Extrinsic and Intrinsic Factors among Rank and File Employees in the Hospitality Industry - Research Paper Example

The Importance of Extrinsic and Intrinsic Factors among Rank and File Employees in the Hospitality Industry: An Empirical Study 0 Introduction 1 Introduction Effectively managing employees at work is one of the most important priorities of any organisation (Tella, Ayeni, and Popoola 2007). To gain insight into the significance of human resources is to understand that such individuals and the company itself should be one and the same. The group becomes more effective and successful when their goals are accomplished through employee motivation, satisfaction, and commitment which influence majority of organisational outcomes (Manolopoulos 2008). Most often, these components all make an impact on their attitudes and behaviours. The need for strong and long-term motivation has, thus, become a critical issue for researchers and organisations alike. Motivation refers to a driving force that enables people to accomplish tasks and can either be intrinsic or extrinsic (Huitt 2001). Motivation has been explained through a wide range of theories that it is primarily rooted in people’s various needs, whether these are basic or specific ones. Generally, motivation has been classified into intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (Rabey 2001). Intrinsic motivation is characterized by a motivation that is compelled by one’s pleasure and interest in a certain task, hence existing within the person instead of being influenced by external factors (Waterman et al 2003). This form of motivation has been found to improve performance, productivity, and achievement among employees and students as well. Extrinsic motivation, meanwhile, refers to the form of motivation that is brought about by factors outside of the individual that oblige them to carry out a certain task such as financial rewards or recognition (Kominis and Emanuel 2005). Because of the differences between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation, this paper aims to determine which of these classifications can provide more beneficial outcomes to the individual. 1.2 Research Aims and Objectives The current study aims to identify which of the intrinsic or extrinsic rewards can act as better motivators for working individuals. In particular, the following objectives are addressed: 1) To determine which extrinsic factors are perceived as most important by employees in the hospitality industry; 2) To ascertain which intrinsic factors are perceived as most important by these employees; and 3) To provide viable recommendations that may increase the motivation of employees. 1.3 Significance of the Research Employee motivation is known as a primary factor in achieving success or experiencing failure in organisations (Bright 2005). Without the presence of motivation in the working environment, a number on unfavorable outcomes are brought about such as a decrease in employee productivity and morale as well as reduced profits and service quality. In order to maintain a competitive advantage and an ideal reputation, there is a need for companies to place their time and efforts in implementing strategies that will increase the level of motivation among staff members (Islam and Ismail 2008). This study can contribute to the research on employee motivation as it aims to determine the most important factors or rewards that can provide long-term motivation for working individuals. Different people are motivated by different factors as a result of different needs. From monetary rewards to career development or from having a flexible schedule to attaining a sense of accomplishment, people are driven to perform tasks by a set of motivators. It will be of great use to employers if they understand the key factors that motivate their employees to bring about useful outcomes for them and for these working individuals, thereby improving the chances of individual and organisational development. 2.0 Review of Related Literature 2.1 Introduction Individual differences along with work-related characteristics can often result to differences in the employees’ levels of motivation, satisfaction, and performance. At the present time when companies seek and retain highly competent individuals, there is a crucial need for employees to develop motivational strategies that can address the needs and reward preferences of their staff members (Farmer and Seers 2004). When the relation between motivation and performance is examined, the influence of various incentives that are to be given to employees for them to improve work quality should be thoroughly considered (Bendoly and Prietula 2008). To understand the preferences of workers play a fundamental role in establishing work environments as well as reward and incentive systems to fulfill such needs and enhance organisational efficiency. 2.2 Motivation: An Overview Motivation refers to an essential psychological process that plays an important role in explaining individual behaviour. Primarily, it refers to a condition or state that triggers a behaviour and provides a certain direction or goal, thus instigating action; additionally, certain needs and desires can also have an impact on the direction and strength of a particular behaviour (Muller, Alliata, and Benninghoff 2009). In short, motivation is known to be the process of energizing and directing behaviour as well as performance. An effective means to stimulate individuals is to make use of motivation strategies that will enable them to achieve a higher level of satisfaction and commitment towards work (Baard, Deci and Ryan 2004). A wide range of incentives have been continuously used by organisations to help retain their employees through motivation, from monetary rewards to work life balance practices. Motivation does not only have its function in explaining behaviour; rather, it is also integrated into other intervening process and within the environment. Generally, based on various motivational theories, there is a need to be aware of the inter-relationship between individual needs and motives to understand the concept of motivation as Miner, Ebrahimi, and Watchel (1995) asserted that motivation is made up of inter-reliant components including needs, drives, and incentives. Researchers and organisational managers have perceived that desired goals cannot be attained when employees do not demonstrate long-term commitment towards their work (Wright 2001). Motivation has been characterized as an individual psychological attribute that influences the level of commitment among people including certain elements which instigate, control, and maintain behaviour towards a certain goal. Adeyemo and Aremu (1999) have noted that there are a number of notions that should be understood by organisations with regards to motivation. First, motivation is often thought of as a favorable thing; that is, people will not feel good about themselves if they are not motivated in any way. Motivation is also one of the causes of an individual’s performance along with individual ability, availability of resources and working conditions. Both researchers and managers presume that motivation is limited and should be constantly replenished. Finally, motivation is a means by which managers can drive their employees to stay committed, improve their performance, and work towards organisational goals. Thus, motivation can be perceived as the way with which employees are encouraged to work by satisfying their needs and addressing their preferences. Because motivation is goal-oriented, it should always be carefully considered in the organisational context, whether it be private, public, or non-profit (Olajide 2000). Motivation and satisfaction among employees have been recognized as relevant concerns for an organisation as previous research has indicated how intrinsic motivation can lead to job satisfaction, hence a higher level of performance among workers (Selden and Brewer 2000). Work-related motivation has also been primarily pointed out to be caused by the needs of employees for personal achievement, association and power, social contribution, sense of obligation and commitment towards the organisation, and high status (Houston 2000). Additionally, individual characteristics were also shown to motivate people such as values, personality, and reward preferences. Organisational aspects have also been associated with employee motivation as it can significantly influence the intensity of motivation among staff members. Wright (2004) stated that job attributes are characterized by the characteristics of a certain job that a worker performs; work context primarily refers to the organisational setting. The positive relationship between job attributes and employee motivation has been proven by ample research (Frank and Lewis 2004); for instance, job variety, job importance, job challenge, and task significance have all been shown to influence and contribute to employee motivation. Specific work-related attributes such as worker autonomy and feedback can also have an impact on the workers’ motivation levels. 2.3 Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation Because work motivation has been a broad and significant topic in the research for psychology and management (Frey and Osterloh 2002), organisations have been challenged to address the goal of enhancing performance and efficiency through the fulfillment of their employees’ needs and keep them motivated. According to Baard, Deci, and Ryan (2004), ‘needs’ are characterized by an individual’s deliberate desires and motives; moreover, these needs can either be inherently intrinsic or extrinsic (Sansone and Harackiewicz 2000). Extrinsic needs motivate people in obtaining concrete results, hence extrinsically motivating employees when their needs are indirectly fulfilled, especially through monetary rewards (Osterloh, Frey, and Frost 2002). Extrinsic motivators can initially be brought about by any outside force that seeks to improve employee performance; although these may be based upon an individual’s work, extrinsic motivators are not necessarily innate aspects of work. On the other hand, intrinsic needs are brought about by the accomplishment of a certain task without obtaining a concrete reward except the pleasure and satisfaction attained from performing this activity (Gagne and Deci 2005). Intrinsic motivation among employees can also be influenced by incentives offered by their employers that are well-matched to their values, culture, and capabilities. Therefore, it has been suggested that intrinsic motivation is a component of an individual’s growth and development and takes place when his or her behaviour is directed towards fulfilling intrinsic psychological needs (Ryan and Deci 2000). Intrinsic motivation tend to be self-determined and self-sustained, driven by one’s commitment towards his or her job itself, which may be fulfilling and desirable to the employee. Intrinsic motivators remain to be an aspect of an individual’s involvement with a particular activity that does not have an external cause, essentially binding the person to the nature of the work. 2.4 Herzberg’s Theory on Motivation The motivation-hygiene theory originally proposed by Herzberg, Mausner, and Snyderman (1959) has been a very controversial motivation theory over the years, though it has been widely accepted in numerous studies. The theory developed basic assumptions regarding the factors that satisfy and motivate employees, such that income only contributes little to employee satisfaction, that every worker should be able to attain psychological growth and development, and that establishing interpersonal relationships tend to result to dissatisfaction rather than satisfaction. That is to say that the motivation-hygiene theory can be used as a framework for recognizing the twofold nature of intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation, satisfaction versus dissatisfaction, as well as psychological growth versus psychological pain avoidance. By creating a comprehensive literature review, Herzberg, Mausner, Peterson and Capwell (1957) was able to determine that factors contributing to satisfaction significantly differed from those that influenced dissatisfaction. The study of Herzberg et al (1959) along with other studies which followed identified a number of variables that made an impact on job satisfaction including the opportunity for workers to obtain achievement, having interesting and challenging work, recognition, career advancement, increased work responsibility, and learning. Meanwhile, job dissatisfaction was associated with unfavorable working conditions, weak interpersonal relationships, incapable or unjust managers, unreasonable organisational policies, bad salary, and job uncertainty. More importantly, it was noted that variables for satisfaction were not similar to those of dissatisfaction; for example, although there were findings that unfair company policies contributed to dissatisfaction, good company policies were not shown to influence satisfaction. Job satisfaction may be attributed to achievement, through dissatisfaction cannot necessarily be associated with failure (Sachau 2007). With these findings, the satisfying variables have since been referred to as motivator factors or motivators while those contributing to dissatisfaction were named as hygiene factors. Findings also pointed out that good feelings were aroused by motivators for a long time while good feelings associated with the hygiene factors only lasted for a short time. Motivator factors can mainly be found in the specific job content while hygiene factors are associated with the job context (Latham 2007). Hygiene factors also need to be improved while motivators need not. Motivator factors also include psychological growth while hygiene factors are associated with physical and psychological pain avoidance. Psychological growth plays an important role as it involves the understanding of facts and skills and their relationship as well as the use of these knowledge and skills in developing new ideas. Hence, the current study focuses on the motivation-hygiene theory of Herzberg et al (1959) which assumes that motivators including achievement, recognition, responsibility, advancement, growth, and the work itself can lead to satisfaction while the absence of hygiene factors such as relationships with supervisors and colleagues, company policies, supervision, working conditions, and salary can result to dissatisfaction. 2.5 Job Enrichment The sole application of Herzberg’s motivation-hygiene theory particularly on the workplace is job enrichment, which includes the modification of jobs in order to enable employees to further experience motivating factors (Ozturk, Bahecik, and Baumann 2006). If the motivation-hygiene theory is used, this implies that the management should not only be capable of providing and enhancing hygiene factors to avoid dissatisfaction among employees; rather, they should provide motivator factors that will improve intrinsic motivation for employees to be satisfied with the job itself. Job enrichment is fundamental for intrinsic motivation and should remain as an essential management process. Herzberg (1982) posited that the job should be challenging enough to make a full use of the employee’s capability; moreover, employees who have been exhibiting an increase in their level of competency should be provided with an increase in responsibility as well. If jobs are not appropriately designed and matched to utilize a worker’s abilities, the organisation should convert the task into automation or replace the employee with another one who has a lower level of competency and is suited to the job. This is to imply that when employees are not completely utilized, motivational issues will arise. Job enrichment will significantly provide opportunities for employees to learn, achieve, take responsibility, and exercise autonomy, thus an improvement in quality and performance. Herzberg (1974) also suggested a number of ways to enrich jobs including the provision of performance evaluation directly from the job itself, allowing employees to have control over their working schedule as well as on organisational resources, enabling them to establish direct interpersonal communication, and letting them have responsibility over their actions and performance. 2.6 Conclusion Individuals in a working environment can be motivated to accomplish certain tasks and achieve desired goals due to intrinsic or extrinsic motivators. The application of Herzberg’s motivation theory helps understand how the need for both motivator and hygiene factors is critical in the workplace to increase satisfaction and reduce dissatisfaction among employees. Job enrichment has been suggested to be an effective way of avoiding motivation problems as it allows employees to experience more motivators such as the sense of achievement and responsibility. To increase and retain satisfactory levels of motivation among employees is crucial to maintain high levels of performance, productivity, and commitment, thereby increasing the likelihood of benefits being obtained by both the organisation and its employees. 3.0 Methodology 3.1 Research Approach The research takes on a purely quantitative approach to research in determining the importance of intrinsic and extrinsic motivators among hospitality employees. The selection of this approach is anchored on its advantages. First, this approach permits the collection of voluminous, numerical data in an expedient manner. The highly structured and direct nature of this approach allows for such leverage. Typically, the research methodology employed under such approach is survey methodology, where response options are presented in a direct, straightforward manner (Neuman 2002). This approach was found apt for the current study, where perceptions on the importance of intrinsic and extrinsic motivators of hospitality employees are determined. 3.2 Research Design The present study also takes on a purely descriptive research design. Descriptive approaches are distinguished by their observation and description of the variables of interest as they occur within their natural setting. However, the researcher does not introduce any intervention onto these variables that will cause them to be modified (Bryman & Bell 2007). In the present study, the perceptions of hospitality employees as regards the importance attached to intrinsic and extrinsic motivators are gathered without introducing any other intervention. This is done through survey methodology. 3.3 Research Methodology The main research methodology that was used in the present study is the survey method, whereby the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) is deployed among employees from any sector of the hospitality industry. Surveys are advantageous because they are able to capture relevant data without much expense, tedium, and time. This was the primary consideration of the researcher in choosing the methodology for the research. However, the methodology is not without its disadvantages. Since the response options are fixed and highly structured, these do not allow the respondents to explain their responses or to share related experiences. This may be mitigated by supplementing surveys with qualitative follow-up approaches such as semi-structured interviews, to increase the validity of the outcomes from the survey (Punch 2003). 3.4 Sampling Plan The present study makes use of two sampling methodologies in finalising the sample of respondents. The first non-probability sampling technique utilised is purposive sampling, where certain traits of the prospective respondent are sought for them to be included in the sample. These are referred to as inclusion criteria (Reid 1987), and increase the likelihood that the respondents are in the best position to share information related to the topic at hand. In the present study, the inclusion criteria which have been used in respondent selection are as follows: 1) should be an employee of any sector of the hospitality industry; 2) have a minimum tenure of 12 months or one year with the current employer; 3) occupies a rank and file position; and 3) has submitted the consent form to the researcher to express his willingness to be part of the study as a respondent. Apart from purposive sampling, the study likewise made use of snowball sampling whereby the first group of identified respondents referred their friends or acquaintances (Bryman & Bell 2007). Using these procedures, a total of 62 rank and file employees from the hospitality industry served as respondents to the study. 3.5 Procedure There are two types of data that were used in the research, namely, secondary data and primary data. The secondary data sources were primarily culled from books, journals, and online references. There were particular search terms that have been used in searching for online references, including: “intrinsic and extrinsic motivators”; “Herzberg’s two-factor theory of motivation”; and “effects of motivation”. The sources were manually assessed with regards to their pertinence to the present topic. They were put together to form the literature review. In addition, the survey questionnaire used is the MSQ. There was no need to test for the reliability of the instrument because it has been empirically shown to have acceptable internal consistency (Weiss, Dawis, England, & Lofquist, 1967). The primary data were gathered by approaching an initial pool of 20 hospitality industry employees from various sectors, and having them refer their colleagues through snowball sampling. A total of 62 respondents have been enlisted to the final sample. The accomplished questionnaires were analysed through SPSS v. 15.0, and the outcomes were compared to the related literature gathered, forming the basis for the conclusions and recommendations. 3.6 Instruments The instrument that has been used is the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ), which is based on Herzberg’s two-factor theory of motivation. The first part of the questionnaire inquired about the demographic traits of the respondent, particularly their gender and tenure. Other demographic traits were not inquired about because they were not to be used in the analysis. Tenure was asked about since these were among the inclusion criteria used in the study. The second portion of the questionnaire asked about the degree of importance of the various motivational factors under Herzberg’s typology. The following factors were categorised as intrinsic: Ability Utilization, Moral Values, Achievement, Creativity, Activity, Independence, Responsibility, Security, Authority, Social Service, Social Status, and Variety are classified as intrinsic. In comparison, Co-workers, Recognition, Advancement, Supervision—Human Relations, Supervision—Technical, Company Policies, Compensation, and Working Conditions were considered as extrinsic factors (Weiss et al 1967). The level of importance that was attached to each factor was rated through a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 which suggests that the factor is unimportant, to 5 which connotes that the motivator is very important to the respondent. 3.7 Method of Data Analysis Simple descriptive statistics were used in the analysis of data. Frequencies and percentages were used to describe the profile of the respondents in terms of gender and tenure. Moreover, the results on the importance of motivational factors were depicted through means and standard deviations. The mean is a measure of central tendency, which is ideal when the distribution of data being dealt with does not have extreme values. It is computed by summing all of the responses and dividing by the total number of responses (Reid 1987). Additionally, the standard deviation is the square root of the variance, and indicates how far apart or close together the answers to a particular item are (Balnaves & Caputi 2001). 3.8 Limitations The study is limited by the number of respondents who participated, and the validity of the results may be enhanced if this number is increased. In addition, the use of non-probability sampling techniques also limit the populations for which the results are also applicable (Balnaves & Caputi 2001). 3.9 Conclusions The present study aims to determine the importance of intrinsic and extrinsic motivators on the motivation of hospitality industry employees. Through purposive and snowball sampling, the final sample consisted of 62 respondents. They answered the MSQ and the results were encoded onto SPSS v. 15.0. The outcomes were compared against the findings of related studies. 4.0 Results and Discussion Table 1. Breakdown for gender. Frequency Percent Male 38.00 61.29 Female 24.00 38.71 Total 62.00 100.00 61% of the respondents are male, while the remainder are female. Table 2. Breakdown for tenure. Frequency Percent 1- Read More