Motivation ( ) - Literature review Example

?Literature Review Motivation can be defined as force that develops within an individual and makes him develop a “can do” attitude. Theories of motivation encapsulate all those processes which explain the development of motivation in people. Managers need to have a sound understanding of the potential factors that drive employees’ motivation in order to take the best out of them. In common practice, the salary of professional employees increases as they increase in age. It so happens because with the passage of time, the employee gains more experience, so he/she is able to make use of it by getting promoted and thus, being paid more. The rate of increase of pay is controlled by a number of factors in addition to the employee’s ability that include but are not limited to the nature and scope of work, the positions offered, and the opportunities associated with the work. In the Characteristic Model of Motivation, a job has core dimensions such as skill variety, task identity, autonomy, and feedback. To the extent that these are present in a job, the employee will experience certain psychological states such as experiencing meaningfulness in the work and assume responsibility for outcomes as well as have better knowledge of the actual results of work activities. The more frequent and satisfying these psychological states are, the higher the internal motivation, the better quality the performance, the greater the satisfaction, and the lower the absenteeism and turnover. (Griffin, 1999, p. 328 cited in Jordan, n.d.). Hence, an employee demands challenging work along with due support of the peers and management and finally, the reward of pay increase. Every individual progresses in his/her career in accordance with a particular remuneration “grade line” that is unique. Employee belonging to a certain field acquires norms from the very remuneration grade according to his/her own ability. The individual is caught in frustration when his/her salary and level of working decline to the extent of dropping below this grade line. This is what happens when he/she is left behind the friends and colleagues that are his/her age and are involved in similar kind of work. “Progress according to these remuneration grade lines is the norm, is the way in which others doing similar work at the same age are in fact progressing” (Davidmann, 2006). Changes from the remuneration grade line are quickly assessed by the employee. An upward movement is understood as promotion whereas a downward movement is perceived as demotion in comparison to the colleagues that belong to the same field, are the same age, and at the same level. Employees that progress in their profession with respect to their remuneration grade line feel that their expectations from the job are being met and hence remain satisfied. Employees gain satisfaction or dissatisfaction according to the knowledge of their position in the community. Satisfaction or dissatisfaction results into motivation or demotivation respectively. What impacts employees the most is their intense concern regarding increased differentials between theirs and their colleagues’ statuses. Employees strive hard to sustain their position, thus trying to acquire their individualistic share of the increasing national income. When work environments consistently fail to provide the direction, resources and respect employees require, their innate desire to achieve is suppressed or redirected. They experience frustration and a kind of learned helplessness. They become motivated to retain their jobs rather than to perform them in a way that delivers optimal value to the organization. (Roulet, 2009). Theoretical Analysis Of all the motivational theories, two types that apply the most to the case under consideration are the content theories and the process theories. The content theories of motivation assert that human behavior is controlled by intrinsic factors. These internal desires convince people to behave in a certain way. Major content theories of motivation include Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and Alderfer’s ERG theory. On the other hand, the process theories of motivation interpret motivation in terms of conscious processes of decision making. They determine the way behavior is developed, energized and sustained in the cognitive processes. Process theories of motivation include expectancy theory and equity theory. Of these two types, the process theories are more applicable on the case under consideration as compared to the content theories. Vroom’s Expectancy Theory Vroom’s Expectancy Theory applies best in the pre-review phase. Mary undoubtedly was worthy of acquiring the label of a top level performer. Vroom’s Expectancy Theory states, “individuals make decisions, which they believe will lead to reward or reduce the likelihood of pain” (LearnManagement2.com, n.d.). Reward may not necessarily be perceived as positive. Its effect upon employees varies from individual to individual. In light of this discussion, Vroom’s Expectancy Theory promotes four fundamental concepts: 1. Hard work and performance are strongly interlinked 2. An individual gets rewarded in accordance with the performance 3. The reward will fulfill one or several essential needs 4. An individual derives the effort from the intrinsic desire to fulfill the need/needs. Vroom's Expectancy Theory explains the cause of Mary’s demotivation. Mary’s behavior before meeting Sue was conducive for best display of performance because she was quite sure that her efforts would be rewarded according to their weight. Mary was sure that although she had to work beyond the regular duty hours and go an extra mile in the achievement of her objectives, but the temporary pain would increase her eligibility for the best increment in pay in the yearly review. Mary’s exceptional efforts were not hidden from the manager. Accordingly, the manager offered Mary a 10% merit increase. This, to the manager, was appropriate for the hard work Mary showed. Mary did put in her best as long as she was sure that she was controlling her pay through her conscious efforts, but as soon as she learned that reality was otherwise, she spared putting that much effort. Equity Theory Equity theory proposed by John Stacy Adams fundamentally explains the reason why Mary’s performance declined after she heard from Sue. The Equity Theory is based on the nature of understanding, comparison and competition among peers in an organizational setup. According to this theory, an employee gains influence from the job conditions of the peers either intentionally or otherwise. The Equity Theory states that employees’ actions are directed at establishing equity between their coworkers and themselves. When two workers in similar conditions and with same level of competence have the same ratio of output over input, there is equity between the two. Equity Theory (Equity Theory, 2011). Adam’s Equity Theory is based on the assumption that an employee struggles not only to achieve individual equity but also for that of other workers. The comparison of the ratio of output to input may be internal or external. Internal comparison results from the comparison made by an employee to another from the same company whereas external comparison results from the comparison made between two employees from different companies. Inputs include but are not limited to effort put in work, skills, competence and experience whereas outcomes include fringe benefits, rewards and positions. “This idea of equity has to do with the perception employees have of their importance in relation to others within the company” (JonDW, 2011). Only the achievement of equity satisfies the employees. With the knowledge that Sue and she were of the same caliber because of the college history, Mary’s act of comparing her pay to that of Sue became the fundamental reason of her demotivation. When she made the comparison, Mary realized that Sue was getting more than what she would get even after the increment has been adjusted into her salary. What made things worse was that she had been serving in the Universal Products for quite a long time while Sue was just a newly recruited. Although her hard work and performance was both acknowledged and appreciated by her manager as well as her colleagues, yet Mary felt the inequity of reward, or pay because the ration of her output over inputs far exceeded in value to that of Sue. This realization led to the creation of inequity that made Mary lose her enthusiasm for work. Mary thought that the Universal Products maintained an equitable policy in its rewards system. Thus, Mary’s motivation declined. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Theory: Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory is one of the most important theories in the discussion of motivation. It is a needs based theory which emphasizes that employees derive motivation with respect to their individualistic needs. This theory is presented in the form of a pyramid as shown below: Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (Abraham Maslow, 2009). The pyramid is divided into five types of needs which are arranged in ascending order as physiological needs, safety needs, social needs, esteem needs, and self-actualization. This theory is based on the assumption that people tend to develop a higher level need when a lower level need has been satisfied. Fulfillment of the physiological needs that include food, air and sleep is fundamental to human survival. That is why, they form the base of the pyramid. An employee may not feel a higher level need unless all lower level needs have been adequately fulfilled. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory also considerably explains the cause of Mary’s demotivation. Before meeting Sue, Mary believed that Universal Products fulfilled all of her four basic needs namely, the physiological needs, safety needs, social needs and esteem needs, so she would work hard and be creative and innovative in her ideas and approaches in order to fulfill her need of self-actualization. Almost everyone’s physiological needs are naturally fulfilled because air, food and water are everywhere, and so were Mary’s. Mary felt safe in the environment of the company because the colleagues were supportive. Besides, she was earning good enough to ensure her security. Colleagues’ and manager’s support and care fulfilled the social needs in workplace. Regular increments in yearly reviews and manager’s appreciation fulfilled the esteem needs. So Mary used to work hard in order self-actualize until she met Sue and found that her esteem needs were not being adequately fulfilled. Since she was not getting what she thought she deserved for the amount of effort she used to put into work, she dropped from the need to self-actualize to the need to fulfill esteem needs, and thus, felt demotivated. Alderfer’s ERG Theory: Clayton Alderfer was another theorist who accepted the idea of arranging the basic human needs in a hierarchical order, yet he proposed three levels instead of five. His three levels reflect in the name of the theory. ERG stands for existence, relatedness, and growth. Alderfer’s ERG theory can be compared with Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory in that the existence in the former covers the physiological and security needs of the latter. Likewise, relatedness unites the social and esteem needs into one level while growth in the Alderfer’s ERG theory coincides with the self-actualization of the Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory. This theory believes that when an employee’s higher level need is not satisfied, the employee jumps back to the lower level need even if it is satisfied. This theory slightly explains the cause of Mary’s demotivation. When Mary felt betrayed, she jumped back to the relatedness need from the growth. This changed her behavior for the worse and she got demotivated. David McClelland’s Theory of Motivation: The three aspects of motivational needs as proposed by David McClelland can be listed as follows: 1. The Need for Achievement 2. The Need for Affiliation 3. The Need for Power The first of the three needs explains why an employee works hard and tries to be successful. Mary wanted to achieve the highest salary among all her parallel colleagues, so she worked hard. But when she realized that this was not happening despite her best efforts, she spared the idea of fulfilling the need for achievement. This reflected in her attitude and she felt demotivated. Conclusion: Concluding all that has been discussed above, Mary got demotivated because of the following fundamental reasons: 1. Her assumptions about the company she worked with that it was the highest paying company were proven wrong. 2. Her friend, Sue, whose caliber was by no means, greater than that of Mary, got hired in the same company at a salary higher than that of hers. 3. Sue was freshly hired while Mary had been offering her services for years, but her years of hard work and struggle and increments upon pay could not equalize her pay to what Sue was getting without all that. 4. She was no more the highest paid employee as she had been among all the employees since she started to work. 5. She came to realize that she could get paid far better than what she was getting with a little bit of search like Sue did. Mary’s realization that her assumptions about the company were wrong was the most fundamental reason why she felt demotivated. Having realized that The Universal is not the best rewarding company around, she must have felt betrayed. She might think that she has been wasting her time while working for The Universal day and night. The theoretical analysis of the case suggests that the theories of motivation that explain the cause of Mary’s demotivation are the Vroom’s expectancy theory, the equity theory, Maslow’s hierarhcy of needs theory, Alderfer’s ERG theory and David McClelland’s theory. Of these, the first two apply the most while the rest three apply in the order in which they have been named. A number of possibilities arise in the case under consideration with respect to Mar’s response to her realization. First, as a result of her disappointment, Mary would look out for new jobs that could do justice to her potential. Secondly, she would not put as much effort as she used to do originally and would wait for the opportunity to talk to her manager regarding the injustice. Thirdly, Mary would carry on like a silent sufferer. These are the three principle outcomes that are possible to result in the given circumstances. However, an in-depth analysis of Mary’s attitude and personality suggests that she would indeed, display a combination of the three possibilities. Mary would most probably carry on doing work in the normal style. Meanwhile, she would search for a higher paying employer and apply for the new job without resigning. Once she gets the job, she would meet her employer and tell the inequity between Sue and her was the reason of her resignation. This case also has a message for the managers that decide for the employees’ salary. While establishing the salary of a new employee, the managers should give due consideration to the competence level and salary of the existing staff. This would allow them to escape such unexpected consequences as reflected in the changed behavior of Mary. “The toughest decisions in organizations are people decisions, hiring, promoting, firing, etc. The ability to make good decisions regarding people represents one of the last reliable sources of competitive advantage, since very few organizations are good at it” (Peter Drucker cited in Business Mind, n.d.). References: Abraham Maslow. (2009). Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs: Father of Modern Management & Leadership by Employee Motivation. Retrieved from http://www.abraham-maslow.com/m_motivation/Hierarchy_of_Needs.asp. Business Mind. (n.d.). Your company can gain competitive advantage by hiring Top Performers. Retrieved from http://www.businessmind.com.au/workshops.html. Davidmann, M. (2006). The Will to Work: What People Struggle to Achieve. Retrieved from http://www.solhaam.org/articles/willwork.html. Equity Theory. (2011). Equity Theory. Retrieved from http://www.equitytheory.net/. JonDW. (2011). The Effect of Motivation on Employee Performance. Retrieved from http://www.ehow.com/about_6547505_effect-motivation-employee-performance.html. Jordan, T. (n.d.). Motivation of Employees: The Pros and Cons of What Works and Doesn’t. Retrieved from http://www.businesstrainers.net/pdf/EMPLOYEE_MOTIVATION.pdf. LearnManagement2.com (n.d.). Victor Vrooms Expectancy Theory. Retrieved from http://www.learnmanagement2.com/vroom.htm. Roulet, J. (2009). Stop motivating your employees! Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/2009/05/18/motivation-demotivation-employees-leadership-managing-stop.html. Read More