Why is Motivation important?

• Under optimal conditions, effort can often be increased and sustained

• Delegation without constant supervision is always necessary
• Motivated employees can provide competitive advantage by offering
suggestions & working to satisfy customers
• Motivation can account for Improved Productivity
• Motivation encourages learning among employees
• Motivation also accounts for Organizational Changes
• Individual Differences can be accommodated with the help of motivation

1.THE EXPECTANCY THEORY.

Expectancy theory is about the mental processes regarding choice, or choosing. It

explains the processes that an individual undergoes to make choices. In organizational
behavior study, expectancy theory is a motivation theory first proposed by Victor
Vroom of the Yale School of Management.

Expectancy theory predicts that employees in an organization will be motivated when

they believe that:

• putting in more effort will yield better job performance

• better job performance will lead to organizational rewards, such as an increase in
salary or benefits
• these predicted organizational rewards are valued by the employee in question.

"This theory emphasizes the needs for organizations to relate rewards directly to
performance and to ensure that the rewards provided are those rewards deserved and
wanted by the recipients." [1]

- Emphasizes self interest in the alignment of rewards with employee's wants. -

Emphasizes the connections among expected behaviors, rewards and organizational goals

Vroom's theory assumes that behavior results from conscious choices among alternatives
whose purpose it is to maximize pleasure and to minimize pain. Together with Edward
Lawler and Lyman Porter, Vroom suggested that the relationship between people's
behavior at work and their goals was not as simple as was first imagined by other
scientists. Vroom realized that an employee's performance is based on individual factors
such as personality, skills, knowledge, experience and abilities.

Victor H. Vroom introduces three variables within the expectancy theory which are
valence (V), expectancy (E) and instrumentality (I). The three elements are important
behind choosing one element over another because they are clearly defined: effort-
performance expectancy (E>P expectancy), performance-outcome expectancy (P>O
expectancy).
E>P expectancy: Our assessment of the probability our efforts will lead to the required
performance level.

P>O expectancy: Our assessment of the probability our successful performance will lead
to certain outcomes.

Vroom’s model is based on three concepts: [2]

1. Valence - Strength of an individual’s preference for a particular outcome. For the

valence to be positive, the person must prefer attaining the outcome to not
attaining it.
2. Instrumentality – Means of the first level outcome in obtaining the desired second
level outcome; the degree to which a first level outcome will lead to the second
level outcome.
3. Expectancy - Probability or strength of belief that a particular action will lead to a
particular first level outcome.

Vroom says the product of these variables is the motivation.

In order to enhance the performance-outcome tie, managers should use systems that tie
rewards very closely to performance. Managers also need to ensure that the rewards
provided are deserved and wanted by the recipients.[3] In order to improve the effort-
performance tie, managers should engage in training to improve their capabilities and
improve their belief that added effort will in fact lead to better performance.[4]
2.TWO FACTOR THEORY.

The two-factor, or motivation-hygiene theory, developed from data collected by Herzberg

from interviews with a large number of engineers and accountants in the Pittsburgh area.
From analyzing these interviews, he found that job characteristics related to what an
individual does — that is, to the nature of the work he performs — apparently have the
capacity to gratify such needs as achievement, competency, status, personal worth, and
self-realization, thus making him happy and satisfied. However, the absence of such
gratifying job characteristics does not appear to lead to unhappiness and dissatisfaction.
Instead, dissatisfaction results from unfavorable assessments of such job-related factors
as company policies, supervision, technical problems, salary, interpersonal relations on
the job, and working conditions. Thus, if management wishes to increase satisfaction on
the job, it should be concerned with the nature of the work itself — the opportunities it
presents for gaining status, assuming responsibility, and for achieving self-realization. If,
on the other hand, management wishes to reduce dissatisfaction, then it must focus on the
job environment — policies, procedures, supervision, and working conditions[1]. If
management is equally concerned with both (as is usually the case), then managers must
give attention to both sets of job factors.

The theory was based around interviews with 203 American accountants & engineers in
Pittsburgh, chosen because of their professions' growing importance in the business
world. The subjects were asked to relate times when they felt exceptionally good or bad
about their present job or any previous job, and to provide reasons, and a description of
the sequence of events giving rise to that positive or negative feeling.

Here is the description of this interview analysis:

Briefly, we asked our respondents to describe periods in their lives when they were exceedingly
happy and unhappy with their jobs. Each respondent gave as many "sequences of events" as he
could which met certain criteria including a marked change in feeling, a beginning and an end,
and contained some substantive description other than feelings and interpretations…

The proposed hypothesis appears verified. The factors on the right that led to satisfaction
(achievement, intrinsic interest in the work, responsibility, and advancement) are mostly unipolar;
that is, they contribute very little to job dissatisfaction. Conversely, the dis-satisfiers (company
policy and administrative practices, supervision, interpersonal relationships, working conditions,
and salary) contribute very little to job satisfaction[3].

Two-factor theory distinguishes between:

• Motivators (e.g. challenging work, recognition, responsibility) which give

positive satisfaction, arising from intrinsic conditions of the job itself, such as
recognition, achievement, or personal growth[4], and

• Hygiene factors (e.g. status, job security, salary and fringe benefits) which do not
give positive satisfaction, although dissatisfaction results from their absence.
These are extrinsic to the work itself, and include aspects such as company
policies, supervisory practices, or wages/salary[4].

Essentially, hygiene factors are needed to ensure an employee is not dissatisfied.

Motivation factors are needed in order to motivate an employee to higher performance,
Herzberg also further classified our actions and how and why we do them, for example, if
you perform a work related action because you have to then that is classed as movement,
but if you perform a work related action because you want to then that is classed as
motivation.

Unlike Maslow, who offered little data to support his ideas, Herzberg and others have
presented considerable empirical evidence to confirm the motivation-hygiene theory.
Their work, however, has been criticized on methodological grounds. Nevertheless,
Herzberg and his associates have rendered a valuable service to science and to
management through their efforts to apply scientific methods to understanding complex
motivational problems at work and have stimulated others to continue the search.
3.NEED HIERARCHY THEORY.

Maslow's hierarchy of needs is a theory in psychology, proposed by Abraham Maslow

in his 1943 paper A Theory of Human Motivation
4.EQUITY THEORY

5.REINFORCEMENT THEORY

6.THEORY X AND Y.

7.ERG THEORY.

8.GOAL SETTING THEORY.

Application of Motivational Strategies
• Thompson (1990) identified seven practices that can raise the level of
motivation of people in work organizations :
�Ensure that worker’s motives and values are appropriate for the jobs on
which they are placed.
� Make jobs attractive and consistent with worker’s motives and values.
� Define work goals that are clear, challenging, attractive and attainable.
� Provide workers with the personnel and material resources that facilitate
their effectiveness.
� Create supportive social environments.
� Reinforce performance.
� Harmonize all these elements into a consistent sociotechnical system.