Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Motivaton
Motivaton
Direction
Intensity Persistence
Motivation
Why Rewards Often Fail to Motivate
Too much emphasis on monetary rewards
Rewards lack an “appreciation effect”
Extensive benefits become entitlements
Counterproductive behavior is rewarded
Too long a delay between performance and
rewards
Too many one-size-fits-all rewards
Use of one-shot rewards with a short-lived
motivational impact
Continued use of demotivating practices
such as layoffs, across-the-board
raises and cuts, and excessive
executive compensation
Goal-Setting Theory
• Specificity • Commitment
• Challenge • Self-efficacy
• Feedback • Characteristics
• Participation • Culture
Insights from Goal-Setting Research
Difficult Goals Lead to Higher Performance.
- Easy goals produce low effort because the goal is too easy to
achieve.
- Impossible goals ultimately lead to lower performance
because people begin to experience failure.
Specific Difficult Goals Lead to Higher Performance for
Simple Rather Than Complex Tasks.
- Goal specificity pertains to the quantifiability of a goal.
- Specific difficult goals impair performance on novel, complex
tasks when employees do not have clear strategies for
solving these types of problems.
Feedback Enhances The Effect of Specific, Difficult Goals.
- Goals and feedback should be used together.
Insights from Goal-Setting Research
(continued)
Participative Goals, Assigned Goals, and Self-
Set Goals Are Equally Effective.
- Managers should set goals by using a contingency
approach.
Different methods work in different situations.
Goal Commitment and Monetary Incentives
Affect Goal-Setting Outcomes.
- Difficult goals lead to higher performance when
employees
are committed to their goals.
- Difficult goals lead to lower performance when
employees
are not committed to their goals.
- Goal based incentives can lead to negative outcomes
for employees in complex, interdependent jobs
requiring cooperation.
Guidelines for Writing “SMART”
Goals
Specific
Measurable
Attainable
Results oriented
Time bound
Managerial Implications of
Expectancy Theory
• Determine the outcomes employees value.
• Identify good performance so appropriate
behaviors can be rewarded.
• Make sure employees can achieve targeted
performance levels.
• Link desired outcomes to targeted levels of
performance.
• Make sure changes in outcomes are large
enough to motivate high effort.
• Monitor the reward system for inequities.
Organizational Implications of
Expectancy Theory
• Reward people for desired performance, and do not
keep pay decisions secret.
• Design challenging jobs.
• Tie some rewards to group accomplishments to build
teamwork and encourage cooperation.
• Reward managers for creating, monitoring, and
maintaining expectancies, instrumentalities, and
outcomes that lead to high effort and goal
attainment.
• Monitor employee motivation through interviews or
anonymous questionnaires.
• Accommodate individual differences by building
flexibility into the motivation program.
Cognitive Evaluation
Intrinsic Extrinsic
Motivators Motivators
The Job Characteristics Model
Moderators
1. Knowledge and skill
2. Growth need strength
3. Context satisfactions
Approaches to Job Design
1. The Mechanistic Approach focuses on
identifying the most efficient way to perform a job.
Employees are trained and rewarded to perform their
jobs accordingly. Approaches these techniques (job
2. Motivational
enlargement, job rotation, job enrichment, and job
characteristics) attempt to improve employees’
affective and attitudinal reactions and behavioral
outcomes.
3. Biological and Perceptual- Motor Approaches
Biological techniques focus on reducing employees’
physical strain, effort, fatigue, and health complaints.
The Perceptual-Motor Approach emphasizes the
reliability of work outcomes by examining error rates,
accidents, and workers’ feedback about facilities and
equipment.
Skills and Best Practices: Applying
the Job Characteristics Model
1. Diagnose the level of employee motivation and
job. satisfaction and consider redesigning jobs
when motivation ranges from low to moderate.
2. Determine whether job redesign is appropriate
in a given context.
3. Redesign jobs by including employees’ input.
Equity Theory
Ratio Employee’s
Comparison* Perception
Outcomes A < Outcomes B Inequity (Under-Rewarded)
Inputs A Inputs B
Outcomes A = Outcomes B Equity
Inputs A Inputs B
Outcomes A > Outcomes B Inequity (Over-Rewarded)
Inputs A Inputs B
*
Where A is the employee, and B is a relevant other or referent.
Negative and Positive Inequity
A. An Equitable
Situation Other
Self
$2 $4
= $2 per hour = $2 per hour
1 2
hour hours
Negative and Positive Inequity (cont)
B. Negative Inequity
Self Other
$2 $3
= $2 per hour = $3 per hour
1 1 hour
hour
Negative and Positive Inequity (cont)
C. Positive Inequity
Other
Self
$3 $2
= $3 per hour = $1 per hour
1 1
hour hours
Organizational Justice
Distributive Justice: The perceived fairness of
how resources and rewards are distributed.
Procedural Justice: The perceived fairness of the
process and procedures used to make allocation
decisions.
Interactional Justice:
The perceived fairness of the decision maker’s
behavior in the process of decision making.
Research into Equity
Distributive Procedural
Justice Justice
• ESOP
• An annual excellence reward system
• Sharing of ideas
• Facilities provided to employees
GROUP 7
• RITESH
• SUDHIR
• DEEPAK
• PRASHANT
• NISHCHIT