How to Motivate?

There are several methods the modern organizations uses to keep their employees motivated. These methods can be mainly broken into two. Monetarily vs non monetarily motivation. 

Non Monetarily Motivation.

Non monetarily motivation can be related to:

• Position, Designation or Promotion

• Recognition

• Level of relationship with one’s hierarchy & subordinates.

• Goals & tasks

• Work environment (Office space, working tools, working hours etc.,)

There are steps that a manager can take to help motivate their employees. First, the manager should always give the employee reasonable goals and set a time period to accomplish each goal. The goals should be work related, and once a set of goals has been reached, a new set of goals should be created. Second, a manager should always remember to treat his or her employees fairly, as this will create a positive environment for all employees, and it will help satisfy the employees’ needs. Third, managers can also restructure jobs to help motivate their employees, by adjusting the employees’ job descriptions (Randall et al, 2006). Rotation of jobs - involves moving employees through a range of jobs to increase interest and motivation (Panait & Panait, 2018).

Monetarily Motivation.

Monetarily motivation methods can be related

• Salary or Salary raise

• Commission 

• Bonuses 

• Dividends

• Foreign Trips

• Gifts

Financial incentives and rewards make continuation of the employment relationship because it create the basis for high levels of commitment so, firms must develop strategies that include financial incentives and rewards for example promotion, bonus, profit sharing or gain sharing and employees stock ownership etc (Saleem, 2011).

References:

Panait and Panait (2018). Trends in Non-Financial Motivation Policies of Employees. Global Economic Observer, 6(1), pp.148–153.

Randall, Novotny and Larson (2006). Is it Really all about the Money?: Motivating Employees in the 21st Century. Journal of Undergraduate Research at Minnesota State University, Mankato, 6(18), pp.2–8.

Saleem (2011). The Impact of Financial Incentives on Employees Commitment. European Journal of Business and Management, 3(4), pp.258–266.

Vroom’s Expectancy theory of Motivation

There are many motivational theories expressed in the literature over the years that approach motivation through different perspectives. Nonetheless, most theories would agree that motivation requires a desire to act, an ability to act, and having an objective (Ramlall, 2004). Motivational theories have been grouped in three main categories by taking into consideration different approaches as it follows. Vroom’s Expectancy theory of motivation falls under the category of ‘process theories’ which explains how motivation occurs, what factors influence it and what are the relations between those factors (SUCIU et al, 2013)

The expectancy theory of motivation was originally derived by victor Vroom  in 1964, this theory defines the process of decision making by individuals using various behavioral alternatives. The motivational force for a behavior, action, or task is a function of three distinct perceptions: expectancy, instrumentality, and valence. Motivational force is the force directing specific behavioral alternatives, which are suggested when deciding among behavior options (Chiang & Jang, 2008). The theory emphasizes some very important aspects or variables of management that are efforts, performance, rewards and personal goals. It establishes relationships between effort, performance, rewards and personal goals and tries to synthesize all these into one theory of motivation. (Parijat & Bagga, 2014)

According to Vroom, the motivational force that drives behavior is a product of these three variables and can be represented by the equation: (Lloyd and Mertens, 2018).

Motivation = Expectancy * Instrumentality * Valence

Expectancy explains the subjective probability of the effort resulting in an outcome (called the first level outcome). 3 The value of expectancy will vary between 0 and 1. 0 level of expectancy means that our maximum effort will also not result in any change in performance. In other words the probability of improvement in performance is nil. An expectancy of the level of 1 means that our effort will lead to highly successful or the best performance. In other words the probability of improvement is 1. (Parijat & Bagga, 2014)

Instrumentality is the perception that a given outcome of performance on their part will lead to them receiving an anticipated reward. Vroom describes this as an outcome-outcome association and also ranges on a scale of 0, where there is no expectation of desired outcome delivery to 1, where a reasonable probability of the delivery of rewards is perceived. It is an “estimate of the probability that a given level of achieved task performance will lead to various work outcomes” (Lunenburg, 2011, cited in Lloyd and Mertens, 2018).

Valence is the degree to which an individual has a preference for a given outcome. Vroom describes valence as “effective orientations toward particular outcomes” (1964). Valence can be positive, whereby the attainment of the reward is desired, or negative whereby the attainment of the reward is something an individual wishes to avoid. As such, valance can have a value ranging from -1 to 1. Vroom clarifies the difference between valence and value in that valence is the perception of anticipated satisfaction while the value is the actual satisfaction or utility received after attaining the reward. (Lloyd and Mertens, 2018).

References:

Chiang, C.-F. and Jang, S. (2008). An expectancy theory model for hotel employee motivation. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 27(2), pp.313–322. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2007.07.017.

Lloyd and Mertens (2018). Expecting More Out of Expectancy Theory: History Urges Inclusion of the Social Context. International Management Review, 14(1), pp.28–43.

Parijat, P. (2014). Victor Vroom’s Expectancy Theory of Motivation – An Evaluation. International Research journal of Business and management, 7(9), pp.1–3.

Ramlall, S. (2004). A Review of Employee Motivation Theories and their Implications for Employee Retention within Organizations. The Journal of American Academy of Business, Cambridge, pp.52–64.

SUCIU, MORTAN and LAZĂR (2013). Vroom’s Expectancy Theory. an Empirical Study: Civil Servant’s Performance Appraisal Influencing Expectancy. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 39, pp.180–200.