Developing Managers Ability to Empower Employees - Case Study Example

Running Header: Motivation: Theory and Practice Student’s Name: Institution’s Name: Course Title: Instructor: Date: Motivation: Theory and Practice Introduction Employee motivation has a central role in the field and practice of management. To organization managers, work or employee motivation is regarded as a crucial and integral component of employees performance equations at all levels in an organization. Organizational researchers on the other hand, regard work or employee motivation as an essential and fundamental building block for the building of critical and useful theories in the practice of effective organization management. As such, it is crucial to understand the foundation of employee or work motivation in order to envision where this field is headed. It is thus, crucial to note that the various definitions of employee or work motivation all have three common components. These components are primarily concerned with the factors that energize, channel and sustain the behaviours of humans (employees) over a given period of time. Contemporary theories of work or employee motivation are derived from the interrelation of these factors in influencing organizational behaviours (Steers, Mowday & Shapiro, 2004, p.379). The purpose of this paper is to review the motivational models of Maslow, Aldefer, Herzberg and Adams (equity theory) and discuss the ways in which the theories are similar and how they are different. This paper will also provide an explanation on how a manager could apply each of these theories to help reduce the problems of involuntary absenteeism or employee disengagement in the workplace. Work Motivation Motivation is derived from a Latin word “movere” meaning movement. Based on this origin, many have defined the term motivation in various ways. One such definition is that motivation is the immediate influence of employees with regard to their direction, vigour, as well as persistence of action. Motivation has also been defined as the process of governing choices made by individuals in given alternative forms of voluntary choices or rather activities. According to Steers, Mowday and Shapiro (2004, p.379), a more succinct definition of work motivation was provided by Campbell and Pritchard. They defined motivation as a set of either dependent or independent variable relationships that seek to provide an explanation on the direction, amplitude, as well as the persistence of an individual’s or an employee’s behaviour when factors such as their skills, aptitude, understanding of the task, and the prevailing challenges are held constant. Robbins and Judge (2011, p.204) reiterates that motivation is a process of influencing an individual’s intensity, direction, as well as persistence of effort geared towards achieving an organizational goal. In their definition, intensity refers to the degree of effort; direction is the quality of effort while persistence refers to the period of effort. Motivation is an essential component of management as managers get thing done through their employees (Tietjen & Myers, 1998, p.226). Thus, the study and application of motivation theory is vital. Some of the benefits of motivation include the following. First, motivation increases the productivity of employees, job satisfaction and organizational citizenship. Second, motivation enables managers to manage employee behaviours such as decreasing involuntary absenteeism, turnover, as well as employee disengagement. Third, motivation could also be applied by managers to direct and manage the behaviours of an organizations consumers or rather customers hence, increasing consumer loyalty and sales. Motivational Models Motivational theories are approaches that seek to provide an understanding of human motivation. These theories are classified as either content or process theories. Content theories of motivation explain motivation from the perspective of individual needs while process theories of motivation explain human motivation from the perspective of individual choices. Some of these theories date back to the period of Greek philosophers while others have been developed by contemporary philosophers (Steers, Mowday & Shapiro, 2004, p.379). Some of the early theories of motivation include Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, Herzberg’s two-factor theory, Alderfer’s ERG theory, McClelland 3 learned needs theory among others. Motivation theories formulated by contemporary philosophers include Adams’ equity theory, Locke’s goal-setting theory, self-efficacy theory, and cognitive evaluation theory among others. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Theory This is one of the content theories developed in 1954 with the principal objective of identifying the factors influencing human motivation. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory suggests that the development of individuals is characterised by working their way up a hierarchy based on the achievement of a series of prioritized psychological, belongingness, safety and security, esteem and self-actualization needs (Schwartz, 1983, p.933). In his argument, Maslow reiterates that the psychological and safety and security needs of an individual are deficiency needs that essential for the healthy development of an individual’s personality. On the other hand, esteem and self-actualization relate to the achievements of an individual, as well as the development of their potential (Steers, Mowday & Shapiro, 2004, p.381). The diagram below represents the hierarchies in Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory. With regard to the needs of individuals, Maslow postulated the notion that there is a steady progression up the hypothetical hierarchy of needs over time as individuals grow and become mature. Unlike Herzberg, Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory focused on the crucial role that individual differences play in motivation (Steers, Mowday & Shapiro, 2004, p.381). In management and employee motivation, the managers of organization can apply this theory in various levels or hierarchy of their employees need to make them more productive and to ensure job satisfaction (Kuvaas, 2006, p.365). At the physiological needs hierarchy, managers can motivate their employees by offering fair pay and equitable wages, providing comfortable and safe working environments and conditions. Managers can also motivate their employees at this level by providing rest and annual leave breaks. With regard to safety, managers can formulate and implement broad benefit and health programs, job security equal and fair treatment of all workers. At the esteem hierarchy, the management can motivate their employees by praising and rewarding good performance, proving prompt and frequent feedback for employees’ accomplishments, providing greater work responsibility and employee promotion among others. For self-actualization hierarchy, it is essential that the management of organization motivate their employees by encouraging creativity, achievement, as well as participation in community betterment endeavours. Provision of training and development programs, together with growth and carrier enhancement opportunities will also go along way in motivating employees at this hierarchy of needs (Heller, Judge & Watson, 2002, p.815). Alderfer’s ERG Theory of Motivation Alderfer’s ERG theory of motivation was adapted from Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory and postulated in 1972. Alderfer revised the initial five needs to only three needs. In his theory, Alderfer posit that the human needs that determine their motivation include existence need, relatedness, and growth needs (Steers, Mowday & Shapiro, 2004, p.381). The existence need represents the physical and safety needs of humans; relatedness represents social needs while growth needs are those which are related to self-esteem and individual actualization. Alderfer in his ERG theory of motivation, posit that more than one of this needs may be present at the same time. This is in contrast to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory which emphasizes a rigid hierarchy of human needs. Alderfer also notes that any attempt to stifle higher level needs will only cause the increase of the lower level needs through a three-factor process of frustration-progression-regression. The fact that Alderfer reiterates that the ERG needs can exist simultaneously can enable managers to motivate their employees in a similar manner. For instance, if the existence needs in Alderfer ERG needs model are not fully satisfied employees could still be motivated by challenging work that addresses their growth needs. Also, when the higher level needs of employees are not met or rather are frustrated, then regression to lower level needs will still motivate the employees. Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory In his theory, Herzberg sought to provide an understanding on the influence of work activities and the nature of work influence human motivation, as well as performance. In his view, Herzberg notes that work motivation is determined by the extent to which the work involved is challenging and presents opportunities for the recognition and reinforcement of the employees’ efforts. He referred to the factors surrounding a job as hygiene factors and argued that they are more temporal when it comes to job satisfaction and future motivation of employees. Herzberg is accredited for introducing job design in terms of job enrichment and noted that that it was a significant determinant in work motivation and subsequently, job attitudes among employees (Steers, Mowday & Shapiro, 2004, p.381). Herzberg two-factor theory is based on two motivational factors he referred to as hygiene factors and motivational factors. According to Herzberg, hygienic factors contribute to job dissatisfaction. Such factors include the quality of employee supervision, rate of wage or pay, company policies, conditions of work environment, relations among employees, their supervisors and the management, as well as job security (Burke, 2011). Motivational factors enhance job satisfaction and improve employee performance. Motivational factors include employee personal growth, recognition, career advancement, achievement and responsibility among other factors (Rhodes & Steers, 2006, p.409). I n the application of Herzberg two-factor motivational theory, it is essential for organization management to emphasize motivational factors. In his argument, Herzberg reiterates that employees’ responses to their jobs would be either by feeling exceptionally good or bad about their jobs. Thus, in his view intrinsic factors contribute to job satisfaction while extrinsic factors relate to job dissatisfaction (Burke, 2011). Thus, for managers to address problems that relate to employee disengagement or involuntary absenteeism, then Herzberg two-factor theory comes in handy. In both situation managers must emphasize intrinsic factors rather than hygienic factors to motivate their employees (Alpander, 1991, p.13). Adam’s Equity Theory of Work Motivation This is a cognitive theory that was proposed by Adams in 1963. Adam sought to provide an explanation to how employees respond both behaviourally and cognitively to perceived unfairness in their workplaces. In his argument, Adams notes that both conditions of underemployment and overpayment have the potential to greatly determine the behaviour of employees (Steers, Mowday & Shapiro, 2004, p.382). Adam’s equity theory of motivation is principally the comparison one employee’s ratio of input to outcomes with those of a relevant other employee. Inputs in this case include, time effort, loyalty, ability, education, skill, heart and soul while outcomes comprise of pay, job status, recognition, promotion and other job related benefits. In essence, perceived disequilibrium between any two relevant employees should drive an employee or rather the management to take measures that restore the equilibrium. Thus, equity and its consequences in workplaces should be of great concern to the management of organization if they are to address the problems that relate to involuntary employee absenteeism and disengagement at workplaces. The management of organization can apply this theory to motivate their employees by leading by example, mentoring and coaching employees, encouraging teamwork, through vision and inspiration and above all motivating employees. The management can reduce or minimize inequality in the workplace by changing inputs and outcomes, ensuring the distortion of perception on employees own self and those of others, choosing a different comparative person for the employee or by leaving the field (Brockner, 2006, p.122). Conclusion It is argued that it is very easy to energize individuals who want to be motivated. However, the question is how to deal with the tough cases, individuals or employees who never seem not to do what should be done, yet take up all the vital time. It takes good managers to motivate their employees with the power vested in their vision, their passion to deliver, and their compelling reasoning in a logical manner. Motivation to such managers simply means adding in the appropriate incentives, and employees will enthusiastically do what should be done and march off in the much needed direction. That is work or employee motivation. Reference List Alpander, G 1991, ‘Developing managers’ ability to empower employees’, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 10, No.3, pp. 13-24. Brockner, J 2006, ‘Why is it so hard to be fair?’ Harvard Business Review, Vol. 84, No. 3, p. 122-129. Burke, K 2011, Restless generation lack job satisfaction, Viewed March 13, 2012 from: http://www.theage.com.au/executive-style/management/restless-generation-lacks-job- satisfaction-20110912-1k64b.html Heller, D., Judge, T & Watson, D 2002, The confounding role of personality and trait affectivity in the relationship between job and life satisfaction, Journal of Organizational Behaviour, Vol. 23, No. 7, pp. 815-835. Kuvaas, B 2006, Work performance. Affective commitment, and work motivation: the role of pay administration and pay level, Journal of Organizational Behaviour, Vol. 27, No. 1, p. 365-385. Nicholson, N 2003, How to motivate your problem people, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 81, No. 1, p. 57-65. Rhodes, S & Steers, R 1996, Major causes of absenteeism, “In R. Steers, L. Porter, & G Bigley (Eds). Motivation and leadership at work (6th ed.) (408-421)”. New York: McGraw-Hill. Robbins, S & Judge, T 2011, Organizational Behaviour, Upper Saddle River, Prentice Hall. Schwartz, H 1983, Maslow and the hierarchical enactment of organizational reality, Human Realations, Vol. 36, No. 10, p. 933-956. Steers, R., Mowday, R. & Shapiro, D 2004, The Future of Work Motivation Theory, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 29, No. 3, pp. 379-387. Tietjen, M. & Myers, R 1998, Motivation and job satisfaction, Management Decision, Vol. 36, No.4, p. 226-231. Read More