The work motivation ideas can be broadly labeled as content theories and process theories. The content ideas are worried with identifying the needs that individuals have and how needs are prioritized. They are concerned with types of bonuses that drive visitors to attain need fulfillment. The Maslow hierarchy theory, Fredrick Herzberg's two factor theory and Alderfer's ERG needs theory land in this category. Although such a content strategy has logic, is easy to understand, and can be conveniently translated used, the research proof points out restrictions. There is very little research support for these models' theoretical basic and predictability. The trade off for simpleness sacrifices true understanding of the complexness of work motivation. For the positive side, however, this content models have given emphasis to important content factors which were largely dismissed by individuals relationists. In addition the Alderfer's ERG needs theory allows more flexibility and Herzberg's two-factor theory pays to as a conclusion for job satisfaction so that a spot of departure for job design.
The process theories are worried with the cognitive antecedents that go into inspiration and with just how these are related one to the other. The theories given by Vroom, Porter and Lawler, collateral theory and attribution theory show up in this category. These theories provide a much sounder explanation of work motivations. The expectancy model of Vroom and the extensions and the refinements provided by Porter and Lawler help describe quite cognitive variables and how they relate to one another in the process of work desire. The Porter Lawler model also provides specific attention to the important relationship between performance and satisfaction. A growing research books is relatively supportive of the expectancy models, but conceptual and methodological problems remain. Unlike the content models, these expectancy models are relatively complex and difficult to result in actual practice. They have also failed to meet the goals of prediction and control
Motivation Theory 1 - Adam's Equity Theory of Work Motivation
The theory talks about a major type into job performance and satisfaction is the amount of equity or inequity that folks perceive in work situations. Adam depicts a specific procedure for how this inspiration occurs.
Inequality occurs whenever a person perceives that the percentage of his or her final results to inputs and the ratio of a relevant other's benefits to inputs are unequal.
Our Final results < Other's Final results = Inequity (under-rewarded)
Our Inputs Other's Inputs
Our Benefits = Other's Results = Equity
Our Inputs Other's Inputs
Our Benefits > Other's Results = Inequity (over-rewarded)
Our Inputs Other's Inputs
Both the inputs and the outputs of the individual and the other are founded upon the person's perceptions, that are affected by years, sex, education, social position, organizational position, requirements, and how hard the individual works, etc. Effects consist mostly of rewards such as pay, position, campaign, and intrinsic interest in the job. Equity sensitivity is the proportion based upon the individuals notion of what the individual is offering (inputs) and obtaining (outcomes) versus the percentage of what the relevant is giving and receiving. This cognition may or might not be the same as someone else's observation of the ratios or the same as the real situation.
If the person's perceived proportion is not equal to the other's, he or she will make an effort to restore the percentage to collateral. This striving to revive equity is utilized as the explanation of work drive. The strength of this motivation is within direct percentage to the perceived inequity that is present.
Research shows that individuals take part in illegal behaviors to maintain equity in relationships, either with their employing organization or with other people (Greenberg, 1990).
The theory was later broadened with the concept of "Organizational Justice". Organizational justice reflects the extend to which people perceive that they are treated fairly at the job. It identified three different components of justice: distributive (The identified fairness of how resources and rewards are sent out), procedural (The perceived fairness of the process and methods used to make allocation decisions) and interactional (The recognized fairness of your choice maker's behavior in the process of decision-making). (Copanzano, Rupp, Mohler and Schminke, 2001).
Critiques:
Equity theory is descriptive and it displays much of our daily experience. As being a theory however collateral is only incomplete in analysis and since a predictor. There are numerous societal and institutional factors (inequalities) that we all navigate. The idea ignores people's natural resilience, their competitiveness, selflessness and selfishness, their ethical dilemmas in decision-making and their passions.
It will not adequately explain interactions in close relationships such as matrimony or "emotional labor" - where we might provide attention to others at a burdensome cost of declining personal well-being and self-denial. Norms of equity and reciprocity are often low priced in close and romantic friendships or where there are profound family bonds.
In the communal exchanges of business, causal, or stranger human relationships, there may be more of a dominant assumption that inputs are offered with the expectation of the like response. There is more of a formal deal of tangible and intangible reward. A promises unfulfilled, without proper reciprocity incurs a arrears of honor. A offer is broken. Inside our community, obligations of reciprocal response operate. We are expected to apply the Golden Guideline and help where we can - an take action ably exhibited by "the Parable of the nice Samaritan".
Social exchange theory assumes rational, calculated action concerning an expected pay-off. We do not always respond rationally. Many will not be as selfish as logical action may suggest. Indeed our prize will be the inner glow of respecting oneself and living to one's own values. Such altruism, albeit self-referential, will not sit down easily under the assumptions of the "logical, economic-person" model.
Implications
It is necessary to focus on what employees' perceive to be good and equitable. For instance: In my company, one of my fellow workers was allocated to a task that required him to work during non business hours frequently. He performed three days in the office and two times at home in weekly for per month and 1 / 2. This induced others to get started on working from home during business hours.
Allow employees to truly have a "voice" and an opportunity to charm. Organizational changes, promoting assistance, etc. will come easier with equitable results.
Management's failure to accomplish equity could be expensive for the organization. For instance: One of my technically associates had not been very qualified. He took twice enough time to complete any give work in comparison with others. Management failed to take any action; instead the others received more work. Eventually, even the skilled workers required it easy to revive equity causing job delays.
Motivation Theory 2 - Vroom's Expectancy Theory of Inspiration:
Expectancy theory provides a framework for examining work drive, which is eminently useful. It offers a checklist of factors to be considered in virtually any managerial situation and it details to the links between your relevant factors and the path, which these factors have a tendency to follow in their interrelationships. (Tony J. Watson, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1986).
Expectancy theory retains that folks are determined to behave with techniques that produce desired combinations of expected results. It could be used to anticipate motivation and tendencies in virtually any situation when a choice between several alternatives must be made. (Kreitner R. & Kinicki A. , Mcgraw Hill, 7th Edition). Vroom offered the following formula of Drive:
Motivation (M) = Valence (V) x Expectancy (E)
Valence means the preference of a person for a particular results. Thus, when an individual desires a particular outcome the value of V is positive. Alternatively when the average person does not desire a certain outcome, the value of V is negative.
The value of expectancy ranges between zero and one. Whenever a certain event will definitely not occur the worthiness of E is zero. Alternatively when the event is sure to occur the value of E is one.
Since its original conception, the expectancy theory model has been refined and extended many times. The better know of most is the Porter-Lawler model. Although standard knowledge argues that satisfaction leads to performance, Porter and Lawler argued the opposite. If rewards are good, high levels of performance may lead to satisfaction. As well as the features contained in the original expectancy model, the Porter-Lawler model includes abilities, features, and role perceptions.
Critiques:
Vroom's theory will not directly contribute to the techniques of motivating people. It is of value in understanding organizational tendencies. It clarifies the connection between individuals and the organizational goals. The model was created to help management understand and evaluate employee desire and identify some to the relevant factors. However, the theory falls in short supply of providing specific answers to the motivational problems.
The theory also will not take into account the individual differences based on individual perceptions nor would it assume that most folks have the same hierarchy of needs. It snacks as a varying to be looked into just what it is that one employees would like in their work. Thus the idea suggests only the conceptional determinants of motivation and how they are related.
Research studies have established that the association of both kinds of expectancies and valences with effort and performance. The enthusiastic behavior of individuals comes from their valuing expected rewards, thinking effort will lead to performance, which performance will lead to desired rewards.
The expectancy theory clarifies motivation in the U. S. much better than elsewhere and for that reason might not be suited to other areas.
Implications
This theory can be employed by the professionals to:
· Determine the primary outcome each employee wants.
· Determine what levels and sorts of performance are needed to meet organizational goals.
· Make sure the required levels of performance are possible.
· Website link desired effects and desired performance.
· Analyze the situation for conflicting prospects.
· Make sure the rewards are large enough.
· Make sure the entire system is equitable for everyone.
Motivation Theory 3 - Maslow's Theory of Hierarchy of Need:
Maslow thought that within every person, there exists a hierarchy of five needs and that each level of need must be satisfied before a person pursues another higher-level of need (Maslow, 1943). As an individual progresses through the many levels of needs, the proceeding needs loose their motivational value.
The basic individuals needs positioned by Maslow within an ascending order of importance can be summarized and shown as below:
The desire to become what you are with the capacity of becoming.
These are the must be held in esteem both by oneself and by others.
These are the needs to belong and be accepted by various communities.
These are the must be free from physical danger. The basic safety needs look to the near future.
These are the basic needs for sustaining individual life itself, such as food, drinking water, ambiance, shelter, and sleep.
Maslow in his later work (Maslow, 1954) said:
1. Gratification of the self-actualization need triggers an increase in its importance rather than a decrease.
2. Long deprivation of confirmed need, ends in fixation for that require.
3. Higher needs may emerge not after gratification, but rather by long deprivation, renunciation or suppression of lower needs.
4. Human being habit is multi-determined and multi-motivated.
Critiques:
Part of the appeal of Maslow's theory is the fact that it provides both a theory of individuals motives by classifying basic individuals needs in a hierarchy and the idea of human motivation that relates these must general patterns. Maslow's major contribution is based on the hierarchical notion. He was the first ever to recognize that a need once satisfied is a spent pressure and ceases to be a motivator.
Maslow's need hierarchy presents a paradox in up to as the theory is generally accepted, there is a little research proof open to support the theory.
It is said that beyond structuring needs in a certain fashion Maslow does not give concrete information to the managers as to that they should motivate their employees.
Implications:
The need hierarchy as postulated by Maslow will not come in practice. It is likely that over fulfillment of anyone's particular need may cause fixation for the need. If so even when a specific need is satisfied a person may still take part in the fulfillment of the same need. Furthermore, in a standard individual, all the needs are not always satisfied totally. There remains an unsatisfied part of each need regardless of that your person seeks fulfillment of the higher need.
A person may move on to the next need regardless of the lower need being unfulfilled or being partly fulfilled.
Conclusion
No single inspiration theory can suffice in today's work area. Each motivational theory has its benefits and drawbacks. A theory may get the highest performance from a worker but may not from another employee.
The organization's work place has changed significantly in the past ten years. Companies are both downsizing and growing (often at the same time, in various divisions or levels of the hierarchy). Work has been out-sourced to various locations and countries. The labor force is seen as a increased variety with highly divergent needs and demands. It has frequently evolved both manner and location of work activities. New organizational forms (such as e-commerce) are actually common. Clubs are redefining the idea of hierarchy, as well as traditional vitality distributions. The usage of contingent personnel is on the rise and globalization and the troubles of managing across borders are actually the norm. These changes have had a profound effect how companies try to attract, preserve, and motivate their employees.
Yet we lack new models capable of guiding professionals in this new age of work. As management scholar Peter Cappelli notes, "Most observers of the corporate world assume that the traditional romance between workplace and employee is gone, but you can find little understanding of why it finished and even less in what is exchanging that romance" (Cappelli, 1999). I believe the existing work desire and job performance theories are insufficient to cater to the present era of such diverse workforce. New ideas of motivation are required to commensurate with this new time.
