Motivation in Small Businesses - Coursework Example

Task Motivation in Small Businesses Introduction In every business undertaking, motivation is most essential that keepsrunning the business all the way from its establishment to the accomplishment of the set goals and objectives. Businesses whether small or big have to come up with or develop various strategies to make the business activities run in a smooth mannerism. Motivations within small businesses can prove to be additionally complex than for a bigger business since certain individual or families possess the establishments. The motivations within a business can also come from the inner self or the individual drive, towards starting a certain business enterprise or being forced by certain individuals, into starting a business enterprise. In order for achieve motivation in a small business enterprise, an individual or groups of individual ought to come up with the excellent strategic planning. The strategic planning can be considered to intermarry or rather the two that is strategic planning with motivation have intricate connections. The two, strategic planning together with motivation have the complexity in that, the small enterprises act as extensions for the owners, and that the visions brought forward have close alignment towards private motivations and ambitions. In an endeavor, to explain the idea of stimulus within small businesses, various conjectures have been placed onward and these include; theory Y and X, motivation- Hygiene theory, and performance readiness level and leadership style. Theory X and Theory Y Douglas in his explanation of worker motivation proposed two theories that are theory X, and theory Y. The two theories start with the principle that, management’s responsibility in an organization puts together, the factors involved in creation, for the financial advantage of the firm. According to Douglas’s theory X, a typical individual abhors toil and tries to evade working by any means. These people lack ambition, disregard any form of responsibility, and prefer to follow than take up the leading role. The average populaces also have self- centered approaches; therefore, have little to care about the organizations undertakings (Abahe 1). The average persons also have a shear opposition for changes and are often credulous and not intelligent in most cases. In short, the theory presents the assumption that the average citizens have only two points in mind, and these are money and security (Abahe 1). The theory further utilizes two approaches and these are the soft approach and the hard approach. In the hard approach, intimidation or compulsions dominate the working environment. The other strategies utilized in this approach include; inherent threats, close management and rigid controls. This suggests that the presented environment in the hard approach is an environment full of commands and power. In the soft approach, the management seeks peace and permissiveness bearing in thought that the employees will respond to the management through cooperation, therefore, generating motivation. However, the hard approach has no much to add to business since it only results into aggression, low output and in severe cases, union demands may arise (Abahe 1). According to McGregor, optimal management under the theory appears in between the two extremes (Abahe 1). In the end, the theorist asserts that the two approaches cannot be appropriate since the assumptions presented in the theory are incorrect. In theory Y, the needs in the high level in one’s life and the level of personality actualization are rarely achieved although they can act as the motivating agents in an organization. The general assumption put forward in theory Y include; work can appear to be natural just like play or break. Individuals’ manage to meet the work objectives provided they have the commitment. Individuals appear to have commitments once the organization puts in rewards that address the higher needs, and under such working environments, individuals seek accountability (Abahe, 2). The final assumption suggests that the majority of the population manage responsibilities since creativity and resourcefulness appear in all populace. Considering these suppositions, a prospect to align personal ambition together with organizational objectives can be a relevant matter. According to McGregor, he recognizes that most people have already reached this level, therefore, require more tight control that gets relaxed as employees develop within the firm’s environment. This implies that the soft methodology can be used in the small business. The business enterprise carries out different activities in an attempt to harness the motivational energy within the company’s surroundings. The business may reduce the administration positions within a business as well as decentralize controls. This suggests that every manager controls a laager group of employees, therefore, will be forced into entrusting some responsibilities and decision making to his subordinates (Abahe, 3). Broadening the focus of employees aims at adding value and presenting chances that satisfy higher levels requirements. The business management’s consultation of the employees on various matters helps in tapping ideas and provides controls within the working environment (Abahe, 3). Proper implementation within the business environment would serve as the ultimate motivation strategy especially for employees with higher expectations in relations to hierarchy needs. Motivation-Hygiene Theory In an attempt to bring a better comprehension of the employee mind-set and motivation, Hertzberg carried out researches to determine the factors that led to either satisfaction or dissatisfaction within a working environment in a business enterprise. Through the studies, Hertzberg got results from the different people that he asked about motivation in a company’s working surroundings. The scholar found out that factors that created satisfaction in these environments were not the same factors that created dissatisfaction within the same surroundings. Through the two different findings, he managed to come up with the motivation-Hygiene theory. In this theory, factors that created satisfaction were declared the motivators while the factors that created dissatisfaction came to be regarded as the hygiene factors. The hygiene factors were regarded as so because they are maintenance factor that must be evaded in the provision of a satisfactory environment. According to Hertzberg, assumed that factors that created either satisfaction or dissatisfaction ought not to be treated as opposites, but rather should be treated, as two independent subjects (Abahe, 1). Hertzberg argues that the opposite of the word satisfaction come to no satisfaction while the opposite of the word dissatisfaction is no dissatisfaction. The theorist further argues that two dissimilar needs were presented with the first being, the psychological needs accomplished through obtaining money or finances, and the second being, the psychological needs accomplished through the fulfillment of certain activities that brought growth in an individual’s life. The second need being clearly defined by the need or urge to realize and grow (Abahe, 2). The theorist presented various motivational factors from his motivation-hygiene conjecture and these include; growth, the job, accountability, accomplishment, development and recognition. On the other side, the hygiene factors include; firms policies and management, supervision, status, interpersonal associations, working environment, job security, and earnings. The motivation factors can also be regarded as the factors that concerns with the job content and direct to work contentment. The hygiene factor can be regarded as the factors that have concerns or regards for the job framework and job discontent. In case the motivation factors are not present within a job atmosphere, the employees have no tendency to get discontented. Employees who are dissatisfied have no exhibition of productivity restrictions rather; they do not get involved with their occupation or put any additional energy to present satisfactory results in the firm’s earnings. In cases where, the hygiene factors get considered being up to standard or acceptable, the employees in that company exhibited the tendency to become satisfied meaning that they simply come out to be not dissatisfied. Throughout the period, output does not emerge to be restricted and may be said to be held within a satisfactory level. In times, when the presence or absence of these factors dissatisfies the employees within a certain business establishment, the tendency to restrict productivity eventually emerges. Taking into thought, the provisions of the theory, and the annihilation of the hygiene factors serves as a good course to achieving satisfaction. The factors can be removed through various ways such as, fixation of pitiable and obtrusive firm policies, provision of efficient and non-invasive supervision, development of respective cultures and the culture that ensures dignity for all employees (Chapman 2). The other methods of eradication of the hygiene factors include; provision of wage structures that appear to be competitive provision of job security, raise the job status within an organization through the provision of evocative effort (Chapman 2). According to Hertzberg, the creation of satisfaction within a company’s or business environment involves addressing the impetus factors that exist within these environments (Chapman, 2). Satisfaction can be obtained through the provision of opportunities that encourage developments, recognition of employee contributions, creation of work that presents satisfying results and that brings a match between employee’s skills and capabilities. The provision of numerous responsibilities to all the company team leaders also helps in the creation of satisfaction. Others are the provision of chances for employees to develop through company’s promotion undertakings and lastly the provision of training and advancement chances to employees (Chapman, 2). The latter serves to allow employees to pursue the levels that they admire within the firm. In accordance to the theory, management has to present hygiene factors in an attempt to thwart dissatisfaction of an employee with the business enterprise, as well as, present intrinsic factors that bring satisfaction to the workers within the work environment (Abahe, 2). The theorist continued, and presented the idea that job enrichment played some part in intrinsic motivation since it acted as a continuous management practice. He continues and argues that a job has to present numerous challenges to the employees to utilize the unexploited potential of a company’s workers. The employees presenting exceptional abilities ought to be presented with similar levels of responsibilities within a business. He continues and suggests that, in cases where a firm does not manage wholly to exploit the abilities of its employees, and then the firms has the alternative of either making the job automated or considers presenting a low-level skill employee. The fact the theory deals with job contentment has little implications on motivation of its workers through there subsist some affiliation among motivation and satisfaction levels. The antagonists of the theory argue that the factors are viewed since the idea seems to be natural (Abahe, 2). People obtain credits in cases of satisfaction and obviously blame dissatisfaction in terms of external factors. However, the theory has principally been applied despite its vulnerability. In the real sense, the theory presents the idea that it identifies that true motivation has its origin in a person’s inside self and no necessarily from the hygiene factors. Performance Readiness level and Leadership style Performance readiness level is a measure of how a person is willing and able to execute certain task. Aptitude can be measured in terms of experience, knowledge, and skills about a certain job. Alternatively, willingness has to do with commitment and motivation in carrying out a certain task. These ways, the worker is motivated determine the performance of the small businesses (Chevalier & Roger, 67). When the workers are well motivated, their willingness to perform a certain task and are at a high performance readiness level. Workers might have exceptionally good ability in a certain field, but poor motivation makes them not utilize their full potential. Performance of the worker is, therefore, an interaction of willingness and ability both of which are equally indispensable. Different types of leadership style can be adapted by a leader in influencing the performance of the worker depending on the performance readiness level of such a worker. The styles differ in the instructional and supportive behavior that the leader uses. Directive etiquette include the manner in which the leader elaborates on how to perform a given tasks in terms telling them what to do, how to do it and where to conduct it. Supportive behavior, on the other hand, is the degree to which the leader encourages, praises, listens to and sets positive expectations (Hersey et al, 34). A leader needs to offer what the workers need, to be effective in leading and influencing performance of workers. Direction and support should be structured in such a way that they convene the individual workers needs according to their performance readiness level. This implies the leader should first access the performance readiness level in order to be able to know what management approach to apply. A leader should, therefore, take his time in understanding the workers, be persevering and committed to his work. In small businesses, the supervisor who is the leader should understand his workers in order to know the motivation styles to apply on them (Chevalier & Roger, 127). Conclusion Through the utilization of the presented theories, a business entity can manage to develop the most excellent motivation scheme for their workers. The management ought to get involved with the motivation of the firm’s employees since motivation to employees in majority cases leads to better results. This means that the method applied by the management team must have the best impact towards the employee’s motivation to work for that company. The company may even combine the theories through analysis to determine the best strategy. The firm may also engage in activities that encourage employees to toil and provide the best results for the wellbeing of the business entity. Works Cited Abahe. Herzbergs Motivation-Hygiene Theory (Two-Factor Theory). 2010. Web. December 14, 2011. Available at: < http://www.landcoalition.org/pdf/08_G02268.pdf> Abahe. Theory X and Theory Y. 2010. Web. December 14, 2011. Available at: < http://www.abahe.co.uk/Free-En-Resources/Theories-of-Management/Theory-X-and-Theory-Y.pdf> Chapman, Alan. Hertzberg’s motivators and hygiene factors. 2009. Web. December 14, 2011. Available at: < http://www.lacpa.org.lb/Includes/Images/Docs/TC/TC308.pdf> Chevalier, Roger. A Managers Guide to Improving Workplace Performance. New York: AMACOM, American Management Association, 2007. Hersey, Paul, and Ken, Blanchard, and Dewey, Johnson. Management of Organizational Behavior: Leading Human Resources. Upper Saddle River, N.J: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2008. Read More