Motivation (content theories)

Motivation is a step of achieving goal that affected by the right decision and the
influence by the environment that change could change our behaviour. Based on the
definition, motivation can be examined from the goals, decisions and influence of
each people and/or an organization.

Furthermore, there are two things derive the motivation which is drive (an initiative
action triggered by deprivation) and motive (triggered by needs of human)
(Huczynski & Buchanan, 2014, p.292). These concepts known as content theories that
theoretically similar to Maslow hierarchy of needs that based on psychological,
security, social, self-esteem and self actualization which still dominantly recognized
by management practice (Maslow, 1943) (Maslow, 1954) (Maslow, 1971) (Huczynski
& Buchanan, 2014, p.295).

Extreme Jobs and boreout: How work is changing.

Richard steers stated nowadays jobs are measured by time to assess the performance,
focused on teamwork that creates more conflict and values (Steers et al., 2004).
However, another fact suggest that there is a core issue in motivation within 2 (two)
trend which is extreme jobs that consist of time consuming, various time zone, and
burden and boreout which is caused by repetitious, constant and unattractive task
(Rothlin & Werder, 2008). This issues can be overcome by motivation techniques
which includes three perspectives like Goal, decisions and influence which can be
explored by the content theories, process theories and goal enrichment theories
respectively

Process Theories:
This theory of motivation involves intellectual determination-making processes
influencing an individual's goal selection (Huczynski & Buchanan, 2013). It describes
and analyses how behaviour is stimulated, focused, sustained and interrupted. There
are four known process theories, which are Equity, Expectancy, Inner Work Life, and
Goal Setting theories.

Equity Theory
This theory suggests that individuals compare their job inputs and outcomes with
those of others and then react to eradicate any inequities (Robbins & Judge).
Ratio Comparisons Perception
A<B Inequity by under rewarded
A=B Equity
A>B Inequity by over rewarded
*where A represents individuals; and B represents relevant others
This theory hypothesises that individuals are motivated by a desire to be treated
equally at work. Strategies for resolving inequity are changing outcomes, altering
inputs, distorting self-perceptions, altering perception of others, correlating with
different referent, and leaving the field. Equity theory prediction has been confirmed
in many real work situations, but it has problems with its application (e.g. not all
people respond in the same way for the same level of inequity).

Goal-Setting Theory
This theory suggests that definite and difficult goals, with feedback, will lead to
higher performance. According to Edwin Locke, goal setting is more aptly viewed as
a motivational technique rather than a formal theory (Locke, 1975 p. 465).
Goal setting theory is based on the hypothesis that definite goals lead to performance
increase in a much better scale than ambiguous goals. The clear implication for
managers is that getting employees to set and strive of fixing relatively challenging
targets will generate a strong force of motivation (Stotz & Bolger).
According to Locke and Latham (1990), the main positive features of goal setting
theory are:
Goal difficulty fixing goals within the employees ability level will increase
the performance
Goal specificity explaining goals clearly in quantifiable terms will avoid
setting uncertain goals
Participation motivating employees to volunteer in the goal setting process
to increase the ability of their commitment to goals
Acceptance suitable explanation and justification of the goals for the
purpose of clear understanding
Feedback provide information and compare the past and present results of
employees performance to improve future performance

1. THE SOCIAL PROCESS OF MOTIVATING OTHERS

 1.1. Frederick Winslow Taylors Scientific Management Approach
Taylor (1911) suggested that the best way for managers to start designing jobs is to
decide on the extent of task fragmentation, simplifying a complicated job into more
straightforward steps. The next step is to define the optimum way to perform the job.
After coming up with the most effective method, the managers need to train
employees on how to do the job with the specified method and, finally, financially
reward employees should they meet the target performance.

Taylors task fragmentation approach provides significant cost advantages for the
company since the necessary employee training is not expensive or time-consuming,
and unskilled and simpler work gets lower reward. However, this approach
emphasizes on boring monotonous works, which could potentially lead to employees
dissatisfaction and carelessness. In conclusion, Taylors approach looks efficient and
sensible, but the jobs it creates do not encourage motivation or performance
improvement.

1.2. Frederick Herzbergs Job Enrichment

Herzberg (1966, 1968) concluded that the factors which cause satisfaction in job were
different than those which cause dissatisfaction. He named the two different factors as
motivator (job content) factors; which involves employees achievement,
advancement, growth, recognition, responsibility, and the work itself; and hygiene
(organizational context) factors; which involves salary, company policy, supervisory
style, status, security, and working conditions.

Herzberg suggested that in order to improve motivation and performance, job

redesigning should emphasize on motivator factors, as focusing on hygiene factors
will eliminate dissatisfaction but does not affect motivation and performance. Based
on how the job is designed, employees may be able to get intrinsic rewards, which are
valued outcomes which come from the employees themselves (e.g. accomplishment,
self-esteem), and extrinsic rewards, which are valued outcomes provided by other
parties (e.g. salary increases, promotion).

2. EMPOWERMENT, ENGAGEMENT, AND HIGH

PERFORMANCE

Back in 1990s, many organisations were considering job enrichment and other
methods to enhance working life quality through the concepts of employee
empowerment and engagement. This will eventually lead to high performance work
 system. Peter Vaill (1982, p. 25) argued that organisations or groups are considered
high performance system if they can perform magnificently compared with an
external standard or in comparison to what they achieved previously, or if they can
bring about a particular levels of performance with less resources than required.

Research had proven that organisations embracing high performance concept

outperform those which ignore it (CIPD, 2008). Another research by Anna Psoinos
and Steve Smithson (2002) found out that empowerment is extensively developed and
accepted by managers from multiple companies. One opinion stated that
empowerment is granting employees a degree of flexibility and a space to manoeuvre,
and this is done so that they can perform their job at a higher standard. The key is to
provide employees with the proper training, proper skills and proper tools to perform
their jobs in the most efficient way. However, it is also crucial for managers to remind
employees that they do not abuse the decision making responsibilities granted to
them.

 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Steers, R.M., Mowday, R.T. & D.L, S., 2004. The future of work motivation
theory. Academy of Management Review, pp.379-87.

Huczynski, A.A. & Buchanan, D.A., 2014. Organizational Behaviour. 8th ed.
United Kingdom: Pearson.

Maslow, A., 1943. A theory of human motivation. Phsycological review,

pp.370-96.

Maslow, A., 1954. Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper and Row.

Maslow, A., 1971. The Farther Reaches of Human Nature. Harmondsworth:

Penguin Books.

Rothlin, P. & Werder, P.R., 2008. Boreout!: Overcoming Workplace

Demotivation. London: Kogan Page.

Huczynski, A.A. & Buchanan, D.A., 2013. Organizational Behaviour. Harlow:

Pearson.

Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, 2008. High

Performance Working Factsheet. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel
and Development.

Taylor, F.W., 1911. Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Harper.

Herzberg, F., 1966. Work and the Nature of Man. New York: Staples Press.

Herzberg, F., 1968. One more time: how do you motivate employees?
Harvard Business Review, 46(1), pp.53-62.

Psoinos, A. & Smithson, S., 2002. Employee empowerment in

manufacturing: a study of organizations in the UK. New Technology, Work
and Employment, 17(2), pp.132-48.

Vaill, P.B., 1982. The purposing of high-performing systems. Organizational

Dynamics, 11(2), pp.23-39.