Guidelines-Communication and Motivation - Literature review Example

Table of Contents 1.0.Introduction 1 2.0.Evaluating the Guidelines- Communication and Motivation 2 2.1.Communication 2 2.2.Motivation 4 3.0.Compare and contrast the Guidelines- communication and Motivation 7 4.0.Justification of the Guidelines 10 5.0.Conclusion 12 6.0.References 12 1.0. Introduction Diverse sets of motivation and communication techniques have been identified to be appropriate in creating readiness for leading change. Motivation and communication principles have been of importance in organizational performance. Application of the principles and guidelines of both motivation and communication have been proven to be instrumental in marshalling the best of the inputs for better production. 2.0. Evaluating the Guidelines- Communication and Motivation 2.1. Communication Effective communication has revolutionized the way in which businesses are conducted, managed and controlled. The leading, controlling and organization skills in management owe their successes to frequent communication with the relevant departments in organizations. The dynamism exhibited in the communication methods was a relevant choice to adapting communication as a vital skill in management. The underlying principle to the choice presented a flexible case to using communication to developing any other skill including self awareness, conflict resolution, empowering teams and managing teams in organizations. Communication is the process of exchanging ideas, facts, thoughts, opinions and feelings between two or more parties (Kitchen and Daly, 2002). Organizations have applied the numerous concepts, theories and models of communication for adaptation in the relevant departments and fields to aid the smooth running of various activities within and outside the business context.In regards to this, the different types of communication have been applied in different scenario to avert crisis, solve problems and for strategic running of the different departments of an organization. Hebda et al (2007) suggest that ‘stop communication and life withers away’. This implies that for the well-being of organizations, communication as a commonality that unites the different department is relevant and is inevitable for the coordination of the various components that make up an organization. As coalescing to the above sentiments, Rodgers and Roethlisberger (2000) further points out that, proper communication is the bedrock to any success. Groysberg and Slind (2012) define communication as the process through which experiences are shared on the basis of commonness. The essence of commonality is of great importance to organization as the programs of the organization are therefore likely to be executed from a common point of communication for the overall whole of the numerous components. This principle envisages a scenario that meeting the goals and objectives are done from a central point of commonness where all the stakeholders are accountable to and from the fronts which are applicable to all. This therefore posits a situation in whereby organizations are obliged to utilizing communication as management tool for communicating the needs and roles as should be executed by the employees. It is on the basis of connecting the employees to the expectations of the employers in terms of the roles and improving the performance of organizations in service delivery and the quantity of output. The principles of openness, redundancy, supportiveness and positiveness are relevant pointers to optimal utilization of communication in organizations as a management tool (Rodgers and Roethlisberger, 2000). All the underlying principles prompt flexibility in the operations of an organization. Nohria et al (2002) contrasts the idea that openness in communication is mandatory when he suggests that ‘managers in particular instances have the obligation to impose communication to employees without regards to the implications’. This puts organizations at crossroads though it is it would be an impeccable move for managers to apply both principles to sort out the different situations at work. 2.2. Motivation Employees in an organization need something to keep them at work everytime. In many occasions, it is the meaningful and reasonable salary that keeps the employees working. In an effort to realize the full potential of the employees, there is need to create a working environment that is motivating to them. The incentive theory of motivation is basically concerned with the way the employees can be controlled to work in a particular way as a result of the external rewards(Nohria et al, 2008). The association and reinforcement principles of motivation play an important in maintaining behaviour which would sustain the drive to work tomeet the goals. On the contrary, Atkinson (2004) also stresses on the use of punitive rewards like punishment to motivate employees. Motivation is the force that initiates, guides and maintains goal-oriented behaviors (Pritchard and Ashwood, 2008). The need to model such forces to appeal to the employees is an important aspect that should be considered by the employees. It is therefore vital to provide a working environment that motivates the employees to continue working hard to achieve the fore-set objectives. It worth noting that motivation plays a vital role in controlling the locus dimension of an overall employee. It the understanding of what behaviours controlthe employee that would provide employers with the skills on the gaps to fill so as to guide the way individual employees perform.As amotivation principle, employees believe that on the positive end of a continuum exist high externals who believe that behaviour is a result of the external and internal forces. Accordingly, the organizational strategies need to base on motivational logical appeals which focus on feelings, personality, emotions, praise and advice. The proper usage of such appeals as is portrayed by Atkinson (2004) is relevant in boosting the morale of workers and proves the need in results. The arousal theory suggests that people take particular actions depending on the level to which their desire to fulfil certain tasks have reached. According to the drive theory of motivation, employees are motivated to take certain roles and actions with a view to reducing the internal tension that is caused by unmet needs. The desire to work and meet certain goals is driven by the need to work and accomplish designated jobs(Nohria et al, 2008). For instance, an employee may be in need to accomplish a particular job on grounds that the internal drive pushes him/her to satisfy the internal drive needs.Conversely, raising employees’ efficiency level is a move that organisations can adopt to improve their efficiency and effectiveness thereby increasing productivity. For this to be successful, there is need for a self-drive among the employees that ensures that work is done without supervision and with the thirst to accomplish all the jobs in due time. Humanistic theories of motivation focus on the cognitive reasons that guide workers to performing certain actions. For employees to tap the potential of employees optimally there is need for an understanding of their cognitive desires at work. The principle of work motivation as portrayed by Nohria et al. (2008) suggests that the various needs of workers need to be satisfied at various levels along the hierarchy of needs. The lower needs should be satisfied before the higher needs are met. For instance in a working scenario, the basic needs of employees need to be satisfied first followed by the security of tenure before the higher needs like actualization are satisfied. Therefore, employees need to understand the order in which the needs of the employees need to be satisfied. The employees will thus be motivated to work once the needs have been satisfied at various levels. Intrinsic and extrinsic methods of motivation have been relevant to developing the motivation of employees. Extrinsic motivation focuses on the performance of actions to attain certain outcomes. The concept of competition can be utilized by organizations to model the behaviour of employees by encouraging them to work harder to enjoy the competitive advantage over others.Intrinsic motivators also drive the employees to enjoy the performance of tasks as well as work to improve their skills, thereby increasing their capabilities.Intrinsic motivation is also relevant in ensuring that the efficacy skills of employees that would allow them to reach the desired goals are developed (Pritchard and Ashwood, 2008). Incentive theory of motivation emphasizes on the rewards to influence behaviour of individuals in a positive way. The rewards are meant to associate positive meaning to behaviour with an intention for the behaviour to occur again. Reinforcement principles of motivation of behaviour have been found to increase the future magnitude of responses to actions. From this perspective, motivation is mediated by environmental occurrences, and the concept of distinguishing between intrinsic and extrinsic forces is irrelevant. Applying proper motivational techniques can be complex than it superficially seems. Atkinson (2004) notes that when creating a reward system, it can be easy to reward a given action, while hoping for another, and in the process, attract side effects that can jeopardize the organizational goals. 3.0. Compare and contrast the Guidelines- communication and Motivation Social psychological theories have indicated that extrinsic rewards can lead to over justification of actions subsequently reducing intrinsic motivation. The desirability of performance and action can be reduced by the provision of extrinsic rewards.On the other hand, Nohria et al (2008) has indicated that for situations where no extrinsic rewards are provided, self-determination theory of motivation proposes that the self-drive can provide an external motivation to individuals if the tasks performed is fulfilling to their beliefs and value.From my experience point of view, I can submit that employees can be motivated to work if the overall conditions of the job provide a sense of fulfillment to their values and the desire to completion of such tasks. However, Pritchard and Ashwood (2008)tend to disagree with the latter when he suggests that behaviour that guides an action may not solely result from motivation and internal thoughts instead the observable cause of the behaviour and the external action are the key components that would guide the behaviour of individuals. In the context of businesses,the performance of individuals in organizations can be looked at in terms of the external push factors that control such behaviours in the realization of the goals and objectives of the organization.Incentive theories are distinguishable from the motivation drive theory, in terms of the direction of the motivation. Incentive theory focuses on positive reinforcement in pushing the employees towards fulfilling a particular task. I agree to the fact put forward by Pritchard and Ashwood that behavior displayed by individuals may in certain occasions be influenced by what the external drive that causes the behavior. Linear school of thought looks at communicationas a process of transmitting messages and meanings irrespective of the interaction and reaction of the receiver (Groysberg and Slind, 2012). On the other hand semiotics school of thought laid importance to the receiver of the message; the encoding and decoding of the message should be clear and encompassing to the intended recipients so as to ensure its proper usage. The semiotic modelcan best be utilized in organization for better performance and results. However, Lasswell model of communication suggests that for effective communication, one needs to understand all the stages of communication. In addition this model emphasizes on the effect of the message instead of the message itself. The measurable effects that the contents of the message create in organizations are of value comparable to the message transmitted in its bare state. I applaud the models since my practical experience as a worker in one of the busy organization imparted on me the aggressive skills of encoding and decoding of messages with speedto boost production. Social learning theory as was propounded by many scholars suggests that human beings learn by model behaviours and observation. Other scholars like Kitchen and Daly (2002) proposes that communication can be positive to the recipients if there is an element of transferability in forms of observation and action. In my opinion therefore, communication between the employers and employees can be productive if the employees can learn from the messages conveyed by the employers by changing their attitudes at work. It is therefore prudent for employers to communicate their demands to the employees in a more succinct and precise ways and through a display of good mannerisms that can be learnt by the employees. Knowing the purpose of a communication is a basic principle that organization needs to embrace in order to communicate with the employees effectively. Before managers come up with the plans to coordinate the various departments of an organization, the purpose to mobilizing the employees of such departments should be articulated well and precisely to the persuasion of concerned parties.I support the principle expounded by the Kitchen and Daly in social learning theory, in motivating and providing effective communication as the associates of implementation of change in organization. I realized these as the best predictors in an organization that leaders did strongly facilitate and influence. Groysberg and Slind (2012) suggest that during communication, messages should be accurate and clear and sent in ways that appeals retention and avoids rejection. The same notion is supported by Nohria et al (2002), who emphasize the need to eliminate all the barriers to communication when relaying information between different parties.On the other hand, Kitchen and Daly (2002) proposes the concept of inducing some ambiguity when relaying information to arouse the attention of the recipients. Though this notion seems irrelevant in the context of organizations, where any communication needs immediate feedback for progress to be realized. In my opinion therefore, it is important to adopt the mode of communication which relays information in a clear and accurate forms for homogeneity in managing the various departments. Communication is an equal-opportunity endeavor. It allows participants toshareownership of the content and substance of their discussion. Organizational communication, by thesame vein, calls on employees to take part in generatingthe content that makes up an organization’s strategies. According to Nohria et al (2002) inclusivity is a potential to realizing the benefits of communication. In addition Groysberg and Slind (2012), inclusivity adds a critical component to the elements of interactivity and intimacy.In contrast, intimacy focuses on bringing the employees closer to the employers while inclusion focuses on the roles of employees in the inclusion process.As a principle of communication, interactivity enables employees to provide their own input rather than following the demands of the managers. Leaders therefore need to nurture the emotional engagement that the employees bring in an organization. 4.0. Justification of the Guidelines Charisma as a communication principle has been used by many organizations to ensure that work is accomplished within the framework of their demands. Charismatic leaders talk persuasively to their juniors and colleagues with an aim to motivating them to continue working harder and /or try out a new idea.For communication to be successful, it requires a charismatic speaker who addresses the employees with a moral conviction and that which reflects the group’s sentiments.As a result this would ensure that the speaker persuades the employees by establishing credibility which would make them follow his/her sentiments to the pursuit of the objectives. As Antonakis et al (2012), points out that ‘from those to whom much is given, much is expected’(pg 45). This implies the extent to which charismatic employers and employees are expected to give back in terms of the performance to organizations. Networking is one of the ways of building close ties with the employees to realize better results. Networking in organizations involves bringing employees positive energy into the realm of the organization. The enthusiasm and authenticity of the managers would follow the employees as well as to work with vigor since there is a feeling of togetherness at work. A guided approach to networking has created positive impacts to organizations-by building balanced networks and pursuing the right kind of relationships (Gill, 2003). Proper networking has presented businesses with an opportunity to diversify the ideas, product and services-bringing new ways of managing andleading in organizations. From my personal experience, I used to work at an insurance company; I found that although there was a good network, I could still make decisions in isolation. Notably, there was little progress towards realizing the organizational goals since eliciting insights from expertise contacts seemed minimal. I started using the junior employees as my immediate contacts by asking questions regularly regarding their job. As a result the questions allowed me to improve on decision making since the employees offered the firsthand experience rather than relying solely on the external expertsfor advice. The principle of commonness and openness has been utilized to a lager extent in organizations. For instance, in an organization where there is an opennessin receiving and addressing employees needs have been reported to survive and productive. The natures of services they offer have been complemented by majority of customers. As mentioned with personal experience, commonality as an aspect of communication has been instrumental in maintaining workforce stability. In organizations, the sense of commonness as is discussed by Kark & Van Dijk (2007) in the ‘the drive to bond’ has bonded the employees to their places of work and attached to the job itself. Intrinsic and extrinsic forms of motivation have been utilized in many organizations to ensure that employees work hard to their satisfaction and for better results to organizations. As an experience these forms of motivations have proved dependable to realizing the potential of the employees. In fact working with de-motivated employees frustrates the fulfillment of the fore-set goals and objectives. For practical implications, neglecting the drives that dictates work manifest themselves in negative consequences, for instance working as a production assistant manager revealed to me the need to motivate all through. By emphasizing individual performance, the production was found to double. But when I created a hostile environment that interfered with the drive for the employees to work, there was a feeling of unjust treatment among the employees, who therefore reneged on their efforts to work. As a consequence, the production was reported to reduce drastically. The drive to bond is essential to providing a culture that promotes work. This principle of motivation encompasses the sharing of ideas and best practices for the betterment of the whole organization. As an experience, organizations that encourage bonding among workers would reap the value of teamwork and collaboration (Ford &Gioia, 2000). 5.0. Conclusion Overall, employee motivation is an influential component to the success of businesses that is affected by a complexity of the organizational and managerial factors. It is evident that a motivated workforce can boost performance, human behavior and their influential insights depicted in this article would be of importance to organizations to model and get the best out their workforce.Application of clear communication strategiesin organizations and sensitivity to its importance has proved evident to ensuring that the employees adapt to changes instituted by the management. The guidelines presented in this article are therefore useful in enhancing positive changes in organizations. 6.0. References Antonakis, J. Marika, F. & Sue, L. 2012, Learning Charisma: Transform yourself into theperson others want to follow. Harvard Business School Press, viewed 15 March 2014. Atkinson, J. 2004, A theory of Achievement Motivation (6thed.). Krieger Publication Company. Cross, R., Nohria, N, & Parker, A. 2002, Six myths about informal networks—and how to overcome them. MITSloan Management Review.43(3), pp. 67-75. Ford, C., &Gioia, D. 2000, Factors influencing creativity in the domain of managerial decision making. Journal of Management, 26(4), 705–732. Gill, R. 2003, Change management—or change leadership?Journal of Change Management, 3(4), 307–321. Groysberg, B &Slind, M. 2012, Leadership Is a Conversation. Harvard Business School Press, Harvard. Hebda, J et al 2007, Motivating technical visionaries in large American companies. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 54(3), 433–444. Kark, R & Van Dijk, D. 2007, Motivation to lead, motivation to follow: The role of the self regulatory focus in leadership processes. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 500–528. Kitchen, P. & Daly, F. 2002, Internal communication during change management. Corporate Communications: An International Journal. 15(2), pp. 16-83. Nohria, N. Boris, G. & Linda-Eling, L. 2008, Employee Motivation.A Powerful New Model. Harvard Business Review. July–August 2008. Pritchard, R &Ashwood, E. 2008, Managing Motivation. New York: Taylor and Francis Group Rodgers, R. & Roethlisberger, J. 2000, Barriers and Gateways to Communication(3rded.). Harvard Business School Press, Harvard. Read More