The next step of motivation – Process theories of motivation
Process theories of motivation
From the
previous two posts the author has elaborated on content theories which are
possibly co-relate with extrinsic motivation. From this post the author will
explain what is a process theory and types of process theories.
What is a
process theory?
A process theory
on motivation is focusing on the psychological and mental forces that have a
direct impact on motivation (Armstrong & Taylor, 2014) . These theories are
also known as “cognitive theories” because of the fact that these theories
emphasise on the employees understanding of his work environment and the ways
of performing his duty. There are several conceptual theories which are built
upon the basis of a process theory. In 21st century it is believed
that nonmonetary incentives are the best way to motivate and employee because
the employees have started to value intrinsic incentives over extrinsic
incentives. (Elena, 2012) .
Vroom’s
Expectancy theory
Expectancy
theory states that an employee is motivated to work if he knows the reward he
gets by performing his work and if that work is in line with the expected
target (Armstrong & Taylor, 2014) . This theory was
initially developed by Victor Vroom in 1964 and studied and altered by many
throughout the history. The functionality of the theory is depending on a
formula thus making it possible to give a numerical valuation to Motivation.
Before defining
the equation it is sensible to understand the relationship between each
variable of the equation.
1.
Relationship between Effort and Performance –
Expectancy (E)
a.
Expectancy is defined as the probability of an
effort converting into a possible outcome (Suciu, et al., 2013) . This value will
vary between 0 and 1. Where 0 depicts no possible outcome for a given effort
and 1 means the expected outcome can be reached by the given effort.
2.
Relationship between performance and rewards –
Instrumentality (I)
a.
The instrumentality is the employee’s perception
towards possible rewards for a given performance (Estes &
Plonick, 2012) .
For an example an employee will be motivated to show superior performance
because of the desire to obtain a higher bonus or a second level outcome. Value
will vary between 0 and 1.
3.
Relationship between rewards and personal goals –
Valence (V)
a.
Valence is the effective value of a given
outcome. If an employee sees an outcome has a direct relevance to his personal
goals it is said to be positively valent. But if he chooses to avoid the
outcome it considers to be negatively Valent (Suciu, et al., 2013) . The value of the
Valence will vary between (-1) and 1.
(Updated on 03rd October
2019)
Effort of motivation = Valence x
Expectancy x Instrumentality
Expectancy theory – Manager’s guide to employee motivation
From the
viewpoint of a manger, this theory supports a managerial role by defining the
relationship between the effort, performance, rewards and personal goals in a
quantitative manner (Estes & Plonick, 2012) . The equation gives
the advantage of eliminating the imaginary implications in motivation and
providing numerical comments where comparison and soft experiments are possible (Parijat &
Bagga, 2014) .
An organisation can plan a set of actions and predict the consequence on
employee motivation by using the equation to assess the every possible scenarios.
A manager can come with a firm strategy and implement it after establishing a
calculated desired outcome. Employee performance variation due to a change in
the organisational procedures or processes can only be guessed without this
equation (Suciu, et al., 2013) . Moreover applying
this theory along with the equation, a manger can focus on negative trends on
employee performance and plan remedy actions to turn around the tables.
This theory is
much highlighted due to its focus on individuality and the revelation of the
relationship between each three afore-mentioned variables. Moreover, a manger
of an organisation always should be in the understanding that the variables are
changing with the time and if to maintain the same value for motivation for a
longer period, he needs to adjust the variables of the equation accordingly.
For the best results, it is advised to use this theory on individual basis. Refer the following video for a recap of what the author have already discussed.
(Jiko, 2018)
Expectancy theory – understanding the equation
To clarify the
equation and it’s implications author will create a case from his experience on
aircraft maintenance field.
Motivation = V * I * E
Preface to the
case – the current practice is to refer to the aircraft maintenance manuals is
to take a print out from the computers which are placed at the main office
premises. The office is 10 mins away from the actual work place (apron) and
finding a vehicle (which is faster to reach the computer lab) is ardours. Aviation
regulators have mandated to have a some form of manual transcripts on hand
before starting work. Most of the engineers have complained about the issue and
there were numerous occasions where flights had delayed due to the above issue.
Case 1
Management is
proposing to buy Smart 3G tabs, which has the access to maintenance data
online. However, the tabs are outdated and the internet speed is found
insufficient.
Valance –
Engineers think it is a good initiative and will make things easier as their reward. (1)
Instrumentality –
Engineers because the tabs are 3G, doubt that it will not be faster enough to
retrieve heavy data load from the servers. (0.25)
Expectancy –
Engineers believe due to the robust condition of the working environment the
tabs would easily get damaged and the desired outcome would not be achieved.
(0.1)
So the M =
1*0.25*0.1 = 0.025
Case 2
Line Maintenance
manager has come up with an idea giving engineers an additional allowance for
an extended data usage so they can use their smart phones to access the maintenance
data.
Valence – Same as
the case 1 it is an initiative to solve the problem. (1)
Instrumentality –
Though this sounds like the perfect solution, engineers believe there will be practical
issues with the implementation.
1.
Smart phones have smaller screen size hence
making it harder to refer to the engineering drawings.
2.
Engineers doubt that, the allowance that is been
proposed would not be sufficient to pay the bill and there is no provisions to
increase the allowance in case if the data charges go up due to taxes or by the
provider.
Nevertheless,
this idea looks more appealing to the engineers than the case 2. (0.5)
Expectancy –
Same as case 1 due to the robust working environment prolonged usage of the
smartphone will reduce the durability of the device and since it is a personal
device engineers would be hesitant to use that in rainy and misty conditions. (0.1)
M = 1*0.5*0.1 =
0.05
Case 3
Third proposal
from the manager. Using the existing rest areas at the apron, can create mini
computer labs consisting of two computers and a printer in each lab. This will
give them the same advantages of having print outs on hand and it will directly
address the issues that were pertaining by only having a central computer lab
at a remote location.
Valance - Same
as case 1 and 2. (1)
Instrumentality –
Since this can be done by using the existing computers and printers in the
central lab, no additional cost for procurement is involved. Only the
rearranging of the rest areas would be sufficient. Hence, engineers consider
this as the most practical solution. (1)
Expectancy – By implementing
this, No new issues will arise other than the issues it had. In addition, this
will address all the issue it had and would solve them. (1)
M = 1*1*1 = 1
From the
outcomes of the equation, the manager can easily predict how he can increase the
motivation of the engineers by giving them the perfect solution they were
seeking. However as explained, a manger always should consider the behavioural aspects
of a human. The solution that may seems to be ideal would not be suitable for
the same problem in future. With experience and the working conditions human
behaviour and human expectations will definitely change (Parijat & Bagga, 2014) . Using the
expectancy theory will solve half of the manager’s problems by giving him the advantage
of having the almost perfect solution at every time.
References
Armstrong, M. & Taylor,
S., 2014. Armstrong’s Handbook of Human Resource Management. 13 ed.
Philadelphia: © Michael Armstrong.
Elena, N. I., 2012. HUMAN RESOURCES MOTIVATION – AN
IMPORTANT FACTOR IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF BUSINESS PERFORMANCE. The Annals of
the University of Oradea, 1(1), pp. 1039-1045.
Estes, B. & Plonick, B., 2012. Examining
Motivation Theory in Higher Education: An Expectancy Theory Analysis of
Tenured Faculty Productivity. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT,
BUSINESS, AND ADMINISTRATION, 15(1).
Jiko, A., 2018. www.youtube.com. [Online]
Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpnzW06shsM
[Accessed 2 October 2019].
Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpnzW06shsM
[Accessed 2 October 2019].
Parijat, P. & Bagga, S., 2014. Victor Vroom’s
Expectancy Theory of Motivation – An Evaluation. International Research
Journal of Business and Management , 7(9).
Pearson Education Inc, 2014. Vroom's Expectancy
Theory. [Art] (Pearson Higher Education).
Suciu, L. E., Mortan, M. & Lazar, L., 2013.
Vroom's Expectancy Theory. An Empirical Study: Civil Servant's Performance
Appraisal Influencing Expectancy. Transylvanian Review of Administrative
Sciences, Volume 39, pp. 180-200.
Agreed on the above post, As Discussed by Hussey (2007) in his book the expectation theory provides a mechanism for finding motivation through some kind of calculation. It is based on employee common sense psychology and says that when their actions lead to the achievement of expected results, they are motivated to act. The benefit of this is that it predicts whether employees will work overtime for career development, maintain good interpersonal relationships, establish a more ethical image, and do other things.
ReplyDeleteThank you for the agreement. This equation will definitely has the allowance of predicting the future in numerical way. Though at the beginning this may looks like a ardours work with the time (past data) will make it easier to compare and adjust according to a given situation (Parijat and Bagga, 2014)
DeleteAgreed,Furthermore this theory recognizes as more realistic than Maslow and
ReplyDeleteHerzberg approaches.Since it explains many of the phenomenon related to employee efforts, work performance, employee motivation.Also leaders can understands the subjective differences that cause
differences in motivation of different individuals (Parijat and Parijat,2014).
The usefulness of this theory is not only because it gives a numerical value, additionally this theory gives the freedom of adjusting the variables according to a give situation (Parijat and Bagga, 2014). Hence this theory can be considered as universal.
DeleteI think best theories to use Maslow’s and Herzberg’s two –factor Theory to improve employee motivation and efficiency. Dartey-Baah and Amoako (2011), emphasis that Herzberg divided motivation in to two factors: Motivator and Hygiene’s further, two factors determine employee’s satisfaction or dissatisfaction about their job. Abbah (2014), stated according to Maslow’s employees have five major needs: physiological, safety, social, ego, and self- actualizing. His theory mainly based on personal judgment and employee’s lower level of needs had to be fulfilled before the next higher level need.
ReplyDeleteI have covered those theories in an earlier article. In this article i tried to explained the importance of having numerical value for motivation. Maslow's and Herzberg theories can be considered as the foundation of any motivation theory. But absence of an equation makes them harder to compare with an earlier incident (Estes & Plonick, 2012).
DeleteThe Vroom's theory is mainly based on self knowledge or psychological sense of employees and will be triggered when the need arises based on situations (Parijat and Bagga, 2014)
ReplyDeleteExactly, the situational approach made this theory very popular among the leaders. However extensive use of this theory will make managers or leaders to think only inside the box (Suciu, et al., 2013). Because the tendency to predict everything with a numerical value will make them restricted only to use the past experiences.
DeleteProcess theories marked the middle of the 20th century, including but not limited to theories such as equity theory, expectancy theory, goal-setting theory, and reinforcement theory. Within the theories, administrators are given ways to understand how certain behaviors are caused or stopped by different motivational factors.
ReplyDeleteValid addition, Thank you. In the middle of the century leadership has noticed the shift of factors affecting the employee motivation. Rabbit and carrot methods expired and human needs became more complex. Leaders had to focus on the behavioural impact of motivational strategies they used (Black, et al., 2019). Hence we saw a lot of process theories came into the light.
DeleteThe expectancy theory looks at every motivational factor as a stand-alone event. Under the theory's worldview, employees work on a project for a certain reward, then go on to the next one for the next reward (Victor, 1964) It, however, doesn't take into account an employee who does the right thing on a project or two because of a desire to get promoted to meet her long-term career plan. That employee is motivated by a reward, but she's not motivated by a reward tied to a project. This makes the expectancy theory weak at predicting long-term patterns of behavior.
ReplyDeleteInteresting argument Chamari. Lloyd and Mertens (2018) in their very eloborative article on expectancy theory have answered to this problem. The key is to understanding the social context. If you expecting more from the expectancy theory then you have to take the applicability of social context into the Vroom's theory. Some might looks for short term rewards but some are looking forward for long term rewards. But specifically this theory can address both the issues.
DeleteAgree with you Kalum, the purpose of rewards and promotions is to provide a systematic approach for delivering positive consequences and attracts people to join the organisation and ultimately be motivated to deliver higher level of performance (Pratheepkanth, 2011). Employees perform when they are rewarded and when they exceed the expectation and limits and surpass the target, as a way to motivate them they should be immediately rewarded.
ReplyDeleteIn the field of recruitment, this theory can be used as the most effective way of understanding the applicants' needs and how practically the organisation can fulfil those (Arndt and Harkins, 2017). By doing that the recruitment team can stay one step ahead in the recruitment process.
DeleteAgree you’re your Blog comments furthermore, Vrooms Expectancy theory is a more complex motivation theory, however, it is based on employee’s common sense psychology and says they will be motivated to act when there is an expectation that their behavior can lead to desired results being achieved (Parijat & Bagga, 2014).
ReplyDeleteThough this looks like a complex approach the advantages in comparison and understanding different situations make this theory an attractive one than most of the other motivational theories (Parjit and Bagga, 2014).
DeleteAgree with you.
ReplyDeletePotential weakness of the expectancy theory is that it assumes all necessities are in place, which is not always the case. Employees need to have the ability, the resources and the opportunity to perform their job well. An example of this would be the role genetics can play as a biological limiting factor of performance (Walker, 2003).
Motivation is the mindset to pursue and fulfil the specific un-reached needs (Nagar and Sharma, 2016). Hence the application of theory should be combined with earlier theories of motivation such as need theory or Herzberg's, so that the basics of human needs are counteracts in an efficient manner.
Delete