People Organization and Leadership - Case Study Example

Each employee’s situation examined through the lens of Equity Theory Equity theory looks at having match between the input and the output so that employees can be provided different rewards, incentives, promotions and perks based on their contribution, efforts and hard work. This helps to develop a relationship between the input and output and acts as a mechanism through which employees are motivated for carrying out different business activities. The theory when analyzed and looked at the different employee and the situation they are in highlights the following Lynda Lewis: is a hard working employee and has contributed towards the performance of the organization. The usage of Equity theory shows that the inputs with respect to hard work, team person, loyalty, enthusiasm are not being recognized. The inputs don’t match the output as Lynda has ensured that she was able to accomplish the task which was assigned to her (Erez, 2010). It was the first incident that she had missed her target and had to undergo a training program. Further on examination it is found out that the economic factors have resulted in a downturn. This is something beyond her control and not matching her inputs with outputs which should have been rewards, promotions and other perks has dissatisfied her. Further an employee looks at social security and since Lynda has to attend the training on Saturday where she has the job of looking after her kids has further affected her motivation level. Equity theory requires a proper match of the inputs with the outputs and should look at compensating or imposing penalty on employees after examining all the factors (Chen, Kanfer, DeShon, Mathieu & Kozlowski, 2009). Since, Lynda hasn’t been able to receive the benefit from the equity theory and instead it has created a negative impact the overall result will be seen through a dip in performance and will thereby have an impact on the future prospect of the organization. Michael Benjamin: The situation of Michael is adversely opposite to what equity theory requires. Equity theory requires that the employees should be committed, loyal, hard working and should look towards accomplishing the goals. The fact that Michael looks to run away from job and prefers to have more leisure time it will have an impact on other employees associated with him. The fact that Michael inputs are such that it doesn’t results in productivity and matching the same with the long term performance so it becomes imperative that Michael should be removed (Erez & Isen, 2012). There is no way that Michael can be motivated because Michael on the forefront doesn’t have the desire to work. A person who is able to ensure that the level of commitment is high provides an opportunity where working on the different dimensions the motivation of the employee can be improved. Since, Michael has inputs where it will be related to penalties, fines and demotion it becomes difficult for the organization to have such employees as it will have an impact on the morale of other employees as well and will thereby result in having an impact on the future performances (Gagné & Deci, 2005). Kyle Sherbo: Kyle has ensured that his commitment towards the organization is high but the inability of the management to recognize the skills of the employees and provide different incentives and benefits based on it has affected his level of motivation. The Equity theory of motivation requires that the different inputs should be matched with the outputs so that employee gets motivated. The inability of the management to identify the different skills and award the employee accordingly has impacted the level of motivation (George, 2007). Since, Kyle has been committed and has helped the new entrants by guiding them shows leadership skills along with the ability of the person to deal with different situations and understands the job properly. This needs to be recognized and the efforts have to be incentivized. The lack of efficiency to match the inputs with the outputs has affected the overall productivity and is an aspect which could lead towards a decrease in motivation within the organization and could impact the other employees as the fear of not being recognized for their contribution will have an impact on the future performance. Using Expectancy Theory to explain each employee’s motivation Expectancy Theory looks at determining the reasons why a person chooses a particular behaviour over the other as the expectation of the benefits or gains which the person will get is higher compared to another. People expect that when they demonstrate a certain behaviour and accomplishes a certain task in the most efficient and effective manner it will result in additional perks and incentives (Gagné & Forest, 2008). This thereby looks towards identifying the behaviour through which employees will be motivated and will be able to carry out the different functions effectively. Lynda Lewis: is a hard working employee and has contributed towards the performance of the organization. Using the expectancy theory it can be clearly identified that Lynda will be rewarded for her consistent performance and being able to deliver better results. It was the first incident that she had missed her target and had to undergo a training program doesn’t matches her expectations because on examination of the cause for the decrease in sales it is found out that the economic factors have resulted in a downturn (Colella, Paetzold, Zardkoohi & Wesson, 2007). This is something beyond her control and should be counted as one isolated situation so that the employee is able to contribute positively and remains motivated towards the goal of the organization (Berg, Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2010). Further an employee looks at social security and since Lynda has to attend the training on Saturday where she has the job of looking after her kids has further affected her motivation level. Expectancy theory requires that the management is able to understand the same and act in a responsible manner so that they satisfy the employee and meet their expectations. This will have a positive impact as being able to match with the expectation of the employee will ensure that the level of commitment will improve and the employee will be further motivated to work towards the betterment of the organization. Michael Benjamin: The situation of Michael such that the person expects to receive rewards but doesn’t look towards contributing positively towards the goal of the organization. Expectancy theory requires that the employees chooses a behaviour which they feel will multiply the overall experience and will ensure that working in a manner will help to provide better incentives and perks (Elsbach & Hargadon, 2006). The fact that Michael looks to run away from job and prefers to have more leisure time it will have an impact on other employees associated with him. The fact that Michael just want to receive promotions, leisure hours, enjoy and have other factors associated with him the expectations are far beyond the level of commitment that the employee makes. There is no way that Michael can be motivated because Michael on the forefront doesn’t have the desire to work. A person who is able to ensure that the level of commitment is high provides an opportunity where working on the different dimensions the motivation of the employee can be improved (Fried, Levi & Laurence, 2008). The expectations of Michael are baseless as the employee expects to be rewards but doesn’t look towards working towards the goals which will thereby impact the long term prospect of the organization and is imperative that such employees are kept out of the working culture so that other employees don’t get affected. Kyle Sherbo: Kyle has ensured that his commitment towards the organization is high due to which the expectations that the employee has is also high. The Expectancy theory of motivation requires states that a person chooses one behaviour over the other when the employee is able to associate the gains that they will get by following a particular behaviour (Grant, 2007). The inability of the management to identify match the required expectations has thereby resulted in reducing the motivation level of the employee and will result in having an impact on the long term prospect of the employee. Since, Kyle has been committed and has helped the new entrants by guiding those shows leadership skills along with the ability of the person to deal with different situations and understands the job properly. This needs to be recognized and the efforts have to be incentivized (Barsky, 2008). The lack of effectiveness to be able to match the expectations of the employee clearly highlights the manner in which the organization has been unable to meet the different expectations and has thereby been an area through which the level of motivation and commitment if the employee has been affected (Berg, Grant & Johnson, 2010). Plan for motivating each employee To ensure the long term success of the organization the management needs to develop plan which will be aimed at ensuring that the employees are motivated so that the level of commitment towards the organization changes. This will help to bring a change in the working style and will have a positive impact on the performance. This requires that the following plan is developed for each individual employee Lynda Lewis: The management needs to identify the talented people within the organization and have to develop appropriate strategies so that they can be properly compensated. Since, Lynda Lewis is a hard working employee and has contributed towards the performance of the organization it is important that the organization recognizes her contribution and has plans to compensate her accordingly. Even the expectancy theory states that Lynda should be rewarded for her consistent performance and being able to deliver better results (Chen & Kanfer, 2006). It was the first incident that she had missed her target and had to undergo a training program doesn’t matches her expectations because on examination of the cause for the decrease in sales it is found out that the economic factors have resulted in a downturn. This is something beyond her control and should be counted as one isolated situation so that the employee is able to contribute positively and remains motivated towards the goal of the organization. The overall process should be such that the management understands the manner in which Lynda has contributed towards the long term goal and has the potential to be able to contribute in a similar manner in the future. This makes it imperative that the management should look at providing her different rewards and incentives so that she becomes more committed and will provide an opportunity where she will be able to handle different responsibility in the future. Michael Benjamin: Motivating Michael is a difficult task because the person doesn’t have the zeal to work and improve. Instead Michael looks to run away from job and prefers to have more leisure time which will thereby have an impact on other employees associated with him. The fact that Michael just want to receive promotions, leisure hours, enjoy and have other factors associated with him the expectations are far beyond the level of commitment that the employee makes. There is no way that Michael can be motivated as the management can just look at ensuring that they make Michael aware of the actual situation and provides an opportunity or a chance so that the employee improves. The management needs to thereby be more cautious with Michael as it could lead towards a situation where the person acts in such a manner that other gets impacted (Grant, 2008b). The most important change which will be required will be to bring a change in the manner in which the employee work and needs to be more committed towards the organization so that the business and the management is able to achieve the overall objectives and ensure that the employee is motivated at the same time. Kyle Sherbo: The management needs to identify and develop ways which will be aimed towards ensuring that Kyle understands the different dimensions and areas which they need to work on. The management while looking to motivate the employee has to ensure that they try to make Kyle understand the fact that he has to continue working in a similar manner. Providing training and ensuring both on and off the site training will provide an opportunity through which the business will be able to identify the different needs of the business. The process of motivation has to be developed on the framework that Kyle has the required acumen through which business process can be controlled and will thereby require that the business identifies the different dimensions through which employee retention and other aspects becomes possible. This will help to frame a policy towards which the business will be able to find out policies through which employees will be compensated correctly at the same time opportunities will be provided so that overall satisfaction of the employee improves (Barrick, Stewart & Piotrowski, 2007). The management needs to ensure that the overall policies should be developed in such a manner that it helps to develop policies through which employees are better committed and look towards working for the long term future of the organization. Conclusion The paper highlights the manner in which the different employees can be visualized through the different motivational theories which helps to identify the different dimensions which needs to be worked on. The analysis shows that the management needs to identify the individual needs and requirements of the employees and based on have to develop strategies which will be aimed at motivating the employees. This will have a long term impact and will provide an opportunity through which the business is able to identify the future needs and garner the employees in such a manner that the long term goals and objectives can be easily achieved. References Barrick, M. R., Stewart, G. L., & Piotrowski, M. 2007. Personality and job performance: Test of the mediating effects of motivation among sales representatives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 43-51. Barsky, A. 2008. Understanding the ethical cost of organizational goal-setting: A review and theory development. Journal of Business Ethics, 81, 63-81. Berg, J. M., Grant, A. M., & Johnson, V. 2010. When callings are calling: Crafting work and leisure in pursuit of unanswered occupational callings. Organization Science. Berg, J. M., Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton, J. E. 2010. Perceiving and responding to challenges in job crafting at different ranks: When proactivity requires adaptivity. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 158-186. Chen, G., & Kanfer, R. 2006. Toward a systems theory of motivated behavior in work teams. Research in Organizational Behavior, 27, 223-267. Chen, G., Kanfer, R., DeShon, R. P., Mathieu, J. E., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. 2009. The motivating potential of teams: Test and extension of Chen & Kanfer’s (2006) cross-level model of motivation in teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 110, 45-55. Colella, A., Paetzold, R. L., Zardkoohi, A., & Wesson, M. J. 2007. Exposing pay secrecy. Academy of Management Review, 32, 55-71. Elsbach, K. D., & Hargadon, A. B. 2006. Enhancing creativity through “mindless” work: A framework of workday design. Organization Science, 17, 470-483. Erez, M. 2010. Culture and job design. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 389-400. Erez, A., & Isen, A. M. 2012. The influence of positive effect on the components of expectancy motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 1055-1067. Fried, Y., Levi, A. S., & Laurence, G. 2008. Motivation and job design in the new world of work. In S. Cartwright and C. L. Cooper (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of personnel psychology, 24 (pp. 586-611). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gagné, M., & Deci, E. L. 2005. Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 331-362. Gagné, M., & Forest, J. 2008. The study of compensation systems through the lens of self determination theory: Reconciling 35 years of debate. Canadian Psychology, 49, 225-232. George, J. M. 2007. Creativity in organizations. Academy of Management Annals, 1, 439 477. Grant, A. M. 2007. Relational job design and the motivation to make a prosocial difference. Academy of Management Review, 32, 393-417. Grant, A. M. 2008a. Does intrinsic motivation fuel the prosocial fire? Motivational synergy in predicting persistence, performance, and productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 48-58. Grant, A. M. 2008b. The significance of task significance: Job performance effects, relational mechanisms, and boundary conditions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 108-124. Read More