Free The Main Approaches To Employee Motivation Essay Sample
Motivation is one of the most important factors, which affects the performance of an employee in an organization. It is the responsibility of an organization to satisfy its employees as it is the main reason for an employee’s sustainability. Motivation is the driving force behind all actions of an employee. The concept of motivation interrelates to motives, needs, desires, wants, drives, wishes and incentives. There is a general assumption that the higher the salary, the higher is the factor of motivation; however, according to the Expectancy Theory of Vroom, motivation does not merely depend on high salary. It involves the efforts, performance and outcomes of the employees . For example, a person might work hard to produce a product for valence in the form of pay. On the contrary, a manager might work hard to achieve the goals of the company for a promotion.
Employee’s motivation depends upon the value they place on the outcome of their effort and the confidence that their effort would aid in achieving the goal. Individuals have personal goals that are different from organizational goals and it is the responsibility of the organization to recognize the employee needs and motivate them to achieve their goals. Vroom’s theory is consistent with the system of managing by objectives and fits the concept of harmony of objectives . It is also consistent a manager’s job is to design an environment for performance taking into account the differences in situations. Unfortunately, Vroom’s theory is difficult to apply in practice. In spite of its difficulty in application, the logical accuracy of the theory indicates that motivation is much more complex than the approaches of other motivational theorists.
Another important factor in motivation is whether individuals perceive the reward structure as being fair. One way of addressing the issue is through the use of Adam’s Equity theory. According to the Equity theory, an individual’s subjective judgment about the fairness of the reward he or she gets is relative to the inputs, such as efforts, education and experience when compared to the rewards of others . There should be a balance between the inputs and outcomes of one person in comparison to another person. If individuals feel that they are receiving inequitable rewards, they feel dissatisfied and reduce the quantity or quality of output. In some cases, the employees may even leave the organization. If employees perceive the rewards as equitable, they continue to work at the same level of output.
If people feel that the rewards are greater than the equitable rewards, they might work harder. One of the major issues of the equity theory is that certain employees overestimate their contribution and the rewards they perceive . While certain equities are tolerant for a short period, prolonged feelings of equity result in strong reactions within the employees. For example, a reprimanded employee for being late may get angry and quit the job not because of the reprimand, but because of the long standing feelings that the rewards for his or her contributions are inequitable in comparison with the rewards of others. Similarly, a person may feel satisfied with a weekly salary of $500 until he finds out that another person doing the similar work gets $10 more. Thus, Adam’s Equity explains about the impact of inequity on the levels of employee commitment, motivation, trust and performance.
Frederick Herzberg and his associates researched to find a two-factor theory of motivation. According to Herzberg, company policy and administration, salary, job security, status, working conditions, interpersonal relations and personal life are only dissatisfiers and not motivators . If these factors exist in the work environment in high quantity and quality, they yield no dissatisfaction. Their existence does not motivate in the sense of yielding satisfaction, but their lack of existence would obviously result in dissatisfaction. Herzberg names these factors as maintenance, hygiene or job-context factors . On the other hand, Herzberg categorizes certain satisfiers, which are motifiers related to job content. They include achievement, recognition, advancement, challenging work and growth in the job. Their existence renders feelings of satisfaction or no satisfaction but not dissatisfaction. The dissatisfiers do not motivate people in an organization, yet they must be present, else it leads to dissatisfaction .
The job content factors are real motivational factors as they have the potential of yielding a sense of satisfaction. Herzberg’s theory relates intrinsic factors to job satisfaction and extrinsic factors to dissatisfaction. If Herzberg theory of motivation is sound, it is the responsibility of the managers to give considerable attention to upgrading the job content. The well-known tendency of people to attribute good results to their own efforts and to blame others for poor results is a form of prejudice in Herzberg’s theory. The methodology used by Herzberg in his theory is questionable because the theory looks at mere satisfaction and ignores productivity of the employees . The theory also ignores situational variables. For example, an employee may dislike a part of his job, yet still thinks the job is acceptable overall. In spite of several detractors, Herzberg’s theory is a widely accepted theory and a majority of the organizations follow the theory in motivating their employees.
The most important contribution of Porter and Lawler is the Porter and Lawler theory of motivation, which states that performance leads to satisfaction rather than satisfaction leading to performance . The theory considers motivation, performance and satisfaction as separate variables. Motivation does not equal satisfaction or performance and effort does not directly lead to performance as the abilities, traits and role perception are the mediating factors that lie in between motivation and performance. The theory majorly aims at what happens after the performance. It is the rewards that follow performance that determine satisfaction. The experience of the actual performance influences the perceived effort and the probability of actually achieving a reward. The actual performance in the job actually depends on the expended effort.
For example, if individuals know that they can do a job or if they have already done it, they have a better appreciation of the necessary effort and a better knowledge of the probability of getting the reward. The Porter and Lawler theory of motivation is more complex than the other theories of motivation . However, it is certainly a more adequate portrayal of the system of motivation. To the practicing manager, the model means that managers should carefully assess their reward structure. Through careful planning, managing by objectives, and clearly defining duties and responsibilities through a good organization structure, it is possible to integrate the effort, performance, reward and satisfaction into the system of managing .
Understanding and implementing motivation techniques is central for managing people in the hospitality industry. Moreover, customer’s perception of the employees’ effort has a major impact on customer satisfaction in the hospitality industry. In various studies conducted by the researchers, employees consistently ranked interesting work, appreciation and their work experience higher than good wages (Koontz & Weihrich, 2010). Employees are content with their jobs, because although line-level hospitality jobs do not pay well in comparison to the manufacturing jobs, they are less repetitive and hence more interesting in comparison to the manufacturing jobs. Opportunity for growth is a motivational factor for young workers in the hospitality industry, while the old workers prefer job security. A question that remains unanswered for hospitality applications of the motivational theory is the extent of quantifying customer service in a fully-accepted way by the employees.
Although the motivational theories look at the general category of outcomes, it is evident that social rewards enhance the effectiveness of financial rewards. The prevalence of tipped profession in hospitality serves to incent or reward tipped employees for their excellent service, which is a form of motivation. Another factor to consider as an element of motivation in the hospitality industry is the social context as the industry involves the employees’ interaction with the customers (Hayes & Ninemeier, 2008). Social context plays a major role as people rely on their peers for information and judgments about ambiguous situations. The views and attitudes of the coworkers strongly affect the perceptions of the employees towards their work environment as well as their job. Commitment plays an important role in employee motivation.
Since the hospitality industry is a dynamic industry, the boundaries of responsibility and authority motivate the employees. Employee fairness perceptions and behavioral integrity are the two relative issues that have profound consequences in the hospitality industry . It is an industry in which even the best of work teams require regular care and maintenance. Additional areas of staff maintenance concern relate to communications efforts designed to keep the employees informed about work-related issues. Since many employees in the hospitality industry hold more than one job, lack of motivation leads to serious concerns. In order to minimize the negative consequences associated with lack of motivation, it is important to follow the basic concept of fairness and quality employee relations. The motivational theories produce the best results based on the size and type of the hospitality.
Arthur, D 2004, Fundamentals of Human Resources Management. AMACOM Div American Mgmt Assn.
Dessler, G 2005, Human Resource Management. Pearson/Prentice Hall.
Hayes, DK & Ninemeier, JD 2008, Human Resources Management in the Hospitality Industry. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Koontz, H & Weihrich, H 2010, Essentials of Management. Tata McGraw-Hill Education.
Kusluvan, S 2003, Managing Employee Attitudes and Behaviors in the Tourism and Hospitality Industry. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
Lauby, S. J 2005, Motivating Employees. American Society for Training and Development.
Reyes, M 2011, Employee motivation: Do incentives and/or threats really help to motivate employees? (Google eBook). GRIN Verlag.
Saiyadain, M. S 2009, Human Resources Management. Tata McGraw-Hill Education.
Sapru, R. K 2013, Administrative Theories and Management Thought. PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd.
Thomas, K. W 2010, Intrinsic Motivation at Work: What Really Drives Employee Engagement. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.