Motivation and Its Impact on Employees Commitment and Work Performance - Essay Example

The commitment, ability and skill of a work force are vital for meeting production and service demands of organizations. It is widely acknowledged that people are the most valuable assets in corporations; however over two-thirds of organizations worldwide are struggling to meet organizational performance requirements because of the lack of commitment and engagement of employees in relation to their jobs. According to Gallup Organization research, “only 29 percent of employees are motivated and energized” (Daft 2007: 248). A similar Towers Perrin global survey reveals even lower results with only 14 percent of employees across the world showing high engagement levels in their jobs. Empowering employees promotes motivation which in turn increases their engagement and commitment to their jobs, these factors raise their performance levels, and ultimately increase the company’s competitive advantage. Employee motivation is inducement or incentive which may be self-generated or produced by external forces, that promotes satisfaction and an urge towards improvement in performance. Employee commitment is defined as the attachment, loyalty, and the “strength of the individual’s identification with, and involvement in a particular organization” (Armstrong 2006: 271), and includes the employee’s extent of engagement in his job. Productivity is defined as “the efficient as well as the effective use of resources to achieve outcomes” (Berman, Bowman, West & Van Wart 2005: 309). Productivity is related to the quality of human resources and their performance. Thesis Statement: The purpose of this paper is to examine the significance of empowering employees to increase their motivation levels; and with the help of relevant theories and examples explain how motivation can affect employees’ commitment and performance at work. The Empowerment of Employees to Motivate Them Empowerment is the process of increasing employees’ responsibilities while holding them accountable for outcomes. The purpose of empowerment is to get employees to take responsibility for producing results rather than merely “following rules and regulations without producing tangible results” (Berman et al, 2005: 316). It includes various factors such as re-engineering and re-designing existing delivery processes to make them less error prone, more efficient, effective, and timely. Re-organization of the company’s operations to eliminate wastage of resources and personnel; and replacement of earlier methods of working with information technology are also reforms that empower the workforce. Replacement of old tasks with high technology equipment or new approaches would require staff training for new responsibilities. Any anxiety on the part of workers should be addressed by human resources personnel to help employees increase their skill sets, and when any jobs become obsolete the employees should be helped to find comparable jobs within the organization. An example for addressing employees’ concerns regarding management’s disinterest in their welfare, is the Scotland-based insurance intermediary Kwik-Fit Financial Services. Low employee turn out for work worried top managers regarding the firm’s future profitability. Therefore the management discussed the employees’ issues with them at several workshops. As a result, they introduced a new working environment. This consisted of a renovated building, “bonuses, performance-based pay, flexitime, flexible benefits, and onsite daycare” (Daft 2007: 225), in addition to a free corporate gym, recreation room, yoga and tai chi classes and a massage service. Further opportunities for increasing staff well-being consisted of special theme days, social evenings, annual sales awards and the holiday party. These measures which created an environment where people felt valued served to empower the workforce, and radically reduced absenteeism. The two main reasons were employee satisfaction and their feeling that the management genuinely cared about them and were willing to listen to their problems and concerns. Thus, Kwik-Fit was recommended by 80 percent of the employees as a great place to work in. Human resources management has to ensure that managers and employees are trained in empowerment processes in which what actually matters are “consequences” and “outcomes” rather than orders or hierarchical command implementation systems. New standards of accountability on the part of the workforce are agreed upon with the employees’ union, by the human resource management (HRM). Accountability will impact training, performance evaluation and pay, and HRM must give the detailed criteria by which employees will be held accountable. Employees’ compliance is necessary regarding proposed action, its consistence with the department’s mission, whether the plan is ethical and legal, is in the interest of all concerned in the organization, and is a reform for which they are willing to be held accountable. Employees may refuse empowerment if they fear arbitrary evaluation and performance appraisal standards (Berman et al 2005).. Yusoff & Abdullah (2008) state that empowerment is a vital aspect of organizational change to meet the demands of the increasingly competitive global business environment. The HRM policy of empowerment is based on Frederick Herzberg’s motivation-maintenance model that separated motivational factors such as the “work itself, achievement, possibility for growth, responsibility, advancement and recognition” from maintenance or hygiene factors such as “status, job security, interpersonal relations, salary and working conditions” (Petrick & Furr 1995: 10). According to Herzberg, only the former positively motivated behaviour, while the latter could be demotivators if absent, but could never act as motivators. Herzberg applied his model to work situations, and promoted job enrichment by increasing the areas of responsibility of workers in order to increase motivation, rather than resort to pay increases. This is in alignment with empowerment of the workforce by HRM, supporting employee involvement and work redesign programmes. Rewards can form one component of empowerment, rather than the only basis for motivation. Financially rewarding employees based on company’s performance are through profit sharing and employee stock ownership plans ( ESOPs). At the company Reflexite, an ESOP provides three-quarters of the equity of the company in the hands of employees including managers, professional staff members, and factory floor workers. Similarly, the manufacturers of Gore-Tex, W.L. Gore and Associates compensate employees through three methods: salary, profit sharing, and an associate stock ownership program. “Unlike traditional carrot and stick approaches these rewards focus on the performance of the group rather than individuals” (Daft 2007: 245). Everyone works in the same direction, towards best possible performance outcomes. Promoting Employee Motivation: A Primary HRM Function In studying employee motivation and human resource management strategies to improve motivation, the factors that affect how people behave at work should be taken into consideration. These factors encompass the fundamental characteristics of people which include: individual differences pertaining to competencies based on abilities, intelligence and skills; constructs or the conceptual framework of how people perceive their environment; expectations from own and others’ behaviours, values or what people believe to be important, and self-regulatory plans or goals and how they intended to achieve them (Armstrong 2006). Other important characteristics of people that impact employees’ behaviour at work are: their attitudes, their causes, manifestations and influences on behaviour; attribution theory or how other people are judged; orientation or approaches adopted to work; and roles played by employees to carry out their work (Armstrong 2006). Besides the employees’ personal characteristics, environmental variables include the type of work that individuals carry out; the culture, climate and organizational style in the organization; the social group within which individuals work; and the reference groups that individuals use for comparative purposes such as comparing conditions of work between various categories of employees. “Goal-setting theory is one of the best examples of human motivation and task performance” (Erez, Kleinbeck & Thierry 2001: 50). This theory is based on the concept that performance goals are the most powerful determinants of task behaviour. Setting goals facilitates increased performance outcomes. Research evidence indicates that striving for difficult and specific performance goals leads to higher performance than striving for easy or nonspecific goals such as “doing one’s best”. High goal commitment, feedback during task performance, and moderate complexity of task results in an increase in performance of up to 16 percent. Further, both conscious and subconscious goals have been found to impact job performance. For example, a 25-year study of American Telephone and Telegraph (AT & T) managers revealed that a one-item interview question in the first year, which asked the hired employees how many levels they wanted to progress in the company “was strongly related to subsequent promotion over the next 25 years” (Erez et al 2001: 23). Raising Employees’ Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation Intrinsic Motivation: This is implemented by providing opportunities for developing skills and abilities, ensuring that the work is challenging and interesting and promoting opportunities for progress. It is based on the fact that people can motivate themselves by seeking, finding, and carrying out work that satisfies their needs, or at least leads them to expect that their goals will be achieved. This is composed of self-generated factors that influence people to behave in a particular way or to work towards a particular goal. According to Armstrong (2006: 253) these factors include “responsibility, which is feeling that the work is important and having control over one’s own resources; autonomy or the freedom to act; scope to use and develop skills and abilities; and interesting and challenging work and opportunities for advancement”. The cognitive evaluative theory reiterates the significance of a person’s perception of themselves as the locus of control (Erez 2001). An example for intrinsic motivation is the Oprah Winfrey Show on television. Winfrey, an Emmy Award winning talk show host is personally worth several billion dollars. Yet, Winfrey states that her motivation was not a desire for money, power or prestige. The driving force that motivated her was “to serve others by uplifting, enlightening, encouraging, and transforming how people see themselves” (Daft 2007: 227). Extrinsic Motivation: People can be motivated by the management through methods such as rewards that incude increased pay, promotion, commendation, etc. “and punishments such as disciplinary action, withholding pay, or crticism” (Armstrong 2006: 254). Extrinsic motivation encompasses all the actions taken by the management to motivate people. Extrinsic motivators can have an immediate, short-term and powerful effect. On the other hand, the intrinsic motivators which are concerned with the quality of working life are inherent in employees and have a deeper and longer term effect. Extrinsic motivation is exemplified by both individual and system-wide rewards. For example, a bonus cheque or a promotion for the best individual job performance; or rewards such as insurance benefits or vacation time for those employees who continue working in the same organization over a specified period of time. Extrinsic rewards can produce intrinsic rewards such as a sense of self-fulfillment derived from one’s work, or the inner pride of contributing to a winning organization. Human resources management who bring out the best in people, and help them in achieving intrinsic motivation are able to motivate their workforce effectively for achieving optimal outcomes. The company Les Schwab Tyre Centers makes their employees feel like the management’s partners in providing help to people and making their lives easier. Employees go out of their way to help stranded passengers in installing tyres, revealing the high levels of intrinsic motivation employees get from their work. Their extremely high motivation is attributed to equity in profit sharing among all employees, and promotions only from among the employees in the company based on job performance (Daft 2007). According to Banfield & Kay (2008), the concept of motivation is based on Douglas McGregor’s model of managerial leadership assumptions known as Theory X and Theory Y. According to Theory X, employees dislike work, will avoid responsibility whenever possible, and need to be persuaded to perform. On the other hand, Theory Y believes that employees “do not dislike work, can become committed to meet organizational objectives, without coercive pressures, and will learn not only to accept but also to seek responsibility” (Petrick & Furr 1995: 11). In alignment with Theory X, HR professionals need to focus on incentives, penalties, close supervision and inspection to ensure productivity. In accordance with Theory Y, HRM should implement system improvements that require participation, delegation of responsibility and provision of appropriate resources to increase employee competency and productivity. It is evident that focusing on Theory Y would be beneficial to the company. Human resource management believes employees to be valued assets, with the potential to ensure competitive advantage based on their commitment, adaptability and high quality skills. Meyer, Becker & Vandenberghe (2004) argue that though commitment and motivation are different, they are related concepts. More precisely, commitment is one component of motivation; by combining the theories of commitment and motivation, a better understanding can be achieved of the two processes and of workplace behaviour. Motivation Increases Employee Commitment and Engagement The external environment of companies has undergone extensive changes in the last decade. Increased international competition and globalization of businesses have created new requirements for higher financial results, greater profitability and more shareholder value. Though profitability outcomes have been positive, employees’ well-being and workability have been adversely affected by the restructuring and downsizing of companies and the increased constraints on the size of the workforce. Employees’ levels of motivation in the workplace is directly related to their commitment to their jobs which emerges from their sense of well-being and quality of life. Thus, well-being is a significant factor which impacts employees’ performance levels and consequently the company’s performance in the global market (Vanhala & Tuomi 2006). Evidence from research indicates that the human resource policy of “commitment” when studied against a control system, was useful in testing specific combinations of policies and practices in predicting differences in performance and turnover across a business organization. The units with commitment systems had higher productivity, lower wastage levels, and lower employee turnover than those with control systems. In addition, the relationship between turnover and manufacturing productivity was moderated by the human resource system of commitment. This indicates the importance of fostering commitment among employees in an organization, by fulfilling first their basic needs, and further more complex needs, in the hierarchy (Arthur 1994). This strategy of inducing commitment is based on the theory of Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs fulfillment. Maslow stated that five innate, genetically determined needs existed in an ascending hierarchy: physiological, safety, belonging, esteem and self-actualization. Employee behaviour and motivation to perform work activities of a high standard, is based on whether the five fundamental needs of the individual have been fulfilled. This means that higher order needs such as esteem and self-actualization will influence motivation only if the lower order needs such as physiological, safety and belonging were satisfied to a large extent. For HRM, this would mean that additional empowerment or pressure for commitment would not motivate a hungry employee, since the latter is a basic need that the employee will be motivated to fulfill first (Marchington & Wilkinson 2005). A theory of employee commitment and organizational control is Ronald Dore’s welfare corporatism (Dore 2000). In accordance with this theory, Britain and other industrial economies are gradually transforming towards the Japanese employment system which include trade union bargaining structures, employees’ welfare and security measures, higher levels of employment stability, and the integration of manual workers with the full-time workforce. Further, employee commitment and job engagement towards enduring improvement in organizational performance can be increased through changes in organizational culture. This was demonstrated by the joint venture forged by General Motors with Toyota, which resulted in employees thinking in a radically different way about the company and their role in it. Higher morale, improved efficiency, and increased productivity of greater quality resulted from changes in company culture emphasizing employee welfare (Cameron & Quinn 2006). Significantly, the three main criteria for competitive advantage are quality, innovation and cost. Organizational strategies centred on quality and innovation promote workforce commitment. However, in some organizations, cost may be the dominant concern, and this results in control becoming more important than commitment. For example, in McDonald’s, though to some extent employee consent is necessary, control is high on the company’s agenda. This is achieved from the recruitment stage where candidates with an orientation for trade unions are eliminated, through the direct supervision of employees, the use of machines, “the physical layout of the restaurant, and the detailed prescription of rules and procedures” (Royle 2000: 61). On the other hand, employees and the company’s management are to some extent interdependent. Hence, McDonald’s management cannot resort only to coercion or compliance to achieve high levels of business performance, but has to actively work towards ensuring employee consent and cooperation. According to Kimball & Nink (2006: 66), employee engagement in the workplace and to their job is one variable that has the potential to predict an organization’s ability to achieve high results related to greater productivity, raised profit levels, efficiency of customer service, improved staff retention and workplace safety. Job satisfaction is the key element for maintaining an engaged work force. More than the factor of higher pay levels, employees’ relationship with their immediate senior impacts job satisfaction. To ensure that people become part of the organization, relationships need to be focused on. Employees’ emotional disconnection from their colleagues and supervisor results in lack of commitment to their work. To sustain employee engagement, the management should make it clear that they sincerely care about the employees and have their interests at heart. This would include helping employees “refocus on the demands of their roles and on the skills, knowledge and talents they bring to their jobs” (Kimball & Nink 2006: 68). Management’s efforts to discuss employee strengths and the ways in which these can make a difference, help managers to forge bonds with the work force, which leads to employee commitment to the organization and to their jobs. This ensures that they stay longer with the organization, and are more committed to quality and growth than their less engaged or actively disengaged counterparts. The factors that underscore engagement and commitment are employees’ strong relationship with their manager, clear communication from their manager, a clear pathway for focusing on what the employees do best, strong co-worker relationships, a deep commitment to their colleagues which promotes their taking risks and stretching for excellence, and employees making use of opportunities to learn and grow. Human resource management’s active efforts in having meaningful conversations with their employees, help to strengthen commitment and interrupt the disengagement process. This includes defining and consistently communicating goals and objectives to their team members, while regularly inviting ideas and feedback from them. Further, during team members’ times of difficulty, an ideal manager uses honest and direct communication channels, “even when communicating a difficult message” (Kimball & Nink 2006: 69). Fitch (2008) reiterates the importance of effective communication, and adds that supervisors should also listen and respond to the employees’ feedback. Evidence from research conducted by the Gallup Organization reveals that successful managers always maximize the potential or workers by not trying to change them. This is because fixing weaknesses is a waste of time. Instead, great bosses ensure that their employees work at jobs that suit their individual strengths and skills. Thus, the Gallup Organization found that by promoting employee engagement in their jobs, work force retention increased by 44 percent, productivity rose by 50 percent , and workplace accidents decreased by 50 percent. All these features contribute significantly to optimizing organizational operations (Kimball & Nink 2006: 69). Management’s Involvement With Employees to Promote Commitment It is important for organizations to continuously improve their products and services, and increase their efficiency and scale of production in order to ensure their competitive advantage in the twenty first century. The various factors that create the demand for greater productivity are: “rapid change, rising expectations, tides of reform, effective training, new missions, and pressure to do more with less” (Berman et al 2005: 309). Both efficiency and effectiveness in the use of resources are key to organizational progress. Efficiency allows companies to use less resources for greater productivity, and effectiveness is important for achieving improved service delivery. Management involvement is considered to be crucial for impacting employee attitude towards work and productivity. Initiatives to step up productivity invariably require HR managers to deal with inherent tensions by fostering open organizations, promoting performance improvement, increasing employee motivation and raising workplace quality of life. The above strategy of HRM involvement with employees for promoting increased productivity through various strategies, is based on the theory of Hawthorne Effect. This theory states that productivity is a direct result of management involvement with workers, and their motivation is a key factor in productivity (Petrick & Furr 1995). Yusoff & Abdullah (2008: 9) state that “the ultimate source of competitive advantage for an organization is the quality of its human resource – competent, committed, flexible and empowered”. This can be achieved only through the management’s involvement with employees, providing them with continued support and motivation. Further, an essential part of management’s involvement with employees is the promotion of employee well-being. This refers to psychological well-being which includes “affective well-being, job satisfaction, aspiration” (Vanhala & Tuomi 2006: 245), and freedom from anxiety and burnout. For achieving employee well-being, the management should implement human resource practices such as training and development, performance appraisal and a fair system of payment. Corporate culture constitutes “the basic assumptions and beliefs of members of an organization, that operate unconsciously, and define an organization’s view of itself and its environment” (Swanson 2009: 109). Therefore, another important area of focus is fueling changes in organizational culture to ensure highly self-motivated employees with the ability to work autonomously and responsibly. An example is McDonald’s corporate culture of discouraging employee Unions, since the management perceives Unions as unwarranted interference that will destroy the effectiveness of the management’s involvement with the employees on a more personalized basis. According to Royle (2000), McDonald’s company’s performance level is high since it successfully implements its belief that employee motivation for increased commitment to their job is best achieved by protecting their interests and by looking after their well-being. A study conducted by Pathak, Budhwar, Singh and Hannas (2005) found a postive correlation between the implementation of HR best practices and employees’ positive psychological contract, higher commitment and greater motivation. Optimal outcomes in company’s performance could be achieved through using evidence based practice. The Impact of Motivation on Productivity To underscore the importance of human resources management in motivation and subsequent productivity, theories have been formulated on the content and process motivational models by various theorists such as “Abraham Maslow, Frederick Herzberg, Douglas McGregor, Victor Vroom, Lyman Porter, and Edward Lawler” (Petrick & Furr 1995: 10). Earlier, the “content” theories attempted to explain motivation at work in terms of the events, goals, needs and motivators, and “process” theories were concerned with behaviour at work resulting from employees’ choices; and how different kinds of events, conditions or outcomes motivate behaviour. Thus, the work of the theorists Maslow, Herzberg and others underlined managerial concern for employee satisfaction and motivation for improvement in performance and productivity, thereby raising the company’s bottomline and competitive edge (Lashley 2001). According to Abraham Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs or needs-based theory, the process of motivation is initiated by the conscious or unconscious recognition of unsatisfied needs. Human beings are motivated by multiple needs which emerge in a hierarchical order. The low order needs are physiological in nature: food, water and oxygen. In the corporate environment, these are the need for adequate heat, air, and base salary for survival. Along with the physiological needs are the need for safety and sense of belonging. These low order needs or the deficiency needs are satisfied according to the sequence. These needs are similar to Frederick Herzberg’s Two-Factor theory’s Hygiene Factors (Daft 2007). After each of the basic needs is satisfied, it declines in importance and the next need takes priority. The higher order needs are esteem and self-actualization. These are similar to Herzberg’s Motivators which relate to the need for “achievement, recognition, responsibility and opportunity for growth” (Daft 2007: 231). Goals are established and a behaviour pathway is selected to satisfy the hierarchy of needs and wants. The influence of expectations should also be taken into account (Armstrong 2006). For example, after an employees’ Union wins good pay and working conditions for its members thus meeting their basic needs, the next step may be towards getting their social and esteem needs met in the workplace. At the steel company Nucor, leaders have applied Herzberg’s two-factor theory successfully. The management has created one of the most motivated and dynamic workforces in the United States by providing hygiene factors for fulfilling basic needs, and incorporating motivators to meet employees’ higher level needs. “At Nucor rewarding people richly, treating them with respect, and giving them real power sparks amazing motivation and performance” (Daft 2007: 233). The management creates an environment that facilitates employees’ autonomous decision making on what they can and should do, which results in beneficial outcomes for themselves as well as the organization. The management has found that employees’ finding answers on their own drive the progress of the business faster than solutions that they may provide. Conclusion This paper has highlighted empowerment of employees to motivate them; the management’s promotion of motivation among employees, raising employees’ intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, how motivation increases employee commitment and engagement with their work, management’s involvement with employees to promote commitment, and the impact of motivation on productivity. These factors in turn increase the productivity and performance outcomes of organizations. Human resource strategies based on relevant theories of the above concepts have been investigated. Today there is a shift towards organizational practices based on high performance work activities which are wider in scope, and include not only motivation of employees for improving productivity, but also an in-depth implementation of managerial practices in all aspects of the organization for total quality outcomes. Human resource personnel who use high performance work practices by adopting best practices developed from research evidence gain a competitive advantage over the organization’s competitors. This is because they take into account the competencies and capabilities of employees based on a multidimensional view on performance. By effecting change in organizational culture and supporting worker creativity, both human resource and organizational development practitioners should together aim to achieve higher levels of proficiency in business activities and profits. Further, it is important to align HRM strategies for improving employee motivation with the organization’s goals. Lashley (2001) reiterates that focus on high performance work practices extends beyond the sphere of employee motivation to areas such as recruitment and selection, training, rewards, and other personnel management practices which are important for improving organizational performance. Bibliography Armstrong, M. (2006). A handbook of human resource management practice. United Kingdom: Kogan Page Publications. Arthur, J.B. (1994). Effects of human resource systems on manufacturing performance and turnover. The Academy of Management Journal, 37 (3): 670-687. Banfield, P. & Kay, R. (2008). Introduction to human resource management. London: Oxford University Press. Berman, E.M., Bowman, J.S., West, J.P. & Van Wart, M. (2005). Human resource management in public service: paradoxes, processes and problems. The United Kingdom: Sage Publications. Cameron, K.S. & Quinn, R.E. (2006). Diagnosing and changing organizational culture: Based on the competing values framework. The United States: John Wiley & Sons. Daft, R.L. (2007). The leadership experience. Edition 4. The United States of America: Cengage Learning. Dore, R.P. (2000). Stock market capitalism: Welfare capitalism: Japan and Germany versus the Anglo-Saxons. London: Oxford University Press. Erez, M., Kleinbeck, U. & Thierry, H. (2001). Work motivation in the context of a globalizing economy. London: Routledge. Fitch, B. (2008). Motivation: Rethinking the supervisor’s role. Law & Order, 56 (3): pp. 100-104. Kimball, L.S. & Nink, C.E. (2006). How to improve employee motivation, commitment, productivity, well-being and safety. Corrections Today, 68 (3): pp.66-69. Lashley, C. (2001). Empowerment: HR strategies for service excellence. Great Britain: Butterworth-Heinemann. Marchington, M. & Wilkinson, A. (2005). Human resource management at work: people management and development. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development Publications. Meyer, J.P., Becker, T.E. & Vandenberghe, C. (2004). Employee commitment and motivation: A conceptual analysis and integrative model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89 (6): pp.991-1007. Pathak, R.D., Budhwar, P.S., Singh, V. & Hannas, P. (2005). Best HRM practices and employees’ outcomes: A study of shipping companies in Cyprus. South Asian Journal of Management, 12 (4): pp.7-18. Petrick, J.A. & Furr, D.S. (1995). Total quality in managing human resources. Florida: CRC Press. Rothwell, W.J., Sullivan, R. & McLean, G.N. (2005). Practising organization development. The United Kingdom: Wiley Publishers. Royle, T. (2000). Working for McDonald’s in Europe: The unequal struggle. London: Routledge. Swanson, R.A. (2009). Analysis for improving performance: Tools for diagnosing organi- zations and documenting workplace expertise. California: Bennett-Koehler. Vanhala, S. & Tuomi, K. (2006). HRM, company performance and employee well-being. Management Revue, 17 (3): pp.241-255. Yusoff, Y.M. & Abdullah, H.S. (2008). HR Roles and empowering the line in human resource activities: A review and a proposed model. International Journal of Business and Society, 9 (2): pp.9-19. Read More