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.
Well described Rumaiz, according to Estes and Polnick (2012), Overall, research on expectancy theory supports the notion that people make decisions about changing their inputs based on preferences for desired outcomes and the likelihood of achieving those ends satisfactorily. According to studies, each element of the expectancy theory—expectancy, instrumentality, and valence—plays a significant role in determining how motivated an individual is to either enhance or decrease productivity.
ReplyDeleteDear Shiran, Thanks for your input. Vroom’s Expectancy Theory tries to explain the motivated behavior as goal oriented. He argues that people tend to act in a hedonistic way preferring the actions that will bring the highest subjective utility (Suciu et al, 2013) . Essentially, the expectancy theory argues that the strength of a tendency to act in a certain way depends on the strength of an expectation that the act will be followed by a given outcome and on the attractiveness of that outcome to the individual (Robbins, 1993, cited in Suciu et al, 2013).
DeleteEmployee motivation, just one aspect of the motivation and performance formula, is often
ReplyDeletestudied because it gives insight into employee behavior and provides a basis to predict future
behavior. There is not just one theory surrounding employee motivation which has been
unanimously accepted. Furthermore, motivational philosophies are divided into three classes,
content motivation, process motivation, and reinforcement theory (Lussier, 2017)
Dear Rinosha, Parijath & Bagga, (2014) states Expectancy Theory of Motivation is recognized under Process Theories.
DeleteVroom's expectancy theory does not clearly explain what motivates organization members. Instead, it is more focused on intellectual actions that encourage employees and how they relate to each other.
ReplyDeleteIt explains the cognitive process of that employee's belief of effort they put to work, achieved performance from that effort and rewards they receive from the effort and performance. In other words, an employee will be motivated if they believe the effort they put in will lead to performance and rewards (Simone, 2015).