Motivation

Emily Haisley
Fall 2005
Outline
 Cases
 Lincoln Electric groups
 Lincoln Electric overview
 Submission process
 Popular but mistaken theories
 Mazlow’s hierarchy, Theory X and Y, Herzberg’s
2-factor theory
 Current, well validated motivation theories
 Expectancy Theory, Goal-setting theory
 Procedural and distributive justice
 Punishment
 Readings
 Motivation
Unsatisfied
Tension
Need/Goal

Work to
Drives
Satisfy Drive

Satisfied Reduction
Need/Goal of Tension
 Working to satisfy a goal or
drive:
The essence
Motivation - set of processes thatof motivation
arouse, direct, and maintain human
behavior toward attaining some goal or need

Arousal - drive or energy behind

our actions
-Yerkes-Dodson Law:

Direction - choices regarding

which goals to pursue

Maintaining - commitment to a goal

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs
Theory As each of these need becomes
satisfied (starting at bottom) the
next need becomes activated.
Self- Very little evidence found in
Actualization support of theory.

Esteem

Social

Safety

Physiological
 McGregor’s Theory X and
Theory Y
Theory X Workers Theory Y Workers
• Dislike work • View work as natural
• Must be threatened • Self-directed
with punishment
• Exercise self-control
• Avoid responsibilities
• Accept responsibility
• Seek formal direction
• Seek responsibility
• Require security
• Make innovative
• Little ambition decisions

McGregor believes that Theory Y assumptions are more correct. However,

there is no strong evidence that encouraging Theory Y assumptions increases
motivation.
Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory: What
do people want from their jobs?
Hygiene factors affect Motivator factors affect
job dissatisfaction job satisfaction
• Quality of supervision • Promotional opportunities
• Pay • Opportunities for personal
• Company policies growth
• Physical working • Recognition
conditions • Responsibility
• Relations with others • Achievement
• Job security

High Wants when 0 Wants when High

dissatisfied satisfied

Theory rejected due to methodological problems and assumption that satisfaction

and motivation are highly linked.
Expectancy Theory
Motivational Force = Expectancy X Instrumentality X Valence

 Expectancy probability: based on perceived effort-performance

relationship, dependent on past experience, self-confidence, and
perceived difficulty of goal
 If I work harder will I produce more?

 Instrumentality probability: based on perceived performance-

reward relationship, dependent on beliefs about incentive system
 If I produce more, will I get promoted faster?

 Valence: the individuals valuation of the reward. Function of

needs, goals, values
 Do I want a promotion? Is it worth the extra effort?

Q: Where does a piece work system lie on the dimensions of this

theory?
 Expectancy Theory: An Overview

Effort Skills and

abilities
Expectancy

Performance X
Instrumentality Motivation Job
Performance

Rewards X
Valence of
Rewards
Role perceptions
and opportunities
Goal Setting Theory
Locke and Latham’s Goal-Setting Theory -
having a goal serves as a motivator because it
influences:
 people’s beliefs about their ability to perform the task
- self-efficacy
 the degree to which people invest themselves in the task
- goal commitment is determined by the extent to
which an individual desires to attain the
goal and believes that s/he has a reason-
able chance of doing so
 the reference point and defines a loss and a gain
SMART Goals Clearly defined the
performance: e.g. instead of
“I want you to increase
sales”, “ I want to see a
10% increase in sales by
January 2000 in X kinds of
Measurable accounts”.

Specific Achievable
SMART
Goals

(Clear)
Timetable Reasonable
 Goal Setting: Some Impressive Effects
100
Goal level
Percentage of Maximum Weight

90
Carried on Each Trip

80 Performance at the goal level

was sustained seven years after
the goal was first set
70

60 There was a
dramatic improvement
in performance after
50
a goal was set

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Seven
Before After Years Later
goal goal
Four-Week Periods
The Goal-Setting Process

Set goals following SMART rules

Involve employees in goal-setting to gain

commitment and acceptance

Monitor and provide support and regular

feedback

Increased motivation and performance

A necessary precondition for
motivation: Fairness
Procedural fairness/justice - perceived fairness of
the process used for resource allocation decisions
Distributive fairness/justice (Equity theory) -
perceived fairness of the outcomes themselves
3 Distributive Logics:
Equity
Equality
Need

Q: Why is fairness important?

- it makes rewards and incentives believable and
predictable
- strong desire to punish those behaving unfairly
Procedural Justice
For the outcome to be fair, the procedures must be fair
 Structural side of procedural justice
 give people a say in how decisions are made - voice
 provide an opportunity for errors to be corrected - appeal process
 apply rules and policies consistently
 make decisions in an unbiased manner
 Interactional justice is the social side of procedural justice:
quality of interpersonal treatment received at the hands of
decision maker
 informational justification
 social sensitivity
Distributive justice based on
equity
Adams’ Equity Theory - people strive to maintain a
ratio of their own outcomes (rewards) to their own
inputs (contributions) equal to the outcome/input ratio
of others with whom they compare themselves
 Outcomes - the rewards, such as salary, recognition,
promotions, security, autonomy, etc.
 Inputs - people’s contributions to their jobs; effort, time,
reliability, cooperation, sharing resources, etc.
 Equity Theory
Motivation results from
 A person’s rewards-to-effort ratio
 Reward-to-effort ratios are not absolute
but relative Self Coworkers
Applications
 When persons perceive they are relatively Input
Input
under-rewarded, they
lose motivation and shirk Outcomes Outcomes
 When persons perceive they are relatively
over-rewarded, they
become motivated to exceed standards 2.0 co-worker

Effort
 When persons perceive they are fairly 1.0
rewarded, they are motivated to work to Self
standards
1.0 2.0
 Relative to peers, status quo, or time
Rewards

Q: According to equity theory, why is a piece work system so motivating?

The Evolution of Equity

MONKEYS

 
REJECT
UNEQUAL PAY

            

          
Monkeys have a sense of justice!! They will down tools if they see
another monkey get paid more for the same job.
Monkeys were happy receiving a piece of cucumber. But if they saw
another monkey getting a piece of grape - a more coveted food item - they
took offense. Some still took the cucumber, but others even disdained to
eat it. The animal's umbrage was even greater if the other monkey was
rewarded for doing nothing.
Using Reinforcement in
Organizations
EMPHASIZE REWARD, NOT PUNISHMENT

 Tell employees explicitly what’s rewarded

 Be consistent
 Deliver rewards promptly, or at least tell people
immediately that they will be getting a reward later
 Even small rewards can be effective
 Verbal “well done”

 Send a note of praise

 Recognition - plaque

 Give them a day off, or tell them to leave early

 Take them to lunch

 The motivating effects of rewards may be enhanced by

making them public
Q: How does a piece work system stack up?
But there is a role for
punishment in organizations:

Terrible Terry Tate says:

WHEN YOU KILL THE JOE, YOU MAKE SOME MO!
http://www.advertisementave.com/tv/ad.asp?u_player=
realplayer&adid=526
Keys to punishing effectively
 Deliver punishment immediately after undesirable
behavior
 Give moderate levels of punishment - not to high or too
low
 Punish the undesirable behavior, not the person - be
impersonal
 focus on what person can do to avoid disapproval
 Use punishment consistently - all the time, for all
employees
 Clearly communicate reasons for the punishment
 identify undesirable behaviors that precipitated the disciplinary
action
 Do not follow punishment with non-contingent rewards
 represents inadvertent reward for unwanted behavior
 Praise in public; punish in private?
 Using Positive Reinforcement to
AMotivate
portion of an employee’s pay is based on some
measure of performance
Individual-level rewards
 Piece-rate plans or commissions
 Bonus tied to individual goal achievement, not
organizational performance
 Merit pay
Group-level rewards
Organizational-level rewards (incentive and risk
sharing system)
 Profit sharing, gainsharing bonuses (increases in
productivity)
 Stock options
Key Elements
 Must ensure procedural and distributive
justice
 Must set rewards at the right level
 E.g. group level pay may create competition
between groups
 May increase employment stability because
firm can avoid downsizing
 Employees must be compensated correctly
for the risk that they bear.
Happy workers are not necessarily
productive workers, but satisfaction is
certainly good for business
The performance-satisfaction
relationship
Performance and satisfaction may both be
cause by a 3rd variable
 Role ambiguity
 Self esteem
 Organizational commitment
 Positive affect

Performance  satisfaction?
 Increasing mental
challenge
Job Rotation - periodic shifting of an
employee from one task to another
Job enlargement - Increasing the number and
variety of tasks that an individual performed
Job enrichment - increases the degree to
which the worker controls the planning,
execution, and evaluation of his or her work
Form natural work units
Establish client relationships
Open feedback channels
 Poor Performance? Do a
Motivation Audit
 Failure to see relationship between effort and performance
 Does the individual have the necessary skill set?
 Failure to see relationship between performance and
outcomes
 Are rewards and incentives provided on a performance-contingent
basis?
 Is there a failure to set clear, specific, challenging but
attainable goals?
 Is there a belief that the organizational rewards are unfair?
 Are rewards and punishments applied consistently and fairly?
 Is your variable pay system viewed as equitable?
 Survey satisfaction using the Job Characteristics Model.
Cases