The Job Characteristic Model of Work Motivation - Essay Example

Motivation: Theory and Practice xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Name xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Course xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Instructor xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date Motivation: Theory and Practice It is quite evident many theories that have been developed to try and capture organizations motivational processes as well as predict how employees will or will not be motivated. According to Alera (1990), motivation is a process defined to start with a psychological need which cumulates to a drive or a behavior that is largely aimed at a goal. There are numerous different views as to what motivates employees thus making motivation a complex phenomenon. Several theories largely attempts to explain how motivation works across a given organization. It is further evident that understanding what motivated workers and how they were motivated was the focus of many researchers especially following the publication of Hawthorne study results (Alera 1990). The four major approaches that have led to understanding employee motivation and practices are; Maslow’s need theory, Herzberg’s two factor theory, Adams equity theory and Aldefer ERG theory. Maslow defining work was mainly on the development of the hierarchy of various employees needs. Stephen and Timothy (2007) maintain that, Maslow believed that there are at least five sets of goals that are greatly referred as basic needs. These sets of goals are; self actualization, physiological, safety, esteem and love. He stated that employees within an organization, employees are usually motivated by the desire to maintain as well as achieve various conditions upon which basic satisfactions rest. Maslow argued that for an employee to be motivated it is important for lower level needs to be satisfied first before the next higher level wants could be used to motivate workers (Garger 1999). Maslow’s theory is based on two principle namely; deficit and progression principle. Garger (1999) maintain that, the deficit principle indicates that a want that is satisfied no longer motivates employee’s behavior since workers will work to satisfy deprived wants whereas Hale (1998) suggests that, the progression principle indicate that the need identified in Maslow hierarchy should be in such a manner that the need at any level should come into being after a lower level need has been satisfied. Maslow theory can be used to explain why some organizational management is unable to motivate their employees effectively. By way of accessing an employee motivation through appraisal, managers should be able to examine as well as analyze the next level that the employee should aim for in this case reducing workers disengagement and absenteeism (Hale 1998). The following diagram defines Maslow hierarchical needs; Source; http://www.cipfa.org.uk/students/nsf/download/nsf05_motivation.pdf The implication of this theory highly provides various insights for managers as well as other organizational leaders. Kleinbeck and Schmidt (1990) maintains that, this theory requires managers to find various ways of motivating workers through devising practices which aims at satisfying emerging needs (Keller 1999). Another implication that can be related to this theory is for organization managers to implement focus groups as well as support programs that will assists workers deal with stress especially in challenging cases and create time to understand the needs of workers. Garger (1999) maintain that, when Maslow need hierarchy concept is widely applied to an organization, implications for various managerial action become clear forcing managers to take the responsibility of creating an environment where employees cal highly develop to their fullest potential (Kleinbeck and Schmidt 1990). It is quite evident that when an organization creates a conducive environment then, employees will not fail to report working work and they will engage in ensuring organizational goals and objective are met. Alderfer’s theory is also called the ERG theory defining Existence, Relatedness and Growth (ERG). Alderfer’s theory is considered to be reworked Maslow need hierarchy only that it is more align more to an empirical research. Kretiner and Kinicki (1998) suggest that, existence refers to employees concern with basic materials. Existence requirement also refers as physiological need in Maslow hierarchy. Relatedness refers to employees desire to maintain interpersonal relationships (similar to Maslow love need represented as the external component of employee esteem need) and finally, growth refers to an employee intrinsic desire for personal development (similar to Maslow self actualization and esteem need). This theory differs to Maslow theory in that more than one need may be used at the same time (Kretiner and Kinicki 1998). ERG theory does not largely assume that a lower want must be substantially be satisfied before moving to a higher need. Further, this theory deals with frustration regression in that if a higher level need is frustrated then an employer can increase the satisfaction of a lower level need. Adams’ equity theory states that workers strive for equity between themselves as well as other employees. Here, equity is achieved when the ration of workers outcome over their inputs is equal to other workers out come over inputs. Adams largely recognized that employees are not only concerned with the total amount of rewards received for their efforts but rather the relationship of this amount to what other workers receive (Harpaz 1990). Based on an employee input such as education, competence, effort and experience, a worker can be able to compare the outcome defined in salary and recognition. Adams equity theory lies upon three major assumptions. First, the theory holds that individuals develop beliefs on what constitute an equitable and fair return for their contributions to their jobs. Secondly, equity theory assumes that individuals tend to largely compare what they recognize to be the exchange they have with their employers (Lake2000). The third assumption is where employees believe that their own treatment is not fair relative to the exchange they recognize others to be making thus they become motivated to take actions deemed to be appropriate. For managers, this concept of equity is interpreted as a positive association between an employee’s effort on the work and the pay received. It is therefore important for managers to adopt Adam’s equity theory through developing reward systems that are equitable and fair. Further, these rewards should be distributed in accordance with workers beliefs about the value they generate to an organization. According to O’ Malley (2000), creating equitable as well as fair treatment within an organization ensures that organizational goals are achieved. Consequences of unequal treatment of employees such as; reduced input by way of restricting output, employee disengagement and involuntary employee absenteeism will be reduced by way of effectively adapting Adam’s equity theory. Managers need to understand that equity theory assumes that one important cognitive process largely involves employers looking around as well as observing what effort employees are putting into their work and what kind of rewards follow them (O’ Malley 2000). Through adapting this theory, managers are able to establish a framework that defines work motivation which, in turn reduces employee absenteeism and disengagement (Rich 1999). The motivator hygiene theory is considered to be one of the earliest theories in the area of job design and how it affects employee’s motivation. The theory was established by Frederick Herzberg. Herzberg adopts a two factor theory where he identifies two sets of factors that largely impacts on workplace motivation (Jones 2008). He discovered that employees tend to describe their satisfied experiences in terms of the various factors that were considered to be intrinsic to the content of the designed job. These defined factors are known as ‘motivators’ and they include variables such as responsibility, growth, advancement, recognition an achievement. On the contrary, dissatisfying employees experiences called “hygiene” largely result from extrinsic non job related factors such as company policies, coworker relations, salary as well as supervisory styles. Herzberg further argued that eliminating the various causes of employee dissatisfaction (by way of hygiene factors) would not result in a state of satisfaction but rather it will create a neutral state (Dickson 1973). The implication of this theory to managers in ensuring that employee disengagement and absenteeism is reduced is through increasing motivation through creating basic changes to the nature of a workers job especially by way of job enrichment. Managers should constantly redesign jobs so as to allow increased responsibility, personal growth, advancement opportunities and recognition. According to Herzberg, the factors considered to enhance job satisfaction are distinct and separate from those that lead to work dissatisfaction. Therefore, managers that seek to eliminate employee disengagement and absenteeism need to create organizational peace. Kinicki and Kreitner (1998) outline one of Herzberg findings, managers should refrain from giving employees additional task but rather more responsibility should be given to workers. Thomas (2000) maintain that here, employees usually take tasks that are normally performed by their supervisors. In essence, there is more to a manager role in motivating workers other than good working condition, good salary and compensation. For Herzberg, managers should motivate their employees through enriching his/her jobs thus enabling the employee have the opportunity for recognition and achievement, advancement, responsibility as well as stimulation (Thomas 2000). Following the two factor theory, managers should ensure that hygiene factors are adequately followed so that they can then build satisfiers into the jobs. It is further evident that, managers should motivate employees by way of adopting a more democratic approach as well as improving the content and nature of an employee actual job through empowerment, enrichment and enlargement (Stephen and Timothy 2007). In order to have a clear understanding of motivational theory and practices, it is important to analyzed ways in which these theories are similar and differ from each other. Maslow and Alderfer’s theories are similar in that they sue a hierarchical need to explain employee definition. Based on their differences, Alderfer argue that it is better from managers to think in terms of a continuum as opposed to a hierarchy. While Maslow argues that when an employee becomes satisfied, a need is termed to be less important to an individual whereas Alderfer argue that growth or relatedness become more important when an employee is satisfied. This largely implies that proper working arrangement can continue to motivate employees and in this case they are not necessarily superseded by growth needs. According to Maslow, an employee would stay at a certain need level until that specific need is satisfied completely. ERG theory counters this through noting that when a higher order need level is frustrated the employees opt to increase a lower- level need takes place (Weightman 2008). Further, inability to satisfy a need for social interaction, for instance, might enhance the desire for better working conditions or money. Based on the Herzberg and Maslow theories the two are similar in that the two are need theories. Maslow self actualization and esteem can be represented as motivators using the Herzberg theory whereas social, safety and physiological are considered to be hygiene factors. The similarity can be defined in the diagram below; Source; http://www.cipfa.org.uk/students/nsf/download/nsf05_motivation.pdf In conclusion, from the above analysis of the Maslow, Herzberg, Adams equity and Alderfer theories, it is quite evident that they define the various ways in which employees can be motivated. It is further evident that managers can adapt either or all these theories in ensuring that organizational problem such as employee involuntary absenteeism in the work place as well as employee disengagement is reduced. All the work researched by the theorists; Abraham maslow, Clayton Alderfer, Fredrick Herzberg assist in explain needs as a source of motivation whereas Adams equity theory defines the necessity in providing equitable and fair treatment towards all employee within a given workplace. From the above analyzed theories, through knowing what largely motivates employees as well as incorporating this knowledge by managers into the reward system assist them in identifying, employing, retaining as well as training a productive workforce. Further, it is evident that adaptation of the above discussed theories requires both employees and managers effort. This implies that employees must always be willing to let their managers know what largely motivate them whereas managers must in turn be willing to design reward systems that ensures their employees are motivated. References Alera, J. 1990, The job characteristic model of work motivation revisted. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate Dickson, W.1973, Hawthorne experiments. In C. Heyel (ed.), The encyclopedia of management, 2nd ed. (pp. 298-302). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Garger, E. 1999, Holding on to high performer; a strategic approach to retention, Compensation and benefit management journal, 15(4), 10-17 Hale, J.1998, Strategic rewards; keeping your best talent from walking out the door, Compensation and benefit management journal, 14(3), 39-50 Harpaz, I. 1990, The importance of work goals: an international perspective, Journal of International Business Studies, 21. 75-93. Jones, I. 2008, The Human Factor: Inside the CIA's Dysfunctional Intelligence Culture. New York: Encounter Books Keller, J. 1999, Motivational systems, in E. Keeps (Ed.), handbook of human performance technology, San Fransisco: Jossey Bass Inc Kleinbeck, R., and Schmidt, K. 1990, The translation of work motivation into performance, Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Kretiner, R., & Kinicki, A. 1998. Organizational behavior, Boston: Irwin McGraw-Hill Lake, S. 2000, Low cost strategies for employee retention, Compensation and benefit management journal, 32(4), 65-72 O’ Malley, M. 2000, Creating commitment: how to attract and retain talented employee by building relationships that last, New York: Willey & Sons, Inc Rich, C. 1999, Incentive compensation challenges: attracting and retaining key employees, The human resource professional, 12(2), 12-15 Stephen, P., & Timothy, A. 2007, Essentials of Organizational Behavior, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall Thomas, J. 2000, Guide to Managerial Persuasion and Influence, Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson Prentice Hall Weightman, J. 2008, The Employee Motivation Audit, Cambridge: Cambridge Strategy Publication Read More