The Motivational Strategies of Company - Report Example

Of Motivation, Performance and Hitting Organizational Bottomlines Introduction The current paper focuses on the motivational strategies of Company X, which is a business process outsourcing company, with a satellite office in the United States. All of the HR strategies adopted by the company have been adopted from those practiced in the mother company. This paper discusses the organizational efforts which have been applied by the company to enhance the performance of emplyees, overcome their resistance to increasing productivity, and promote an overall culture of motivation and high performance among its workforce. Company X’s Organizational Efforts One such initiative is the performance management system. They have recently launched the LEAP program or the Leading Empowered and Accomplished Performers Program, which is the banner initiative for their performance management system. This initiative is intended to clarify how performance planning, monitoring, evaluation, and development ought to be undertaken. This is a good vehicle for aligning the objectives of the company with those at the department down to the individual levels. Monetary rewards being based on performance is not the sole feature of this program; rather there are also subprrograms which aim to recognze and accord ‘high performer’ status to those who perform well in their jobs. It is critical for Company X to ensure that their employees are motivated intrinsically, and not just through monetary rewards. Intrinsic motivators have more lasting, sustainable effects compared to external rewards (Jakobson & Rauch, 2005). Moreover, still related to their performance management system, the performance ratings from appraisal forms are used as one of the promotion criteria, lending a greater sense of equity into the promotion process. Such motivates employees and leads them to increased engagement in their jobs (Griffeth & Hom, 2001). There is also a clear incentives system that is an offhshoot of the LEAP program. People are rewarded in terms of bonuses and salary increases on the basis of their performance rather than on tenure, seniority, or entitlement. This is particularly important since most of the employees of Company X are GenYers who have a great need for sense of accomplishment and esteem and who strongly espouse performance-based rewards (Glass, 2007). Apart from individual rewards though, there are also team rewards, which are based on the performance of the whole department. The whole idea is to foster an atmosphere of teamwork rather than competition amongst employees. One other effort to increase productivity in General are the floor discussions conducted by HR. In these, there is open communication between the HR Manager and the BPO agents, where they can express their opinions on all concerns that affect performance. This is also a chance for them to make suggestions about work-related conditions and anything which has an impact on their work. This venue is very effective at surmounting whatever resistance there may be with new programmes, since people are allowed to participate and are empowered to give insights towards a collective decision. This venue is also a way of listening to the voice of employees, and they feel that they are valued in the process (Goman 2004). The competency framework of the company which it uses for its training and development efforts is another way of motivating employees. The structured, frequent provision of training allow employees to be equipped with the necessary skills in their current and future roles (Thompson and Guilde 1994). Since the framework is structured, it also provides Company X with a cohesive ‘glue’ that ties together other HR functions. For example, Recruitment may use the same developmental framework in selecting candidates who are most suitable in terms of the competency profile being sought for a post. Increasing this match between what is required and what the candidate already posseses makes it easier for both the employee and the organization to adjust during the onboarding process. On one end, the employee does not experience undue stress from being required so much in terms of work load and complexity, and he is also motivated in the process . On the other hand, the organization shall also benefit because the new employee will not require too much training time to be able to contribute to the attainment of organizational goals through his role (Backhaus, 2003,). In some sense, the hiring of competent candidates is an effective way of promoting a culture of motivation and high performance, since HR screens for candidates who are most suited to the culture of the organization and who uphold the same set of values (Backhaus, 2003,). Moreover, the same development framework is used as basis for promotion and succession planning. One of the most effective venues through which employee opinion is heard is the annual Employee Satisfaction Survey of the company. Through this tool, the management of the company is made keenly aware of the needs and concerns of employees. Some of the clusters that are measured in the tool include pride and dedication to the company, leadership, supervision, compensation and benefits, among others. Both intrinsic and extrinsic motivators (Herzberg, Mausner, and Snyderman, 1959) are evaluated in the instrument. The feedback is taken seriously be Management and are used for dovetailing interventions that are directly relevant to employeees’ needs. Of course, these programmes are aligned practically with the strategies of the organization (Schneider, 1983). Yet another initiative that has been implemented by HR are its work life balance programs. The company offers clubs where employees can pursue their unique interests. These clubs include the Art, Badminton, Jogging Clubs, among others. These are venues where young employees, in particular can use as venues for self-expression (Westerman and Yamamura 2007). Again, this is very important for Gen Yers who make up bulk of its work force. Motivational Theories which May be Considered by Company X One theory of motivation which may be considered by Company X is Maslow’s theory of motivation. Based on this theory, people have varying needs, beginning from the most basic needs of food and shelter, gradually developing into more abstract and intangible needs of belongingness, esteem, recognition onto self-actualisation (Maslow, 1954). This theory of motivation likewise assumes that these are met in heirarchical order, beginning with the most basic ones. If this were the case, different employees would also have differing needs, and thus, Company X must devise a way to address their needs. One ingenious way of doing this is through the adoption of flexible working practices and flexible benefits. For example, flexible working pratices may afford employees with the freedom to choose their shift, to have a shortened work week, among others. In essence, the idea is to give employees greater sense of control and autonomy to their schedules. This may be especially effective for married employees whose needs go beyond the material to time with their families and time to pursue their personal interests. An important theory that may also be considered by Company X is Adams’ (1965) equity theory. While the performance management system is continually being enhanced, employees at the rank and file level still experience a strong sense of inequity as a result of the company’s pay structure. The last Employee Satisfaction Survey of the company shows that employees generally feel that their counterparts in other companies within similar positions are being paid more, suggesting that perceived external competitiveness of salaries is low. In addition, there is also a perception from the same survey that the salaries within the company are not fairly determined. Employees generally perceive that their jobs are more difficult than others, and yet they receive lower pay. Based on Adams’ (1965) equity theory, employees tend to compare their inputs and outputs to similar others. If they sense unfairness in the comparison, they tend to exert less effort, leading to lower productivity (Yoon. & Beatty, 2001). Conclusion The current paper allows a look at the organizational initiatives that have helped Company X in maintaining a motivated and empowered workforce. The primary program of Company X is the LEAP program used by the company to address all performance-related issues. It is also a way for the company to ensure that all individividual and team rewards are given on the basis of performance rather than on tenure, entitlement or seniority. Moreover, the company has consultation sessions with its employees that give them the chance to express their concerns, and which management uses to enhance its people initiatives. Apart from these, they also have an annual Employee Satisfaction Survey for the same purpose. They also implemented a well-defined competency framework that ensures greater competency matches between what is required and what the incumbent possesses. Two motivational theories, that of Maslow ( 1954) and Adam (1965) were cited for Company X’s consideration, for addressing employee needs in a more encompassing way, and for creating a greater sense of equity in terms of salaries, respectively. References Adams, J.S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 62, 335-343. Backhaus, K. (2003). Importance of person-organization fit to job seekers, Career Development International, 8(1), 21 – 22. Glass, A. (2007). Understanding generational differences for competitive success, Industrial and Commercial Training, 39(2), 98-103. Goman, C.K. (2004). Communicate for commitment, Strategic Communication Management, 8(4), 5. Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., and Snyderman, B.B. (1959). The motivation to work (2nd ed.), New York: John Wiley & Sons. Jakobson, L. & Rauch, M. (2005). Study quantifies effect of happy workers on bottom line. Incentive, 179(1). Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality, New York: Harper. Schneider, B. (1983). An interactionist perspective on organizational effectiveness. In K.S. Cameron and D.A. Whetton (Eds.), Organizational effectiveness: a comparison of multiple models. Orlando: Academic Press. Thompson, P. and Guilde, D. (1994). Matching skills: a question of demand and supply, Education + Training, 36(2), 3 – 9. Westerman, JW, and Yamamura, JH 2007, Generational preferences for work environment fit: effects on employee outcomes, Career Development International, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 150-61. ***The company is SPI Technologies in the US. Read More