Leadership and Motivation The Effective Application of Expectancy Theory

Leadership And Motivation: The Effective Application Of Expectancy Theory
Author(s): Robert G. Isaac, Wilfred J. Zerbe and Douglas C. Pitt

Source: Journal of Managerial Issues, Vol. 13, No. 2 (Summer 2001), pp. 212-226
Published by: Pittsburg State University
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40604345
Accessed: 12-12-2017 08:04 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40604345?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
Pittsburg State University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Journal of Managerial Issues
This content downloaded from 202.65.183.201 on Tue, 12 Dec 2017 08:04:17 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES
Vol. XIII Number 2 Summer 2001: 212-226
Leadership And Motivation: The Effective Application

Of Expectancy Theory
Robert G. Isaac
Instructor of Management
The University of Calgary
Wilfred J. Zerbe
Associate Professor of Management
The University of Calgary
Douglas C. Pitt
Professor of Business
University of Strathcldye
In this article, we discuss the appli- ing environments. In so doing,

cation of a motivational model that individuals acquire the means to tran-
provides a practical tool for individ-
scend their traditional roles of super-
uals wishing to assume leadership visor, manager, or follower, and re-
roles. This model, namely expectancyalize their potentials as leaders. In
theory (Vroom, 1964; Porter andorder to remain competitive at home
Lawler, 1968), suggests that individ-
or within the global market, we must
uals, acting through self-interest,
stop relegating in our minds the func-
adopt courses of action perceived astions of leadership to the office of the
president or CEO of the organiza-
maximizing the probability of desira-
ble outcomes for themselves. This de- tion. Instead, we must come to view
sire to maximize self-interest provides the leadership role as part of every
aspiring leaders with unique opportunities employee's job, at all levels of the or-
to assume leadership roles by simultane- ganization.
ously meeting both follower needs and or- In the next section, we pose the
ganizational requirements. question "How many leaders does an
We intend to explicitly link expec- organization require?" and we an-
tancy theory and leadership concepts swer this question by suggesting a
to demonstrate that leader interac- change in our way of thinking regard-
ing how we view the traditional roles
tions with followers permit the estab-
lishment of highly motivational work-of manager, supervisor, and follower.
JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XIII Number 2 Summer 2001
(212)
Leadersh ip And Motivation 213
leadership
In a following section, we fullyrole outline
are viewed as admin-
the expectancy theory istrators
model (Robinson,
and1999).
at-
tempt to establish its validity In light of such
in distinctions,
the we
mind of the reader. We then break propose that managers use legitimate
the model apart to examine eachpowerof to push employees towards de-
sired ends, whereas leaders use their
its three major components. In each
influence to pull followers towards
case, we identify issues to consider
goals. We all know that a piece of
and address when attempting to cre-
string travels purposefully when
ate an environment followers per-
ceive as highly motivating. Next,pulled
we and not pushed, as noted by
describe leader attitudes requiredMiller
to (1996) in a discussion on em-
establish a climate conducive to the powerment of employees, and we
application of this model with follow-support this principle as it applies to
ers in the workplace. Finally, we sum-leadership and the use of influence.
marize our discussion and outline im- The effective application of influence
plications for the organization. instils a sense of purpose or mission
amongst the workers. The source of
this influence stems from the leader
How Many Leaders Does an and not the organization. The leader
Organization Require? emphasizes doing things with people,
rather than to them (Blanchard,
We argue that every organization 1999), and places extreme impor-
needs a workforce comprised of lead-tance on entering into a relationship
ers, rather than employees. We de-with those who follow (Kouzes and
velop and present our rationale in thePosner, 1993).
discussion that follows.
The push/pull distinction between
Much has been written about the
managers and leaders is not entirely
differences between managers new and by any means. For example, the
leaders. In general, leaders are transformational leader (Bass, 1990)
viewed to take control of situations,
inspires others to follow along a path-
while managers learn to live with way towards a vision, just as surely as
them (Bennis, 1989). Other distinc- a source of light attracts the moth. By
tions include: leaders create vision
contrast, the transactional manager
and strategy while managers imple- adopts a push strategy, engaging in
ment the outcomes (Kotter, 1990a), exchange processes with the em-
leaders cope with change while man- ployee that include the use of rewards
agers cope with complexity (Kotter, and sanctions to secure acceptable
1990a and b), and leaders focus upon levels of performance.
interpersonal aspects of the job, In order to survive the impact of
whereas managers deal with admin- economic, technological, environ-
istrative duties (DuBrin, 1995). Per- mental and other pressures of the
haps, the best known phrase differ- global marketplace, we must entrust
entiating the roles of managers and the fates of our companies to people,
leaders suggests that "managers are at all levels of the hierarchy, capable
people who do things right and lead-of being both managers and leaders
ers are people who do the right simultaneously. We require individu-
thing" (Bennis and Nanus, 1985:21). als who define management and lead-
Frequently, people who avoid the ership the same way and who incor-
214 Isaac, Zerbe and Pitt
tence,
porate both of these we must into
roles train ourselves
their to view
personal repertoires (Whetten
leadership and
as an employee role,
Cameron, 1998). rather than relegating this concept
Besides eradicating the
solely to thedistinction
domain of managers.
between a manager and But can a anyone become a leader
leader, we
also suggest the need to
and if so, eliminate
how? We suggest that dis-
the
tinctions between leaders and follow- answer is yes and that the secret to
ers. All employees need to be flexibleleadership is the ability to create a
to both lead and follow according to highly motivating work environment
situations encountered regardingthat infects anyone who comes into
their jobs. After all, it is ultimately
contact with it. In the next section, we
will discuss how to do this.
their effective efforts that collectively
make it possible for the president or
CEO to accomplish strategic ends
that would otherwise fall by the way-
Expectancy Theory: A Model of
Motivation
side.
Furthermore, each employee must

not only be a leader and follower V. H. Vroom (1964) suggested that
from time to time, but a manager as
people consciously choose particular
well. We need employees capable of courses of action, based upon percep-
tions, attitudes, and beliefs, as a con-
managing their work by planning, or-
ganizing, and controlling activities as sequence of their desires to enhance
required. Without such individuals, pleasure and avoid pain. Building
capable of managing the journey to- upon some of Vroom 's original con-
wards the achievement of organiza- cepts, Porter and Lawler (1968) later
tional goals, expressions of corporate developed a theoretical model, sug-
visions become empty dreams of gesting that the expenditure of an in-
overly active presidential imagina- dividual's effort will be determined by
tions! expectations that an outcome may be at-
In summary, we need people who tained and the degree of value placed on
are able to create the vision, embrace an outcome in the person's mind (Pinder,
and communicate it with others, and 1984). This model is generally known
also enact it through personal man- as expectancy theory but is sometimes
agement at every level of the organi- referred to as VIE theory, where the
zation. In order to translate macro letters stand for valence, instrumen-
ideas into micro realities, we need a tality, and expectancy, respectively
workforce where every member is a (Mitchell and Mickel, 1999).
self-appointed leader-manager-fol- Before describing the model itself,
let us examine some of its character-
lower, capable of recreating the vi-
sion within the context of the job. We istics. Expectancy theory is classified
need role models for followers that as a process theory of motivation
(Fudge and Schlacter, 1999) because
assist in sustaining culture (Schein,
1986) conducive to supporting the it emphasizes individual perceptions
of the environment and subsequent
expressed vision of the organization.
interactions arising as a consequence
Ultimately, since all organizational
members must step forward and carryof personal expectations. By contrast,
the corporate banner in an effortcontent
to theories constitute the other
progress past mere survival and exis-
major classification of motivation the-
Leadership And Motivation 215
oríes and they focus upon 3. The internal

outcome attained at- is per-
tributes of the person. sonally valued.
Expectancy theory We mainly relies
label the first point above "ex-
upon extrinsic motivators to explain
pectancy," which suggests that people
causes for behaviours exhibited in the will expend effort when they believe
workplace (Leonard et al, 1999). Ex- that certain levels of performance are
ternal rewards are viewed as inducing attainable (Karathanos, et al, 1994).
motivational states that fuel behav- This relationship between effort and
iours, as opposed to intrinsic motiva- performance is known as the E-P link-
tors, where behaviours are derived as age. The second relationship de-
a consequence of internal forces such scribed above, known as "instrumen-
as enjoyment of the work itself. The tality" constitutes a perception that
distinction between intrinsic and ex- performance levels are related to re-
trinsic motivational sources was orig- wards bestowed (Fudge and Schlac-
inally suggested by deCharms (1968). ter, 1999) and is symbolized as the P-
Shamir (1990) states that motiva- O linkage. Finally, "valence" (V)
tional theories based upon the con- relates to the third statement above
cept of extrinsic motivation assumeand refers to the extent to which the
that followers make conscious person values the reward he or she
choices to maximize self-interests. receives (Fudge and Schlacter, 1999;
This fact permits us to suggest thatVan Erde and Thierry, 1996). It
expectancy theory offers a vehicle forshould be noted that, due to individ-
individuals to realize their leadership
ual differences, people often assign
goals, because it equips them with
different valences to rewards, such as
tools to influence the psychologicalpay (Gerhart, et al, 1995).
processes resident in their followers, Therefore, the motivational state
as the latter continuously create ex- of an individual performing a partic-
pectations resulting from perceptions ular task is illustrated by using the fol-
of their environments. By following alowing formula:
checklist of issues to address, arising M= E X I X V
from the theory itself, and by bestow- Where:
ing rewards in an appropriate fash-
E represents expectancy
ion, the leader is enabled to adopt a
I represents instrumentality
pulling or influence strategy that en-
V represents valence
hances levels of personal motivation
of followers wishing to maximize Any weakness in the E-P or P-O
their self-interests. linkages or in the level of value at-
Figure 1 describes the expectancy tached to the outcome significantly
theory model. In essence, the model impacts the person's motivational
suggests that the individual feels mo- state, due to multiplication of factors
tivated when three conditions are in the formula expressed above. The
perceived. motivational chain is obviously only
1. The personal expenditure of as strong as its weakest link.
effort will result in an acceptable level Over the years, belief in the model
of performance. outlined above has grown from the
2. The performance level optimistic viewpoint expressed by
Pinder in 1984 that the theory ap-
achieved will result in a specific out-
come for the person. pears to be a reasonably valid model
Figure 1: The Expectancy Theory
EFFORT
EXPECTANCY (E-P LINKAGE)
PERFORMANCE
INSTRUMENTALITY (P-O LINKAGE)
OUTCOME 4 VALENCE
MOTIVATIONAL STATE
for explaining behavioural causeslating

in to the model (Harrell and
a work setting. For example, FudgeStahl, 1984; Hope and Pate, 1988;
and Schlacter (1999) conclude thatKlein,
it 1991; Snead and Harrell,
has undergone rigorous examination1994).
through testing and consequently re- The expectancy theory model has
been related to a number of different
ceives strong support today. Certainly
a wealth of empirical evidence exists
subject areas. For example, it receives
that ratifies our faith in supporting
attention regarding goal setting (Gar-
the various linkages noted aboveland,
re- 1984; Klein, 1991; Mento et al,
1992; Moussa, 1996), leader-member

performance. On the other hand, ex-
exchange theory and the treme challenges on
effects are rejected at a psy-
perceptions of expectancychological level by the follower as un-
and instru-
mentality (Klein and Kim,attainable.
1998). TheItleader
is attempts to
also considered in relation to self- strike a balance with the follower,
concept and the production of feed- where the latter perceives that the
back that matches our view of the goals are manageable and yet stretch-
ing. To accomplish this, the leader
ideal self (Leonard et ai, 1999), ethi-
must demonstrate both imagination
cal reasoning and the creation of cor-
porate cultures that support ethical and initiative, especially in cases
behaviour (Fudge and Schlacter,where the nature of the job dictates a
1999), performance appraisal (Hen- series of routine and potentially mo-
notonous
dry et al., 1997; Daly and Kleiner, activities.
1995), and the influences of pay dis-Second, the leader must consider the
tribution systems on perceptions of
ability of the follower. People bring to
the job differences in experience, tal-
instrumentality regarding perform-
ance (Lawler, 1981; Mitchell and ent, skill, knowledge, training, and
Mickel, 1999). These subjects only education levels. Should the follower
represent a partial listing of the areas perceive that he or she lacks the ca-
of interest associated with this moti- pability to carry out the duties asso-
1 jtional model in the managementciated with the task, the motivational
literature. level will decline due to the weak E-P
Where does expectancy theory linkage. Therefore, the leader must
leave us with respect to the develop-diagnose not only the state of the fol-
ment of a leader-follower relationship lower's ability to perform the job at
based upon mutual interest? Specifi- hand (Moussa, 1996), but also, the
cally, how does the leader intervene former must exercise great care in as-
with the follower to establish a pull- sessing the latter's perceptions in
ing, rather than pushing, situation? these regards. After all, the strength
In the next three subsections we shall or weakness of the E-P linkage resides
examine the E-P and P-O linkages, as entirely within the mind of the fol-
well as valence, and state concrete lower in relation to its influence on
steps to follow in aiding the followerthe motivational state. Suggestions
to overcome problems detracting and assistance for the follower in-
clude further education, training,
from overall motivational states.
and experiential programs.
The Effort-Performance (E-P) Third, the leader must recognize that
Linkage followers differ significantly regarding
their levels of self-esteem (Moussa, 1996)
With reference to the E-P linkage, and self-confidence when attacking a task.
there are five distinct considerations Each individual assesses the probabil-
for the leader to keep in mind. First, ities associated with different courses
the work must provide a reasonably chal- of action in relation to outcomes that
lenging assignment for the follower, in ratify perceptions of the self-concept
(Leonard et al, 1999). We choose
light of the latter 's self-confidence, abilities,
education, training, skills, and experi- tasks that promise to provide feed-
ence. Non-challenging work leads to back congruent with our self-image.
boredom, frustration and marginal If we have low esteem, we probably
lack the confidence to choose stretch- (Brown and Peterson, 1994). Individ-
ing goals. Leaders must recognizeuals wish to feel productive, involved,
this and help followers in their devel- useful and competent. The job pro-
opmental efforts. vides a vehicle for the expression of
A significant role of the leader, inthese needs. Therefore, the leader re-
these regards, involves spending timeinforces these feelings in the follower
encouraging this individual as he or whenever possible in an effort to
she tries to achieve a desired level of
strengthen the E-P linkage by ensur-
performance. Of equal importance ing is that the follower understands the
the expression of appreciation when importance of his or her work in ful-
various successes are encountered
filling the organizational vision. The
along the pathway towards thesatisfactiongoal. of the employee in per-
This strengthens the E-P linkage. In-
forming meaningful work assists in el-
deed, the retention of employees par- overall motivational states.
evating
tially depends upon recognition
given by supervisors for follower
The Performance-Outcome (P-O)
achievements and efforts (Ramsey,
1998). Linkage
The leader also ought to be there
The strength of the P-O linkage de-
to provide encouragement when
there are setbacks and to ensure for- pends upon three beliefs in the fol-
lower's mind. First, the follower must
giveness whenever honest mistakes
trust that the leader will be able to "deliver
occur in the follower's earnest at-
tempts to accomplish results (Rigs- the goods" as promised. The outcome,
bee, 1996). The leader coaches the given that it represents a salient re-
ward in the follower's mind, drives
follower and, in so doing, establishes
conditions whereby the follower is the motivational state. Thus, leaders
more likely to assess his or her abili- must consistently ensure that prom-
ties in a favorable light, building both ises made are fulfilled (Daly and Klei-
personal esteem and confidence. ner, 1995). They cannot afford to
make excuses such as "conditions
Fourth, the leader must ensure that both
parties clearly determine exactly what out- have changed since I said that" or "I
comes constitute acceptable performance really thought I could get you that
and those results which do not (Katzen- raise but you know the constraints we
bach, 1996). Together, they must set are under due to the economy." In
forth mutually agreed upon perform- such cases, the P-O linkage will be sig-
ance measures that represent success- nificantly weakened in the follower's
ful behavior in both their minds. The mind as trust in the leader dissipates
follower must fully understand the(Karathanos et al, 1994). Leaders
expectations established in order tocannot afford a loss of credibility in
accurately assess the strength or weak-the eyes of their followers. Above all,
they should never lie, even in rare in-
ness of the E-P linkage. These per-
formance measures must therefore stances where they are unable to fol-
be expressed in concrete terms. low through on their assurances.
Fifth, and finally, the leader must They
un- must honestly confront such sit-
derstand that for many followers, theuations
ex- with followers. The followers
penditure of effort on the part of the must
fol- feel reasonably sure that the
lower leads to satisfaction on the outcome
job promised will result from
the performance rendered in all are

various rewards but contingent upon
performance as a consequence of
the most exceptional cases.
regular
Second, leaders also make surecommunication
that fol- between the
parties. in a predict-
lowers receive fair treatment
able manner. Turpin (1999) suggests
that treating people fairly
Valence ought to
constitute a primary consideration
for the promotion of Three workers into
issues concern the leader
corporate leadership roles. with reference to the valence at-
However,
this does not mean that fair treatment tached to outcomes perceived by the
means the same treatment for all fol- follower. First, the attractiveness of out-
lowers (Satava and Weber, 1998). comes differs amongst individuals
While leaders may vary their treat- (Snead and Harrell, 1994) and the
ments of followers according to their leader needs to determine the salience of
needs, they need to ensure that out- each of the available rewards from the per-
comes appear fair not only to follow- spective of the follower. For outcomes to
ers, but also to their peers (Adams, induce heightened motivational
1965). Further, the leader makes sure states amongst followers, they must
that each of their followers expects be highly valued in each case. Fur-
such outcomes on a consistently ap- ther, we must remember that, while
plied basis. This serves to reinforce everyone wants and needs money,
the P-O linkage. In other words, the most individuals respond well to re-
follower comes to realize that "if I do
wards which cost the organization
A, X will happen" but "if I do B, Yvery little to supply. For example, say-
will happen." Furthermore, all of his ing "thank you" constitutes a signif-
or her peers operate under a similar icant reward to many people. Others
understanding. In this manner, the respond well to praise or tokens of es-
leader builds motivational states teem and recognition (Rigsbee, 1996;
amongst the followers. Beavers, 1996). An occasional day off
Third, the leader must be honest. Re-pay, attending a conference of
with
garding performance in relation to interest, or being given spe-
personal
the P-O linkage, the leader must cial consideration regarding working
"level" with the follower in giving hours when a close family member is
clear feedback that does not permit ill, all represent rewards potentially of
misinterpretation. This does not high valence in the mind of the fol-
mean that the leader should be brutal lower.
when offering commentary to the fol- Second, leaders must expend a signifi-
lower, but rather it suggests that feed-cant amount of effort to ensure an align-
back should be given in a tactful, yet ment betiueen the personal goals of their
straightforward manner, focussingfollowers and those of the organization.
upon performance and not the per-The leader needs to determine the
son. Specific information regardingfollower's interests, aspirations and
follower performance, given directly goals of both a short- and long-term
on the job or at appraisal times by the nature, and creatively frame the or-
leader, will help to ensure that the ganizational vision in such a way that
follower maximizes opportunities tothe follower perceives congruency be-
attain desired outcomes. Further- tween personal and organizational
more, the follower will perceive that
ends. This does not involve a process
of deception but rather, lence of outcomes. Without a doubt,

illumination,
which demonstrates that the attain-
this formidable list of concerns rep-
ment of personally valued rewards resents a significant challenge to ad-
arises as a consequence of behavior
dress for anyone wishing to assume a
and performance aligned with the leadership role. However, this price
furtherance of organizational inter-
must be paid in terms of time and ef-
ests. Satisfaction derived from the fort with each follower in order to
knowledge that the job was per-
achieve this goal.
formed well, in the mind of the fol-
lower, constitutes an intrinsic reward Leadership and Motivational
of high valence. Effectiveness: A Question of
Leaders must also discuss "means" is- Attitude
sues with followers. With reference to
each follower, a personal balance Successful leaders share four im-
sheet must be drawn up, outlining onportant insights and beliefs about the
one side the various positive attrib- nature of their relationships with fol-
utes of the organizational outcomes lowers. First, they view the chain of
offered and on the other side, the command in a rather unique way, rec-
negative aspects in terms of personal ognizing that it works best in achieving
constraints acting upon the individ- results when the follower is gently pulled
ual. For example, how much time and through influence towards desired goals
effort will attaining a particular out- (Miller, 1996), rather than pushed
come require and is it worth the cost and shoved to accomplish corporate
to the follower? Life stages and the purposes (Maccoby, 1996). By estab-
corresponding constraints they im- lishing a relationship of mutual inter-
pose warrant discussion in order to est (Kouzes and Posner, 1993), the
establish realistic expectations be- leader draws the follower along a
tween the parties. A follower's needs pathway that satisfies the goals of
continually change as they go both parties. Like the piece of string
through life, such as getting married mentioned earlier, the chain of com-
or the birth of a child. Expectations mand when pushed generally leads to
require revision from time to time in unsatisfactory results and frustration.
response to changes in personal cir- Second, the successful leader views
cumstances. Otherwise, the valence the chain of command, or perhaps more
attached to organizationally spon- appropriately stated, the "chain of influ-
sored outcomes might decline in the ence, " as a delicate one, only as strong as
mind of the follower, leading ulti- its weakest link. To strengthen the
mately to a decline in performance chain, leaders must get to know their
and increased frustration with the followers, what motivates them, and
work. Leaders must frequently dealtheir various stages of personal devel-
opment (Miller, 1999). The leader
with productivity, quality and disci-
pline problems precisely for this seeks
rea- to understand the needs, goals,
son.
and personal motives of the follower.
Figure 2 illustrates the issuesThe challenge
con- for the leader lies in
sidered by leaders when attempting
finding ways to satisfy both the inter-
to forge strong E-P and P-O linkages
ests of the follower and the company.
on behalf of their followers, as McConnell
well as (1998) suggests that
those involved in heightening
the the
most va-
important information for
Figure 2: Issues to Address Concerning Follow
The Effort/Performance 1 . Is the nature of the

Linkage (E-P) interesting, attainable and challenging? How does the
follower feel?
2. Does the follower feel able to perform the task? Is

more education, training and/or experience warranted?
3. Does the follower possess the self-confidence required

to do the job? Do I need to spend more time with this
individual to raise the level of confidence?
4. What constitutes acceptable performance for the

follower and are we both sure we know this and
agree? Do we have concrete measures of
performance to monitor?
5. Does this job provide the follower with feelings of

usefulness, involvement and competence? What can I
do to reinforce these emotions?
The 1 . Do my employees trust me? Do I keep promises made

Performance/Outcome to my followers? Do I avoid making excuses and l
Linkage (P-O)
2. Am I predictable, as well as fair, in dispensing
outcomes to all of my followers? While outcomes may
vary in each case, are they perceived as being
equitable? Am I consistent in their application?
The Valence 1 . Are the goals of the follower congruent with those of
the organization? Does the follower perceive this?
What can I do to engineer a greater degree of
alignment in these regards?
2. Is the outcome for the follower worth the expenditure

of time and effort? What constraints on and off the job
influence this person? Do we have realistic and
mutual expectations and are they current?
3. Am I offering this follower rewards he or she really

values? What informal rewards can I offer over and
above the formal ones sanctioned by the organization?
How are they perceived?
view.
supervisors is getting to When
know a follower
each ofhighly values
their employees. Thisreward, advice applies
the probability of triggerin
to leaders as well. Leaders need
self-motivational to pay
processes grows con-
attention to detailssiderably.
regarding Determiningtheir the salien
followers, asking theof various rewards to followers
following consti-
kinds
of questions: tutes a primary responsibility for the
leader.
• What level of ability does this
Effective leaders differentiate be-
person display?
tween extrinsic and intrinsic rewards.
• What education and experien-
tial background does he or she pos- Leaders may only give their followers
sess? extrinsic rewards, such as praise, rec-
• What are this person's interests, ognition from others, and money,
goals, values and beliefs? and may not bestow intrinsic rewards.
• What motivates this individual? Intrinsic rewards arise exclusively and
Effective leaders enter into mean- naturally within the follower's psy-
chological domain whenever a job
ingful discussions with followers to
has been completed. Satisfaction re-
mutually establish training needs,
sults when the effort expended
work assignments, developmental (Brown and Peterson, 1994) has
pathways, valued outcomes for per-
proven personally worthwhile and
formance, and other issues of impor-
fulfilling. Followers experience a
tance for the latter. The leader must
sense of personal accomplishment
display sensitivity, ingenuity, and
when they perceive the outcomes of
judgement in marrying corporate
their performance as satisfactory.
and personal follower objectives While leaders have little or no di-
throughout the process of commu- rect control over intrinsic motiva-
nication. Special attention must be
tional states experienced by follow-
paid to those areas in which the fol-
lower lacks self-confidence or the ca- ers, they may enhance the probability
that such feelings and emotions will
pability (Daly and Kleiner, 1995) to
achieve results. These constitute weak arise by:
links in the chain and they must be • Spending time with the follower
strengthened through appropriate and enhancing, rather than under-
reinforcement and training. mining, self-confidence.
Third, successful leaders under- • Increasing follower knowledge,
skills and abilities through exposure
stand that they are unable to directly mo-
tivate followers. Given the nature andto various educational and training
programs, as well as experiences.
purpose of our article, this admission
may appear somewhat surprising.These activities enhance both fol-
lower capability and self-confidence
Nevertheless, the only reasonable un-
dertaking for any leader is to establish • Establishing realistic, meaning
conditions that offer the highest ful and attainable goals with the fol
probability of encouraging the fol-lower satisfactory to both parties.
lower to become self-motivated • Creating a climate of mutual re-
(McConnell, 1998). Perhaps the most
spect.
important consideration relates to
• Showing appreciation when the
the significance of organizational follower
re- meets or exceeds expecta
wards from the follower's point tions,ofor addressing problematic is-
sues regarding the rather

follower's per-
than sending their followers
formance by focussingahead
uponintothe
the darkness.
work They toler-
rather than the individual. ate mistakes (Rigsbee, 1996), ear-
nestly made by followers, in the pur-
For the person in search of lead-
suit of excellence. Any employee can
ership qualities, the fourth and final
become a leader when it is under-
attitude relates to the impoitance of hon-
stood that leadership is an acquired
esty (Earle, 1996) and consistency of be-
skill demanding a great deal of time,
haviour displayed to followers (Daly and
effort and practice.
Kleiner, 1995). Leaders must exercise
extreme care when making promises
that they may find difficult to keep Summary and Conclusion
later. They should fear a loss of cred-
Blanchard warns "if you want to
ibility (Weaver, 1996), as well as a re-
duction in follower motivation, when
know why your people are not per-
forming well, look in the mirror"
unable to fulfil agreements made in
(1999: 15). We support this senti-
the past. Apart from considerations
ment, suggesting that one may move
relating to honesty, leaders also need
beyond mere existence as a manager,
to maintain high levels of consistency
supervisor, or follower, and assume
in behaviours displayed towards in-
the leadership sole through the con-
dividual followers regarding matters scious, conscientious, and consistent
such as fairness, expectations and
application of principles relating to
personal code of conduct. Through the expectancy theory model. High
consistency, leaders create a positive levels of performance occur when we
climate for their followers, enabling establish motivational environments
the latter to concentrate upon their that inspire followers to achieve levels
jobs. Inconsistency breeds discontent
of performance that meet our expec-
and causes followers to brood upon tations and perhaps exceed their ini-
what they perceive as arbitrary and ca- tial beliefs in their own capabilities.
pricious leader behaviors. Further, to And these followers are not only
maintain high levels of employee those employees reporting to us, for
commitment, leaders must minimize
they may just as readily include co-
distinctions of status that might cause workers and those in the organiza-
some followers to conclude they are tional hierarchy above us.
not valued (Pfeffer and Veiga, 1999). We argue that everyone in the or-
In summary, successful leaders de- ganization should strive to become a
velop realistic attitudes and assump- leader within the context of the de-
tions regarding their relationships mands of their job. By choosing a
with followers. They seek to build leadership role, each of us becomes a
strong chains of mutual influence pebble tossed into a pond, causing
with their followers, aligning per- ripples to ultimately spread through-
sonal goals of those led with those of out the entire organization that in-
the organization. They support their spire measurable results, in terms of
followers and harvest a similar en-
significant performance improve-
dorsement in return. They takement,the creative approaches to prob-
time to pay attention to details,lem
bothsolving, and many other benefits.
in regards to their followers, asWewell
do this by developing our capacity
as themselves. They light the to way,
influence others through the use
of expectancy theory
a personalprinciples,
basis, according to the
thereby consciously choosing
principles a of
of the model pull,
expectancy
theory. But ifAny
rather than push, strategy. we are unwilling
organ- to ex-
ization employing a this
pend workforce of
effort, we are really denying
leaders, rather than those around us the benefits
managers, super- of po-
visors, and workers, will
tential likely
contributions realize
arising from our
enormous gains as use of influence to achieve
individuals the out-
collec-
tively attempt to mutually comes of the vision,ease andonein the long
another's journey towards run, we are the choosing to forego our
vision
shared by all. own opportunities to grow. In so do-
Leadership is hard work because it ing, we sadly short-change ourselves
means stepping forward and taking and all others we work with, by failing
the time to motivate each follower on to create the future everyone seeks.
References
Adams, J.S. 1965. "Inequity in Social Exchange." In Advances in Experimen

Social Psychology, Vol.11. Ed. L. Berkowitz. New York, NY: Academic Press.
Bass, B.M. 1990. "From Transactional to Transformational Leadership: Learn
to Share the Vision." Organizational Dynamics 18 (Winter): 19-31.
Beavers, K. 1996. "Supermotivation: A Blueprint for Engineering Your Org
zation From Top to Bottom." Business Credit 98(2): 23-24.
Bennis, W. and B. Ñanus. 1985. Leaders: The Strategies for Taking Charge. New Yo
NY: Harper and Row.
of Organizational Change Management 2(1): 7.

Blanchard, K. 1999. "Smart Work." Executive
Brown, S.P. and R.A. Peterson. 1994. "The Effect of Effort on Sales Performance
and Job Satisfaction." Journal of Marketing 58 (2): 23-24.
Daly, D. and B.H. Kleiner. 1995. "How to Motivate Problem Employees." Work
Study 44(2): 5-7.
deCharms, R. 1968. Personal Causation: The Internal Affective Determinants of Behav-
ior. New York, NY: Academic Press.
DuBrin, AJ. 1995. Leadership, Research Findings, Practice, and Skills. Boston, MA:
Houghton Mifflin Company.
Earle, V. 1996. "Motivational Leadership." Executive Excellence 13(11): 16.
Fudge, R.S. and J.L. Schlacter. 1999. Motivating Employees to Act Ethically: An
Expectancy Theory Approach." Journal of Business Ethics 18(3): 295-304.
Garland, H. 1984. "Relation of Effort-Performance Expectancy to Performance
in Goal Setting Experiments." Journal of Applied Psychology 69: 79-84.
Gerhart, B., H.B. Minkoff and R.N. Olsen. 1995. "Employee Compensation: The-
ory, Practice, and Evidence." In Handbook of Human Resource Management. Eds.
Ferris, G.R., S.D. Rosen, and D.T. Barnum. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Harrell, A.M. and MJ. Stahl. 1984. Modelling Managers Effort-Level Decisions
for a Within Persons Examination of Expectancy Theory in a Budget Setting."
Decision Sciences 15: 52-73.
Hendry, C, P. Bradley and S. Perkins. 1997. "

agement 3 (10): 20-25.
Hope, J.W. and L.E. Pate. 1988. "A Cognitive E
Decisions." Human Relations 41: 739-751.
Karathanos, P., M.D. Pettypool and M.D. Troutt. 1994. "Sudden Lost Meaning:
A Catastrophe?" Management Decision 32(1): 15-19.
Katzenbach, J.R. 1996. "Real Change Leaders." The McKinsey Quarterly 1: 148-
163.
Klein, HJ. 1991. "Further Evidence on the Relationship Between Goal Setting
and Expectancy Theories." Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Proc-
esses 49: 230-257.
straints, Leader-Member Exchange, and Goal

Academy of Management Journal 41(1): 88-95.
Kotter, J.P. 1990a. A Force for Change: How Leade
York, NY: Free Press.
103-111.
Kouzes, J.M. and B.Z. Posner. 1993. Credibility: How Leaders Gain and Lose It, Why
People Demand It. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Lawler, E.E. 1981. Pay and Organization Development. Reading, MA: Addison-Wes-
ley.
Leonard, N.H., L.L. Beauvais and R.W. Scholl. 1999. "Work Motivation: The
Incorporation of Self-Concept-Based Processes." Human Relations 52(8): 969-
998.
Maccoby, M. 1996. "Resolving the Leadership Paradox: The Doctor's Dialogue."

Research-Technology Management 39(3): 57-59.
McConnell, C.R. 1998. "Learn What Motivates Your Employees: Look to Your-
self." The Health Care Supervisor 16(4): 1-11.
Mento, A., E.A. Locke and H. Klein. 1992. "Relationship of Goal Level to Valence
and Instrumentality. "Journal of Applied Psychology 77(4): 395-405.
Miller, J.B. 1996. "Winning Strategies: The Long and Short of It." Incentive
170(9): 49-52.
Miller, C. 1999. "The Renaissance Manager: Embracing the Three Dimensions
of Dynamic Leadership." Supervision 60(2): 6-8.
Mitchell, T.R. and A.E. Mickel. 1999. "The Meaning of Money: An Individual-
Difference Perspective." Academy of Management 24 (3): 568-578.
Moussa, F.M. 1996. "Determinants and Process of the Choice of Goal Difficulty."
Group and Organization Management 21(4): 414-438.
Pfeffer, J. and J.F. Veiga. 1999. "Putting People First for Organizational Success."
The Academy of Management Executive 13(2): 37-48.
Pinder, C.C. 1984. Work Motivation: Theory, Issues, and Applications. Glenview, IL:
Scott, Foresman and Company.
Porter, L.W. and E.E. Lawler. 1968. Managerial Attitudes and Performance. Home-
wood, IL: Dorsey Press.
Ramsey, R.D. 1998. "How to Keep Key Workers." Supervision 59(10): 9-11.
Rigsbee, E.R. 1996. "Employee Motivation." Executive Excellence 13(6): 19.
Robinson, G. 1999. "Leadership vs Managem

istrative Management Jan/Feb: 20-21.
Satava, D. and J. Weber. 1998. 'The ABCs of
185(2): 72-76.
Schein, E.H. 1986. "Are You Corporate Cult
83-96.
Shamir, B. 1990. "Calculations, Values and Identities: The Sources of Collective
Work Motivation." Human Relations 43: 313-332.
Snead, Jr., K.C. and A.M. Harrell. 1994. "An Application of Expectancy Theory
to Explain a Manager's Intention to Use a Decision Support System." Decision
Sciences 25(4): 499-513.
Turpin, S.C. 1999. "Promoting the Best." Warehousing Management 6(6): 64-66.
Van Eerde, W. and H. Thierry. 1996. "Vroom's Expectancy Models and Work-
Related Criteria: A Meta-Analysis." Journal of Applied Psychology 81(5): 575-586.
Vroom, V. 1964. Work and Motivation. New York, NY: Wiley.
Weaver, R.L. 1996. "Motivating the Motivators: Eight Characteristics for Empow
ering Those Who Empower Others." Executive Speeches 11(1): 35-37.
Whetten, D.A. and K.S. Cameron. 1998. Developing Management Skills, 4th edition
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers Inc.

Leadership and Motivation The Effective Application of Expectancy Theory

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Leadership and Motivation The Effective Application of Expectancy Theory

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Leadership And Motivation: The Effective Application Of Expectancy Theory

Author(s): Robert G. Isaac, Wilfred J. Zerbe and Douglas C. Pitt

Leadership And Motivation: The Effective Application

In this article, we discuss the appli- ing environments. In so doing,

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XIII Number 2 Summer 2001

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XIII Number 2 Summer 2001

Furthermore, each employee must

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XIII Number 2 Summer 2001

oríes and they focus upon 3. The internal

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XIII Number 2 Summer 2001

Figure 1: The Expectancy Theory

EXPECTANCY (E-P LINKAGE)

INSTRUMENTALITY (P-O LINKAGE)

for explaining behavioural causeslating

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XIII Number 2 Summer 2001

1992; Moussa, 1996), leader-member

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XIII Number 2 Summer 2001

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XIII Number 2 Summer 2001

the performance rendered in all are

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XIII Number 2 Summer 2001

of deception but rather, lence of outcomes. Without a doubt,

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XIII Number 2 Summer 2001

Figure 2: Issues to Address Concerning Follow

The Effort/Performance 1 . Is the nature of the

2. Does the follower feel able to perform the task? Is

3. Does the follower possess the self-confidence required

4. What constitutes acceptable performance for the

5. Does this job provide the follower with feelings of

The 1 . Do my employees trust me? Do I keep promises made

2. Is the outcome for the follower worth the expenditure

3. Am I offering this follower rewards he or she really

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XIII Number 2 Summer 2001

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XIII Number 2 Summer 2001

sues regarding the rather

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XIII Number 2 Summer 2001

Adams, J.S. 1965. "Inequity in Social Exchange." In Advances in Experimen

of Organizational Change Management 2(1): 7.

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XIII Number 2 Summer 2001

Hendry, C, P. Bradley and S. Perkins. 1997. "

straints, Leader-Member Exchange, and Goal

Maccoby, M. 1996. "Resolving the Leadership Paradox: The Doctor's Dialogue."

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XIII Number 2 Summer 2001

Robinson, G. 1999. "Leadership vs Managem

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XIII Number 2 Summer 2001

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi