The Different Motivational Theories

This model, namely expectancy theory, suggests that individuals, acting finished expediency, adopt courses of action perceive as maximizing the probability of desir commensurate popcomes for themselves. This desire to maximize self-interest deliver the goodss aspiring leaders with unique opportunities to assume leadership roles by at the similar eon meeting both follower needs and organizational requirements. We intend to explicitly link expectancy theory and leadership concepts to demonstrate that leader interactions with pursual permit the establishment of highly motivational contributeing environments.In so doing, individuals acquire the means to transcend their traditional roles of supervisor, manager, or follower, and realize their potentials as leaders. In order to remain competitive at home or within the global market, we must stop relegating in our minds the functions of leadership to the office of the president or CEO of the organization. Instead, we must come to horizon the leadership role as part of every employees job, at all levels of the organization. (Isaac, Zerbe & Pitt, 2001, p. 212)Since its origins in the 1960s rightfulness Theory held forrad the promise of dowery to explain how employees respond to situations in which they perceive they atomic number 18 being rewarded much or less favorably in comparison to a referent doing similar work. Shortly after its inception, Weick (1966) deemed it to be one of the approximately useful existing organizational behavior theories. Subsequent reviews concluded that the empirical demonstrate supporting comeliness Theory was generally strong, particularly with regards to how workers respond to under-reward situations.Equity Theory proposed that subjects respond to under-reward situations in various ways in an sweat to bring their equity ratio back into balance. For example, subjects whitethorn choose a behavioral response to help reduce their feelings of injustice. They may respond in such ways as reducing their inputs (i. e. , not put forth as often snips effort) or increasing their outcomes (i. e. , ask for a raise).Subjects may instead use a cognitive response to reduce feelings of inequity such as selecting an new(prenominal) person to use as their referent. in the end the subject may choose to exit the situation by decision making to transfer or quit the organization. eachen & White, 2002) Although previous Equity Theory query has concluded that under-rewarded subjects generally respond in a manner that is self-consistent with classic Equity Theory, it is not easy to predict which option they pull up stakes select to bring their equity ratio into balance. This lack of specificity regarding what responses individuals experiencing inequity ar analogously to have is a serious shortcoming of the original Equity Theory.As such, the original Equity Theory eventually fell out of favor due in part to this inability to predict simply how individuals wou ld respond to an under-reward situation (e. . , lower their inputs, attempt to raise their outcomes, cognitively justifying the situation, sink to leave the organization). This lack of predictive ability of Equity Theory makes it much less useful to practitioners such as managers and human resource professionals who would greatly benefit if they could accurately predict the reactions that their employees would have to different inequitable situations. Accordingly, bearing for on the topic of Equity Theory moved off in another direction.Inspired by legal research, the procedural justice catamenia of research began to focus more on the care fores and procedures of how pay and recognition argon determined, rather than the reactions that individuals have to them. Equity Theory research became less existence and eventually withered away. (Allen & White, 2002) While ever-changing organizational culture is not an easy military operation, it can be accomplished by emphasizing a comm itment to the individual employee. Despite the literatures heavy emphasis on the hugger-mugger sector, many of the elements of Theory Z can be set up in public organizations.This article describes one citys effort to change culture by emphasizing fair treatment of organizational members, employee involvement, two-way communication, employees personal maturation and recognition and camaraderie. During the past decade, organizations in the American society have go about great uncertainty. The challenge of meeting the increasing competition of the Japanese and Hesperian Europeans in the international marketplace, massive reordering of corporations through leveraged acquisitions and consolidations, and rapidly changing technology have impacted organizational life in the backstage sector.Public sector organizations have faced the effects of the new federalism, the revenue enhancement Reform Act of 1986, taxpayer revolts, and numerous other events and actions which have caused disr uption. These demands on American organizations, especially those coming from foreign competition, have forced leaders to challenge their management abilities and their organizations commitment to excel. As part of this introspection, an examination of the underlying values, beliefs, and attitudes of organizations has been undertaken, especially in the popular, non-academic literature (Watson & Burkhalter, 1992)Job Design for servicing employees has been categorized as a production line feeler or an empowerment approach (Bowen & Lawler, 1992). The production line approach, as its name implies, is based on a Tayloristic view. It is based on four tenets simple tasks, liberate division of labor, permutation of equipment and systems for employees, and little decision-making discretion of employees. This design seeks to gain customer gladness through efficiency, consistency, and low costs.It is imperative with the production line job design that IT is installed as a part of that d esign so as to facilitate unified it to the serve up assures anticipated. The number and nature of the options from which the employee chooses should then be limited to coordinated the constraints on their decision-making authority. Any access to additional information would not completely be of no use it would actually deter efficiency. For example, if all hamburgers atomic number 18 prepared to the kindred degree of doneness, giving a customer fall upon person the option of asking a customer how he/she would like the meat cooked would slow d birth the process.In fast food, cash registers (which as well communicate orders to the backroom) prompt order-takers through the decisions that are allowable. Thus, the more standardized the service the more easily describe technologically it can be(5) because the reality of the encounter is simple and presumed to be more easily captured than encounters in which provided services are customized and the outcome of any one such encoun ter is variable. The more circumscribed technologically the service is, the more efficiently the service can be performed but the more dependent upon the circumscribing technology customer encounter service personnel become.Mechling & Little, 2000, p. 65) The Two-factor Theory, or Motivation and Hygiene Theory, purports to differentiate between inbuilt and extrinsic aspects of the job. The authors referred to the intrinsic factors as mental object or motivators, and they include achievement, advancement, the work itself, responsibility, and recognition. The extrinsic factors were referred to as hygiene has and included company policy and administration, expert supervision, working conditions, salary, and interpersonal supervision. (Maidani, 1991) the applicability of Herzbergs Two-factor Theory of job Satisfaction among public and private sector employees.The study, therefore was designed to investigate the job content (motivators or intrinsic) and job context (hygiene or extrin sic) factors contributing to job satisfaction among those employees. Furthermore, the study attempted to determine whether using this instrument would yield the akin results as those of Herzberg et al. (1959) using the critical incidents techniques. Hypothesis 1 was supported. Significant contraventions were found due to the fact that the satisfied group values motivator squarely more than the dissatisfied group. A t-value of 1. 98 indicated that a significant difference existed between the two groups.Hypothesis 2 was not supported. No significant differences were found between the satisfied and dissatisfied employees relating to value placed on hygiene factors. Hypothesis 3 was not supported as no significant differences were found between private and public sector employees on the value placed on motivator factors. (Maidani, 1991) The expectancy theory conjecture by Edward C Tolman in the 1930s (whereby behavior rests on the innate(p) tendency for individuals to balance the value of expected benefits against the expenditure of energy) falls into the same stimulus-response approach to motivation.It demonstrates that an individuals strength of motivation can be affected by the expectations of outcomes from certain actions and further strengthened by the individuals preferred outcome, as show by Victor H. Vroom in the 1960s. Individuals are consciously self-interested in the outcomes of their actions. For example, a worker may put in extra time and effort to a project and expect to be paid more money. That is his desired reward and what he expects. If he does not receive, what he expects his motivational level exit fall dramatically.Elton Mayo, in the Hawthorne experiments concluded that individuals adjusted their motivational levels to fit in with the group. The individual values the approval and acceptance of others and will conform to the groups motivational standards in order to fit in. One measurable point about expectancy theory is that individua l perceptions can be very different, and the motivation and behavior of individuals will vary considerably.It pays, therefore, in away stimuli to bear in mind that 1. he routes to desired outcomes for individuals and teams are clear and 2. individuals perceive the rewards or punishments in different ways according to their own values. There is a great need to treat people as individuals but as the 5050 rule also indicates, other motivational factors should always be set in the context of the individuals managed environment. leaders have a vital role to play in creating a motivational environment in which their team members can excel by in turn using the motivation within themselves.To be able to do this, we as leaders need to begin by looking at at ourselves and getting our contribution right before we can ping others. (Thomas, 2004, p. 61) Process models are based on the important insight that responses to (persuasive) messages do not tho take the form of controlled, capacity- intensive cognitive processes, or only the form of simple automatic processes involving little working memory. Message bear on may be dominated by either form, or it may blend the two, depending on our ability and motivation to think about the burden of a message.Affective processes appear to (a) influence levels of motivation and ability to process in a thoughtful manner, (b) guide the retrieval of information from memory, and (c) provide cues to simple responses (Babrow, 1993, p. 111) Dialectical perspectives on communication also embody multiple- process theory. Of course, dialecticalal analyses of one sort or another have been discussed for centuries (see Adler, 1952). As numerous dialectical thinkers have pointed out, however, several themes are consistent in these writings these themes exemplify some of the most desirable potentialities of multiple- process theory.The most elemental theme in dialectical thinking is that of opposition dialectic either begins or ends with som e sort of intellectual conflict, or develops and resolves about such oppositions ( Adler, 1952 , p. 350). Dialectical opposites are mutually conditioning (the occurrence, existence, or center of one pole is conditioned by its opposite) and at the same time mutually excluding . For instance, sound presupposes but also excludes silence, and so too for favor and enmity, motion and stillness. (Babrow, 1993, p. 15)All of these theories thrive on the perception of the individual working to better themselves in some way. They differ in their methods, some look at how the individual will work for recognition, advancement, or just for encouragement. All of these methods are effective means of making individuals and groups work more efficiently. However, it is important to point out that each method does not work for the same situation. One must be able to differentiate between the theories in order to determine the best means.