Motivation, leadership style and performance management - Essay Example

?Reflective Essay In this essay, I take the stand that motivation, leadership style and performance management had a definitive impact on the performance of my team as well as on my own performance. My argument will be supported by literature review and examples from the group’s performance over the period of 6 weeks. This essay is structured in different sections, with each section dealing with one factor of crucial influence on performance. The first section discusses the various theories of motivation including the works of Maslow (1943), Alderfer (1972), McClelland (1955) and evaluates the impact of motivation on the group’s performance. The second section discusses theories of leadership by XYZ, and assesses the impact of leadership style on the performance of our group. The third section of the essay covers performance measurement as the factor that impacts on the team performance. The final section of this essay covers my conclusions and the recommendations that can help in better performance management. The first factor that I intend to relate to performance of team is motivation. Motivation has been one of the most studied and discussed topics relevant to performance. According to one of the oldest and most popular theories of motivation, motivation is the result of drives or needs that human beings have. For example, Maslow’s Theory of Hierarchy of Needs (1943) states that there are several stages of needs, like the basic needs for food, shelter and security; social needs related to feeling a sense of belongingness or affection, status and self-esteem needs, and self-actualization needs. As a person is able to fill his lower order needs, the higher order needs become operant and motivate him. See Figure 1 below: Figure 1: Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Theory (Source: Maslow, 1943). Another version of the derive theory is that proposed by Alderfer (1972), which segregates these needs into only three categories – ERG or existence, Relatedness and Growth needs. According to Alderfer (1972), all three types of needs can be operational at the same time. Similarly, a theory of need is proposed by McClelland (1955), which states that people are motivated by different needs and the prominent need defines what factors may motivate them. For example, according to McClelland (1955), people who have a high need for achievement are motivated by challenging tasks and lofty objectives, while people who have a high need for affiliation are motivated by opportunities that furnish them with more social interactions or recognition. Need for power is high in people who are motivated to obtain positions of high status and power. These theories root the basis of motivation into an internal need of the person. In contrast to these theories, theories like that of Vroom (1964), consider the external rewards and expectations as the driving forces for motivation and performance. Vroom’s theory states that people gauge if their efforts are capable of getting them the desired performance, and if the performance outcome can lead them to their goals or rewards. This means that there are basically two aspects to motivation one is the expectations of a link between effort and performance, and the other a direct link between the performance and rewards. Another essential aspect of motivation according to this theory is the desirability of the reward or the expected value of the reward. People are motivated to expend the effort only if the reward has value for them. As such, motivation according to this theory is a product of: Motivation = Expectancy X Instrumentality X Valence Where, Expectancy is expectation that the effort leads to performance Instrumentality is the perception that the performance will be instrumental in attaining the reward Valence is the value of the reward for the person In addition, motivation can be both extrinsic, as in the case where rewards and incentives are the motivating factors, and intrinsic, where the person wants to fulfil an internal need – a need for recognition or social acceptance, a need for self-actualization or self-esteem (Murphy, 2009). It is also observed that the system of rewards or incentives, and the process of achieving these rewards need to be perceived as fair by the team members if they are to be motivated. This means that if the members do not think that they have an equal chance of attaining the reward, they will not be motivated to participate in the process that leads to rewards. This is also explained Equity Theory (Spector, 2008) states that employees assess their own efforts and the resultant rewards and compare these to the efforts to reward ratio for colleagues: Self-Effort or Performance Effort or Performance of the other ---------------------------------------- = ---------------------------------- Reward or Incentives Attained by Self Reward or Incentives Attained by the other Dissatisfaction results in case the above equation is not balanced and employees may lose faith and interest in the fairness of their organizations. In most cases, it is possible that the employees reduce their performance so that in their perception they are equitably rewarded (Spector, 2008). Numerous scholars have already provided strong linkages between motivation both extrinsic or intrinsic, and performance (for example, Hackman, 2002; Mendibil and Macbryde, 2005; Murphy, J2009). I also observed that motivation played a substantial role in encouraging the team members to participate in the group activities. For example, in the week one, where A had introduced the system of rewards for participation, I observed that all the members tried to out-do each other and were very vocal and participated in the discussion enthusiastically. The team members were aware that there was no bias or preference from the Leader and hence a sense of objectivity and equitable rewards was established. Also, an intrinsic motivation in all the group activities for all the weeks was observed to be the need to appear interested and knowledgeable and actively involved in the activities. This was an inherent need which reflected most of the members’ inherent need to conform to the groups requirements and to gain recognition and acceptance by the other members. These intrinsic motivators were in some cases actively introduced by the leaders where the team members were further sub-divided into groups to debate, or role play or where the leader used a quiz or activity chart to encourage students to display their knowledge. It can therefore be said, that as seen in the dynamics of the group activity over the period of the six weeks, motivation – both external rewards and incentives and recognition, and intrinsic sense of achievement and conformity to the group – play a crucial role in inspiring the team members to give in their best performance. The next factor that I discuss in this essay is the leadership style of the Leaders. I contend that Leadership style plays a crucial role in performance management in teams. More specifically, I state that leaders who adopt a transformational style are more successful in inspiring their team members to perform. I support my argument by first elucidating in brief, theories of leadership style, and then discussing my own observations with leadership styles adopted by leaders in my team. There are numerous theories of leadership ranging from personality and trait theories (Spector, 2008), behavioural (Wang, Huey-Wen and Jiang, 2005), situational and contingency theories (Whichard and Kees, 2006) to leadership orientation theories (Zhang, Tremaine, Milewski, Fjermestad, and O’Sullivan, 2012). These traditional theories discuss the importance of factors either present in leaders or in followers or pertaining to the situation. However, a relatively newer way of looking at leadership styles is related to the who set of activities, attitudes and behaviours that leaders indulge in. According to this perspective, leaders who are task oriented and who emphasis the fulfilment of objectives through traditional performance management measures using rules and protocols are classified as transactional leaders (Whichard and Kees, 2006). On the other hand, leaders who focus on developing relationships and providing insights, guidance and support to the team-members and who are able to generate an inherent drive and motivation among the team members are classified as transformational leaders (Spector, 2008). Researchers have found that both type of leaderships work well in specific circumstances, though there is a gaining popularity of the transformational leadership style. In my observation of our team leaders, I found that the leaders who exhibited characteristics akin to transformational leadership – for example, who facilitated the team members in understanding the article (for example, by using role play or debate, as opposed to merely summarizing the article as in the case of leader A) were able to ensure that all the members understood the content of the article well. Another example of transformational leadership was exhibited where the leader was able to recognize the need for involving the Chinese team members to participate in the discussions and the role plays as some of us were slightly hesitant with spoken English. This encouragement and acceptance by the leaders helped the non-native speakers gain confidence and security and we were able to engage more with the team. Next, I also observed that leaders who provided feedback and fielded questions from team members and encouraged us to use our own analytical skills to provide answers and seek more information, were able to encourage a more enthusiastic participation from the team. This is considered as an essential characteristic of transformational leaders, that they are able to encourage the team members to think for themselves and to become problem solvers and gain confidence and autonomy (Spector, 2008). In my experience, the leaders who displayed this characteristic were able to fill the team with greater curiosity and inspiration to explore the topic under discussion. As an example, I would like to mention the case of leader F. I believe that it was a brilliant display of transformational leadership when she introduced the concept of 360 degree feedback by encouraging the team to first draw a diagram that each member perceives as reflective of 360 degree feedback. This activity created anticipation among the team members to know if what they thought was correct; and hence led to their being more engaged in the discussion that followed the activity. As such, using the above evidence I can say that my argument that transformational leadership leads to better team performance is justified in the case of our team. Finally, this essay discusses the impact of performance measurement on the actual performance of the teams. It is noted that performance management, being a much expansive task for managers, is different from performance measurement. Performance measurement is postulated as a tool of managing employees output and efficiency and forms an essential aspect of the overall performance management (Mendibil and Macbryde, 2005). The concept of performance measurement has gone substantial change over the years. Traditionally, performance was measured in terms of the financial outputs, both at the organizational level and at the individual level (Fulk, Bell and Bodie, 2011). This meant that organizations were gauged on their sales, revenues of cost savings while individual performance was assessed in terms of the employee’s productivity. However, more recently, non-financial measures like customer satisfaction, customer retention, employee satisfaction, employee retention, employee engagement and organisations’ long term viability (Dossi and Patelli, 2010). These factors related to performance measurement indicate that there is a growing recognition of the fact that people-related factors too impact on performance and hence these need to be incorporated in any measurement program. This background highlights the fact that measuring performance is an intricate process and needs to take into account several factors, which can accurately gauge the individual’s performance. Leaders’ performance is therefore measured in terms of several factors, including the financial contribution that their team makes to the company as well as the guidance and job clarity that they can provide to their subordinates (Ittner and Larcker, 2003). Also, leaders are often assessed in terms of managerial skills (which include organizing ability, task scheduling ability, facilitating of resources and using effective communications), and on their ability to motivate and inspire subordinates to excel at their tasks (Whichard and Kees, 2006). In the case of our team dynamics, we evaluated the performance of the leaders in terms of their contribution to the team activity (or their involvement with the group), their preparedness and their communications’ skills. These were considered to be apt measurements of the performance of the leader based on the understanding that that the role of the leader was to facilitate the group activities – and this facilitation is possible only if the leader has adequate knowledge or is prepared with the task, and he or she has the desired communications skills and interpersonal skills. I observed that leaders who were well prepared (like leaders A, B, F and E), were able to encourage more serious participation from the team members. Also, another essential aspect was related to the involvement of the leaders with the group and their interpersonal skills and ability to facilitate the activity– through asking questions, keeping the focus on the theme of the discussion, encouraging participation from members who were relatively quieter and displaying vigour and energy in the discussions. I observed that leaders who had prepared extensive notes and handouts or who had developed charts and maps or quizzes were more successful. Finally, another essential factor that seem to impact on performance of the team was the communication skills of the leader. I, being a Chinese student, am a bit hesitant in speaking in English and I feel that this is a reason that I may not have come out as a very involved leader. In addition to the performance of the leaders in the group activity, I think it was also essential to assess the performance of the team members for every group activity. This was omitted from our list of activities, though an informal assessment of all the team members’ behaviour and attitudes made in the group diary for every weekly session. I believe that this is something that could have been done better by setting formal guidelines of performance measurement for the team members. The available literature on performance management states that organizations that have a well- defined and comprehensive plan of measuring the performance of employees are able to improve their performance more (van Vugt and Ahuja, 2010). This means that it is not sufficient to tell the team that they are expected to perform well or to their best ability; instead what is needed is to tell the team specifically what will be counted as performance. So, in the case of our team, we could have encouraged better performance from team members if we had set objectives or standards of performance (like we did for the leaders by determining factors like preparedness, involvement and communications). This lack of adequate performance measurement clarity for the team members was observed in case where some of the team members had participated in the group activity without reading the essential text. These examples clearly highlighted the fact that in the absence of clear performance measurement criteria or objectives, performance tends to deteriorate. The above discussion has focused on explaining how performance of the team may be impacted by factors like motivation, leadership style and performance measurement. The essay reflected on how the theories on motivation predict that performance is impacted by both extrinsic and intrinsic factors. My personal observation of the team’s dynamic confirms that this is the fact, and the sessions where the leaders used motivational incentives like presents, and where they encouraged the participants to express their need for self-esteem and self-actualization by showcasing their mental acumen, were more successful and memorable. Next, my argument was that transformational leadership leads to better performance of teams. I support it with a discussion of studies that have provided evidence on the effectiveness of transformational leadership style in motivating and encouraging teams to perform at their optimum best. I also provide specific examples and reflections from my experience with my team and hence am able to establish that leaders who exhibit transformational style were able to encourage better participation and engagement and overall performance. Similarly, a review of the literature had highlighted the importance of performance measurement as a tool for performance enhancement () My observation conforms to what is known in literature, as it was seen that leaders whose criteria of performance measurement was well-defined, were found to make an exalted effort to show high involvement, good communication skills and preparedness. Also, I noted that lack of objective and clearly defined performance measurement criteria led to a lower commitment to perform in some team members. These observations therefore lead me to conclude that motivation, leadership style and performance measurement, are definitely potent factors that impact on the performance of teams. References Alderfer, C. P. (1972). Existence, Relatedness, and Growth; Human Needs in Organizational Settings, New York: Free Press ?External Reference] Ittner, C. D. and Larcker, D. F. (2003). Coming up Short on Nonfinancial Performance Measurement, Harvard Business Review, 17: 22-25. ?External Reference] Dossi, A., and Patelli, L. (2010). You Learn from What You Measure: Financial and Non- Financial Performance Measures in Multinational Companies. Long Range Planning, 43: 498-526 ?External Reference] Fulk, H. K, Bell, R. L., Bodie, N. (2011). Team Management by Objectives: Enhancing Developing Team’s Performance. Journal of Management Policy and Practice, 12 (3): 17-26 ?External Reference] Hackman, J. R. (2002). Leading Teams: Setting the Stage for Great for Great Performances. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.?External Reference] Maslow, A.H. (1943). A Theory of Human Motivation. Psychological Review 50(4): 370-96)?External Reference] McClelland, D.C. (1955). Studies in Motivation. Appleton. ?External Reference] Mendibil, K. and Macbryde, J. (2005).Designing effective team-based performance measurement systems: an integrated approach. Centre for Strategic Manufacturing, James Weir Building ?External Reference] Murphy, J. (2009). Inner Excellence. NY: McGraw-Hill?External Reference] Spector, P.E. (2008). Industrial and Organizational Behavior (5th ed.). Wiley: Hoboken, NJ ?External Reference] van Vugt, M., & Ahuja, A.(2010). Naturally Selected: the Evolutionary Science of Leadrship. NY: Harper Collins. ?External Reference] Vroom, V. H. (1964). Administrative Science Quarterly, 13 (1): 26–46. ?External Reference] Wang, E., Huey-Wen, C. and Jiang, J. (2005). The impacts of charismatic leadership style on team cohesiveness and overall performance during ERP implementation. International Journal of Project Management, 23(3); 173-180.?External Reference] Whichard, J. and Kees, N. L. (2006). Managers as Facilitators. Westport, CT: Praeger ?External Reference] Zhang, S., Tremaine, M., Milewski, A. E., Fjermestad, J. and O’Sullivan, P. (2012). Leader Delegation in Global Software Teams; Occurrence and Effects. Electron Markets, 22: 37-48 Read More