Motivation Plays a Key Role in the Performance of the Employees - Essay Example

Organization Behavior Employees are the key assets who can effectively run the organization and take it on a successful path. Using their physical and mental abilities, employees with the guidance of the leaders can only successfully accomplish all the organizational tasks thereby enabling the organization to reach their goals, which in turn will provide it with profits, market share and eventually optimum success. Considering this key role of the employees, it is of paramount importance that those crucial assets are well managed by the organization and its management. Well managed in the sense, the employees’ physical and particularly mental aspects have to be managed and kept in an optimal state. For employees or humans in general, mental aspects or brain or mind is the key, which has to be in a highly inspired or motivated state for it to function efficiently. When the mind of the employee is in an inspired or motivated state, then it will utilize not only its’ mental part but the whole physical body to effectively carry out all their allocated tasks thereby contributing their best to the organization. Thus inspiring or motivating (both can be used in an interchangeable manner) the employees forms crucial part of organizational functioning or even leadership duties. In organizational setting, employees will carry out their allocated tasks due to personal motivating factors like salary, taking care of their family, professional growth and so on. However, more than those personal motivations, if the organization and in particularly its’ leaders actualize a motivating environment by setting goals and roles to the employees, by giving them non-financial appreciation, by utilizing the employees’ strengths and by promoting apt Work-Life balance, then the employees’ motivational levels will accentuate and that will lead to strong performance by them. These four motivational strategies and especially leaders’ role in it was focused in the article How to....inspire your staff by Doug Crawford. Focusing on the above mentioned four motivational strategies discussed by the author of the article, the report will first review the key motivational theories, followed by how those theories are relevant and connected to those four motivational strategies. Literature Review At the basic level, motivation can be viewed or termed as the inner drive that would make the humans think as well as act in a particular manner. The term motivation is derived from the Latin word motivus which stands for impelling, moving and driving. (Worsch 2004). Although, it is clear that the process of motivation is universal, which is applicable to all humans and their way of thinking as well as behaving, when viewed from organizational context it provides key perspectives. “Motivation is the force that initiates, guides and maintains goal-oriented behaviors on the part of the employees and it is what causes them to take action in the right direction.” (Cherry). According to Robbins (2012), motivation or employee motivation in particular is defined as the willingness of the employees to exert high levels of effort towards organizational goals conditioned by the efforts ability to satisfy some needs of the employees. Worsch (2004, p.6) provides a similar definition for motivation by stating, employee motivation will in the following be “understood as the stimulation and cause of work-related behavior of employees by a conglomerate of internal and external forces, which can be affected by both, environmental forces and forces inherent in the employee”. Despite the above definitions, there is no unitary definition for motivation or employee motivation, and due to this fact, researchers have developed and are still developing a number of theories to define as well as explain motivation. Among the number of theories, below are the four theories, which are relevant to the four motivational strategies mentioned in the article by Crawford. Psychologist Frederick Herzberg only came up with the two-factor theory, which also known as Herzbergs motivation-hygiene theory as well as dual-factor theory. This theory is being prominently used to define as well as explain motivation in various organizational settings. “Frederick Herzberg’s motivation-hygiene factor theory, although considered non-traditional when it was introduced in 1959, has become one of the most used, known, and widely respected theories for explaining motivation.” (DeShields, Kara and Kaynak 2005, p.128). According to this theory, there are two set of factors for motivation and they are labeled as “motivators” and “hygiene factors”. Motivators are those positive factors like endowing key responsibility for the employee, the resultant achievement, recognition for it, career growth and so on, which could drive the employees into peak performance at work. Hygiene factors are neutral or even negative factors like organizational policy, relationships with the leader, working conditions and so on, which could cause de-motivation as well as dissatisfaction. The fact is, if these hygiene factors are not adequately fulfilled, it can cause dissatisfaction, even if the motivating factors themselves are addressed satisfactorily. (DeShields, Kara and Kaynak 2005). Thus, the main point of Motivation-Hygiene Theory is that organizations should not only provide employees with the motivators that cause motivation, but also has to provide and manage those hygiene factors in order to avoid dissatisfaction. As part of the study of organizational behavior, Victor Vroom came up with his version of Expectancy Theory in 1964 with the basic premise that employees will become motivated based on the expectation of preferred outcomes. Expectancy Theory involves three concepts namely valence, expectancy, and force. Valence is referred to the potential rewards (including both financial rewards as well as non-financial praises), with expectancy being the employee’s belief or expectation that those rewards can be gained, and force is the employee’s drive to perform to acquire those rewards. Thus, “this theory emphasizes the needs for organizations to relate rewards directly to performance and to ensure that the rewards provided are those rewards deserved and wanted by the recipients.” (Eerde and Thierry 1996, p.528). Edwin A. Locke began the work on Goal Setting Theory in mid-1960s and continued to develop and refine it for the next thirty years. Locke’s article, “Toward a Theory of Task Motivation and Incentives” laid the foundation for the goal setting theory, and reflected how setting goals, particularly tougher goals, for the employees by the leaders can make the employees push and importantly motivate themselves to achieve those goals. That is, when the employees are given defined and important goals and the fullest responsibility to accomplish those goals, they will motivate themselves to the maximum by thinking about the significance of the goal and the success it could bring on accomplishment. “Feelings of success in the work place occur to the extent that people see that they are able to grow and meet job challenges by pursuing and attaining goals that are important and meaningful.” (Locke and Latham (2006, p.265). Theory X and Theory Y are the key theories of motivation formulated by Douglas McGregor in the 1960s, which focuses on two fundamental approaches to leading or managing employees. One form of managing is based on Theory X, where the employees dislike work and are not motivated to accomplish their set targets, which will necessitate autocratic form of leadership on the part of the organizational leaders. In the case of Theory Y, employees are inherently motivated and in those cases, the leaders have to adopt participative style of management. “Theory X assumes that people dislike work; they want to avoid it and do not want to take responsibility. Theory Y assumes that people are self-motivated, and thrive on responsibility.” (Mind Tools). Analysis In the article, How to...inspire your staff, Doug Crawford focuses on how employees can be motivated and made to provide their optimum best, with the leaders playing the main facilitating role. Although, Crawford uses the word inspire in the title of the article, he uses the words inspire and motivation interchangeably thereby providing same connotation for both the words. After introducing how leaders have to win the hearts and minds of the employees by leading them in an authentic and effective manner, goes on to list the motivational strategies that can be adopted by the leaders to optimize motivation among the employees. Among the Ten motivational strategies provided by Crawford, the four strategies of “Helping staff see where they fit in”, “Saying Thank you”, “Recognizing peoples strengths” and “Promoting Work-Life Balance” will be analyzed below. The motivational strategy of aiding the employees to aptly and strongly fit into the scheme of things inside the organization can effectively motivate the employees. That is, if the employees are given clear and crucial roles and goals, they could motivate themselves to successfully complete those goals and responsibilities. “Most people feel good about themselves when they are able to understand how their contribution helps the overall success of the organisation.” (Crawford 2006). This strategy is in correlation with the theory of Goal Setting by Edwin Locke because that theory clearly stipulates that if the employees are set important goals by the leaders, then they could motivate themselves to accomplish those goals. As goals have the ability to act as a self-regulatory mechanism, leaders can use it as an important tool to motivate the employees. That is, if the employees are set significant goals and asked to complete the tasks that are relevant to those goals, they will utilize their already acquired knowledge and skills, or in other cases, will even acquire or learn the needed knowledge and skills. This perspective was pointed out by Locke and Latham (2006, p.265), who stated, “Goals may simply motivate one to automatically ‘‘pull’’ stored task-relevant knowledge into awareness, and/or may motivate people to search for new knowledge.” Thus, it is clear that if the employees are given clear roles to play and goals to accomplish, they will motivate themselves strongly. The key motivational strategy of offering non-financial praise was discussed by Crawford in the article, and he points out how a simple uttering of “thank you” by the leaders or managers to the employees who have completed the allocated tasks can motivate them maximally. “A thank you that is heartfelt and spontaneous reinforces the fact that each employee matters and that the organisation recognises and values their contribution.” (Crawford 2006). This strategy is in line with the Vroom’s Expectancy Theory because that it emphasis the fact that employees could be motivated strongly, if the leaders understanding the efforts put by those employees, offer them financial rewards and more importantly non-financial praise. “For most people, genuine praise is more valuable and appreciated than financial rewards.” (Crawford 2006). That is, if the leader and the managers exhibit positive behaviors like providing non-financial praises or even an acknowledgement of the employees’ work, the motivation level of the employees will be strengthened fully. (). When the employees receive acknowledgement and also praise for their good work, they will feel that they have achieved something commendable, which will further motivate them to deliver good work continuously. Crawford points how recognizing employees strengths and accordingly utilizing them can also motivate them to give their optimum best. “Strive to play to employees strengths and seek to make the most of individual capabilities and talents wherever possible.” (Crawford 2006). That is, every employee will have certain strengths, but unfortunately they may be hidden and may not be aptly tapped by the leaders, which may cause those employees to under-perform. However, if the leader exhibiting effective leadership focuses on those strengths, then find tasks which are apt for those strengths and allocate those tasks to the employees, the employees will be motivated to showcase how his/her strengths can successfully accomplish the given tasks. This strategy is connected to Theory X and Y by Douglas McGregor, as it emphasizes how leaders in line with Theory Y can provide participative management style to the employees who are playing to their strengths and are importantly optimally motivated. “In Theory Y, the management style is participative, with the leader involving employees in decision making, but retaining power to implement decisions.” (Mind Tools). Thus, when leaders come across employees are inherently motivated, as part of Theory Y, they can provide them with autonomy and also involve in key organizational process like decision making The strategy of promoting apt work-life balance put forward by Crawford in the article is an effective one, which can motivate the employees to provide their best. When the employees feel that his/her profession is completely occupying his/her life and totally weighing them down, it will physically and mentally affect them. Employees need to have an active and interesting personal life, and that only can refresh, rejuvenate and importantly motivate them thereby enabling them to contribute more on the professional front. Thus, when the organization and its leaders maintain an apt and flexible work-life balance, it can motivate the employees even more. “Your employees will appreciate this demonstration of flexibility and the fact they are not taken for granted.” (Crawford 2006). This strategy underpins the Herzberg’s Motivation-Hygiene theory because that theory implies that even if the organization and its leaders provide all the motivational factors, they need to manage the Hygiene factors also to completely motivate the employees. In this scenario, the Hygiene Factors include the employees’ personal sphere, family and son on. That is, as pointed out above, organization and its’ leaders needs to aptly manage the employees’ professional as well as personal life as part of Work-Life balance, and with this theory implying the same, the strategy is connected to the theory. “Firstly, there are physiological needs that can be fulfilled by money, for example, to purchase food or shelter. Second, there is a psychological need to achieve and grow, and this need is fulfilled by activities that cause one to grow” (Xu and Xu 2011, p.240). These factors are not caused by the work itself but are external caused by the personal and also working environment, and so when it is aptly managed by promoting Work-Life balance, it can motivate the employees further. Reflections and Conclusions From the above review as well as the analysis, it is clear that motivation plays a key role in the performance of the employees and thereby on the success or even failure of an organization. With employees being the key asset for any organization, they would expect the leaders or management to fulfill their expectations and take care of their needs, and allow them to take part in various key organizational processes. Organizations or leaders for their part, as pointed by Crawford in his article, have to implement effective motivational strategies to keep the motivational levels of the employees at optimum levels. The above discussed four strategies can all have applications in real-life organizational environment because those strategies clearly provides key inputs on how to improve the performance of not only the employees but also the leaders. As far as the theoretical connections to those strategies are concerned, those are also relevant to the contemporary business environment because those are not “time-proof” and are applicable in any time, organizational culture, geographical location and so on. The bottom line is, if the employees perform in an highly motivated state, due to organization or leaders’ motivational strategies, then not only the organization and its’ leaders but also the employees themselves can achieve optimal success. References Cherry, K. Theories of Motivation: A Closer Look at Some Important Theories of Motivation. Available from http://psychology.about.com/od/psychologytopics/tp/theories-of-motivation.htm(accessed on August 16, 2014) Crawford, D., 2006. How to... inspire your staff. Available from http://www.cipd.co.uk/pm/peoplemanagement/b/weblog/archive/2013/01/29/howtoinspireyourstaff-2006-05.aspx accessed on August 16, 2014) DeShields, OW., Kara, A and Kaynak, E., 2005. Determinants of Business Student Satisfaction and Retention in Higher Education: Applying Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory. International Journal of Educational Management. Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 128-13 Eerde, WV and Thierry, H., 1996. Vrooms Expectancy Models and Work-Related Criteria: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology. Vol.81, No.5, pp.575-58. Locke, EA and Latham, GP., 2006. New Directions in Goal-Setting Theory. Association for Psychological Science. Vol. 15, No. 5, pp.265-268. Mind Tools. Theory X and Theory Y: Understanding Team Member Motivation. Available from http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newLDR_74.htm accessed on August 16, 2014) Robbins, SP., 2012. Principles of Business Management. Pearson. Wei, LT and Yazdanifard, R., 2013. The Impact of Positive Reinforcement on Employees’ Performance in Organizations. American Journal of Industrial and Business Management. Vol.4 No.1. Worsch, M., 2004. A Better Employee Motivation Through the Application of Public Feedback Processes. Grin Verlag Xu, D and Xu, Meng. “Study on Incentive Strategy to Teachers in Small-City School Based on Web.” In S. Lin and X Huang. Advances in Computer Science, Environment, Ecoinformatics and Education. International Conference, CSEE 2011, Wuhan, China. Read More