Equity Theory of Motivation - Essay Example

Name: Tutor: Title: Motivation and the three Motivational Theories that an Organization might use Course: Date: Introduction Managers of various organizations are required to keep their employees motivated so as to remain on the competitive edge. It is important to note that managers must take their time to understand what exactly drives each person in the organization because different employees perceive different factors as motivating. Motivation is defined as to give reason, incentive or enthusiasm that leads to a specific action or behavior. It is important to note that motivation is required in every life function. Motivation might be intrinsic or occur internally when people are compelled to act out of desire, importance or pleasure. It might also be extrinsic or occur when external factors compel an individual to behave differently or do something. However, several theories have been developed which act as sub titles to what motivations means (Pan 2008). Generally, positive factors that appear to be appealing to a person’s internal needs have been considered to be more effective than in situations where negative criticism, feedback and reinforcement are used only when employees’ performance falls short of managers’ expectations. Motivational theories are classified into two major categories; the content theories which focuses on individual needs and the process theories that provides a clear view of the though processes regarding an individual’s behavior. From the perspective of content theories, it has been examined that needs influence humans to act differently and adopt certain work behaviors. On the other hand, process theories concerns with behavioral decision process of a person (Akers 2013). Motivation theories are crucial in explaining each ingredient required in determining individual performance because performance is perceived to be a function of ability, motivation, resources as well as role perceptions (Schmidt 2002). In this essay, Equity Theory of motivation, Expectancy Theory and Herzberg’s Two-Factor theories will be considered as the three different theories of motivation that can be used in an organization. The Three Theories of Motivation Equity Theory of Motivation Equity theory of motivation was developed in 1960 by J. Stacey Adams. The theory states that an individual’s motivation is determined by what he or she perceives to be fair compared to others. It supports the idea that motivation can be affected by a person’s judgment of fair treatment within the social exchanges. Generally, when individuals compare themselves with other people, they always prefer to be compensated in a fair manner for their contributions. This implies that the perception of a person in regard to what is fair or not fair can greatly affect his or her attitudes, behaviors and motivation. Thus, Equity theory of motivation can be useful for managers to understand what makes highly paid union workers to go on strike particularly, when no other people but them know why other individuals elsewhere who have a lot money feel to be underpaid but do not accept that they make good money (Redmond 2009). Similarly, Gogia (2010) examined that when Equity theory of motivation is applied to workplaces, basically it focuses on the work-compensation relationship of an individual employee and his or her efforts to control the level of unfairness that might be felt. Since Equity theory is more concerned with social relationships as well as the issues of fairness or unfairness, it has been also referred to as the Social Comparison Theory (Gogia 2010). The Equity theory reveals that employees accept to adjust their performance and output only if they consider the outcome to be equitable. A good example could be when a single employee assumes that he or she will be rewarded lowly compared to his colleague for the same amount work and effort, and thus such a person will lack the moral to perform better. Therefore, managers can appropriately apply the theory by ensuring that they use pay structures that are equitable for similar amount of work across the organization. Equity theory is different from Expectancy theory and Herzberg’s Two-Factor theory because it can be applied in almost all exchange situations (Schermerhorn et.al 2005). Expectancy Theory The Expectancy Theory of Motivation was the idea of Victor H. Vroom, the global advisor on leadership and decision making. This theory of motivation is basically described as the process theory because it explains why people opt for one behavior over others. It has been observed that individuals feel motivated if their decisions direct them to their desired outcome or performance (Redmond 2009). Motivational force occurs when key factors such as expectancy, instrumentality and valence are fully met, which in turn exerts internal pressure on a person to be motivated. Managers should be aware that increased motivational force stimulates an individual to achieve high performance of the job. Basically, an individual expects his or her effort to contribute to some level of performance which is commonly referred to as expectancy. As a result, the expected outcome of this performance level is perceived to be influential to the results which make such a person to place subjective value on his or her confidence about the outcome or valence. Therefore, it is this value that determines how satisfactory the outcome could be to that particular person (Redmond 2009). According to Scholl (2002), expectancy theory provides the idea that work motivation is achieved depending on the perceived relationship between performance and outcomes as well as how people adapt to their behaviors and how they perceive the anticipated results. This practically and positively leads to higher levels of motivation in the organization because it enables leaders to develop motivational programs at their workplaces (Scholl 2002). Jay Caulfield applied the Expectancy Theory in his research study to determine the motivational factors that can enable students to give anonymous feedback to their teachers. Caulfield examined that the Expectancy Theory was crucial in predicting the level of motivation particularly in circumstances where the subject being studied was perceived to have discretion in performing a specific task. The fact that evaluation process is absolutely anonymous, it becomes relevant to point out that Expectancy Theory is appropriate for predicting the motivation level among students. Vrooms Expectancy Theory was purposely used to assess the outcome that students expected to be achieved by providing such evaluations. The research findings revealed that the motivation of students was directly dependent on how the perceived the significance of improving the standard of the current and future classes. Additionally, the motivation of students was assessed based on whether they expected their formative feedback to contribute to increased value not only for them, but also their peers within the classroom as well as for new students in the future classes (Caulfield 2007). Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory Frederick Irving Herzberg developed a Two-Factor motivational theory that can be used at workplaces based on hygiene and motivational factors as two distinct categories. The hygiene factors can lead to high levels of dissatisfaction particularly in situations where they are not provided or considered to be negative. Such factors include organizational culture, working conditions, and employee’s status or title, pay and job stability. On the other hand, Herzberg’s motivational factors consist of achievement, personal growth and investment as well as recognition. The fundamental idea of this theory is that these factors can motivate employees to perform highly. Therefore, it can be noted that Herzberg intended to encourage companies to ensure both hygiene and motivational factors are adequately provided or meet employees’ needs. In order to keep their employees motivated, for instance, managers should consider paying them market wages or highly as well as recognize employees’ job performance both in formal and informal ways (Akers 2013). The Two-Factor Theory is different from Equity and Expectancy theories of motivation because it distinctively shows the intrinsic and extrinsic aspects of a job. Some of the intrinsic factors commonly referred to as content or motivators include achievement and advancement, responsibility and recognition on the work itself. However, the extrinsic factors also referred to as hygiene factors include company culture and administrative policies, salary, working conditions as well as interpersonal supervision (Ryan & Deci 2000). Conclusion Based on the above discussions, it can be concluded that motivation theories are crucial in explaining each ingredient needed in determining individual performance. Performance is a function of ability, motivation, resources and role perceptions. Expectancy theory clearly shows that work motivation is achieved depending on the perceived relationship between performance and outcomes as well as how people adapt to their behaviors and how they perceive the anticipated results. The Equity theory provides a clear indication that employees accept to adjust their performance and output only if they consider the outcome to be equitable. The perception of a person in regard to what is fair or not fair can affect his or her attitudes, behaviors and motivation. The Two-Factor Theory is different from Equity and Expectancy theories of motivation because it distinctively shows the intrinsic and extrinsic aspects of a job. Bibliography Aker, H., What Motivational Theory can a Manager use? Retrieved January 14, 2014 from, Caulfield, J., 2007, What motivates students to give feedback to their teachers about teaching and learning? An expectancy theory perspective, International Journal for Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 1(1), 45-56. Gogia, P., 2010, “Equity theory of motivation”, retrieved January 14, 2014 from, Pan, W., 2008, “Definition of Motivation”, retrieved January 14, 2014 from, Redmond, B. F., 2009, Lesson 5: Equity Theory: Is what I get for my work fair compared to others? Work Attitudes and Motivation, The Pennsylvania State University World Campus. Ryan, M.R & Deci, L.E, 2000, “Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivators”, Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54-67. Schermerhorn, R.J, Osborn, R, Hunt, J.G, 2005, Organizational behavior, Wiley. Schmidt, C, 2002, Motivation: Expectancy Theory, Jr. Labor Research Center, The University of Rhode Island. Scholl, R. W., 2002, Motivation: Expectancy theory, The University of Rhode Island Website, retrieved from, < http://www.uri.edu/research/lrc/scholl/webnotes/Motivation_Expectancy.htm> Read More