Factors affecting motivation in public organizations

Project Report

Motivation in Public Organisations

_________________________________________________________________________________

Abstract
Motivation is known as important as other factors for achieving the organisational goals. The high motivation led the employees to the extreme commitment with the organisation goals. Similarly high employee motivation leads to greater employee creativity and productivity, in this survey it has been found that the two independent variables, which are quality supervision and participation, are positively related to the dependent variable, motivation. The participation has a strong relationship level than the quality supervision with motivation. Results highlighted that all the tested variables are positively correlated but correlation of participation and quality of supervision are 0.52 and 0.30, respectively.

Key Words:
sector).

(Quality of supervision, Participation, Motivation, Public

Introduction
Motivation is a force that drives people to do things. Employees are normally motivated to achieve their needs, whatever they may include. Motivation may be intrinsic or extrinsic. This is what we call motivation. Employees of a company will be motivated if they associate certain incentives with an activity of work. It been seen in India that the employees in the public sector organisations are not motivated as much as in the private sector. There are so many factors responsible for this state of nature. In this research the focus is that what are the factors responsible for motivation and its impacts on the organisation goals. There are different types of public organisation but for this research study the insurance companies that are owned by the Government have been selected. The research here will be pertains to the insurance industry but it can also be extended to other public sector organisations. In this research the impact of the two independent variables will be seen on the motivation. Quality supervision is an aspect of immediate work environment, with significant implications for motivation. Parry and Porter (1982) also proved that in any event, quality of supervision is a critical element in motivational process.
1|Page

Participation involves some type of shared or joint decision making between supervisors and subordinates at the work group, program, or organisational level (Parry and Porter, 1982). They have further stated that one might expect that participation would contribute positively to motivational considerations like perception. Donald in his research paper, The Role of Organisations in Fostering Public Service Motivation, has stated that the Empowering of the employees has a positive effect on PSM.

Literature review
A challenging work environment and support of the top management is a very high motivator. Similarly having regular contacts with the senior executives is another factor for motivation. It was also proved by Horwitz et al (2003) that flexible work practices such as flexi-time does not guarantee the motivation. The ineffective practices may be potential dissatisfiers and may not motivate intrinsically (Herzberg, 1966). A highly competitive pay package, with performance incentives, seemed to be more important for attracting the employees than motivation (Horwitz et al, 2003). Higher employee motivation leads to greater employee creativity, productivity and discretionary effort which in turn lead to improved company performance (Gevity Institute, motivating your employees). In the same small business guide it has been mentioned that businesses have the power to directly impact employee motivation through their employee management practices. Collective bargaining is one variant of participation. Frederick Herzbergs motivation theory also states that satisfaction of the employees is associated with the non-monetary, or intrinsic factors like achievement, recognition, personal growth and the characteristics of the work. The intrinsic factors motivate the employee. Similarly the dissatisfying or the extrinsic factors like company policies, salary, co-worker relations, supervisor relationship and job security etc. feels the employee dissatisfied and less motivated. In the same management guide it has been clearly mentioned that the perceived inequality has been shown to lead to low motivation. It has also been pointed in the guide that by investing the time will provide opportunities to employee motivation. Porter and miles (1974) proved that the motivation energises, directs and sustains behaviour. They also identified four factor/variables namely individual characteristics, job characteristics, work environment and the external

2|Page

environment. If motivation is to be affected, one or more of these variables must be changed or affected. Also, government middle managers have higher needs for achievement and lower needs for affiliation than did their business counter parts, but their needs for power may roughly the same. Rawls et al (1975) have found that standards about to enter government sector were significantly more dominated and flexible. They had higher capacity for status and economic wealth. Many researches indicate that public managers experience significantly lower levels of satisfaction and motivation than do their counterparts in the business. The quality supervision is an important factor for motivation. Some papers have reported employees perception of lower supervisory quality in the public that in the private sector. The primary motivators for public sector employees are the interests that attract them to public service. The organisational service learning has a significant positive effect on employee motivation. According to Donald P. Moynihan, in his research paper, The Role of Organisations in Fostering Public Service Motivation, that PSM is strongly and positively related to the level of education. Higher pay and package is less important for public service managers (Rainy 1982). Donald also proved that the hierarchical levels in an organisation would affect employee levels of PSM. Employees can be committed to the organisation itself due to an emotional attachment or because of the benefits associated with the organisation (Wright and Pandey 2005).Public Service Motivation (PSM) may represent a value based commitment to work,(Wright and Pandey, 2005). A relationship exists between employee motives and sector employment (Bradley E. Wright 2001). Work motivation is just one factor that influences performance (Bradley E. Wright 2001). Sector differences in performance rewards, procedural constraints, and goal content may influence work motivation directly (Bradley E. Wright 2001). The observed behaviour in the public organisations can be understood only if citizens and policy makers are motivated by altruistic considerations (John King et al, 1992).Most of the managers in the public sector are motivated by productivity and service enhancement (John King et al, 1992). It has been further proved by John King et al, 1992, that lack of significance of variables such as organisational role and context suggests that motivations are not determine purely or even primarily by environmental factors. They are instead the result of more complex interactions among the environment, experience and personality.
3|Page

Rationale
In this research, the employees of the insurance company that was a public sector company were surveyed. The impact of the two independent variables on the dependent variable that is motivation was seen.

Research question
What is the impact of Quality Supervision and Participation on Motivation?

Hypotheses Hypotheses 1: Quality supervision is positively related to the Public Service

Motivation (Parry and Porter, 1982).

Hypotheses 2: Participation is also significantly related to the public Service

Motivation (PSM).

Research Methodology Sample:

About one hundred and fifty (150) questionnaires were sent to the employees of the insurance company that is owned by the government. These employees were included the officers from Assistant General Managers to Executive Officers (the starting grade). Only one hundred and twenty six (124) questionnaires were received back duly filled and completed.

Questionnaire:
For this purpose a questionnaire was designed we which all the items were scored on a five point Liker Scale with end points of Agree and Strongly Agree. In this research only two of the independent variables were considered in the Indian environment in a public sector insurance company.

4|Page

Quality Supervision
1=Strongly Disagree 2= Disagree 3=Indifferent 4=Agree 5=Strongly Agree

1 Our immediate supervisor is reasonable. 2 Provides regular feedback about Our performance. 3 Acknowledge when I have performed well. 4 Allows me freedom to use Our initiative in performing Our job. 5 Encourages Our input in to decisions. 6 Encourages and supports Our career development. 7 Our supervisor takes a flexible approach to issues arising between work and family. 8 Our supervisor communicates effectively 9 Our supervisor encourages suggestions for improvements. Participation
1=Strongly Disagree 2= Disagree 3=Indifferent 4=Agree

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

5=Strongly Agree

1 I enjoy working on moderately difficult (challenging) tasks and goals. 2 I relate very well to people 3 I am afraid of making mistakes 4 I involve Our people in defining their roles and procedure of working. 5 I develop teamwork among the people who work for me 6 I am uneasy and less productive when work alone 7 I like to solicit ideas from others 8 I like to accept responsibility in the groups work.

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

Motivation
1=Strongly Disagree 2= Disagree 3=Indifferent 4=Agree 5=Strongly Agree

1 I have high goals and expectations for Ourself. 2 I am confident in Our ability 3 I am eager to learn new things 4 I put forth the necessary effort to reach a goal. 5 I believe I can always improve 6 I seek solutions to complex problems. 7 I take action on causes I believe in. 8 I make sacrifices today to benefit Our future.. 9 I accept responsibility for Our actions. 10 I am optimistic about the future

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

5|Page

Subject:
The employees of the govt. insurance company were surveyed.

Procedure
The two independent variables have been measured after collection of data. The impact of each independent variable has been seen separately on the dependent variable, which is motivation. It has been proved that each independent variable has positive impact on the dependent variable. The positive relation was also found between the independent variable. As we have to establish the relationship between independent variables and dependant variable so we used the Pearson correlation to find the relation of the independent variables with the dependent variable.

Results
Characteristics of Target Population
A total of 150 public officers were asked to complete the survey questionnaires . Out of these 124 officers responded making the response rate 83%. Keeping in view the limited number of officers in these enters the sample is sufficient for analysis of various results.

Descriptive Statistics
Mean Standard Error Median Standard Deviation Range Minimum Maximum Sum Count Confidence level (95.0%) 3.8136 00655 4.000 0.7294 3.1111 1.8889 5.0000 472.8889 124.0000 0.1297 3.7893 0.0447 3.7500 0.4973 2.1250 2.7500 4.8750 469.8750 124.0000 0.0884 4.1782 0.0537 4.2000 0.5975 3.2000 1.8000 5.0000 518.1000 124.0000 0.1062

6|Page

Conclusion
On the basis of the data collected it has been proved that participation is positively related to the motivation. Similarly quality supervision is also positively related to motivation. The next variable participation and the data collected and analysed proved that it has also positively related to the motivation. The quality supervision is an important factor for motivation.

Findings
In the above correlation table it has been established that participation has a relation level of .52 and the quality supervision has .30 with the motivation. It means that participation is more strongly related to motivation in the public service motivation than quality supervision. Our findings are consistent with the above stated researchers in spite of the fact that we have conducted our research in the Indian environment. Because we have found on the basis of our data a positive relationship of independent variables (Quality Supervision and Participation) with the dependent variable (Motivation). It has also been proved that hypotheses one is true because quality supervision is positively related to motivation. In contrast to the hypotheses one, hypotheses two has also been proved to be corrected in the sense that participation is more positively related to motivation than quality supervision. The two independent variables are also positively related with each other. So in the light of the data it has been proved and we can say with confidence that participation and quality supervision are both positively related to the motivation and it was the findings of most of the previous researchers.

7|Page

References:
Hyde, S.J; & Kling, C.K. (2001). Women, Motivation, And Achievement.: University ofWisconsin. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 25 (2001). Perry, L.J. (1999). Bringing Society In: Toward a Theory of Public-Service Motivation:Indiana University. 471/ Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. Motivating Your Employees (A Small Business Guide) Gevity Institute. 2005. GNGIN151 9-05 Gevity HR, Inc. Moynihan, P. D. &Pandey, K. S.The Role Organizations in Fostering Public ServiceMotivation.Forthcoming in Public Administration Review. Bush School WorkingPaper-505 Wright, E. B. &Pandey, K. S. (2005).University of North Carolina at Charlotte.Department of Political Science.Exploring the Nomological Map of PublicService Motivation Concept.

8|Page