Essays on John Stacey Adams Theory and the Vroom Expectancy Theory Assignment

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper "John Stacey Adams Theory and the Vroom Expectancy Theory " is a good example of a management assignment.   John Stacey Adams, a behavioral and workplace psychologist proposed the equity theory in 1963 (Adams 1965). According to Adams, employees are most productive when they perceive that they are being treated fairly. The equity theory is built on the premise that employees, and people, in general, seek to maintain equity (fairness) on their jobs between the inputs they bring and the outputs they receive from the same (Adams 1965). Nature is and has always been concerned with the creation and maintenance of equilibrium, and will often even resort to chaos in an attempt to restore order.

Every creature in nature also possesses this same trait. Humans, therefore, being the most intelligent of all of nature’ s creations would go a step further to ensure that their perceptional and psychological equilibrium is maintained in order for man to be comfortable with himself and others in his surroundings (Shukla 2011). Adams’ equity theory recognizes this innate peculiar behavior of nature (in general) and equates it to the behavior of human minds (in particular) to take a stab at explaining why humans feel discontented even when the output they get exceeds the input they invested (Guerrero and Andersen et al.

2013). This theory can be summarized in the following equation: Individual outcomesRelational partner’ s outcomes Individual’ s own inputs Relational partner’ s inputs Since people always view themselves not merely as individuals, but as an individual in a community and who they perceive themselves to be is affected by their society, employees must be treated in the same way (Businessballs. com 2013).

Each individual employee will, therefore, consider that they are fairly treated if their input to output ratio matches that of his fellow employees (his surroundings). Thus, ceteris paribus, the employee would perceive it fair that a more senior employee receives more benefits because his experience (and therefore his input) is worth more in comparison. However, if the same employee perceives that another colleague with equal experience, who does the same amount and quality of work as themselves gets more recognition, they are prone to feeling discontented and underappreciated by their employer. Because of these feelings of dissatisfaction, their work quality suffers as the employee feels undervalued by and worthless to their employer (Whatishumanresource. com 2014). In our scenario, we will analyze two pharmacy assistants- Beth’ s and Amy’ s input to outcome ratio, and juxtapose them against each other (because employees perceive fairness by comparing themselves to their surroundings) to take a run at explaining both employees’ behaviors and suggest workable solutions.

Beth, an able employee with lots of work experience within the field (She has worked in three of the other pharmacies in the last 4 years).

She has a firm grasp on product knowledge, as well as a caring nature. She is also more conscientious than her fellow employee (Amy) who often manipulates Beth into doing tasks that she dislikes. Beth, therefore, carries hers and part of Amy’ s workload without receiving any recognition for it. Amy, on the other hand, is younger than Beth and has less experience working in a pharmacy or any such establishment (she has been at that pharmacy for four months). She has little product knowledge, is often unkempt in appearance (often wears her uniform un-ironed), chews gum at work, takes frequent bathroom breaks, and seems to have very little motivation to do anything.

She also always finds a way to be absent from work every Saturday and Sunday morning despite the store’ s policy that their employees should be flexible on availability. The only tasks concerned with the pharmacy that she seems to enjoy doing are chatting up customers in the store and setting up product displays. She is bored with other routine chores of assisting with dispensary scripts and stock management.

It is implied that Amy was only employed in this pharmacy because of her relation to the owner’ s partner who might have pressured the former into employing her.

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us