Evaluate the ways in which content and process theories of motivation can help to improve performance and job

satisfaction in work organizations.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. Motivation can be defined as the forces within a person that affect his or her direction, intensity and persistence of voluntary behaviour (Bratton, 2010). It is of great interest for managers to know what motivates their employees and how they can motivate them. Content theories of motivation deal with what motivates, while process theories deal mostly with how. Intrinsic motivation is defined as that which motivates the individual to perform for no other reward that the work itself. Sources of motivation outside the individual are termed as extrinsic, in the form of tangible rewards (Bratton, 2010). Job satisfaction refers to how well the extrinsic and intrinsic rewards for performing a job satisfy the individuals needs and desires (Wilson, 2004). Workers can uphold their motivation levels regardless of the external conditions if they are self-motivated, which results in better performance and job satisfaction. I will evaluate the strengths and weakness of content and process theories of motivation, comprising Maslows need hierarchy, Herzbergs two-factor theory, Alderfers ERG theory and McClellands Achievement Need Theory, Equity Theory, Expectancy Theory and Goal-Setting Theory. I will also incorporate practical examples of how these theories have helped companies achieve their goals. Maslow (1963) arranges needs in a hierarchical fashion. He states people work up the hierarchy by satisfying each need in turn, starting from basic food and shelter and culminating with self-actualisation. This is defined as the intrinsic growth of what is already in the organism, or more accurately what the organism is itself, i.e. the desire to become more and more of what one is, to become everything that one is capable of becoming (Maslow, 1943). Maslow states not only must an individual fulfil the preceding needs of safety, love and esteem, but also operate under the B-values of honesty, integrity, and morality in order to fulfil self-actualisation. A work environment where these values are encouraged, where feelings of respect, sharing and altruism are standard occurrences, makes it easier for people to grow towards their tendency to self-actualize, thereby motivating them to take responsibility of their work. Incorporating opportunities to self-actualize within job itself can have a positive impact. For example, setting varied and challenging tasks with regular and constructive feedback can help employees gain greater satisfaction from their work. Human contact is another important factor to consider here; workers respond much better to managerial goals if they feel they feel they are personally valued. (Reference) Maslows model cannot be applied directly as it was not intended to be a managerial tool (Bratton, 2010) and is aimed at individual development rather than general motivation. This theory also lacks empirical support (Wahba and Bridewell 1976). Alderfer (1972) adapted Maslows theory to the workplace, condensing the 5 levels into the 3 of relatedness, growth and existence needs. His frustration regression principle states that people can regress to a lower need if a higher need is frustrated. This means that a need can continue to be a motivator even after being satisfied. For example, Arnold and Boshoff suggest that even higher order needs can motivate front line workers by increasing their self-esteem. The models broad assertions, however, make it difficult to verify (Wilson, 2004).

51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98. 99. 100. 101. 102. 103.

McClellends need for achievement theory (1961) is perhaps of more potential value to managers attempting to understand motivation in the workplace (Brooks, 2004). McClelland identifies three basic needs for all individuals: power, affiliation and achievement. The dominating need will determine how employees respond to different types of work (Harrel and Strahl). Individuals with a high need for achievement, for example, have a strong desire for feedback about their performance (McClelland et al. 1953). By recognizing their positive contributions, managers can further motivate them to perform well. Those with a need for power should be given an opportunity to manage others, while those with a need for affiliation should be given the chance to work in a team (Long, 2009) to foster greater employee satisfaction. Needs are learned (McClelland, 1961), so managers can place individuals in specific training programs where they will be motivated to find their niche in certain skills needed in the organization. The testing system for needs is easy to use, and includes either a questionnaire or the Thematic Apperception Test. Fineman (1977) found no correlation between results of the questionnaire and TAT results, suggesting there was low predictive validity and reliability (Entwhistle 1972). Herzbergs two-factor analysis (1968) argues that factors involved in producing job satisfaction and motivation are separate and distinct from the factors that lead to job dissatisfaction (Wilson, 2004). Growth or motivator factors are the primary cause of job satisfaction. They are intrinsic to the work and satisfy the persons need for self-actualisation (Maslow, 1964). Hygiene factors do not motivate but are the primary cause of job dissatisfaction. Herzberg states that managers can motivate subordinates if they incorporate motivators, into job design, while making sure hygiene factors are not a cause for distress. In the case of Volvo, workers were made to work in small groups, completing a full assembly procedure rather than repeating the same individual task. This worked towards improving social contact, adding variety to the work, and making it challenging. Employees felt they were making significant contributions rather than being singled out at their individual stations in the assembly line. (Banner and Gagne). In some cases, hygiene factors have found to be motivators as well. Pleasant working conditions can lead to employees identifying with the firm, and thus exerting more effort than the minimum required by the employment contract. It can be a powerful method of retaining key employees (Wharton School of Business, 2008). This two-factor approach is well supported by research (Brooks, 2003), but may be an oversimplification for something so complex as motivation (Vroom, 1964). Equity theory (Adams, 1963) explains how people develop perceptions of fairness in the distribution and exchange of resources (Bratton, 2010). It states that workers compare their effort to their results and of those in similar positions to them. If they feel the outcomes to be inadequate they can be said to experience inequity. In a study of checkout staff at supermarkets (Adams, 1963) it cost approximately 27 percent more to operate the store in which the inequity was higher. According to Lord and Hohenfeld (1979), workers lower their performance in order to make up for the perceived inequity. Hollinger and Clark (1983) found vandalism to be another reaction. In a study by Alf Nachemson, the rate of absenteeism from back pain was almost twice as much in those workers who felt they had no control over their work environment. We can see it is important for managers to adopt as rewards system that responds to the needs of employees. Redefining their reference group, or skills involved in doing the job (Wilson, 2004) may temporarily readjust inequity, but is unlikely to work in

104. 105. 106. 107. 108. 109. 110. 111. 112. 113. 114. 115. 116. 117. 118. 119. 120. 121. 122. 123. 124. 125. 126. 127. 128. 129. 130. 131. 132. 133. 134. 135. 136. 137. 138. 139. 140. 141. 142. 143. 144. 145. 146. 147. 148. 149. 150. 151. 152. 153. 154. 155. 156.

the long run. Lepper and Greene (1978) found some underpaid workers to be motivated to perceive their tasks in a more positive light, so as to cognitively justify their performing for lower wages. It is difficult, therefore, to judge just when and how people will react to inequity, and ever harder to implement a rewards system that takes this into account. Using personality tests, such as the Cattel 16PF, may give more clarity to the prediction process. The John Lewis partnership idea has seemed to work effectively for reducing perceived inequity. It is in the employees own interest to do the job right as they are each given a stake in the business. John Lewis has ranked within the top five last year of the recession survivability index published by the Guardian, possibly because they have the foresight to predict how employees will respond to wage cuts. In this case, motivators have been directed at the personal interests of the employee (John Lewis Partnership Handbook). Expectancy Theory builds on Equity Theory to give a more thorough and detailed explanation for motivational behaviour. Vrooms initial work (1964) states that effort is a function of expectancy, the link between effort and performance; instrumentality, the probability that performance will lead to valued outcomes; and valence, the desirability of these outcomes. If just one of these variables is low, so will be the overall motivation. Managers may improve effort-performance expectancy through additional training. Performanceoutcome expectancy could be improved by making chances of promotion seem more probable with better performance. Finally, increasing the attractiveness of the outcome through motivators such as social recognition could boost the employees perceived valance (Bratton, 2010). Different working cultures will tend to put different values on the various outcomes. In my opinion, managers must take account of this for their rewards system to be effective. Porter and Lawler (1968) developed this model to show the importance of informal learning and social comparisons. It provides a more complex understanding of motivation, and how elements of work motivation relate to one another in the motivation process (Bratton, 2010). Expectancy theory is straightforward and easy to implement. However, the decision making process in an individual is based on many complex psychological factors, and it is unlikely they will carry out all the complicated calculations implied by this model (Wilson, 2004). Goal-setting theorys relative simplicity to other theories makes it convenient. Locke and Latham (2006) showed that setting challenging and specific goals accompanied with feedback and employee participation leads to higher performance levels. I can attest to this from personal experience: my mental focus will be dissipated if Im not clear about my goal. Goal setting theory does not cover the complexity and depth of employee motivation as do the other theories, and therefore it could be more effective if implemented as an accompaniment to other practices. Google Inc. is a good example of a high-performing company. They are placed fourth on the U.S. Fortune 100 Best Companies to Work For and place heavy importance on employee satisfaction. So what exactly do they implement in practice to achieve such high-levels of employee retention? It might be the fact that there are high levels of both intrinsic and extrinsic rewards. Free food, insurance policies, childcare, on-site doctor, financial planning assistance, transport and a substantial salary are all included in employee benefits package. Employees are given great autonomy with their work, and are encouraged to

157. 158. 159. 160. 161. 162. 163. 164. 165. 166. 167. 168. 169. 170.

perform in whichever way that suits them, satisfying their need for selfactualisation (Maslow). Weekly meetings with the co-founders give them a chance to express their opinions and there are very few solo offices, fostering an environment where people can easily share ideas wand innovate. On another front, employees and chief executives all have access to the same resources in the workplace, reducing perceived inequity (Google website). In conclusion, I do not feel any one theory appeals to me in particular, but rather a combination of the different points addressed in them. For example, most theories have underscored the effectiveness of intrinsic motivators rather than extrinsic ones. From this I can infer that the nature of job design plays a vital role in employee motivation (Hackman and Oldham). Combining this with pleasant working conditions and personal involvement with the employees may lead to improvements in employee satisfaction and performance.

Comments with reference to particular lines: 1. Good definition. This could have been elaborated on either as part of a first paragraph, or later on. For example: Each of these three elements of motivation are important for managers: workers that have a sense of direction and focus, for example with clear goals, are shown to be more productive (Locke and Latham, 1990); intensity of effort is also something that managers will want; and lastly persistence in their efforts, rather than starting well and then faltering. Brattons (2010) definition talks about voluntary behaviour. Indeed it is the idea of discretionary behaviour, that is behaviour that goes beyond the behaviour that can be policed by the manager, which is so valuable to management. Brattons (2010) definition also addresses forces within a person, and this is the challenge for managers: how to understand the forces within their workers that leads them to be motivated to doing certain actions and not others. In this way, motivation relates also to the second part of the question, about job satisfaction. There are mixed findings in research about the causal relationship between job satisfaction and productivity, and there is therefore no universal agreement about whether job satisfaction leads to higher productivity, or whether productivity leads to higher job satisfaction. However, most organisations are interested in improving both performance and job satisfactions, and in how motivation theory might assist them with this. If you break down a definition and discuss it you will show me that you have understood it, rather than just learning it off by heart. 1-17 Good introduction covering the main terms, and with two different sources (Bratton, 2010; and Wilson, 2004). 10. Nice point made about self-motivation.

12. Good to state that you will evaluate strengths and weaknesses of content and process theories. It would be even better to state which of these theories are which. The essay could have been a lot clearer about this. For example: (line 12) I will evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of content and process theories of motivation. In doing so, the content theories that I will refer to are Maslows Hierarchy of Needs, Herzbergs two-factor theory, Alderfers modified hierarchy model and McClellands (1961) achievement motivation theory; and the process theories I will draw on are Vrooms expectancy theory and Locke and Lathams (1990) Goal-setting Theory. The essay asks you to evaluate the ways in which content and process theories of motivation can help to improve performance and job satisfaction in work organisations. Therefore, you do not need to go into a lot of detail about each individual theory. Instead, you need to draw out the elements of content and process theories that you can relate to performance improvement and job satisfaction. 16. Good to highlight that practical examples will be given. 19. Good to give a year for Maslow and clearly focused paragraph however, the focus of the question has already been a bit lost here. This is not an essay question about explaining different theories of motivation. Rather, it asks you to group these theories into two content and process and to evaluate these two groupings. A more helpful structure would, therefore, be: Content theories: (but dont use a heading in the essay - this is just to highlight the structure) Paragraph 1 strengths and weaknesses of content theories in relationship to job performance. Showing what needs to be taken account of to get higher levels of performance e.g. Maslows lower level needs have to be addressed before higher levels become relevant; Herzbergs satisfiers are essential to achieve higher levels of performance Weaknesses: see the slide on problems with needs theories in the motivation slides. Paragraph 2 - strengths and weaknesses of content theories in relationship to job satisfaction. This relates to how happy people are in their job. Maslows self-actualisation useful concept for some jobs maybe is it applicable or possible in all jobs? Herzberg specifically talks about job satisfaction as one of his satisfiers. You could here talk about content of work being intrinsically motivating advantages for work organisations are that if the work itself is motivating, then workers will describe themselves as experiencing higher job satisfaction. This has implications for how they talk about their employer, the companys image, ability to recruit, lower turnover. Weaknesses will include that there is no explanation of how different contents work. Process theories Para 1: strengths and weaknesses of process theories in relationship to work performance. I would tend to major on goal-setting theory here explain the

component parts of the theory, provide examples. Weaknesses might include that this requires more concentrated thought. Para 2: strengths and weaknesses of process theories in relationship to job satisfaction. Vrooms Expectancy Theory would be an opportunity to talk about the difficulties in clarifying what people really value, how they decide whether they might realistically expect that their efforts will lead to particular outcomes. 24. Evidence of extra reading in describing Maslows ideas about B-values and good description of this. For Maslow, I would always include a drawing of the hierarchy of needs. 30. Good practical example of incorporating self-actualising opportunities within the job. 33. Good link back to satisfaction maybe even repeat the phrase greater job satisfaction. 33. Good point on human contact Herzberg could be your reference here 35. Good weaknesses identified. Signal this more, e.g. There are two main weaknesses of Maslows theory: firstly, . And secondly 38. Good to give reference of weakness in this theory 42. Evidence of own reading regression principle 45. Evidence of own reading .. good 46. The weakness is highlighted by the use of however this is good. 49. Nice to compare McClelland with the other theories by saying that it is perhaps of more potential value to managers. 49-65 Good explanation of McClelland and good focus on strengths and weaknesses however the link back to the question needs to be made more clearly 75 Good inclusion of Volvo but needs to be linked back into Herzbergs theory more, e.g. that the organisation into small groups, completing a full assembly procedure, allowed for recognition and responsibility, which are two of Herzbergs satisfiers. 79. not sure I understand the singled out bit maybe what is meant here is rather than being left to work on isolated and individual tasks on the assembly line? 80. This could be given as a weakness of Herzbergs theory, i.e. that it is not always as easy to differentiate between dissatisfiers and satisfiers, and that Herzbergs theory does not actually account for situations where improved working conditions appear to result in higher performance. 88. the move to process theories is not signalled there needs to be a clear statement about which theories are content, and which are process 92. Good example with reference 94. Ditto

109 Good to use John Lewis and good to link it with equity theory. Once again specify that a process theory is being used here and evaluate the usefulness of process theories. 117 Using a formula can sometimes help explain expectancy theory 128 It is fine to use in my opinion and as here, to do this only a little. However, it would be even better if there was more argument about why managers must take account of different cultures 138 Nice sentence. 141 Good use of personal experience. 147 Good use of Google rather than list the different rewards (lines 151-153), categorise them more That is, continue from the preceding sentence and state Extrinsic rewards such as . are all included in the employee benefits package. Intrinsic rewards such as greater autonomy, opportunities for selfmanagement, are also provided. 156 Good to refer to Maslow and it would be good to bring in other theories when relevant. 162. Good to start in conclusion. The conclusion should be where you return to the actual question. And it is in this conclusion that the main weakness of this essay is shown up. The whole essay is an excellent response to a question like Evaluate the ways different theories of motivation can help to improve performance and job satisfaction in work organisations it does not however, sufficiently focus on the issues about content and process theories and the differences between these two approaches. Nor does it differentiate between the issues of performance and job satisfaction (although it does address both and does do this well it is just that extra bit about contrasting between them)

Overall comments:
Excellent evidence of own reading and thinking Methodical explanations of theory Good use of examples Excellent use of references Overall good writing style Good definitions, introduction and overall structure

Suggested improvements
Break down the question and structure the essay in response to the question (here it is about content and process theories) Use theories to provide examples in response to the actual question for this question, 4 theories would be ample Keep returning to the question The writing is really very good, especially for the first semester in a degree. To improve further, try linking sentences together more. For example, using however, therefore, One way of doing this.. In contrast On the other hand . This is done sometimes, and it does really work well when such phrases are used in this essay.

As for mark probably 2.1 high because of the excellent points as listed above but not a first because of not quite nailing the answer to the question. And of course, within an exam, it would be unlikely that anyone would write this much so it becomes even more important that you focus your answer on the exact wording of the question.