Motivational Theory in the Context of the US Army - Case Study Example

MANAGING The purpose of this paper is to use a motivational theory to explain the steps taken by the US military in order to improve the productivity of the army officials and employees. The paper also focuses on the alignment of the US Army with the criminal justice system and seeks to explain why the desired results are not the same as the real ones. Introduction The US Army, like any other major institute, comprises of people working in different positions. There are many generals, officers and subordinates. Whenever there is any hierarchy involved there are a general set of principles that have to be followed. According to Cleland and Ireland, in a hierarchical institution, work is organized around processes carried out by teams of employees that work in an ever changing organizational design. (Cleland and Ireland, 2006) This means that the subordinates have to listen appropriately to what orders they have been given. The duty of the subordinates is to follow the orders that have been assigned to them and to make certain that these orders are carried out to the best of their capabilities. The duty of the managers, on the other hand, is to ensure the subordinates a working environment that motivates them and helps them to work efficiently according to what they have been provided to deal with. Since the managers (or generals) have to deal with crucial matters and make important decisions, it is usually important that the decisions are followed immediately and steps taken to ensure that every worker in the army is satisfied with what he/she is doing. For this reason the senior army officials of the US Army have usually attempted to provide incentives to the people working in the army. Hezberg’s Two Factor Theory and its relation to the U.S. Army Dr Herzberg’s motivation theory might apply to the U.S. Army. According to Herzberg, there are two different factors, namely the hygiene and the motivation factors, which are considered essential for increased worker productivity. Hygiene factors are the ones that are required to make certain that the employees do not become dissatisfied. These factors do not provide high levels of motivation but they ensure that the employees are satisfied with their work. Examples of hygiene factors include working conditions, quality of supervision, salary, status, safety, company, company policies and administrations, intra personal relations. The motivation factors, on the other hand, are the ones that are required to encourage the employees into improving their performance. (Sapru, 2006) The motivation factors include achievements, recognition for achievement, responsibility for task, advancement to higher lever tasks and growth. In the 1980s, the US army was not as successful as it is today. This was because there was less research carried out on the increasing of the productivity of the employees. In the 1990s, however, the US army recognized the potential of increased worker productivity and since then, has tried to focus on the providing of incentives to young men and women to join the military. It seems that out of the two factors proposed by Dr Hezberg, the U.S. Army has focused on the first one, which is the hygiene factors, more. In 2008, the funds allocated to the salaries of the army officials were increased such that a maximum of $40,000 were provided if the new recruits enlisted themselves for four years or more. There are also a set of other programs that were introduced. (U.S Army Enlistment Incentives, 2008) Examples include the high school senior deferred enlistment bonuses, active army seasonal bonuses, Army Advantage Fund, ACASP, Ranger Bonus and many more. The reason for the introduction of these programs is to inculcate among the new recruits a feeling of duty. The providing of better salaries and greater advantages not only mean that many people would be willing to join. It also means that the recruits would be more satisfied and so would be willing to work and cooperate with their fellows and obey orders in an appropriate manner. Also, they would comply well with the decisions of their senior officials and would develop better intrapersonal relations. The increased amount of power given to the employees of the US Army in the military criminal justice system is also a reminder of the importance given to the hygiene factors in the process of development of policies. In the past, the military justice system was run by strict military commanders who were usually not very keen to forgive anyone who committed any crime and exerted a great deal of influence on the proceedings of the trial. Since they were very powerful, the military officers, out of personal gain, could also punish the accused for a crime that he/she did not commit. This was something that disturbed the junior military officials and the staff because this way they developed a fear for the highest ranking officials. They could not cooperate fully and obviously the adverse working conditions, as a consequence of the absolute authority of the military commanders, deteriorated the working potential of the employees. This fact was realised in the late 1990s and attempts were made to make the judicial system more transparent and accountable for everyone. As a result, the military justice system today has turned into a more formal and standardized process that not only includes the protection of the constitutional rights of the accused service men and women but also provides these men and women to appeal the decisions of the court if they are not satisfied with them. It has been recognized that in order to maintain a high morale in the army, it is essential to provide a fair system of justice. So, the present US military system balances the need for just decisions with the need of maintain strict discipline. Motivation factors Despite many attempts to increase the productivity of the workers through hygiene factors, the US Army is still lacks the potential of improving the efficiency of the US army officials by focusing on the motivation factors. The US Army serves worldwide in precarious and difficult situations. It is true that salaries are an incentive to join the army, but the US army still needs to recognize the fact that recognition of achievements is extremely important too. (Wardynski et al., 2010) Salaries and other financial benefits may be an incentive for the working of the junior army officials. However, for better working in the field, it is important that the ones who work hard are appreciated. This would not just encourage the army officers, who gain recognition, to improve their skills but would also be an incentive to the others who for some reason have not performed up to expectations. The salary of two army officials working in a certain area, at the same position, is likely to be the same but the effort each exerts would obviously be different. The introduction of awards and plaques would thus mean that the deserving person is appreciated well. Conclusion To conclude, the US army is an institution where the hierarchical differences between job positions may be a hindrance to a worker’s productivity. It seems that the US senior army officials have recognized this fact and have attempted to provide better salaries, a fair justice system, and better working conditions for the employees. However when it still comes to the encouragement of the employees by appreciation, the US army has lagged behind. As Hertzberg relates, motivation factors are essential for the high performance of individuals. The lack of motivation factors is indeed the reason for the less-than-expected success of the US Army. References Cleland, David and Lewis Ireland. Project Management: Strategic Design and Implementation, US: McGraw-Hill Professional, 2006. Print. Sapru, R. Administrative Theories and Management Thought, India: India Prentice Hall, 2006. Print. US ARCPAO. U.S. Army Enlistment Incentives, US: U.S. Army Recruiting Command Public Affairs Office, 2008. Print. Wardynski, Casey, David S. Lyle, and Michael J. Colarusso. Towards a U.S. Army Officer Corps Strategy for Success: Employing Talent. Carlisle, PA: Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College, 2010. Print. Read More