UNIT 3 CONTENT THEORIES, PROCESS ..., Summaries of Designs and Groups

Download UNIT 3 CONTENT THEORIES, PROCESS ... and more Summaries Designs and Groups in PDF only on Docsity! 40 Personality and Attitudes in Organisational Behaviour UNIT 3 CONTENT THEORIES, PROCESS THEORIES AND SCHEDULES OF REINFORCEMENT Structure 3.0 Introduction 3.1 Objectives 3.2 Theories of Motivation 3.3 Content Theories 3.3.1 Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs 3.3.2 Alderfer’s ERG Theory 3.3.3 Herzberg’s Motivator-Hygiene Theory 3.3.4 McClelland’s Learned Needs Theory 3.3.5 Job Characteristics Model 3.4 Process Theories 3.4.1 Vroom’s Expectancy Theory 3.4.2 Equity Theory 3.4.3 Goal-setting Theory 3.5 Reinforcement Theory 3.6 Let Us Sum Up 3.7 Unit End Questions 3.8 Glossary 3.9 Suggested Readings and References 3.0 INTRODUCTION The broad rubric of motivation and motivation theory is one of the most frequently studied and written-about topics in the organisational sciences, and is considered one of the most important areas of study in the field of organisational behaviour. Despite the magnitude of the effort that has been devoted to the study of motivation, there is no single theory of motivation that is universally accepted. The lack of a unified theory of motivation reflects both the complexity of the construct and the diverse backgrounds and aims of those who study it. This unit is devoted to the understanding of the various theories of motivation and their application to the management context. 3.1 OBJECTIVES After reading this unit, you will be able to: • Explain the content theories of motivation and evaluate their applicability; • Describe the expectancy theory and its key tenets to motivating employees; • Define equity theory and its implications for managers; • Explain goal-setting theory; and • Describe reinforcement theory and illustrate schedules of reinforcement. 41 Content Theories Process Theories and Schedules of Reinforcement 3.2 THEORIES OF MOTIVATION There are many competing theories which attempt to explain the nature of motivation. These theories center on three different aspects of motivation: the individual’s predisposition, the cognitive process, and the consequences deriving from the individual’s action. Based on these aspects, there are three types of theories of motivation: • Content theories – These theories are concerned with identifying people’s needs and their relative strengths, and the goals they pursue in order to satisfy these needs. • Process theories – These theories are concerned more with how behaviour is initiated, directed and sustained and attempt to identify the relationship among the dynamic variables, which make up motivation. • Reinforcement theory (outcome theories) – This theory seeks to explain what types of consequences motivate different people to work. It focuses on how environment teaches us to alter our behaviours so that we maximise positive consequences and minimise adverse consequences. 3.3 CONTENT THEORIES Content (or need) theories of motivation focus on factors internal to the individual that energise and direct behaviour. In general, such theories regard motivation as the product of internal drives that compel an individual to act or move toward the satisfaction of individual needs. Major content theories of motivation are Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, Alderfer’s ERG theory, Herzberg’s motivator- hygiene theory, and McClelland’s learned needs or three-needs theory. 3.3.1 Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory (1954) proposes that humans are motivated by multiple needs and that these needs exist in a hierarchical order. Maslow identified five general types of motivating needs: • Physiological needs: These are the most basic human physical needs, including food, water, and other conditions necessary for survival. In the organisational setting, these are reflected in the needs for pleasant working conditions and salary. • Safety needs: These are the needs for a safe and secure physical and emotional environment and freedom from threats and emotional distress. In an organisational workplace, safety needs reflect the needs for safe jobs, fringe benefits and job security. • Social needs: These needs reflect the desire to be accepted by one’s peers, have friendships, be loved, and be part of a group. In the organisation, these needs influence the desire for good relationships with coworkers and supervisors and participation in a work group. • Esteem needs: These needs relate to the desire for a positive self-image and to receive attention, recognition, and appreciation from others. Within an 44 Personality and Attitudes in Organisational Behaviour to build motivation, but their absence is not strongly dissatisfying. These are the characteristics that people find intrinsically rewarding and serve as strongly motivating factors. Although Herzberg’s theory is a popular explanation of work motivation, it has been criticized on the following grounds: 1) It is not universally applicable, because it was based on and applies best to managerial, professional and upper-level white-collar employees. 2) The model appears to reduce the motivational importance of pay, status and relations with others, since these are maintenance factors. 3) The model is limited by its self-report methodology. The appearance of two factors could very well be an outcome of people’s tendencies to take credit themselves when things are going well and to blame the extrinsic environment for failure. 4) The model makes no absolute distinction between the effects of the two major factors but outlines only general tendencies. This has limited applicability and no significant predictive outcomes for productivity. Regardless of the criticisms, Herzberg has contributed substantially to the study of work motivation. He extended Maslow’s need hierarchy concept and made it more applicable to work motivation. He also drew attention to the importance of job content factors in work motivation, which previously had been neglected and often overlooked. The job design technique of job enrichment is also one of Herzberg’s contributions. Overall, Herzberg added much to the better understanding of job content factors, but fell short of a comprehensive theory of work motivation. 3.3.4 McClelland’s Learned Needs Theory McClelland’s theory (1971) suggests that needs are amplified or suppressed through self-concept, social norms, and past experience. Therefore, needs can be “learned”. Three of the primary needs in this theory are as follows: • Need for achievement (nAch) – The desire to excel, to achieve in relation to a set of standards and to purse and attain goals. • Need for affiliation (nAff) – The desire for friendly and close interpersonal relationships. • Need for power (nPow) – The desire to control one’s environment and to influence others. People with a strong need for achievement want to accomplish reasonably challenging goals through their own effort. They prefer tasks with a moderate degree of risk and those that provide immediate and precise feedback information on progress toward a goal. High achievers find accomplishment of a task to be intrinsically satisfying; they do not expect or necessarily desire the accompanying material rewards. Also, when high achievers select a goal, they tend to be totally preoccupied with the task until it is successfully completed. They tend to be realistic about their abilities and tend to persist in their efforts to accomplish goals. 45 Content Theories Process Theories and Schedules of Reinforcement People with a strong need for affiliation try to project a favourable image of themselves. They tend to actively support others and try to smooth out workplace conflicts. High nAff employees generally work well in coordinating roles to mediate conflicts, and in sales positions where the main task is cultivating long- term relations. However, they tend to be less effective at allocating scarce resources and making other decisions that potentially generate conflict. People with a high need for power want to exercise control over others and are concerned about maintaining their leadership positions. They frequently rely on persuasive communication, make more suggestions in meetings and tend to publicly evaluate situations more frequently. McClelland pointed out that there are two types of nPow. Those who enjoy their power for its own sake and use it to advance personal interest have personalised power. Others have a high need for socialised power because they desire power as a means to help others. An extensive amount of research done on the theory makes several predictions about the relationship between needs and job performance: 1) When jobs have a high degree of personal responsibility and feedback and an intermediate degree of risk, high achievers are strongly motivated. High achievers, for example, are successful in entrepreneurial activities such as running their own businesses and managing self-contained units within large organisations. 2) High achievers do not necessarily make good mangers. People with a high achievement need are interested in how well they do personally and not in influencing others to do well. Typically, high achievers make excellent salespersons but seldom good sales managers. 3) People with low need for affiliation tend to do better in decision-making positions because their choices and actions are not biased by a personal need for approval. 4) A high power motive is related to managerial effectiveness. Power-motivated people make excellent managers especially when they have a high need for socialised rather than personalised power. 3.3.5 Job Characteristics Model The job characteristics model (Hackman & Oldham, 1976) proposes that motivation, satisfaction, performance quality, and withdrawal behaviours such as absenteeism and turnover are a function of three critical psychological states: experienced meaningfulness, responsibility for outcomes, and knowledge of results. Experienced meaningfulness is thought to be determined by three core job characteristics: skill variety (being challenged to use a variety of one’s capabilities), task identity (completing a whole, identifiable piece of work from start to finish), and task significance (having an impact on other people inside or outside the organisation). Experienced responsibility is thought to be shaped by the job characteristic of autonomy (freedom and discretion about when and how to complete the work), and experienced knowledge of results is shaped by the job characteristic of feedback (information from completing the work itself about one’s progress and effectiveness). Thus, from a motivational standpoint, well- designed jobs are those that incorporate high levels of the five core job dimensions. When people perform such jobs, they should feel highly motivated, perform high-quality work, be highly satisfied with their jobs, be absent infrequently and be unlikely to resign from their jobs. 46 Personality and Attitudes in Organisational Behaviour Fig 3.1: The Job Characteristics Model To assess the relationship between core job dimensions and motivation, a questionnaire known as the Job Diagnostic Survey (JDS) has been developed. Based on responses to the JDS, an index known as the motivating potential score (MPS) is computed as follows: Skill variety + Task identity + Task significance× Autonomy × Feedback MPS = ———————————————————————————— 3 The MPS is a summary index of a job’s potential for motivating people. The higher the score for a given job, the greater the likelihood of experiencing positive outcomes specified by the model. These effects are, however, moderated by individual differences in growth need strength, such that employees who value learning and development are more responsive to both the enriched job characteristics and the critical psychological states, as well as by knowledge, skill, and autonomy in the work context. Self Assessment Questions 1) Present the three main categories of theories in the area of work motivation. ............................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... Critical psychological states Experienced meaningfulness Core job dimensions Skill variety Task identity Task significance Autonomy Job feedback Knowledge of results Experienced responsibility Internal work motivation Growth need strength Affective outcomes 49 Content Theories Process Theories and Schedules of Reinforcement 1) Skills and abilities – Motivation alone cannot ensure successful performance of a task. The employee should also have the abilities and skills required to successfully perform the task. 2) Role perceptions – The employee should have a clear perception of his role in the organisation and an accurate knowledge of the job requirements. This will enable him to focus his efforts on accomplishing the assigned tasks. Thus although the basic premise of the model is the same as for Vroom’s model, it is more complex. Managerial implications of expectancy theory The expectancy model is a valuable tool for helping managers design a motivational climate that will stimulate appropriate employee behaviour. It provides clear guidelines for increasing employee motivation by altering expectancies, instrumentalities and outcome valences. These are discussed below: 1) Increasing effort-performance expectancies – Effort-performance expectancies can be increased by training employees to do jobs more effectively, by providing sufficient time and resources, by giving supportive feedback and by following employees’ suggestions about ways to change their jobs. Selecting people with required skills and knowledge, matching employees to jobs and communicating tasks required for the job are also an important part of this process. 2) Increasing performance-outcome instrumentalities – The most obvious way to improve outcome expectancies is to measure performance accurately and distribute more valued rewards to those with higher job performance. However, in addition to a having a high performance-based reward system, companies need to regularly communicate the system through examples, anecdotes and public ceremonies, and clearly demonstrate the link between valued rewards and performance. 3) Increasing outcome valences – Performance outcomes influence work effort only when those outcomes are valued by employees. This implies that companies must develop individualised reward systems so that employees who perform well are offered a choice of rewards. Incentive systems that allow employees to choose from a menu of available alternatives like a pay raise, additional vacation days, improved insurance benefits or daycare facilities may serve to increase the satisfaction with the rewards that they receive. There are also performance outcomes that have negative valences that reduce the effectiveness of existing reward systems. For example, when there is peer pressure to perform at the minimum standard, formal rewards may not serve as motivators. Companies must therefore minimise the presence of such counter-valent outcomes. Evaluation of expectancy theory Expectancy theory remains one of the better theories for predicting work effort and motivation. It has been applied to a wide variety of studies, such as predicting student motivation to participate in teaching evaluations, using a decision support system, leaving the organisation and engaging in organisational citizenship behaviours. However, the theory seems to ignore the role of emotion in employee behaviour. 50 Personality and Attitudes in Organisational Behaviour 3.4.2 Equity Theory Equity theory (Adams, 1963) suggests that individuals engage in social comparison by comparing their efforts and rewards with those of relevant others. The perception of individuals about the fairness of their rewards relative to others influences their level of motivation. Equity exists when individuals perceive that the ratio of efforts to rewards is the same for them as it is for others to whom they compare themselves. Inequity exists when individuals perceive that the ratio of efforts to rewards is different for them than it is for others to whom they compare themselves. There are two types of inequity—under-reward and over- reward. Under-reward occurs when a person believes that she puts in more effort than another, yet receives the same reward, or puts in the same effort as another for a lesser reward. For instance, if an employee works longer hours than her coworker, yet they receive the same salary, the employee would perceive inequity in the form of under-reward. Conversely, with over-reward, a person will feel that his efforts to rewards ratio is higher than another person’s, such that he is getting more for putting in the same effort, or getting the same reward even with less effort. The theory suggests that there are four possible referents for comparison: • Self-inside: The employee compares his experiences in the present position with the experiences of those holding a similar position in the same organisation. • Self-outside: The employee compares his experiences in the present position with the experiences of those holding a similar position in another organisation. • Other-inside: The employee compares his experience in the present position with the experience of another individual or group of individuals holding a different position but belonging to the same organisation. • Other-outside: The employee compares his experiences in the present position with that of another individual or group of individuals holding a different position and belonging to a different organisation. Whatever be the source of referent comparison, individuals are motivated to reduce perceived inequity and may attempt to reduce inequity in various ways: • Change the inputs – A person may change his or her level of effort; an employee who feels under-rewarded is likely to work less hard. • Change the outcomes – A person may try to change his or her rewards, such as by asking for a raise or making unauthorised use of company resources. • Change the comparison other’s inputs – A person may change the behaviour of the reference person, perhaps by encouraging that person to put forth more effort. • Change the comparison other’s outcomes – A person may change the outcome of the reference person perhaps by asking the boss to stop giving favourable treatment to him/her. • Change the comparison other – A person experiencing inequity may change the reference person and compare him or herself to a different person to assess equity. 51 Content Theories Process Theories and Schedules of Reinforcement • Change one’s perception – A person may believe that the co-worker is doing more or that the higher outcomes that the other receives are no better that his/hers. • Leave the field – A person may avoid thinking about the inequity by keeping away from the office, moving to another department or quitting the job. While research suggests that under-reward motivates individuals to resolve the inequity, research also indicates that the same is not true for over-reward. Individuals who are over-rewarded often engage in cognitive dissonance, convincing themselves that their efforts and rewards are equal to another’s. Evidence also reveals that some employees decrease their motivation and effort, others increase it and still other show no change in response to over-reward inequity. One approach to resolving these conflicting findings has involved understanding individual differences in equity sensitivity. Huseman, Hatfield, and Miles (1987) proposed that employees can be classified into one of three categories of equity preferences: • Benevolent (preferring a lower outcome/input ratio than comparison others) • Equity sensitive (preferring an equal outcome/input ratio to comparison others) • Entitled (preferring a higher outcome/input ratio than comparison others) Accordingly, under-reward inequity leads to higher motivation among benevolent employees than equity sensitive and entitled employees. While benevolent employees are willing to work hard even when they receive lower outcomes than others, equity sensitive and entitled employees find this distressing. Managerial implications of equity theory Equity theory has important implications for ways of motivating people. The three key one are discussed below: 1) Avoiding underpayment – Companies that attempt to save money by reducing employees’ salaries may find that employees respond in different ways to settle scores. For example, they may steal, shave a few minutes off their work, or otherwise withhold production. In extreme cases, they may go on strike. Thus making people feel underpaid is an unwise decision and ineffective managerial practice. 2) Avoiding overpayment – Overpaying employees to motivate them is also an ineffective strategy mainly for two reasons: (a) Increases in performance in response to overpayment inequity is only temporary. As time goes on, people begin to believe that they actually deserve the higher pay they are getting and drop their level of work down to normal. (b) Overpaying one employee implies that other are being underpaid. When the majority of employees feel underpaid, they will lower their performance resulting in a net decrease in productivity and widespread dissatisfaction. 3) Being open and honest with employees – Openness and honesty about pay is critical because it helps employees understand the basis of their pay. This, in turn, leads to trust in their company, motivating them to put forth the effort required to excel. 54 Personality and Attitudes in Organisational Behaviour likely to continue, while behaviour that is followed by unfavourable consequences is not likely to be repeated. Based on this principle, reinforcement theory describes four contingency methods of shaping behaviour: 1) Positive reinforcement – It occurs when behaviour is followed by a favourable consequence that encourages the repetition of that behaviour. For example, a supervisor may praise the employee for a job well done. In this case, praise serves as a positive reinforcer that strengthens high-quality work. Other common positive reinforcers are recognition, promotion, money, approval, fringe benefits etc. 2) Negative reinforcement – It occurs when behaviour is accompanied by the removal of an unfavourable consequence that results in strengthening of that behaviour. For example, an employee may work till late at the office to revise a sales presentation to prevent being rebuked by the boss next morning. In this example, rebuking serves as a negative reinforcer that encourages avoidance behaviour. 3) Punishment – It occurs when the administration of an unfavourable consequence discourages certain behaviour. Giving an employee a two-day suspension from work without pay for showing up drunk is an example of punishment. 4) Extinction – It occurs when the target behaviour decreases because no reinforcement follows it. For example, research suggests that when mangers stop congratulating employees for their good performance, that performance tends to decline. Schedules of Reinforcement The effects of reinforcement depend heavily on the schedule according to which reinforcers are delivered. The two major types of reinforcement schedules are continuous and intermittent. A continuous reinforcement schedule reinforces the desired behaviour each and every time it is demonstrated. For example, to reinforce punctuality in an employee with a history of tardiness, the manager might compliment the employee whenever he is punctual. With intermittent or partial reinforcement, on the other hand, not every instance of the desirable behaviour is reinforced, but reinforcement is given often enough to make the behaviour worth repeating. Intermittent partial schedules are distinguished by whether they are based on time (interval) or number of behavioural events (ratio), and whether that interval or ratio is fixed or variable. The two dimensions result in four classes of intermittent schedules: 1) Fixed interval schedule – Reinforcement is given after uniform time intervals. For example, being paid the salary on a monthly basis. 2) Fixed ratio schedule – Reinforcement is given after a fixed number of responses. For example, being paid on a piece work basis or being given a day off after serving a specific number of customers. 3) Variable interval schedule – Reinforcement is given after varying time intervals. For example, randomly timed unannounced visits to a company office by the audit staff or getting promotions after undefined time intervals. 55 Content Theories Process Theories and Schedules of Reinforcement 4) Variable ratio schedule – Reinforcement is given after a varying (unpredictable) number of responses. For example, making a variable number of calls to a potential customer for securing a sale. Continuous reinforcement produces rapid learning for newly emitted, unstable or low-frequency responses. However, continuously reinforced responses extinguish more rapidly because the shift to no reinforcement is sudden and easier to perceive. Intermittent reinforcement, on the other hand, produces behaviour that is learned more slowly but is more resistant to extinction. It is therefore more appropriate for stable or high-frequency responses. Further, among the intermittent schedules, the variable ones tend to lead to higher performance and produce a rapid rate of responding than fixed schedules. Variable schedules are also more resistant to extinction. Thus the best way to promote fast learning and high resistance to extinction is to begin reinforcing a desired behaviour on a continuous schedule until the behaviour is well established and then shift to a variable intermittent schedule that is gradually made more demanding. Managerial implications of reinforcement theory Reinforcement concepts have been applied in the managerial setting using organisational behaviour modification (OB Mod). The typical OB Mod program follows a five-step problem-solving model: 1) Identify critical behaviours – Everything that an employee does is not equally important in terms of performance outcomes. It is therefore important to identify critical behaviours that make a significant impact on the employee’s job performance. 2) Develop baseline data – It requires that the manager determines the number of times the identified behaviour is occurring under present conditions. 3) Identify behavioural consequences – It involves performing a functional analysis to identify the behavioural contingencies or consequences of performance. It tells the manager the antecedent cues that emit the behaviour and the consequences that are currently maintaining it. 4) Develop and implement an intervention strategy – It involves implementing an appropriate intervention strategy that will entail changing some elements of performance-reward linkage with the goal of making high- level performance more rewarding. 5) Evaluate performance improvement – It requires that the observed behavioural change be evaluated to ensure that learning had taken place. A number of organisations have used OB Mod to improve employee productivity; to reduce errors, absenteeism, tardiness and accident rates; and to improve friendliness toward customers. Evaluation of reinforcement theory Although the effectiveness of reinforcements in the form of rewards and punishments has a lot of support in the literature, the theory has been criticized for overlooking thoughts and feelings that are evoked by environmental stimuli. The theory assumes that it is not necessary to study needs or cognitive processes to understand motivation, but that it is only necessary to examine the consequences 56 Personality and Attitudes in Organisational Behaviour of behaviour. However, increasing research on cognitive processes has challenged this basic assumption of the theory. Self Assessment Questions 1) Quoting suitable examples, describe the various contingency procedures used to shape behaviour. ............................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... 2) What are the various schedules of reinforcement? Describe the effectiveness of the schedules in shaping behaviour. ............................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... 3) What are the implications of reinforcement theory for management practice? ............................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... 3.6 LET US SUM UP There are several popular approaches to the study of work motivation. Content theories given by Maslow, Alderfer, Herzberg and McClelland attempt to identify specific content factors in the individual or in the job environment that motivate employees. Although such a content approach is easy to understand and can be readily translated into practice, there is very little research support for these models’ theoretical basis and predictability. However, the job characteristic model is supported by some research and represents an extension of the content theories to the job design approach. The process theories provide a much sounder theoretical explanation of work motivation. Vroom’s expectancy model explains the important cognitive variables and how they relate to one another in the complex process of work motivation. Equity theory explains how people respond when they are inequitably treated.