Factors that motivate employees to work hard - Essay Example

 Employee motivation is a that is of great concern to employers. Many employers want to find that staffs that are self-motivated to work andvalue the quality of their output. With such employees on the payroll, management needs to introduce motivational factors and the employees will produce exemplary work. Workers shall be motivated if they can foresee the reward system as long term, and if they feel that as much as the employer is benefitting, the reward scheme is fairly rewarding their input (Kimball & Nick, 2006). This paper shall look at factors that motivate employees to work hard, and it shall explore the various motivational theories. Many studies have looked at the aspect of motivation for a long period. The studies have held that the motivation is that aspect of giving incentives to another person, to influence the level of activity and productivity of that person (Wilson, 2010). Motivation psychology has dwelt on that aspect of finding out what drives individuals to act the way they do and what makes people to generate continuously positive and productive thoughts while other people are laid back and wait to be directed to what to do. In ancient times, researchers studied motivation using traditional approaches but nowadays, the study has taken a more scientific approach (Catano, Pond, & Kelloway, 2001). Earlier studies held that the motivation arose from human instincts to perform certain tasks in a certain way and were mostly psychological. The studies dwelt mostly on the major instincts like meeting deadlines, hunger, fear, as controlling individual behavior. From these theories arose the Drive Theory that holds that past activities and events influenced the kind of decisions and actions people took in the future. In the current motivation studies, scholars do analyze the current plans and expectations as the key motivating factors (Michie & West, 2004). The studies have demonstrated that motivation influences individual wellbeing and that the society, cultures, past activities, and age are some of the determinants of employee motivation. To understand what motivates employees at work, this paper shall look at the various motivation theories. Motivation theories Hierarchy of needs Maslow’s theory of hierarchy of needs is probably one of the best-known theories that explain why people have to work. Maslow’s theory motivated many scientists to understand what motivated people to work hard. The theory states that people have five basic needs that they satisfy in hierarchy. Motivations result in needs, and as one need is satisfied, a higher one emerges, and it calls for more motivation to satisfy it (Wilson, 2010). According to this theory, all people have needs and as employees, they shall be motivated to work hard to earn money to cater for their personal needs. Motivation-hygiene theory Fredrick Herzberg created this motivation theory where he analyzes various work related issues that he relates to work satisfaction and dissatisfaction or what others refer to as motivation and hygiene factors. Hygiene factors include wages, good working environment, and promotions at work. These motivators are those factors that stimulate one’s self-esteem hence elevating one to perform at a higher level of enhanced output (Wilson, 2010). Herzberg notes that these two factors are not opposites of one another rather they work independently. For example, a great working environment creates satisfaction to work but does not motivate one to work harder. Theory X and Y Before 1950s, managers did not understand why employees had lower output when no one monitored progress at work. The managers assumed that naturally, lower level employees were lazy, they liked avoiding work, and they had to be monitored to work well (Wilson, 2010). This is what Douglas McGregor referred to as Theory X. He states that, to motivate staff to work hard, managers had to teach them to work responsibly, own their work and aim to reduce wastage, a thing he called Theory Y. This theory did not have much support hence it has not been widely accepted. Expectancy theory This theory was created by Victor Vroom and consists of three elements namely valence, instrumentality, and expectancy. Valence refers to the degree the person is pleased with the outcome for example salary increment. Instrumentality refers to the belief that once the employee works so well the reward will follow. Expectancy is the notion the employee has with regard to if the task allocated is possible or not (Michie & West, 2004). Each employee shall combine the three aspects as motivation to work hard. A combination of the three shall have more influence to motivate than when one or two factors are missing. Relational Model of Motivation According to Joseph Nuttin, human motivation is comprised of inner desires and outside sources to satisfy those desires. The needs and the sources create the motive to perform, for instance, the need could be to buy a vehicle hence the sources could be to work hard and save money for this venture (Kimball & Nick, 2006). This theory is quite relevant, and its application shows management what could be motivating factors to the staff . The Organizational Behavior on Work Motivation Economics researchers place a lot of emphasis on economic rewards when researching what motivates employees to perform. On their part, Organizational behavior (OB) researchers lay emphasis more on psychological and social factors associated with the working environment and the work itself. The OB researchers argue that work motivation theories look at the outcomes of these situational, individual difference and situational factors on the provision of work effort. By that, there is a wide array of non-monetary factors that that produce greater motivation among employees. Such array includes individual characteristic, job characteristics, leadership-employee relationship, and organizational characteristics (Catano et al., 2001). From past studies, there are employees that are motivated naturally, and they have impressive outputs while some employees are never motivated at all. In addition, some jobs could be motivating than others, an example being jobs like that of sweeping floors may pay well but one may not be motivated to do such jobs at all. The team leadership is responsible for steering the group in the right direction while reminding them of where they are headed to as a way of achieving overall goals. To maximize output of the team, it is important for the leader to assign responsibilities to each member and ensure each person is accountable for his output. That way, each employee shall focus on the common aim and shall approach own work in a way that shall enable others to progress smoothly in their duties as well, hence uplifting individual and mutual accountability. When well-coordinated, each member shall be happy with individual output with the increased capacity for each member to learn from others. Organizational characteristics do play an important role in motivating staff to perform. If an organization appreciates better output, one shall work harder with the anticipation of a reward. On the contrary, organizations like state departments that take long to recognize individual efforts shall offer a satisfaction for one to work but they will not motivate people to work extra hard. Extra role behavior combined with monetary rewards has produced the highest incentive for employees to perform (Kimball & Nick, 2006). For instance, if an employee expects higher managerial ratings as a way of getting a pay rise, the employee shall work smart and harder. According to the economist’s utility model of individual behavior, an employee shall adopt that behavior that he expects to give him the greatest utility (Raub, 2008). Each employee shall demonstrate a behavior, which shall have both positive and negative consequences. Personal desires and the subjective value employees place on the positive and negative elements shall be different for each employee. These individual differences help to explain why people working in the same environment, for the same employer and on the same position shall exhibit different levels of output. The expectancy theory shall influence the conduct of an employee depending on what the employee expects because of acting in a certain way. If the employee receives the kind of rewards expected, he shall be motivated to work even harder next time but if the rewards do not come by, the employee shall be demotivated. The private sector has been particularly able to produce higher output than the public sector given it ability to give management discretionary authority to make quick decisions affecting working life. Under the private sector, management may sit once and approve a reward scheme to be effected in the following month but in the public sector, such a policy may need a number of years to implement (Kimball & Nick, 2006). By establishing highly motivating working environments, companies shall attract self-motivated individuals who shall demonstrate the ability to induce reward schemes from management (Raub, 2008). The reward in such case may come in the form of a promotion or higher salary. The organization culture in some companies may influence motivation to produce higher results. High performing organizations tend to attract high performing individuals who are up to challenging tasks while slower employees fear that such working environment may push them away if they do not perform. Peer group influence can influence employee performance. When the friends meet for a conversation, majority shall be able to talk about their performance at work, and the accompanying benefits awarded. Such talks shall motivate others to try she same kind of performance with the expectation of getting similar or better rewards (Kimball & Nick, 2006). Majority of the peer friends could be of the same age and how one progress at work shall be of much importance to the others who shall try to rival the achievers. On the other hand, underachievers may not want to appear as if they are not working hard enough hence the shall resolve to work more. Such peer influence is common in areas where employees reside in the same community, and each employee can monitor how the other is progressing at the office and in the social environment. Lastly, the family and what they expect the employee to bring back at the end of the month may be the driving force of that employee to work hard. For a married person, the spouse may have a direct influence for one to work hard at the office with an expectation of providing for the spouse. On their part, parents have an upper hand when it comes to influencing the character of their young ones. They shall remind them of the importance of working hard to earn a promotion as opposed to relaxing in the current position. In the case of motivation resulting from the family members, both the employee, employer and the family shall stand to benefit once the person performs well. In such case, the parents act as mentors to the employee. Reference List Catano, V.M., Pond, M., & Kelloway, E.K. (2001). Exploring Commitment and Leadership on Volunteer Organizations. Leadership and Organization Journal, 22(6), 4-11. Kimball, S.L., & Nick, C.E. (2006). How to Improve Employee Motivation, Commitment, Productivity, Well-being, and safety. Corrections Today, 68(3), 722-740. Michie, S. & West, M.A. (2004). Managing People and Performance: An Evidence Based Framework applied to health service organizations. International Journal of Management Reviews, 5/6(2), 91-111. Raub, S. (2008). Does Bureaucracy Kill Individual Initiative? The Impact of Structure on Organizational Citizenship Behavior in the Hospitality Industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 27, 179-186. Wilson, F.M. (2010). Organizational Behavior at Work: A Critical Introduction. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Read More