Universal Theory of Work Motivation - Example

Student Name: Tutor: Title: Human Resource Essay: Motivation and Performance Course: Word count: 1996 To what extent is goal-setting theory a universal theory of work motivation Introduction There are many theories that have been proposed for work motivation in order to enhance productivity. Various theories are applicable in specific situations and culture defines how adaptable the workers can be to a given theory. Goal setting theory of one of the theories proposed for work motivation and is widely applied although it has its own limitations in various situations. Goals that are unambiguous motivate people to work towards them using well defined strategies. No one theory can be applied across all people at all times an in all situations. However, goal setting theory is widely acceptable owing to its ability to emphasize on employee participation and performance measurement (Gerhart & Fang, 2014). Despite its limitations, goal setting theory seems to be universally accepted as a theory of motivation. Goal setting sets the roadmap of attainment of organizational goals and objective within a specific timeframe and reward schemes can be used to motivate the workers more. The goals to be set have to be verifiable, tangible and measurable (Latham & Pinder, 2005). The overall objectives of the organization are translated into objectives that are specific for every succeeding level. Goal setting can happen in virtually all circumstances but the challenge is to ensure that individual goals and organizational goals complement each other in the attainment of the overall mission. This essay explores the extent to which goal setting theory is a universal theory of work motivation. Discussion Expectancy theory states that an employee is bound to work harder or smarter when he knows that his additional efforts will occasion valued results. Expectancy theory can be aptly applied in the designing of a reward system within an organization that can complement goal setting theory after the attainment of the set goals (Parker, 2014). Theories of motivation interlock and sometimes complement each other and there could no single theory that explains motivation comprehensively at the workplace or the competitive world. A motivated workforce is an ingredient to competitive advantage. Motivated workforce is crucial for economic productivity, as well as societal well-being. Motivational is usually volitional and an indicator of well-being. Motivational theories are evaluated with regard to validity, testability, comprehensiveness, parsimony, applicability, and specifying links between performance and motivation. Validity describes how well does a certain theory capture motivation. Testability is the ability of a theory to be tested. Comprehensiveness refers to how widely applicable can the theory be across situations, people and various outcomes. Applicability is the ability of the employee or the manager to use the theory is practical situations (Gerhart & Fang, 2014). Goal setting theory as proposed by Dr. Locke and task motivation has become an important element of the process of employee management. People are more productive if they are motivated using distinct goals and appropriate feedback. Performance and perseverance in attaining the goal is determined by how realistic, specific and difficult the goal can be. Measurable stretch goals occasions improved employee productivity as well as enhanced self-confidence. Dr. Edwin Locke demonstrated that there is a correlation between the setting of goals and motivation. In the modern world goal setting and the theory entrenched behind it is universally accepted as crucial to motivating people not only at the workplace but in many aspect of the society. A lot of research concerning goal setting is emphasized on the workplace goals or the competitive world of sport (Locke & Latham, 1990). Goals which are specific motivate people more than vague goals. Goals that are challenging are more motivating as compared to easy goals. When people receive positive feedback while in the course of working and after working on certain tasks of their goals, they are inspired to achieve more. In goal setting theory the complex goals are attainable where individuals are given time, clarity, and learning. Learning is the opportunity to train as well as learn to attain whatever is needed to reach the defined goal. Goal setting focuses emphasizes on the manner in which individuals come up with goals and respond to them as well as the overall effect on of the process on motivation (Parker, 2014). Specific areas focuses on by the goal setting theory is the goal difficulty, the goal specificity, level of involvement in goal setting, role of objective, and timely feedback in the course of achieving the goals set. As compared to other theories, goal setting theory has evolved and shaped over time. Commendable research provide enough evidence that shows employees perform excellently well when they are assigned challenging and specific goals that they have taken an important role in setting. Majority of the studies were performed in the United States as well as other countries in the world. However, Norwegian employees avoided participation in the research and preferred to be represented by the union representative in the determination of work goals (Locke & Latham, 2002). Individual involvement in goal setting was inconsistent with the Norwegian philosophy of having their union representative represent them. In the United States, participation in setting of goals is motivational but inconsequential in the Norwegian case. It is generally agreed that goal setting is a major source of work motivation. When workers are involved in developing goals that are clear and specific, they are motivated to be more productive in an effort to attain the goals. Self-generated feedback seems to motivate more as compared to externally generated feedback. There are several contingencies in goals setting theory. Apart from feedback other factors that are important in the goals-performance relationship include task characteristics, national culture, adequate self-efficacy, and goal commitment (Locke & Latham, 2009). The culture of a particular nation defines how effective can the managers be in their evaluation of employee performance. Participation in goal setting increases acceptance and a sense of belonging in the organization. Goals appear to have a great impact on performance when the tasks to be accomplished are well-learned, simple, and independent. Goal setting theory is culture bound and has worked well in the North American cultures. Locke’s goal-setting theory has been widely used in organizations around the world to motivate workers. Goal setting presents a powerful means of motivating people as well as one self. The importance of goal-setting is well known that the whole management systems possess goal setting basics incorporated in them. Across different divides and management circles goal setting theory has been accepted generally as the most useful and most valid motivation theory in industrial as well as organizational psychology, organizational behavior, and human resource management (Arnold, 2010). People have been encouraged to set SMART goals. It apparently natural to reckon that setting goals that are Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant and Time bound is a better way of ensuring that they are accomplished. The research done by Dr. Edwin Locke shows that there is a correlation between how challenging/difficult and specific a goal was and the performance of the task by people. Locke discovered that difficult and specific goals lead to better task performance as compared to vague and easy goals. Consequently coming up with a goal that is very easy is not motivating at all. Challenging or hard goals are motivating as compared to easy goals since it is much of a show of accomplishment to attain something that one has to work for or put in determined effort. Other studies have supported the impact of goal setting at the workplace and how it transformed performance. Dr. Gary Latham and Dr. Locke wrote a book in 1990 that emphasized on the need of setting difficult but specific goals. The emphasized characteristics of goal setting that included clarity, challenge, commitment, task complexity, and feedback. SMART goal setting provides a roadmap for accomplishment of specific tasks within a specified time frame within an organization (Locke & Latham, 1990). Goal setting is universally recognized for work motivation. Workers want to handle more challenging jobs in order to apply their skills and develop their expertise. The usefulness of Latham and Locke’s research in SMART goal setting is applied in the current work environment in the measurement of performance. Goals that are clear and challenging make the workers to strive to achieve them than ambiguous encouragement like ‘‘work harder’’. Workers become more committed towards achieving specific goals with a clear timeline regardless of how challenging they may seem to be. It is easy to offer feedback on goal performance where goal setting theory has been applied (Pinder, 2008). The complexity of the task has to be considered when evaluating feedback. Performance measurement is vital in goal setting theory. Clear and challenging goals compel high levels of employee productivity. The goal setting theory offers one of the most influential explanations of the dependable variable. Workers do better in their work when they get feedback on how they are progressing to their goals. Self-generated feedback is powerful as a motivator as compared to externally generated feedback. For goal-setting to be effective self-efficacy of the employee and feedback from the employer have to be present (Locke & Latham, 2009). The tunnel vision focus that arises owing to the goal setting theory brings about the challenge of its not being applicable in almost all situations. Tasks that need improvising can be a lot challenging for goal setting approach but universally goal setting theory remains the most acceptable theory of motivation. Goal setting theory revolves around purposeful, goal-directed and conscious actions. Goal setting defines the factors which affect goals and their correlation to performance, as well as action. Goal setting appear to work since goals produce clear expectations and assist in focusing and directing effort. Individuals involved in goal setting can compared their current performance and what is expected of them from the goals set. When the individuals fall short of the goals set in the first place, they are motivated to worker harder in order to achieve the set targets. Difficult goals or challenging goals inspire search for task strategies to accomplish them (Locke & Latham, 2002). Goals setting is also applicable using intrinsic and extrinsic rewards after the accomplishment of the goals set. Workers are motivated to attain the goals in anticipation of the rewards. Generally goals offer effort, direction and persistence which are the important elements of motivation. Goal setting theory is generally accepted since there direct link of action and performance. However, the organizational, goals are not in line with individual employee’s goals. What the individual desires is not always what the organization expects of him. Moreover, learning goals do not automatically foster interest and interest goals do not usually occasion learning. In some circumstances individuals are tempted to take risky actions in the course of pursuing their goals and this can lead to failure and discouragement. Goal setting is majorly concerned with simple and quantifiable goals and its applicability on complex goals is still a challenge (Parker, 2014). Goals that are narrowly focused can lead to neglecting of areas which are outside the goals set. To a great extent goal setting seem to work to particular individuals who have high self-esteem, self-efficacy and are conscientious. The research methods used to verify the theory have been criticized to be narrow. There is no theory that does not have limitations or assumptions and goal setting theory is an exception. Conclusion Goals provide direction and calculated effort and strategies can be used to attain specific goals. Research has shown that there is greater acceptability when employees are involved in goals setting hence participation of the workers is important in setting of goals. Despite the complexity of goals goal-setting helps in defining the roadmap and measurability of the goals. Goal setting encourages workers to work hard in order to accomplish goal setting. Goals that are SMART motivate workers to put more effort in their work hence increasing productivity. Goal setting provides direction for attainment of organizational goals. Goals are measurable, specific and clear are easy to attain as compared to ambiguous direction that is measurable. Goals setting drives motivation hence making it a more universally acceptable theory despite the challenges that have been described. References Arnold, J. 2010, Work Psychology: Understanding Human Behaviour in the Workplace. Harlow: Prentice Hall/Financial Times. Chapter 8 – Approaches to understanding work motivation and job design. Gerhart, B., & Fang, M. 2014, Pay for (individual) performance: Issues, claims, evidence and the role of sorting effects. Human Resource Management Review, 24(1), 41-52. Latham, G. P. & Pinder, C.C. 2005, Work motivation theory and research at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 485-516. Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. 2002, Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57(9), 705-717. Locke, E., & Latham, G. 2009, Has goal setting gone wild, or have its attackers abandoned good scholarship? Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(1), 17-23. Locke, E.A. and Latham, G.P. 1990, Work motivation and satisfaction: Light at the end of the tunnel. Psychological Science, 1(4): 240-246. Parker, S. K. 2014, Beyond motivation: Job and work design for development, health, ambidexterity, and more. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 661-691. Pinder, C.C. 2008, Human nature: Needs and values as motives at work. Chapter 3 in Pinder, C.C. ‘Work motivation in organizational behavior’. Prentice Hall, New Jersey. Read More