Effective Motivation of Staff Employees in a University Setting - Case Study Example

Effective Motivation of Staff Employees in a Setting of the of the This paper tries to shed light on pertinent issues regarding employee motivation in university setting. Employee motivation within university setting is analyzed with the help of contemporary research and theoretical arguments presented by scholars at different points of time. From a particular university setting, root cause behind lack of motivation of academic and non-academic staff is analyzed and based on identification of root causes; the study has provided some suitable recommendations. As part of recommendations, emergent practices regarding the topic have also been mentioned in the paper. The researcher emphasized more on theoretical aspect of the topic, but empirical value of the research findings has also been discussed in the paper. Table of Contents Table of Contents 3 Introduction 4 Background of the Problem 5 Implications 6 Causal Factors 7 Issues 8 Research Findings 8 References 12 Introduction Universities are being considered as one of the most important contributors in shaping knowledge, value system and personal growth of students, who play vital roles in directing economic, social and cultural growth of countries (Abdulsalam & Mawoli, 2012). Therefore, role of academic and non-academic staff in universities is considered as important from the perspective of human knowledge capital development. According to Abdulsalam & Mawoli, (2012), general belief is that motivation and job performance of employees has strong correlation, which means that probability is high that a well-engaged and motivated academic staff would deliver better job performance in universities in contrast to lesser motivated staff. Although several academic scholars have conducted research on different aspects of motivation in business setting, but apart from research work of Abdulsalam & Mawoli (2012), very few of these works are done to discover dynamics of employee motivation within university setting. In order to fulfill gap in the literature, the researcher decided to dig deep into the topic, with the help of a research work named as “Effective motivation of staff employees in a university setting”. Key objective of the paper will be to understand three issues such as, 1- characteristics and problems associated with employee motivation within university settings, 2- theoretical arguments presented by previous research scholars, regarding the problem and 3- best practices being used to ensure employee motivation within university setting. In the next section, the researcher will discuss background of the research problem in order to develop functional ground for further discussion on the topic. Background of the Problem Consideration of seminal research work of Nohria, Groysberg and Lee (2008) reveals the fact that in modern days, business performance of companies can be directed by its ability to motivate and engage employees in work environment. Nohria, Groysberg and Lee (2008) identified four drivers that can underlie motivation, 1- never-ending drive of people to acquire more items, 2- drive of employees to bond with immediate work group and care lesser about overall organizational development, 3- drive for understanding the job function, career growth and avoid monotonous jobs and 4- drive to defend position within organization and avoid capriciousness in long-term engagement with the organization. In such context, while going through the previous research works of scholars, it has been found that, apart from research works of Stanford University professors on effective employee motivation with academic institutional setting, very few research scholars has tried to explore the topic. For example, research of a Stanford University professor (Department of Psychology), Bandura (2000), revealed pertinent drivers of employee motivation within organizational setting, but question remains whether the same model can be effective to motivate employees in university setting or not. On the other hand, Abdulsalam & Mawoli (2012) found that within university settings, motivation has positive relationship with teaching performance of academic staff. However, according to limited knowledge of the researcher, very few researchers has tried to understand the pertinent factors which drive effective motivation of staff employees in a university setting. Current and historic relevance of the problem is undeniable, as Abdulsalam & Mawoli (2012) found that high attrition rate of academic and non-academic employee in universities is caused due to lack of motivation and engagement level. Poor motivation level of academic staff in universities also negatively affects their engagement level with students or teaching and researching capabilities. Due to such poor consequences, lack of motivation of employees in universities has adversely affected knowledge capital nourishment within university. Such ill effects of poor employee motivation have increased significance of the research topic presented in this paper. Therefore, the problem presented here is pretty relevant from academic and knowledge economy perspective and addressing the problem can not only fulfill gap in the literature, but also help universities to deliver greater value to its internal and external stakeholders. Implications Consideration of research works of James (1998) reveals the fact that standardization of motivational drivers is not possible because same type of motivational drivers might not be applicable to motivate all people in varying conditions. In university settings, staff employee motivation is directed by variety of factors, like, 1- academic learning scope, whether the employment opportunity is relevant to their personal interest, 2-presence of sense of achievement in work setting and 3- work life balance. Noticeable fact is that employees are being considered as valuable asset for the university, while presence of de-motivated employee pool within university can seriously hamper knowledge delivery to students, thereby lowering the reputation of the university. In such context, findings of this research have academic as well empirical implications. From practical implication perspective, findings of this research will help universities to identify root cause of employee de-motivation and on the basis of identification, university authorities can formulate strategies to motivate and engage employees and staff in an effective manner. Causal Factors Oyer (2002) pointed out that long-term engagement and motivation of employees’ can never be directed by financial rewards alone. In such context, Adair (2010) defined effective motivation as an intangible cognitive sense, which can bring about the best in employees. Adair (2010) truncated Maslow’s need hierarchy model and Hertzberg’s two factor theory in order to create parametric effectiveness model, for different motivators used by authorities in organizations. In university environment, effective motivation of employee staff might not be explained by Maslow’s need hierarchy model due to its broad social and cognitive perspective. On contrary, Herzberg’s (1987) and Herzberg, et al. (1957) had given two factor theories; in order to portray the way in which job satisfaction and dissatisfaction are affected by hygiene factors and motivators. According to Herzberg, et al. (1957), employee satisfaction and dissatisfaction cannot be measured at the same time. External factors such as, remuneration, fringe benefits, employment status and physical safety in the workplace, are considered as motivators and presence of these factors within workplace may not guarantee job satisfaction, but absence of these may cause job dissatisfaction. Internal factors, like, diversity in job responsibility, responsibility and recognition, are classified as motivators, that can intrinsically motivate employees for a long-term. It will not be illogical to consider that two factor model of Herzberg, et al. (1957) can even be used to explain problems regarding employee motivation in university setting. Ekundayo & Ajayi (2009) and Abdulsalam & Mawoli (2012) conducted research on motivation of employee staff in universities of African country. They found that absence of motivators had caused poor level of motivation among academic staff, such as, lack of diversity in the job role, lack of career growth opportunity, lack of recognition for performances, distant relationship with other employees and bindings on activities of expatriate academic staff. All of these factors have close links with motivators (one of the two factors) mentioned in research works of Herzberg, et al. (1957). Issues Magnitude of the problem regarding lack of motivation among employee staff members in a university setting can be understood by analyzing four drivers of de-motivation, mentioned in research papers of Nohria, Groysberg and Lee (2008). According to these scholars, intangible and ever-growing nature of four drivers of de-motivation makes it difficult for organizations to address the problem in an efficient manner. Ekundayo & Ajayi (2009) and Abdulsalam & Mawoli (2012) pointed out that magnitude of the problem, revolving around employee de-motivation, has been increased manifold due to reasons like, 1- universities are considered a part of academic field and in academic field, business concepts like, performance management, key performance indicators and employee satisfaction, are not taken very seriously, 2- majority of universities do not have sufficient resource or willingness to measure motivation level of employees and 3- absence of proper human resource management framework makes it difficult for university authorities to address all the four de-motivating drives mentioned by Nohria, Groysberg and Lee (2008). It is evident from the discussion that presence of these negative factors increases graveness of the problem that is being discussed in the research paper and yes, the problem is a big deal as it hampers the quality of academics and academic deliverables in the university. Research Findings Dr. Phil Zimbardo conducted “The Stanford Prison Experiment” in order to understand human psychological orientation and found that presence of bad system or de-motivating drives can defeat a good person or convert a highly engaged employee into a disoriented and de-motivated one (McKeown, 2012). The researcher has found similar kind of results, while conducting research to understand effective motivation of staff employees in a university setting. Finding 1- few academic staff holds permanent position in the university, while other employees are employed in contractual manner. The university has demonstrated well-structured career growth plan to permanent employees and such career opportunities have positively affected motivation and engagement level of these employees. On contrary, contractual employees are not certain about their future and perceive that they are only associated with the university on a temporary basis and are not responsible for welfare of the university. Presence of uncertainty about future and lack of career growth significantly hamper motivational level of contractual employees in universities. Findings 2- de-motivation of employees in the university can also be caused by monotonous work, lack of variety in job responsibility and lack of trust by university authority on existing staff while delegating them with higher job responsibilities. In university environment, bureaucratic organizational structures create constraints for staff employee for communicating with higher authority and in most cases, absence of proper human resource department increases difficulties for higher authority to engage employees. In the recent history, the university has not conducted any training or mentoring program for employees in order to engage them with work environment. Finding 3- team activity and collaborative work practices are not encouraged in the university and as a result, bonding between employees is quite weak. Very few employees communicate with each other in an informal manner beyond office hours and cross-functional knowledge sharing is quite limited in the university. The researcher has found that presence of these factors has created negative impact on overall motivational level of employees within university setting. Recommendations & Emergent Practices On the basis of above researcher findings, certain recommendations can be drawn that can positively influence employee motivation. Abdulsalam & Mawoli (2012) recognized some emergent practices, which are being used by universities in order to motivate employee, such as, implementing fair and balanced performance management system within university, training and development session for contractual employees as well as organizing team meetings and knowledge session for cross-functional departments in order to increase collaborative work practices among staff. In such context, Nohria, Groysberg & Lee’s (2008) suggestion can be used by the researcher as emergent practices. Acquire- university authorities should distinguish excellent performers from average ones and financially reward these excellent performers, regardless of them being permanent or contractual. Bond- the university should foster culture of mutual relationship, friendliness and trust among employees through arrangement of birthday celebration, annual events, meetings and festival celebration. Comprehend- more responsibility should be assigned to able employees so as to render more meaning to their work and cross-functional job designation shift can even be used to put variation in task. Defend- transparency of all employee-related processes should be increased and assurance of career growth should be provided to all employees. Conclusions & Summary It is evident from the research findings that it is difficult to disseminate effective motivation among employees in a university setting due to presence of factors like, absence of proper human resource management system, absence of transparent performance management system, absence of mutual trust and collaborative approach, lack of recognition of employee contribution as well as lack of variety in job responsibility. These problems cannot be addressed in a short time; rather the university should implement the abovementioned recommendations in a step-wise and prolonged manner. As a summary, following points can be indicated; In order to ensure sustainable employee motivation, higher authority should incorporate changes in work responsibilities and work structure. Transparent performance management should be implemented in order to secure higher employee motivation. Within university, culture of mutual trust and team work should be established in order to improve employee engagement level. References Abdulsalam, D., & Mawoli, M. A. (2012). Motivation and Job Performance of Academic Staff of State Universities in Nigeria: The Case of Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida University, Lapai, Niger State. International Journal of Business and Management, 7(14), 142-148. Adair, J. (2010). Effective motivation: How to get the best results from everyone. London: Pan Macmillan. Bandura, A. (2000). Cultivate Self-Efficacy for Personal and Organizational Effectiveness. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.15.7694&rep=rep1&type=pdf. Ekundayo, H. T., & Ajayi, I. A. (2009). Towards Effective Management of University Education in Nigeria. International NGO Journal, 4(8), 343-347. Herzberg, F. (1987). One more time: How do you motivate employees? Harvard Business Review, 65(5), 109-120. Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., Peterson, R., & Capwell, D. (1957). Job attitudes: Review of research and opinion. Pittsburg: Psychological Service of Pittsburg. James, W. (1998). Capturing and Directing the Motivation to Learn. Retrieved from http://www.stanford.edu/dept/CTL/Newsletter/motivation_to_learn.pdf. McKeown, G. (2012). Can We Reverse The Stanford Prison Experiment? Retrieved from http://blogs.hbr.org/2012/06/can-we-reverse-the-stanford-pr/. Nohria, N., Groysberg, B., & Lee, L. E. (2008). Employee Motivation: A Powerful New Model. Retrieved from http://www.stanford.edu/group/designx_lab/wikiupload/b/bb/HBR_Employee_Motivation.pdf. Oyer, P. (2002). Stock Options –It’s Not Just About Motivation. Retrieved from http://www.stanford.edu/group/siepr/cgi-bin/siepr/?q=system/files/shared/pubs/papers/briefs/policybrief_oct02.pdf. Read More