasons of behavior within the individual. The surroundings offer the background against which motivational systems as well as procedures find out suitable strategies. These inner occurrences are hard to monitor and calculate which can bring about several autonomous models of the causes of behavior. In addition, when behavior or productivity does not go well with societal or work principles, one tends to believe that something is incorrect with the person, instead of finding discrepancies within the person’s surroundings. Behavior analysis (Pierce & Cheney, pp. 53-71) tries to clarify behavior, motivation, and productivity by understanding the perspective in which it takes place. It is a known fact that human resources are an organization’s most expensive possessions. This emphasizes the significance of understanding the theory as well as application of motivation to handle employees. Here the question arises that what the basic conditions of employees’ productivity are. Even though this issue cannot be resolved with a specific statement, but with other aspects, motivation is vital for increasing level of job dedication of employees, which always causes a higher productivity of the employees. It is then essential for motivation of the employees within the company to be improved with the intention of raising productivity. Productivity literarily indicates the level of power to produce, but productivity from the management or financial approach is the “ratio of what is produced to what is required to produce it” (Stovall, 2008, p. 87). Generally, this ratio is in the shape of an average; stating the total yield of a specific group of commodities separated by the entire input of, say labor or raw material. Theoretically, any input can be applied as the denominator of the productivity percentage. One can talk about the productivity of property, manual labor, resources, or sub-categories of any of these aspects of production. To put it in simple words, productivity is the way of producing or bringing into being good of high value or adding to the affluence of the world. It can be utilized to calculate the indicator of development, competence, financial standard and so on. On the other hand, motivation is a phrase that is somewhat cumbersome to describe in a significant way. Motivation deals with all the situations that are accountable for difference in the power, excellence, and course of behavior. From a company’s approach, motivation manages everything that an executive identifies or can utilize to control the direction as well as rate of individual’s activities towards dedication. An overpowering quantity of energy is applied in attempting to find individuals to do what company wants them to do. It is generally supposed that when an employee is extremely motivated, this goes a long way in enhancing organizational productivity, efficacy, and competence. Against this backdrop, it is essential to seek a way by which the self-esteem of employees can be enhanced, which will finally develop job dedication with an enhancement on the level of comfort of people, and rise in affluence of individuals. This study finds out the connection between the extents to which different motivation strategies supports the workers to enhance their job dedication and boost their productive capacity. The link between motivation and productivity is more significant than only a psychological link (Stovall, 2008, p. 91). It is specified in research that the mainstream of employees are mostly motivated by their job responsibility instead of “workplace or extra-workplace factors” (Stovall, 2008, p. 91). Interestingly, individuals who were motivated by aspects outside the workplace had less job satisfaction. Perhaps not surprisingly, individuals that were mostly motivated by the job responsibility had a higher productivity as compared to those with other sources of motivation. The study as well revealed that having one’s key requirements met at work was essential to job satisfaction and the better job satisfaction level helps in higher productivity. Pay-for-performance inducements are mostly used during the private sector to promote competition between and within group, but this sort of a model may not be directly pertinent to the public sector, as funds are generally tighter, and cash may not be the key source of motivation for individuals with a philosophy of public service. Research implies that employees are motivated to do well when the job is consequential and believe they have accountability for the results of their allocated jobs. Unambiguous as well as challenging objectives can create higher levels of performance, productivity, and originality, which consecutively is associated with an overall stronger loyalty towards the company. By setting objectives, workers get a comprehensible policy for their own professional growth, which forms better contentment and motivation (Blencoe, 2002, p. 120). Objectives should be demanding but also realistic. Intricate and ambiguous objectives may cause reduced work performance and harmfully effect workers’ self-esteem. Achieving objectives that test employee creativeness and investigative abilities can enhance performance, improve employee self-confidence, and increase job satisfaction, which can be more important than a one-time financial reward (Blencoe, 2002, p. 120). Objective setting should be followed by usual and comprehensive response provided by managers on employee’s objective realizations. Objective setting should be challenging and attainable, objectives can as well encourage learning prospects. Organizations can incorporate learning prospects via setting objectives that let human resources to take part in problem solving and knowledge attainment. It is found that “merit-pay and pay-for-performance methods yield little positive results on employee performance or learning opportunities” (Cooper & Robertson, 2011, p. 111), still a system of gradually giving workers tasks that are more intricate can encourage employee learning and constantly enhance employee performance. Organizational learning prospects can as well challenge an employee to reflect more comprehensively regarding his own personal objectives. Organizational learning and workers personal development are influenced by the inducements given in the working environment. It is suggested that executing a number of awards, for instance, “team awards, individual recognition based on extraordinary performance, and rewards for all employees for their achieved goals” (Cooper & Robertson, 2011, p. 142). With the aim of reinforcing collaboration, admire workers for performance that does well to the team. Rewarding only a small number of employees with incentives can prove to be counterproductive. As said by Behn (2001), a number of hard working recruits might think that they are treated unjustly and lose their work spirit or create bitterness towards other workers as well as the team. Incentives are just a single method utilized to endorse motivation within the working environment; another method is job plan. It is recommended that executing a job plan within an organization in which workers “rotate job positions (if possible), gain more responsibility over their work and resources, and engage in trainings and organizational learning opportunities” (Cooper & Robertson, 2011, p. 169). Research (Stratheford, 2010, p. 20-6) has revealed that job design is a basic component in motivation. Employees perform better if they are involved in the company’s decision-making procedure, and if they have power over their own professional growth. Jobs designed with a sense of challenge and task importance can help a sense of significance, leading to improved work performance in addition to personal development within the working situation (Stratheford, 2010, p. 19-21). There is little research proving that there is a major link between merit pay and productivity, yet motivating aspects, for instance, job design as well as positive reinforcement has better employee productivity. It is strongly recommended that positive reinforcement should be used as a major tool for motivation. The latest study regarding motivation in the public sector has revealed that conventional approaches, for instance, inducement pay methods, do not bring about additional motivation or enhanced productivity on the job. Organizational practices that motivate workers and enhance performance may be unsuccessful if no attention is given to the working atmosphere. It is better to get rid of dissatisfactory work situation. Form a setting in which the workers feel safe. Set up motivators such as recognition, dependability, and learning prospect to enhance the workers’ productivity (Stratheford, 2010, p. 21). There are two components, which are significant for motivated employees: the nonexistence of unhappiness regarding the working atmosphere as well as income, which generates an impartial approach towards job, followed by motivators to produce extrinsic as well as intrinsic motivation. Success needs a broad policy executed considerately. By working simultaneously, it can create a highly motivated and empowered group of capable, top performing professionals. Recent Studies on Motivation and Productivity Uwe (2000) has observed the “outcomes of a psychologically based management system on job motivation as well as productivity”. It is concluded that PPM (Participative Productivity Management) facilitates to boosting productivity largely by rising job and objective precision, and that boosts in productivity can simply be attained consistently when no opposing structure of performance appraisal is there apart from PPM. Wright in 2002 has looked at the position of job perspective within work motivation: A public sector application of objective and communal cognitive theories. The results of a covariance analysis of state government workers’ study records recommended a small number of adjustments to this model, the outcomes showed that the hypothetical framework can recognize particular influence points that can boost work motivation and, as a result, productivity in the public sector. Mehta et al (2003, pp. 50-85) studied the “leadership approach, motivation, and productivity within global marketing channels: a pragmatic study of Poland, America, and Finland.” More exclusively, in managing a company’s marketing channels, participative, helpful, and instructive management approaches may be useful in extracting channel associates to apply higher levels of motivation, which, consecutively, may be related to higher levels of productivity. The connections between management approaches, motivation, and productivity are empirically tested on information taken from a model of auto distributors within Poland, United States, and Finland. Another researcher studied the function of affective understanding in work motivation. Supported by “psychological and neurobiological theories of core affective experience” (Senoff, 2011, p. 33), a set of direct and indirect paths was identified by which affective approach at work influence three aspects of behavioral outcomes: (1) direction, (2) concentration, and (3) determination. Primarily, affective knowledge may persuade these behavioral outcomes indirectly by influencing objective level as well as objective dedication, in addition to three important decision factors of work motivation: (1) anticipation judgments, (2) effectiveness judgments, and (3) development judgments. Secondly, affective experience may as well influence these behavioral outcomes directly. Patterson in 2004 studied the organizational environment and business productivity: The function of worker influence and employee level (Hartel et al, pp. 207-212). A general analysis revealed that company productivity was more strongly associated with those features of environment that had stronger contentment. A second prediction, that executives’ views of environment would be more directly related to company productivity than would those of non-executives, was not sustained. Nonetheless, executives’ evaluations of the majority of aspects of their company’s environment were more positive than those of non-executives. A group of researchers in 2006 has studied job performance, affective dedication, and work motivation: The functions of income level. The most important findings are that base income level, but not additional benefit level, was positively linked with both “self-reported work performance and affective unit commitment, and that these relationships were partly mediated by intrinsic motivation” (Vassiliou, 2010, p. 191). In addition, restraint analyses showed that the links between bonus level and the resultant variables were not influenced by kind of pay plan. In the year 2008, Mason and Rennie (pp. 50-91) studied motivation and perceived productivity at a combined higher education institute. The outcomes reveal that there is a positive link between motivation and perceived productivity on the particular organization in investigation representing a raise or drop in motivation is accompanied by a resultant raise or drop within productivity. He further studies the role of motivation in improving job commitment. It can then be adduced that human beings have a very vital part within every structure and especially in industrialized businesses. Therefore, they should be offered a high consideration so that they can chip in successfully as well as proficiently throughout productive activities. In another study, there was an observation that the perceived investment within workers’ growth, intrinsic motivation and work performance. Intrinsic motivation was revealed to moderate the link between perceived investments within workers’ growth in addition to organizational behavior. The type of the restraint exposed a positive link just for workers having high levels of intrinsic motivation. The same team further studied the motivation among production staff in Nigeria. As a result, it is proposed that staff on Nigerian production spots is supervised in a way, which restricts their chances to satisfy higher level wants. In addition, with the intention of boosting employee motivation, and, as a result, productivity, the administration of these recruits should back off from managing via external means and adopt management via internal as well as cultural forces. Few investigations have observed the controls of core self-assessments, work independence, and intrinsic motivation on in-role job productivity. The outcomes reveal that workers perceived better in-role work productivity when they had better core self-assessments in addition to intrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation somewhat reconciled the link between core self-assessments and work productivity, and it also completely reconciled the link from professional independence to work productivity. Later in the same year, a group of researchers in Iran studied the result of motivation on the productivity of the workers at sport departments of Eghlid region. It is revealed that there is a major positive link between the motivation and the environmental aspects and the level of productivity of human resources. Conclusion Motivation is based on development requirements. Since the vital incentive in motivation is personal development, the only method to motivate a worker is to offer him demanding job for which he can take responsibility. Employees’ motivation is very intricate but equally significant as well, successful management growth for the upcoming times should incorporate hypothetical and practical learning regarding the forms of motivation and their effects on productivity. Human resources are the company’s most valuable assets. If workers are not motivated, it will do a tremendous harm to productivity. The business’s overall competence will drop by unmotivated workers. From this study, it is apparent that the majority of employees in the industry are not pleased and motivated in their professions, particularly individuals in the junior cadre. Important link was established between motivation and productivity. It is found that employees are motivated to do good when the work is important and they think that they have responsibility for the results of their jobs (Davis, et al, 2010, p. 219). It is suggested to have an organizational structure that supports challenges and achievements, develops organizational learning prospects, uses group inducements in addition to individual inducements, reorganizes job plan, utilizes positive reinforcement, and encourages healthy working environments. It is worthy to note that motivational inducements playing an incredibly important part in the routine performance of employees in every company. Hence, it is obvious that employees’ performance of any type is a function of incentive to enhance as well as boost productivity. Motivated workers are inclined to be more productive as compared non-motivated workers. For the most part, organizations make a number of efforts to motivate personnel, but this is mostly easier said than done. Workers are all individuals with special interests, dislikes, and wants, and separate factors will motivate each one of them. Hence, companies have to adopt a broad ‘bottom-up’ method to generate practical beliefs among all their employees, while simultaneously rewarding quality and supporting innovation. Works Cited Blencoe, G. How to Be an Effective Manager: A Basic Guide to Maximizing Employee Morale, Motivation, and Productivity. August Publishing, 2002. Bruce, A. How to Motivate Every Employee: 24 Proven Tactics to Spark Productivity in the Workplace. McGraw-Hill, 2002. Cooper, C. and Robertson, I. Well-being: Productivity and Happiness at Work. Palgrave Macmillan, 2011. Davis, J. Frechette, H. M. and Boswell, E. H. Strategic Speed: Mobilize People, Accelerate Execution. Harvard Business Review Press, 2010. Harte, Charmine J. Emotion in Groups, Organizations and Cultures. Emerald Group Publishing, 2009. Jarvis, Peter and Watts, Mary. The Routledge International Handbook of Learning. Routledge, 2012. Mason, D. R., Rennie, Frank. E-Learning and Social Networking Handbook. Taylor & Francis, 2008. Mehta, R., Dubinsky, A., and Anderson, R. “Leadership style, motivation, and performance in international marketing channels: an empirical investigation of the USA, Finland, and Poland.” European Journal of Marketing. Vol. 37, Issue ½, (2003): 50-85. Naime, James S. Psychology. Cengage Learning, 2005. Pierce, W. D., Cheney, C. D. Behavior Analysis and Learning 3rd. Routledge, 2004. Sember, T. and Sember, B. Bad Apples: How to Manage Difficult Employees, Encourage Good Ones to Stay, and Boost Productivity. Adams Media, 2009. Senoff, M. Incentive Programs Problems Solved: How To Get More Out Of Your Employees With Incentive Program. Michael Senoff, 2011. Shah, J. Y., Gardner, W. L. Handbook of Motivation Science. Guilford Press, 2008. Stovall, J. Ultimate Productivity: A Customized Guide to Success through Motivation, Communication, and Implementation. Thomas Nelson, 2008. Stratheford, M. Motivating Employees: How to Keep Employees Happy While Maximizing Productivity. OUP, 2010. Vassiliou, V. Key factors influencing employee motivation and productivity. LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing, 2010. Appendix Questionnaire used to collect data 1. What is the type of organization you work for: a. Public sector b. Private sector 2. What is your job level? a. Upper management b. Middle management c. Lower management d. Non-management 3. Rate the statement: ‘Top Management is interested in motivating the workers’? a. Strongly Agree b. Agree c. Neutral d. Disagree e. Strong Disagree 4. Rate your level of satisfaction with the working environment of you organization: a. Highly Satisfied b. Satisfied c. Average d. Dissatisfied e. Highly Dissatisfied 5. Rate your level of satisfaction with personal growth prospects: a. Highly Satisfied b. Satisfied c. Average d. Dissatisfied e. Highly Dissatisfied 6. Which of the following factors motivates you most? a. Raise in Salary b. Promotion c. Fringe Benefits d. Motivational talks e. Recognition 7. To what extent you find incentives and benefits motivating: a. Highly Motivating b. Sometimes Motivating c. Neither Motivating or De-motivating d. Sometimes De-motivating e. Very De-motivating 8. Does the Top Management involve you in decision making which are connected to your department? a. Yes b. No c. Occasionally Read More