Brain 2

LuthansChapter6.pdf

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Management homework help >Brain 2

IAP PR

OO FS

LEARNING OBJECTIVES  Define the motivation process.  Identify the primary and secondary needs.  Discuss the major theories of work motivation.  Present the motivational application of job design.  Describe the motivational application of goal setting.

Motivation is a basic psychological process. Few would deny that it is the most important focus in the micro approach to organizational behavior. In fact, a data-based comprehensive analysis concluded that “America’s competitiveness problems appear to be largely motiva- tional in nature.”1 Many people equate the causes of behavior with motivation; however, as evidenced in this book, the causes of organizational behavior are much broader and more complex than can be explained by motivation alone.

Along with many other psychological constructs, motivation is presented here as a very important process in understanding behavior. Motivation interacts with and acts in conjunc- tion with other mediating processes and the environment. It must also be remembered that, like the other cognitive processes, motivation cannot be seen. All that can be seen is behav- ior. Motivation is a hypothetical construct that is used to help explain behavior; it should not be equated with behavior. In fact, while recognizing the “central role of motivation,” many of today’s organizational behavior theorists “think it is important for the field to reempha- size behavior.”2

This chapter first presents motivation as a basic psychological process. The more applied aspects of motivation on job design and goal setting are covered in the last part of the chapter. The first section of this chapter clarifies the meaning of motivation by defining the relationship among its various parts. The need–drive–incentive cycle is defined and ana- lyzed. The next section is devoted to an overview of the various types of needs, or motives: both primary and secondary. The next section of the chapter presents both the historical and more complex contemporary theories of work motivation. Finally, the two major motiva- tion applications of job design and goal setting are given attention.

THE BASIC MOTIVATION PROCESS

Today, virtually all people—practitioners and scholars—have their own definitions of moti- vation. Usually one or more of the following words are included: desires, wants, wishes, aims, goals, needs, drives, motives, and incentives. Technically, the term motivation can be traced to the Latin word movere, which means “to move.” This meaning is evident in the

CHAPTER 6 Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications

Co py ri gh t © 2 01 5. I nf or ma ti on A ge P ub li sh in g. A ll r ig ht s re se rv ed . Ma y no t be r ep ro du ce d in a ny f or m wi th ou t pe rm is si on f ro m th e pu bl is he r, e xc ep t fa ir u se s pe rm it te d un de r

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Business Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 12/29/2017 8:38 PM via LOUISIANA STATE UNIV AT SHREVEPORT AN: 999823 ; Luthans, Fred, Luthans, Kyle W., Luthans, Brett C..; Organizational Behavior : An Evidence-based Approach Account: s3563253

132 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

following comprehensive definition: motivation is a process that starts with a physiological or psychological deficiency or need that activates a behavior or a drive that is aimed at a goal or incentive. Thus, the key to understanding the process of motivation lies in the meaning of, and relationships among, needs, drives, and incentives.

Figure 6.1 graphically depicts the motivation process. Needs set up drives aimed at goals or incentives; this is what the basic process of motivation is all about. In a systems sense, motivation consists of these three interacting and interdependent elements:

1. Needs. Needs are created whenever there is a physiological or psychological imbal- ance. For example, a need exists when cells in the body are deprived of food and water or when the personality is deprived of other people who serve as friends or companions. Although psychological needs may be based on a deficiency, sometimes they are not. For example, an individual with a strong need to get ahead may have a history of consistent success.

2. Drives. With a few exceptions,3 drives, or motives (the two terms are often used inter- changeably), are set up to alleviate needs. A physiological drive can be simply defined as a deficiency with direction. Physiological and psychological drives are action oriented and provide an energizing thrust toward reaching an incentive. They are at the very heart of the motivational process. The examples of the needs for food and water are translated into the hunger and thirst drives, and the need for friends becomes a drive for affiliation.

3. Incentives. At the end of the motivation cycle is the incentive, defined as anything that will alleviate a need and reduce a drive. Thus, attaining an incentive will tend to restore physiological or psychological balance and will reduce or cut off the drive. Eating food, drinking water, and obtaining friends will tend to restore the balance and reduce the corresponding drives. Food, water, and friends are the incentives in these examples.

These basic dimensions of the motivation process serve as a point of departure for the rest of the chapter. After discussion of primary and secondary motives, the work-motiva- tion theories and applications that are more directly related to the study and application of organizational behavior and human resource management are examined.

Primary Motives

Psychologists do not totally agree on how to classify the various human motives, but they would acknowledge that some motives are unlearned and physiologically based. Such motives are variously called physiological, biological, unlearned, or primary. The last term is used here because it is more comprehensive than the others. However, the use of the term primary does not imply that these motives always take precedence over the learned secondary motives. Although the precedence of primary motives is implied in some moti- vation theories, there are many situations in which the secondary motives predominate over primary motives. Common examples are celibacy among priests and fasting for a reli-

FIGURE 6.1. The Basic Motivation Process

NEEDS DRIVES INCENTIVES

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 6  MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 133

IAP PR

OO FS

gious, social, or political cause. In both cases, learned secondary motives are stronger than unlearned primary motives.

Two criteria must be met in order for a motive to be included in the primary classifi- cation: It must be unlearned, and it must be physiologically based. Thus defined, the most commonly recognized primary motives include hunger, thirst, sleep, avoidance of pain, sex, and maternal concern. Although these very basic physiological requirements have been equated with primary needs over the years, just like personality traits discussed in the last chapter, in recent years recognition is given to the role that the brain may play in peo- ple’s motives.4 The “hard-wiring” of emotional needs would meet the primary criteria of being unlearned and physiologically based. Neuropsychologists are just beginning to do research on the role the brain plays in motivation, but potential applications to the work- place are already being recognized. For example, Coffman and Gonzalez-Molina note: “What many organizations don’t see—and what many don’t want to understand—is that employee performance and its subsequent impact on customer engagement revolve around a motivating force that is determined in the brain and defines the specific talents and the emotional mechanisms everyone brings to their work.”5 However, even though the brain pathways will be developed in different ways and people develop different appetites for the various physiological motives because people have the same basic physiological makeup, they will all have essentially the same primary needs, but not the learned secondary needs.

Secondary Motives

Whereas the primary needs are vital for even survival, the secondary drives are unquestionably the most important to the study of organizational behavior. As a human society develops economically and becomes more complex, the primary drives give way to the learned secondary drives in motivating behavior. With some glaring exceptions that have yet to be eradicated, the motives of hunger and thirst are not dominant among people living in the economically developed world. In addition, further breakthroughs in neuro- psychology may receive more deserved attention.6 But for now, the learned secondary motives dominate the study and application of the field of organizational behavior.

Secondary motives are closely tied to the learning concepts that are discussed in Chap- ter 12. In particular, the learning principle of reinforcement is conceptually and practically related to motivation. The relationship is obvious when reinforcement is divided into pri- mary and secondary categories and is portrayed as incentives. Some discussions, however, regard reinforcement as simply a consequence serving to increase the motivation to per- form the behavior again,7 and they are treated separately in this text. Once again, however, it should be emphasized that although the various behavioral concepts can be separated for study and analysis, in reality, concepts like reinforcement and motivation do not operate as separate entities in producing human behavior. The interactive effects are always present.

A motive must be learned in order to be included in the secondary classification. Numerous important human motives meet this criterion. Some of the more important ones are power, achievement, and affiliation, or, as they are commonly referred to, n Pow, n Ach, and n Aff. In addition, especially in reference to organizational behavior, security and status are important secondary motives. Table 6.1 gives examples of each of these important secondary needs.Co

py ri gh t © 2 01 5. I nf or ma ti on A ge P ub li sh in g. A ll r ig ht s re se rv ed . Ma y no t be r ep ro du ce d in a ny f or m wi th ou t pe rm is si on f ro m th e pu bl is he r, e xc ep t fa ir u se s pe rm it te d un de r

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

134 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

Intrinsic Versus Extrinsic Motives

Motives can be thought of as being generated not only by the primary and learned sec- ondary needs, but also by two separate but interrelated sets of sources. One method to char- acterize these two sources is to label them as being either intrinsic or extrinsic motives. Extrinsic motives are tangible and visible to others. They are distributed by other people (or agents). In the workplace, extrinsic motivators include pay, benefits, and promotions. Chapter 4 covered these commonly recognized extrinsic motivators and, especially in tough economic times, low-or no-cost extrinsic alternatives include food (from doughnuts to gourmet meals), games (e.g., one CPA firm holds a “mini-Olympics” with games such as who can pack a suitcase to take to an audit assignment the fastest for a prize), or bring in someone to do manicures or at-desk massages.8 Extrinsic motives also include the drive to avoid punishment, such as termination or being transferred. In each situation, an external individual distributes these items. Further, extrinsic rewards are usually contingency based. That is, the extrinsic motivator is contingent on improved performance or perfor- mance that is superior to others in the same workplace. Extrinsic motivators are necessary to attract people into the organization and to keep them on the job. They are also often used to inspire workers to achieve at higher levels or to reach new goals, as additional payoffs are contingent on improved performance.9 They do not, however, explain every motivated effort made by an individual employee. There is growing research evidence on how to enhance intrinsic motivation (e.g., providing choices).10 Another study found that when intrinsic motivation accompanies other types, for example, prosocial motivation, there will be a more positive impact on desired outcomes such as persistence, performance, and pro- ductivity.11

Intrinsic motives are internally generated. In other words, they are motivators that the person associates with the task or job itself. Intrinsic rewards include feelings of responsi- bility, achievement, accomplishment, that something was learned from an experience, feel-

TABLE 6.1. Examples of Key Secondary Needs

Need for Achievement • Doing better than competitors • Attaining or surpassing a difficult goal • Solving a complex problem • Carrying out a challenging assignment successfully • Developing a better way to do something

Need for Power • Influencing people to change their attitudes or behavior • Controlling people and activities • Being in a position of authority over others • Gaining control over information and resources • Defeating an opponent or enemy

Need for Affiliation • Being liked by many people • Being accepted as part of a group or team • Working with people who are friendly and cooperative • Maintaining harmonious relationships and avoiding conflicts • Participating in pleasant social activities

Need for Security • Having a secure job • Being protected against loss of income or economic disaster • Having protection against illness and disability • Being protected against physical harm or hazardous conditions • Avoiding tasks or decisions with a risk of failure and blame

Need for Status • Having the right car and wearing the right clothes • Working for the right company in the right job • Having a degree from the right university • Living in the right neighborhood and belonging to the country club • Having executive privileges

Source: Adapted from Gary Yukl, Skills for Managers and Leaders, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J., 1990, p 41. The examples of need for status were not covered by Yukl.

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 6  MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 135

IAP PR

OO FS

ings of being challenged or competitive, or that something was an engaging task or goal. Performing meaningful work has long been associated with intrinsic motivation.12

As Manz and Neck noted, “Even if a task makes us feel more competent and more self-controlling, we still might have a difficult time naturally enjoying and being motivated by it if we do not believe in its worthiness. Most of us yearn for purpose and meaning.”13

It is important to remember that these two types of motivators are not completely dis- tinct from one another. Many motivators have both intrinsic and extrinsic components. For example, a person who wins a sales contest receives the prize, which is the extrinsic moti- vator. At the same time, however, “winning” in a competitive situation may be the more powerful, yet internalized, motive.

To further complicate any explanation of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, cognitive evaluation theory suggests a more intricate relationship. This theory proposes that a task may be intrinsically motivating, but that when an extrinsic motivator becomes associated with that task, the actual level of motivation may decrease.14 Consider the world of motion pictures, where an actor often strives for many years to simply be included in a film. The intrinsic motive of acting is enough to inspire the starving artist. Once, however, the same actor becomes a star, the extrinsic motivators of money and perks would, according to cog- nitive evaluation theory, cause the individual to put less effort into each performance. In other words, according to this theory, extrinsic motivators may actually undermine intrin- sic motivation. This may seem like a confusing outcome, but there is some research that supports this theoretical position.15 However, as the meta-analytically based principle at the end of the chapter notes, there is considerable research evidence that extrinsic rewards may not detract from intrinsic motivation, and at least for interesting, challenging tasks, extrinsic rewards may even increase the level of intrinsic motivation (see the end of the chapter OB Principle).16

The seemingly contradictory findings make more sense when the concept of negative extrinsic motives is included. That is, threats, deadlines, directives, pressures, and imposed goals are likely to be key factors that diminish intrinsic motivation. For example, consider the difference between writing a book for fun versus writing a book that must be completed by a certain deadline in order to receive payment.17 There are also a series of criticisms of the cognitive evaluation theory, including that it was built on studies largely using students as subjects rather than workers in the workplace setting and that actual decrements in intrinsic motivation were relatively small when extrinsic rewards were introduced.18

Chapter 7 will extend this discussion into social cognitive variables such as self-effi- cacy, and Chapter 12 will use an extended reinforcement theory–based approach to behav- ioral performance management.

WORK-MOTIVATION THEORIES

So far, motivation has been presented as a basic psychological process consisting of pri- mary, general, and secondary motives; drives such as the n Pow, n Aff, and n Ach motives; and intrinsic and extrinsic motivators. In order to understand organizational behavior, these basic motives must be recognized and studied. However, these serve as only background and foundation for the more directly relevant work-motivation theories.

Figure 6.2 graphically summarizes the various theoretical streams for work motiva- tion. In particular, the figure shows three historical streams. The content theories go as far back as the turn of the twentieth century, when pioneering scientific managers such as Frederick W. Taylor, Frank Gilbreth, and Henry L. Gantt proposed sophisticated wage Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

136 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

incentive models to motivate workers. Next came the human relations movement, and then the content theories of Maslow, Herzberg, and Alderfer. Following the content movement were the process theories. Based mainly on the cognitive concept of expectancy, the pro- cess theories are most closely associated with the work of pioneering social psychologists Kurt Lewin and Edward Tolman and then organizational behavior scholars Victor Vroom, Lyman Porter, and Ed Lawler. Finally, with roots in social psychology, equity and its derivative procedural/organizational justice, and attribution theories have received atten- tion in work motivation.

Figure 6.2 purposely shows that at present there is a lack of integration or synthesis of the various theories. In addition to the need for integration, a comprehensive assessment of the status of work-motivation theory also noted the need for contingency models and group/social processes.19 At present the content and process theories have become estab- lished explanations for work motivation, and there is continued research interest in equity and organizational justice theories, but no agreed-upon overall theory exists. Moreover, unlike most of the other constructs in organizational behavior, reviews conclude that there has been relatively little new theory-building and research in work motivation in recent years.20 As Steers concluded, “over the past decade little will be found focusing on genuine theoretical development in this area.”21 The rest of the chapter gives an overview of the widely recognized historical and contemporary theories of work motivation.

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs: An Important Historical Contribution

Although the first part of the chapter mentions the most important primary and second- ary needs of humans, it does not relate them to a theoretical framework. Abraham Maslow, in a classic paper, outlined the elements of an overall theory of motivation.22 Drawing

FIGURE 6.2. The Theoretical Development of Work Motivation

1900 Scientific Management wage incentives

Human Relations economic security, working conditions Lewin and Tolmanexpectancy concerns

Maslow hierarchy of needs

Herzberg

Vroom valence/expectancy

Porter and Lawler

Festinger and Homans cognitive dissonance/exchange

Heider, de Charmes, and Bemmotivators and hygiene factors

performance-satisfaction cognitive evaluation/self-perception

Alderfer ERG needs

Lawler E P and P O expectancies

Adams equity/justice

Kelley and Rotter attribution/locus of control

Present CONTENT THEORIES PROCESS THEORIES

WORK MOTIVATION

CONTEMPORARY THEORIES

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 6  MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 137

IAP PR

OO FS

chiefly from humanistic psychology and his clinical experience, he thought that a person’s motivational needs could be arranged in a hierarchical manner. In essence, he believed that once a given level of need is satisfied, it no longer serves to motivate. The next higher level of need has to be activated in order to motivate the individual.

Maslow identified five levels in his need hierarchy (see Figure 6.3). They are, in brief, the following:

1. Physiological needs. The most basic level in the hierarchy, the physiological needs, generally corresponds to the unlearned primary needs discussed earlier. The needs of hunger, thirst, sleep, and sex are some examples. According to the theory, once these basic needs are satisfied, they no longer motivate. For example, a starving person will strive to obtain a carrot that is within reach. However, after eating his or her fill of carrots, the person will not strive to obtain another one and will be motivated only by the next higher level of needs.

2. Safety needs. This second level of needs is roughly equivalent to the security need. Maslow stressed emotional as well as physical safety. The whole organism may become a safety-seeking mechanism. Yet, as is true of the physiological needs, once these safety needs are satisfied, they no longer motivate.

3. Love needs. This third, or intermediate, level of needs loosely corresponds to the affection and affiliation needs. Like Freud, Maslow seems guilty of poor choice of wording to identify his levels. His use of the word love has many misleading connota- tions, such as sex, which is actually a physiological need. Perhaps a more appropriate word describing this level would be belongingness or social needs.

4. Esteem needs. The esteem level represents the higher needs of humans. The needs for power, achievement, and status can be considered part of this level. Maslow carefully pointed out that the esteem level contains both self-esteem and esteem from others.

5. Needs for self-actualization. Maslow’s major contribution, he portrays this level as the culmination of all the lower, intermediate, and higher needs of humans. People who have become self-actualized are self-fulfilled and have realized all their poten- tial. Self-actualization is closely related to the self-concepts discussed in Chapter 7. In effect, self-actualization is the person’s motivation to transform perception of self into reality.

FIGURE 6.3. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

SELF- ACTUALIZATION

ESTEEM NEEDS

LOVE NEEDS

SAFETY NEEDS

PHYSIOLOGICAL NEEDS

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

138 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

© 2 015Maslow did not intend that his needs hierarchy be directly applied to work motivation. In fact, he did not delve into the motivating aspects of humans in organizations until about 20 years after he originally proposed his theory. Despite this lack of intent on Maslow’s part,

others, such as Douglas McGregor in his widely read book The Human Side of Enterprise, popularized the Maslow theory in management literature. The needs hierarchy has tremen- dous intuitive appeal and is widely associated with work motivation.

In a very rough manner, Maslow’s needs hierarchy theory can be converted into the content model of work motivation shown in Figure 6.4. If Maslow’s estimates are applied to an organization example, the lower-level needs of personnel would be generally satis- fied, but only a minority of the social and esteem needs, and a small percent of the self- actualization needs, would be met.

On the surface, the content model shown in Figure 6.4 and the estimated percentages given by Maslow seem logical and still largely applicable to the motivation of employees in today’s organizations. Maslow’s needs hierarchy has often been uncritically accepted by writers of management textbooks and by practitioners. Unfortunately, the limited research that has been conducted lends little empirical support to the theory. About a decade after publishing his original paper, Maslow did attempt to clarify his position by saying that gratifying the self-actualizing need of growth-motivated individuals can actually increase rather than decrease this need. He also hedged on some of his other original ideas, for example, that higher needs may emerge after lower needs that have been unfulfilled or sup- pressed for a long period are satisfied. He stressed that human behavior is multidetermined and multimotivated.

Research findings indicate that Maslow’s is certainly not the final answer in work motivation. Yet the theory does make a significant contribution in terms of making man- agement aware of the diverse needs of employees at work. As one comprehensive analysis

FIGURE 6.4. A Hierarchy of Work Motivation

SELF- ACTUALIZATION Personal growth,

realization of potential

ESTEEM NEEDS Titles, status symbols,

promotions, banquets

SOCIAL NEEDS Formal and informal

work groups or teams

SECURITY NEEDS Seniority plans, union, health insurance, employee

assistance plans, severance pay, pension

BASIC NEEDS Pay

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 6  MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 139

IAP PR

OO FS

concluded, “Indeed, the general ideas behind Maslow’s theory seem to be supported, such as the distinction between deficiency needs and growth needs.”23 However, the number and names of the levels are not so important, nor, as the studies show, is the hierarchical concept. What is important is the fact that employees in the workplace have diverse motives, some of which are “high level.” There is also empirical and experiential evidence supporting the importance of Maslow’s various needs (e.g., Gallup survey research clearly indicates that Maslow’s third level social needs are the single most important contribution to satisfaction with life24 and a lot of, if not most, high-achieving people feel unfulfilled because they have not reached self-actualization25).

In other words, such needs as social and self-actualization are important to the content of work motivation. The exact nature of these needs and how they relate to motivation are not clear. At the same time, what does become clear from contemporary research is that layoffs and terminations (i.e., downsizing) can reduce employees to have concerns about basic-level needs such as security. Organizations that endeavor to reduce fears and other strong emotional responses during these moments through severance pay programs and outplacement services may be able to lessen the impact of individual terminations and lay- offs, especially for those who remain with the company.26

In recent years there has been a resurgence of interest in humanistic psychology27 and as will be discussed in the next chapter, positive psychology, of which Maslow was one of the pioneers. Throughout the years there have been attempts to revitalize and make his hierarchy of needs more directly applicable to work motivation. In particular, Herzberg’s two-factor theory covered next is based on Maslow’s concept, and a number of others use Maslow for constructing various hierarchies or pyramids. One example is Aon Consult- ing’s Performance Pyramid that starts with safety and security and moves up through rewards, affiliation, growth, and work and life harmony.28 There is little question that Maslow’s theory has stood the test of time and still makes a contribution to the study and application to work motivation.

Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory of Motivation

Another historically important contribution to work motivation is the content theory of Frederick Herzberg. Unlike Maslow, Herzberg many years ago conducted a widely reported motivational study on about 200 accountants and engineers employed by firms in and around Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. He used the critical incident method of obtaining data for analysis. The professional subjects in the study were essentially asked two ques- tions: (1) When did you feel particularly good about your job—what turned you on; and (2) When did you feel exceptionally bad about your job—what turned you off?

Responses obtained from this critical incident method were interesting and fairly con- sistent. Reported good feelings were generally associated with job experiences and job content. An example was the accounting supervisor who felt good about being given the job of installing new computer equipment. He took pride in his work and was gratified to know that the new equipment made a big difference in the overall functioning of his depart- ment. Reported bad feelings, on the other hand, were generally associated with the sur- rounding or peripheral aspects of the job—the job context. An example of these feelings was related by an engineer whose first job was routine record keeping and managing the office when the boss was gone. It turned out that his boss was always too busy to train him and became annoyed when he tried to ask questions. The engineer said that he was frus- trated in this job context and that he felt like a flunky in a dead-end job.Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

140 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

Tabulating these reported good and bad feelings, Herzberg concluded that job satis- fiers are related to job content and that job dissatisfiers are allied to job context. Herzberg labeled the satisfiers motivators, and he called the dissatisfiers hygiene factors. The term hygiene refers (as it does in the health field) to factors that are preventive; in Herzberg’s theory the hygiene factors are those that prevent dissatisfaction. Taken together, the moti- vators and the hygiene factors have become known as Herzberg’s two-factor theory of motivation.

Relation to Maslow’s Need Hierarchy

Herzberg’s theory is closely related to Maslow’s need hierarchy. The hygiene factors are preventive and environmental in nature (see Table 6.2), and they are roughly equivalent to Maslow’s lower-level needs. These hygiene factors prevent dissatisfaction, but they do not lead to satisfaction. In effect, they bring motivation up to a theoretical zero level and are a necessary “floor” to prevent dissatisfaction, and they serve as a platform or takeoff point for motivation. By themselves, the hygiene factors do not motivate. Only the motiva- tors, Herzberg asserted, motivate employees on the job. They are roughly equivalent to Maslow’s higher-level needs. According to Herzberg’s theory, an individual must have a job with a challenging content in order to be truly motivated.

Contribution to Work Motivation

Herzberg’s two-factor theory provided a new light on the content of work motivation. Up to this point, management had generally concentrated on the hygiene factors. When faced with a morale problem, the typical solution was higher pay, more fringe benefits, and better working conditions. However, as has been pointed out, this simplistic solution did not really work. Management are often perplexed because they are paying high wages and salaries, have an excellent fringe-benefit package, and provide great working conditions, but their employees are still not motivated. Herzberg’s theory offered an explanation for this problem. By concentrating only on the hygiene factors, management were not really motivating their personnel.

There are probably very few workers or associates who do not feel that they deserve the raise they receive. On the other hand, there are many dissatisfied associates and man- agers who feel they do not get a large enough raise. This simple observation points out that the hygiene factors seem to be important in preventing dissatisfaction but do not lead to sat- isfaction. Herzberg would be the first to say that the hygiene factors are absolutely neces- sary to maintain the human resources of an organization. However, as in the Maslow sense, once “the belly is full” of hygiene factors, which is the case in most modern organizations,

TABLE 6.2. Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory

Hygiene Factors Motivators

Company policy and administration Achievement

Supervision, technical Recognition

Salary Work itself

Interpersonal relations, supervisor Responsibility

Working conditions Advancement

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 6  MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 141

IAP PR

OO FS

dangling any more in front of employees will not really motivate them. According to Her- zberg’s theory, only a challenging job that has the opportunities for achievement, recogni- tion, responsibility, advancement, and growth will motivate personnel.

Critical Analysis of Herzberg’s Theory

Herzberg’s two-factor theory remains important in a historical sense and a popular textbook explanation of work motivation and it still makes intuitive sense to practitioners. However, it also is true that from an academic perspective, Herzberg’s theory oversimpli- fies the complexities of work motivation. When researchers deviate from the critical inci- dent methodology used by Herzberg, they do not get the two factors. Further, there is always a question regarding the samples used by Herzberg: Would he have obtained the results from low-complexity jobs such as truck drivers and third-shift factory workers or waitstaff personnel? Presumably both the hygiene factors and satisfiers could be substan- tially different when comparing these groups. Factors that affect research results include the age of the sample and other variables that are not held constant or under control. In international settings, older workers in an Israeli kibbutz preferred jobs that had better physical conditions and convenience. Also, Caribbean hotel workers reported being more interested in wages, working conditions, and appreciation for their work as key motiva- tors.29 These findings suggest that sample and setting may affect preferences for motiva- tors and hygiene factors.

Finally, there seem to be job factors such as pay that lead to both satisfaction and dis- satisfaction. For example, pay can be dissatisfying if not high enough, but, as pointed out in Chapter 4, also satisfying as a form of achievement and recognition. These findings indi- cate that a strict interpretation of the two-factor theory is not warranted by the evidence.

In spite of the obvious limitations, few would question that Herzberg has contributed substantially to the study of work motivation. He extended Maslow’s needs hierarchy con- cept and made it more applicable to work motivation. Herzberg also drew attention to the importance of job content factors in work motivation, which previously had been badly neglected and often totally overlooked. However, even the context can be made to better fit the jobholder. For example, many Internet businesses never have employees directly inter- act with customers so their dress, appearance, and work space can be highly informal and designed according to personal choice.30

The job design technique of job enrichment is also one of Herzberg’s contributions. Job enrichment is covered in the last part of the chapter. Overall, Herzberg added much to the better understanding of job content factors and satisfaction, but, like his predecessors, he fell short of a comprehensive theory of work motivation. His model describes only some of the content of work motivation; it does not adequately describe the complex motivation process of organizational participants that will now be given attention in the more complex theories of work motivation.

The Porter-Lawler Expectancy Theory of Work Motivation

Comments in Chapter 5 on job satisfaction refer to the controversy over the relationship between satisfaction and performance that has existed since the beginnings of the human relations movement. The Maslow and Herzberg content theories implicitly assume that sat- isfaction leads to improved performance and that dissatisfaction detracts from performance. In particular, the Herzberg model is really a theory of job satisfaction, but still it does not Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

142 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

adequately deal with the relationship between satisfaction and performance. It was not until Porter and Lawler that the relationship between satisfaction and performance was dealt with directly by a motivation theory. They start with the premise that motivation (effort or force) does not equal satisfaction or performance. Motivation, satisfaction, and performance are all separate variables and relate in ways different from what was traditionally assumed.

Figure 6.5 depicts the multivariable model used to explain the complex relationships that exist among motivation, performance, and satisfaction. As shown, boxes 1, 2, and 3 are basically drawn from earlier cognitive concepts from pioneering social psychologists such as Kurt Lewin and Edward Tolman and from the recognized seminal work motivation theory of Victor Vroom.31 It is important to note, however, that Porter and Lawler point out that effort (force or motivation) does not lead directly to performance. It is moderated by abilities and traits and by role perceptions. More important in the Porter-Lawler model is what hap- pens after the performance. The rewards that follow and how these are perceived will deter- mine satisfaction. In other words, the Porter-Lawler model suggests—and this is a significant turn of events from conventional wisdom—that performance leads to satisfaction.

The model has had research support over the years. For example, a field study found that effort level and direction of effort are important in explaining individual performance in an organization.32 Also, a comprehensive review of research verifies the importance of rewards in the relationship between performance and satisfaction. Specifically, it was con- cluded that performance and satisfaction will be more strongly related when rewards are made contingent on performance than when they are not.33

Implications for Practice

Although the Porter-Lawler model attempts to be more applications oriented than the earlier expectancy theories, it is still quite complex and has proved to be a difficult way to bridge the gap to actual human resource management practice. To Porter and Lawler’s

FIGURE 6.5. The Porter-Lawler Motivation Model

Value

of reward

Abilities

and traits

Perceived 8

equitable

rewards

3 6

Performance

Effort (accomplishment)

Intrinsic

rewards

Extrinsic

rewards

Satisfaction

Perceived 2

effort reward

probability

Role

perceptions

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 6  MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 143

IAP PR

OO FS

credit, they were very conscientious of putting their theory and research into practice. They recommended that practicing managers go beyond traditional attitude measurement and attempt to measure variables such as the values of possible rewards, the perceptions of effort-reward probabilities, and role perceptions. These variables, of course, can help man- agers better understand what goes into employee effort and performance. Giving attention to the consequences of performance, Porter and Lawler also recommended that organiza- tions critically reevaluate their current reward policies. They stressed that management should make a concentrated effort to measure how closely levels of satisfaction are related to levels of performance, and in a practitioner-oriented article emphasized that the accu- racy of role perceptions may be the missing link in improving employee performance.34 The inference here is that employees need to better focus their efforts on high-impact behaviors and activities that result in higher performance. However, both studies35 and comprehensive analyses36 continue to point out the complex impact that the cognitive pro- cess has in relation to rewards and other outcomes in organizations.

Contributions to Work Motivation

The Porter and Lawler model has definitely made a significant contribution to the bet- ter understanding of work motivation and the relationship between performance and satis- faction, but has not had much impact on the actual practice of human resource management. Yet this expectancy theory provides certain guidelines that can be followed by human resource management. For example, on the front end (the relationship between motivation and performance), it has been suggested that the following barriers must be overcome:

1. Doubts about ability, skill, or knowledge 2. The physical or practical possibility of the job 3. The interdependence of the job with other people or activities 4. Ambiguity surrounding the job requirements37

To overcome these barriers, it is helpful to understand the role other psychological variables such as self-efficacy (covered in the next chapter) play in effort-performance relationships. A series of successes combined with positive feedback build the employee’s sense of self-efficacy, which can, in turn, lead to a heightened sense that “I can do this.” Greater effort may often be the result.38 In addition to psychological constructs such as self-efficacy, there are also pragmatic considerations such as that the opportunity must be present to actually perform. For example, there are many second-string players in pro sports that have stepped in for an injured starter to take the team to the championship. The back-up probably had sufficient valance (pay plus the bonus check paid to the winners), instrumentality or effort-performance calculations (ability combined with self-efficacy), and expectancy or performance-reward calculations (the belief that goal achievement would result in additional pay and recognition), yet still could not succeed until he was allowed to play due to the injury of the first-string player.

In addition, on the back end (the relationship between performance and satisfaction), guidelines such as the following have been suggested:

1. Determine what rewards each employee values 2. Define desired performance 3. Make desired performance attainable 4. Link valued rewards to performance39Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

144 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

The last point was given attention in Chapter 4 on the importance of pay for perfor- mance. At the same time, managers should be advised that an employee in a way calculates expectancies regarding future employment possibilities when seeking to leave an organiza- tion, and more importantly, often sees a connection between performance and reward that invites less effort in a group or team situation. The reduced value is based on the belief that the person’s own efforts are not sufficient to raise group performance levels, and that group incentives are less valuable than individualized rewards.

Also brought out in Chapter 4, managers may also take advantage of this process moti- vational approach by considering the use of nonfinancial rewards for performance. Many times workers may be inspired by being given first choice in selecting weeks for vacation, being allowed to choose when they will go to lunch (ahead of lower performers), being awarded certificates or “employee of the month” parking spaces or, as the accompanying OB in Action: Nice Work If You Can Get It describes, new rewards such as sabbaticals. Recognition as a valence can be a powerful reward within the expectancy theory frame- work and was discussed in Chapter 4 and is given further detailed attention in Chapter 12.

Equity Theory of Work Motivation

Equity theory has been around just as long as the expectancy theories of work motiva- tion. However, equity has received relatively more recent attention in the organizational behavior field. As Figure 6.2 indicates, its roots can be traced back to cognitive dissonance theory and exchange theory. As a theory of work motivation, credit for equity theory is usually given to social psychologist J. Stacy Adams. Simply put, the theory argues that a major input into job performance and satisfaction is the degree of equity (or inequity) that people perceive in their work situation. In other words, it is another cognitively based moti- vation theory, and Adams depicts how this motivation occurs.

Inequity occurs when a person perceives that the ratio of his or her outcomes to inputs and the ratio of a relevant other’s outcomes to inputs are unequal. Schematically, this is represented as follows:

Equity occurs when

Both the inputs and the outputs of the person and the other are based on the person’s per- ceptions. Age, sex, education, social status, organizational position, qualifications, and how hard the person works are examples of perceived input variables. Outcomes consist primarily of rewards such as pay, status, promotion, and intrinsic interest in the job. In essence, the ratio is based on the person’s perception of what the person is giving (inputs) and receiving (outcomes) versus the ratio of what the relevant other is giving and receiving. This cognition may or may not be the same as someone else’s observation of the ratios or the same as the actual reality. There is also recent recognition that the cultural context may affect the entire equity process.40

person's outcomes person's inputs

------------------------------------------- other's outcomes other's inputs

----------------------------------------

person's outcomes person's inputs

------------------------------------------- other's outcomes other's inputs

----------------------------------------

person's outcomes person's inputs

------------------------------------------- other's outcomes other's inputs

----------------------------------------=

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 6  MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 145

IAP PR

OO FS

Equity as an Explanation of Work Motivation

If the person’s perceived ratio is not equal to the other’s, he or she will strive to restore the ratio to equity. This “striving” to restore equity is used as the explanation of work moti- vation. The strength of this motivation is in direct proportion to the perceived inequity that exists. Adams suggests that such motivation may be expressed in several forms. To restore equity, the person may alter the inputs or outcomes, cognitively distort the inputs or out- comes, leave the field, act on the other, or change the other.

It is important to note that inequity does not come about only when the person feels cheated. For example, Adams has studied the impact that perceived overpayment has on equity. His findings suggest that workers prefer equitable payment to overpayment. Work- ers on a piece-rate incentive system who feel overpaid will reduce their productivity in order to restore equity. More common, however, is the case of people who feel underpaid (outcome) or overworked (input) in relation to others in the workplace. In the latter case, there would be motivation to restore equity in a way that may be dysfunctional from an organizational standpoint. For example, the owner of an appliance store in Oakland, Cali- fornia, allowed his employees to set their own wages. Interestingly, none of the employees took an increase in pay, and one service technician actually settled on lower pay because he did not want to work as hard as the others.

Research Support for Equity in the Workplace

To date, research that has specifically tested the validity of Adams’s equity theory has been fairly supportive. A comprehensive review found considerable laboratory research support for the “equity norm” (people review the inputs and outcomes of themselves and others, and if inequity is perceived, they strive to restore equity) but only limited support from more relevant field studies.41 One line of field research on equity theory used baseball players. In the first study, players who played out their option year, and thus felt they were inequitably paid, performed as the theory would predict.42 Their performance decreased in three of four categories (not batting average) during the option year, and when they were signed to a new contract, the performance was restored. However, a second study using the same type of sample, only larger, found the opposite of what equity theory would predict.43

Mainly, performance improved during the option year. The reason, of course, was that the players wanted to look especially good, even though they felt they were inequitably paid, in order to be in a stronger bargaining position for a new contract. In other words, individuals faced with undercompensation may choose to decrease performance, but only to the extent that doing so will not affect the potential to achieve future rewards.44 In any event, there are no easy answers nor is there 100 percent predictive power when applying a cognitive process theory such as equity.

Despite some seeming inconsistencies, more recent studies using sophisticated statis- tical techniques to estimate pay equity among ballplayers45 and focusing more sharply on subsequent performance and other outcomes are more in line with equity theory predic- tions. For example, one study found a significant relationship between losing final-offer salary arbitration and postarbitration performance decline. The ballplayers who were losers in arbitration were also significantly more likely to change teams or leave major league baseball.46 In another study of baseball and basketball players, it was found that the under- rewarded players behaved less cooperatively.47 This type of equity theory development and research goes beyond expectancy theory as a cognitive explanation of work motivation Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

146 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

and serves as a point of departure for more specialized areas of current interest such as organizational justice.

The Relationship Between Equity Theory and Organizational Justice

Recent theory development specifies that equity theory can be extended into what is now commonly known as organizational justice.48 Although procedural justice has received the most attention, there is now research evidence that in addition there is concep- tual and measurement independence (i.e., construct validity) for distributive, interpersonal, and informational justice dimensions as well.49 Equity theory serves as the foundation for the common thread of perceived fairness among these dimensions of justice. For example, equity theory explains conditions under which decision outcomes (pay levels, pay raises, promotions) are perceived as being fair or unfair. Persons engaged in this type of thinking examine the results as opposed to how those results were achieved. Equity theory supports a perception of distributive justice, which is an individual’s cognitive evaluation regarding whether or not the amounts and allocations of rewards in a social setting are fair. In simple terms, distributive justice is one’s belief that everyone should “get what they deserve.” Culturally, the Judeo-Christian ethic is based, in part, on the notion that divine rewards accrue to those who lead good lives and behave appropriately, even while here are on earth. This reflects the distributive justice and equity perspectives. Importantly, meta-analytic results have demonstrated that employee perceptions of distributive justice are related to desirable outcomes such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment, organizational citizenship behavior, turnover, and performance.50

Procedural justice is concerned with the fairness of the procedure used to make a deci- sion. For example, a pay raise may be based on a sales representative selling more units of, for example, automobiles or houses. Some coworkers may consider this procedure to be unfair, believing management should instead base pay raises on dollar volume. This con- clusion may be reached because selling 10 houses or cars for a low amount of money each contributes very little to company profits and they are, at the same time, easier to sell. Sell- ing high-priced cars or houses may take much longer to finalize, but the profits garnered for the company are also higher. In this case it is not the outcome in dispute, which is the amount of the pay received. Instead, it is the perceived justice (fairness) of the procedure used to reach the outcome. Like distributive justice, employee perceptions of procedural justice have been shown through meta-analysis to be related to all the desirable organiza- tional outcomes.51 Indeed, in another meta-analysis, procedural justice was found to be a better predictor of job performance than was distributive justice52 and procedural justice seems to be particularly important to successfully implementing organizational changes.53

Procedural justice can raise issues of equality as opposed to equity. Equality means that in a promotion situation, males and females and all races would have equal opportuni- ties to be selected, and that the criteria used would not discriminate. Equity would mean that the actual choice was fair, and that the criteria were correctly applied and therefore the most-qualified individual was promoted.

Unlike the traditional content and process theories of work motivation, research con- tinues to refine and extend equity theory in general and procedural justice in particular. For example, in support of equity theory, a recent study found that managers who perceive effort-reward fairness perform better and are more satisfied than those who feel underre- warded and unfairly treated.54 Another study used social exchange theory to differentiate interactional justice from procedural justice. Whereas procedural justice is the exchange Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 6  MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 147

IAP PR

OO FS

between the employee and the employing organization, interactional justice is between individuals (e.g., the employee and the supervisor). The research supported the exchange theory predictions.55 There is also some evidence that such interactional justice may not be as predictive as other justice perceptions. For example, a recent study found that manager trustworthiness was more predictive of organizational citizenship behaviors (covered in the last chapter) than was interactional justice.56 Other recent studies focusing on procedural justice have found importance in being allowed the opportunity to voice an opinion on per- ceptions of fairness57 and in the effects of group membership and status (i.e., one’s social standing) on perceptions of fairness.58 In particular, it was found in this latter study that procedural injustice was not perceived by all who observed it (in this case judges and attor- neys did not perceive bias against female attorneys). Finally, a recent study moved to the level of overall justice climate (procedural, informational, and interpersonal) and found it related to various work outcomes (commitment, satisfaction, and citizenship behaviors).59

In total, with equity theory serving as the foundation, the various dimensions of orga- nizational justice play an important role in many dynamics and outcomes of organizational behavior. Organizational justice can help explain why employees retaliate against both inequitable outcomes and inappropriate processes. For example, retaliation in the form of theft, sabotage, forged time cards, and even violence toward the boss or owner can be explained using the principles of organizational justice.60 On a positive note, besides all the findings summarized above, a recent study found that there is a trickle-down effect from organizational justice. Employees’ perceptions of fairness not only positively affect their attitudes and performance, but also influence their fair treatment behaviors toward custom- ers, which in turn cause the customers to react positively to both the employee and the organization.61 In other words, organizational justice pays off not only for employees, but also for customers and the bottom line.

Attribution Theory

Another contemporary theory of work motivation is attribution theory. Attribution refers simply to how people explain the cause of another’s or their own behavior. Like equity theory, it is the cognitive process by which people draw conclusions about the fac- tors that influence, or make sense of, one another’s behavior.62 There are two general types of attributions that people make: dispositional attributions, which ascribe a person’s behavior to internal factors such as personality traits, motivation, or ability, and situational attributions, which attribute a person’s behavior to external factors such as equipment or social influence from others.63 In recent years, attribution theories have been playing an increasingly important role in organizational behavior and human resource management.64 An examination of the various theories, types, and errors of attribution can contribute to an understanding as work motivation and organizational behavior in general.

An Overview of the Theory

Attribution theory is concerned with the relationship between personal social percep- tion (covered in the last chapter) and interpersonal behavior. There are a number of attribu- tion theories, but they share the following assumptions:

1. We seek to make sense of our world. 2. We often attribute people’s actions either to internal or external causes. 3. We do so in fairly logical ways.65Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

148 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

Well-known social psychologist Harold Kelley stressed that attribution theory is con- cerned mainly with the cognitive processes by which an individual interprets behavior as being caused by (or attributed to) certain parts of the relevant environment. It is concerned with the “why” questions of work motivation and organizational behavior. Because most causes, attributes, and “whys” are not directly observable, the theory says that people must depend on cognitions, particularly perception. The attribution theorist assumes that humans are rational and are motivated to identify and understand the causal structure of their relevant environment. It is this search for attributes that characterizes attribution the- ory and helps explain work motivation.

As shown earlier in Figure 6.2, attribution theory has its roots in all the pioneering cognitive theorists’ work (for example, that of Lewin and Festinger), in de Charmes’s ideas on cognitive evaluation, and in Bem’s notion of “self-perception,” the theory’s initiator is generally recognized to be Fritz Heider. Heider believed that both internal forces (personal attributes such as ability, effort, and fatigue) and external forces (environmental attributes such as rules and the weather) combine additively to determine behavior. He stressed that it is the perceived, not the actual, determinants that are important to behavior (see the dis- cussion of perception in Chapter 5). People will behave differently if they perceive internal attributes than they will if they perceive external attributes. It is this concept of differential ascriptions that has very important implications for motivation and organizational behavior in general.

Locus of Control Attributions

Using locus of control, work behavior may be explained by whether employees per- ceive their outcomes as controlled internally or externally. Employees who perceive inter- nal control feel that they personally can influence their outcomes through their own ability, skills, or effort. Employees who perceive external control feel that their outcomes are beyond their own control; they feel that external forces such as luck or task difficulty con- trol their outcomes. This perceived locus of control may have a differential impact on their motivation to perform. For example, classic studies by well-known social psychologist Julian Rotter found that skill versus chance environments differentially affect behavior. In addition, a number of studies have been conducted over the years to test the attribution the- ory-locus-of-control model in work settings. One study found that internally controlled employees are generally more satisfied with their jobs, are more likely to be in managerial positions, and are more satisfied with a participatory management style than employees who perceive external control.66 Other studies have found that internally controlled man- agers are better performers,67 are more considerate of subordinates,68 tend not to burn out,69 follow a more strategic style of executive action,70 have improved attitudes over a long period of time following promotions,71 and present the most positive impression in a recruiting interview.72 In addition, the attribution process has been shown to play a role in coalition formation in the political process of organizations. In particular, coalition mem- bers made stronger internal attributions, such as ability and desire, and nonmembers made stronger external attributions, such as luck.73

The implication of these studies and many others is that internally controlled managers are somehow better than externally controlled managers. However, such generalizations are not yet warranted because there is some contradictory evidence. For example, one study concluded that the ideal manager may have an external orientation because the results indicated that externally controlled managers were perceived as initiating more structure and consideration than internally controlled managers.74 In addition to the impli-Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 6  MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 149

IAP PR

OO FS

cations for managerial behavior and performance, attribution theory has been shown to have relevance in explaining goal-setting behavior,75 group performance,76 leadership behavior,77 poor employee performance,78 and employee interpretations of human resource practices that affect their satisfaction and commitment.79 However, like other constructs in organizational behavior, attribution is now undergoing considerable refine- ment in the research literature. For example, studies have found that (1) attributions about poor performance are mediated by how responsible the employee is judged to be and how much sympathy the evaluator feels,80 and (2) leaders providing feedback to poor perform- ers is significantly affected by the performance attributions that are made.81 A review arti- cle concludes that locus of control is related to the performance and satisfaction of organization members and may moderate the relationship between motivation and incen- tives.82

In addition, attributions are related to organizational symbolism, which in effect says that in order to understand organizations, one must recognize their symbolic nature.83

Much of organization is based on attributions rather than physical or observed realities under this view.84 For example, research has found that symbols are a salient source of information used by people in forming their impressions of psychological climate.85

Other Attributions

Attribution theory obviously contributes a great deal to the better understanding of work motivation and organizational behavior. However, other dimensions besides the internal and external locus of control also need to be accounted for and studied. Bernard Weiner, for example, suggested that a stability (fixed or variable) dimension must also be recognized.86 Experienced employees will probably have a stable internal attribution about their abilities but an unstable internal attribution concerning effort. By the same token, these employees may have a stable external attribution about task difficulty but an unstable external attribution about luck.

Besides the stability dimension, Kelley suggests that dimensions such as consensus (do others act this way in this situation?), consistency (does this person act this way in this situation at other times?), and distinctiveness (does this person act differently in other sit- uations?) will affect the type of attributions that are made.87 Figure 6.6 shows how this type of information affects the attributes that are made in evaluating employee behavior. To keep these dimensions straight, it can be remembered that consensus relates to other peo- ple, distinctiveness relates to other tasks, and consistency relates to time.88 As shown in Figure 6.6, if there is high consensus, low consistency, and high distinctiveness, then attri- bution to external or situational/environmental causes will probably be made. The external attribution may be that the task is too difficult or that outside pressures from home or coworkers are hindering performance. However, if there is low consensus, high consis- tency, and low distinctiveness, then attributions to internal or personal causes for the behavior will probably be made. The supervisor making an internal attribution may con- clude that the associate just doesn’t have the ability, or is not giving the necessary effort, or does not have the motivation to perform well. There is some research evidence from field settings to directly support predictions from the Kelley model.89

In addition to Kelley, other well-known theorists, such as Weiner, use attribution the- ory to help explain achievement motivation and to predict subsequent changes in perfor- mance and how people feel about themselves.90 Some research findings from Weiner’s work include the following:Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

150 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

1. Bad-luck attributions (external) take the sting out of a negative outcome, but good- luck attributions (external) reduce the joy associated with success.

2. When individuals attribute their success to internal rather than external factors, they have higher expectations for future success, report a greater desire for achievement, and set higher performance goals.91

Attribution Errors

Social psychologists recognize two potent biases when people make attributions. The first is called the fundamental attribution error. Research has found that people tend to ignore powerful situational forces when explaining others’ behavior.92 People tend to attri- bute others’ behavior to personal factors (for example, intelligence, ability, motivation, attitudes, or personality), even when it is very clear that the situation or circumstances caused the person to behave the way he or she did.

FIGURE 6.6. Kelley’s Model of Attribution

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 6  MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 151

IAP PR

OO FS

Another attribution bias that has emerged from the research is that people tend to pres- ent themselves favorably. This self-serving bias has been found in study after study; people readily accept credit when told they have succeeded (attributing the success to their ability and effort), yet often attribute failure to such external, situational factors as bad luck or the problem’s inherent “impossibility.93 For example, in explaining their victories, athletes commonly credit themselves, but they are more likely to attribute losses to something else—bad breaks, poor officiating, or the other team’s superior effort.94 When something goes wrong in the workplace, there is a tendency for the manager to blame the problem on the inability or poor attitude of associates, but the situation is blamed as far as he or she per- sonally is concerned. The reverse is true of associates. They blame the situation for their difficulties but make a personal attribution in terms of their manager. By the same token, if something goes well, the manager makes personal attributions for him- or herself and situ- ational attributions for associates, and the associates make personal attributions for them- selves but situational attributions for the manager. In other words, it is typical to have conflicting attributional biases among managers and associates in organizations.95

As a way of creating more productive relationships, theorists and researchers suggest that efforts must be made to reduce divergent perceptions and perspectives among the par- ties through increased interpersonal interaction, open communication channels and work- shops, and team-building sessions devoted to reducing attributional errors.96 Although Martinko, in his book on Attribution Theory, demonstrates the validity and potential of attributional perspectives within an organizational context, theoretical, information pro- cessing, and situational factors all affect the attribution models of organizational behav- ior.97 Despite this complexity, attribution theory does seem to have considerable potential for application and relevance, instead of being a purely academic exercise in theory build- ing.

Other Work Motivation Theories: Control and Agency

In addition to the micro-oriented expectancy and equity motivation theories coming out of cognitive psychology, there are other, more broad-based theories that have emerged in organizational behavior. Representatives of such theories are control theory and agency theory.

One version of control theory, like the other theories discussed so far, is essentially a cognitive phenomenon relating to the degree that individuals perceive they are in control of their own lives, or are in control of their jobs. Recent studies have shown that those who believe they have such personal control tolerate unpleasant events and experience less stress on the job than those who do not perceive such control.98 There is also some evi- dence that perceived control will affect job satisfaction and absenteeism.99 Another ver- sion of control theory, which also has implications for organizational behavior, relates to the more traditional management function of control. Traditional guidelines for effective management have included controlling both the inputs and outputs of organizations, but research has also analyzed strategically controlling human resources as well.100 Especially relevant to today’s workplace environment is that a sense of control seems very helpful when increasing job demands are placed on the employee. Thus, persons who are given more work, but also the control to complete that work, may not feel as negatively about their new assignments. On the other hand, more peripheral aspects of work control, such as when they start or stop a task or arrange the work flow, seem less related to work motiva- tion.101Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

152 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

Similar to control theory’s being taken from the traditional management literature, agency theory as applied to organizational behavior comes from the financial economics literature. As given attention in Chapter 4, an agency relationship involves one or more individuals (the principal) engaging another person or persons (the agent) to perform some service on their behalf.102 The key to agency theory is the assumption that the interests of principals and agents diverge or may be in conflict with one another. The implications for organizational behavior involve how the principals (owners, board members, or top man- agement) can limit divergence from their interests or objectives by establishing appropriate rewards or incentives for the agents (subordinates, middle management, or operating employees) for appropriate outcomes. Although there was initial research evidence sup- porting an agency theory interpretation of areas in organizational behavior such as pay for performance,103 compensation contracts,104 foreign subsidiary compensation strate- gies,105 and variable pay compensation strategies,106 however, a recent meta-analysis of empirical ownership-performance studies found little overall support for agency theory.107 Yet, agency theory is often used to explain some of the excesses and ethical meltdowns that have occurred in organizations in recent years. For example, Don Hambrick recently observed the following:

Today’s top executives, in America at least, are exceedingly obsessed with shareholder value, in ways that their predecessors were not. This obsession is due to the new “rules of the game” that the executives themselves face—rules that agency theorists applaud, even if they didn’t literally engineer them.108

Like the other cognitive-based theories, agency theory helps us better understand the motivation of managers in today’s organizations. However, because of the complexities involved, as was also noted in the other work motivation theories, agency theory obviously is not the final answer. One primary criticism of agency theory that has emerged is that, agency theory strongly emphasizes the roles that various forms of extrinsic motives play in shaping behaviors. Conversely, intrinsic motives, which may be quite powerful, are not accounted for in agency models. When combined with notions of control or the lack of control in a setting, the bias generated by an extrinsic-motive model may confuse any study or theoretical development.109 Yet, as one argument for employee ownership noted, firms indicated that 75 percent experienced increases in sales, profits, and stock price when employees became owners and another study indicated that companies with employee stock ownership plans had total shareholder returns about 7 percent greater than firms where employees did not have an opportunity for ownership.110

Recently, agency theory has been expanded to the macro level. It has been used to explain financing decisions in franchising operations111 and to study the various forms of control that limit the decision-making authority of professional service organizations.112 In the latter study, community control, bureaucratic control, and client control combined with the degree of self-control exhibited by the professional service agent to reduce decision-mak- ing autonomy. Thus, agency theory is also related to control theory and, for the future, theory development and research can contribute to the better understanding of work motivation.

MOTIVATIONAL APPLICATION THROUGH JOB DESIGN

Besides gaining an understanding of motivational needs and theoretical processes, the study of organizational behavior also focuses on motivational techniques of job design and goal setting. Job design may be defined as the methods that management uses to develop Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 6  MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 153

IAP PR

OO FS

the content of a job, including all relevant tasks, as well as the processes by which jobs are constructed and revised. In light of the new environment, job design is an increasingly important application technique. Most importantly, the nature of work is changing because of advanced information technology and globalization. Consequently, two new develop- ments have emerged. The first is a blurring of the distinction between on-work and off- work time. A person carrying a cell phone and/or PDA (personal digital assistant) and a home office containing a fax machine and Internet access is “at work” even when not in the office and is “on-call” practically every moment of the day. This includes drive time and time spent in airports or while flying across the world. The second development, which is tied to the first, is the rising number of telecommuting jobs or teleworking, in which the employee performs substantial amounts of work at home. An increasing number of organi- zations provide employees with advanced information technology for home use. These recent trends create new challenges for job design models, which are already based on an extensive and growing theoretical and research base and are being widely applied to the actual practice of management. A summary of the major job design applications follows.

Job Rotation

The simplest form of job design involves moving employees from one relatively sim- ple job to another after short time periods (one hour, half-days, every day). For example, at McDonald’s, an employee may cook French fries one day, fry hamburgers the next, wait on the front counter during the next shift, and draw soft drinks the next. This form of job rotation has several advantages. First, the odds of injury are reduced, as each worker must refocus on a new task throughout the workday. Further, the incidence of repetitive strain injuries (e.g., carpal tunnel syndrome) may also be reduced. Second, as employees learn sets of tasks, they are more flexible and able to cover for someone who is absent or who quits. Third, supervisors who are promoted from the ranks know more about how the entire operation works. A manager promoted from the ranks at McDonald’s after only six months on the job has probably been exposed to every production task performed at the unit. The primary disadvantage of job rotation is that each individual task eventually becomes as boring as the rest of the simple tasks. In other words, over the long term there is no substan- tial difference between cooking French fries and frying hamburgers. Consequently, job sat- isfaction and/or performance may decline. Rotation does, however, have some research evidence showing a positive impact,113 especially for cross-training and developing employees for broadened responsibilities.114 In any event, it is a better alternative to job design than doing nothing.

Job Enlargement

This job design process involves increasing the number of tasks each employee per- forms. A sales clerk who waits on customers, finalizes the sale, helps with credit applica- tions, arranges merchandise, and reorders stock has an enlarged job, when compared to a checkout clerk or a shelf stocker at Wal-Mart. Workers in enlarged jobs are able to use more skills in performing their tasks. Many times, however, enlargement reduces the effi- ciency with which tasks are completed, thereby slowing work down. Imagine being waited on individually at Wal-Mart. The company’s competitive advantage for low labor costs compared to a full-service department store would be quickly and dramatically reduced. However, enlargement does not necessarily result in improved employee satisfaction and Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

154 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

commitment. For example, one of the major by-products of recent downsizing is enlarged jobs assigned to the members of the organization who remain. The survivors with anxiety of “I’m next” and greatly enlarged jobs are less, rather than more, satisfied and committed to the organization.

Job Enrichment

Job enrichment represents an extension of the earlier, more simplified job rotation and job enlargement techniques of job design. Because it is a direct outgrowth of Herzberg’s two-factor theory of motivation (covered earlier in the chapter), the assumption is that in order to motivate personnel, the job must be designed to provide opportunities for achieve- ment, recognition, responsibility, advancement, and growth. The technique entails “enrich- ing” the job so that these factors are included. In particular, job enrichment is concerned with designing jobs that include a greater variety of work content; require a higher level of knowledge and skill; give workers more autonomy and responsibility in terms of planning, directing, and controlling their own performance; and provide the opportunity for personal growth and a meaningful work experience. As opposed to job rotation and job enlarge- ment, which horizontally loads the job, job enrichment vertically loads the job; there are not necessarily more tasks to perform, but more responsibility and accountability. For example, instead of having workers do a mundane, specialized task, then passing off to another worker doing another minute part of the task, and eventually having an inspector at the end, under job enrichment, the worker would be given a complete module of work to do (job enlargement) and, importantly, would inspect his or her own work (responsibility) and put a personal identifier on it (accountability).

As with the other application techniques discussed in this text, job enrichment is not a panacea for all job design problems facing modern management. After noting that there are documented cases where this approach to job design did not work, Miner concluded that the biggest problem is that traditional job enrichment has little to say about when and why the failures can be expected to occur.115 Some of the explanations that have been suggested include that job enrichment is difficult to truly implement, that many employees simply prefer an old familiar job to an enriched job, and that employees in general and unions in particular are resistant to the change. Some employees have expressed preferences for higher pay rather than enriched jobs, and others enjoy their current patterns of on-the-job socialization and friendships more than they do increased responsibility and autonomy. Essentially, job enrichment in some situations may inhibit a person’s social life at work.

Despite some potential limitations, job enrichment is still a viable approach, and research provides continuing evidence that it has mostly beneficial results (more employee satisfaction and customer service, less employee overload, and fewer employee errors).116

There is even a study that found employees were more creative when they worked in an enriching context of complex, challenging jobs and a supportive, noncontrolling super- visory climate.117 However, management must still use job enrichment selectively and give proper recognition to the complex human and situational variables.118 The job char- acteristics models of job enrichment are a step in this direction.

The Job Characteristics Approach to Task Design

To meet some of the limitations of the relatively simple Herzberg approach to job enrichment (which he prefers to call orthodox job enrichment, or OJE), a group of researchers began to concentrate on the relationship between certain job characteristics, or Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 6  MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 155

IAP PR

OO FS

FIGURE 6.7. The Hackman-Oldham Job Characteristics Model of Work Motivation

CORE JOB CHARACTERISTICS

Variety of skill Identity of the task Significance of the task

Autonomy

Feedback

CRITICAL PSYCHOLOGICAL

STATES

Experienced meaningfulness of the work

Experienced responsibility for work outcomes

Knowledge of results from work activities

Moderated by employee growth- need strength

PERSONAL AND WORK OUTCOMES

High internal work motivation High-quality work performance High satisfaction with the work Low turnover and absenteeism

the job scope, and employee motivation. Richard Hackman and Greg Oldham developed the most widely recognized model of job characteristics,119 shown in Figure 6.7. This model recognizes that certain job characteristics contribute to certain psychological states and that the strength of employees’ need for growth has an important moderating effect. The core job characteristics can be summarized briefly as follows:

1. Skill variety refers to the extent to which the job requires the employee to draw from a number of different skills and abilities as well as on a range of knowledge.

2. Task identity refers to whether the job has an identifiable beginning and end. How complete a module of work does the employee perform?

3. Task significance involves the importance of the task. It involves both internal signif- icance—how important is the task to the organization?—and external significance— how proud are employees to tell relatives, friends, and neighbors what they do and where they work?

4. Autonomy refers to job independence. How much freedom and control do employees have, for example, to schedule their own work, make decisions, or determine the means to accomplish objectives?

5. Feedback refers to objective information about progress and performance and can come from the job itself or from supervisors or an information system.

The critical psychological states can be summarized as follows:

1. Meaningfulness. This cognitive state involves the degree to which employees per- ceive their work as making a valued contribution, as being important and worthwhile.

2. Responsibility. This state is concerned with the extent to which employees feel a sense of being personally responsible or accountable for the work being done.

3. Knowledge of results. Coming directly from the feedback, this psychological state involves the degree to which employees understand how they are performing in the job.

In essence, this model says that certain job characteristics lead to critical psychological states. That is, skill variety, task identity, and task significance lead to experienced mean- ingfulness; autonomy leads to the feeling of responsibility; and feedback leads to knowl-Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

156 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

edge of results. The more these three psychological states are present, the more employees will feel good about themselves when they perform well. Hackman states: “The model pos- tulates that internal rewards are obtained by an individual when he learns (knowledge of results) that he personally (experienced responsibility) has performed well on a task that he cares about (experienced meaningfulness).”120 Hackman then points out that these internal rewards are reinforcing to employees, causing them to perform well. If they don’t perform well, they will try harder in order to get the internal rewards that good performance brings. He concludes: “The net result is a self-perpetuating cycle of positive work motivation pow- ered by self-generated rewards. This cycle is predicted to continue until one or more of the three psychological states is no longer present, or until the individual no longer values the internal rewards that derive from good performance.”121 Not only did Hackman and Old- ham provide original research supporting the existence of these relationships, but subse- quent research has found strong support for the linkages between the core job dimensions and the critical psychological states, and between these states and the predicted out- comes.122

An example of an enriched job, according to the Hackman-Oldham characteristics model, would be that of a surgeon. Surgeons must draw on a wide variety of skills and abil- ities; usually surgeons can readily identify the task because they handle patients from beginning to end (that is, they play a role in the diagnosis, perform the operation, and are responsible for postoperative care and follow-up); the job has life-and-death significance; there is a great deal of autonomy, as surgeons have the final word on all decisions concern- ing patients; and there is clear, direct feedback during the operation itself (real-time moni- toring of the vital signs and the “scalpel”-”scalpel” type of feedback communication) and afterwards, because, of course, the patient’s recovery and subsequent health determine the success of the operation. According to this explanation, these job characteristics determine the surgeon’s considerable motivation—not the needs developed while growing up or his or her valences, instrumentalities, and expectancies as postulated by the process theories discussed earlier.

At the other extreme would be most traditional blue-collar and white-collar jobs. All five job characteristics would be relatively minimal or nonexistent in the perceptions of many such jobholders and thus can help explain the motivation problem with these low- level jobs. In other words, the job design, not just the person holding the job, helps explain the motivation to perform under this approach.

Practical Guidelines for Redesigning Jobs

Specific guidelines such as those found in Figure 6.8 are offered to redesign jobs. Such easily implementable guidelines make the job design area popular and practical for more effective high performance management. An actual example would be the application that was made in a large department store.123 In a training session format, the sales employees’ jobs were redesigned in the following manner:

1. Skill variety. The salespeople were asked to try to think of and use a. Different selling approaches b. New merchandise displays c. Better ways of recording sales and keeping records

2. Task identity. The salespeople were asked to a. Keep a personal record of daily sales volume in dollars b. Keep a record of number of sales/customersCo

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 6  MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 157

IAP PR

OO FS

c. Mark off an individual display area that they considered their own and keep it complete and orderly

3. Task significance. The salespeople were reminded that a. Selling a product is the basic overall objective of the store b. The appearance of the display area is important to selling c. They are “the store” to customers; they were told that courtesy and pleasantness

help build the store’s reputation and set the stage for future sales 4. Autonomy. The salespeople were

a. Encouraged to develop and use their own unique approach and sales pitch b. Allowed freedom to select their own break and lunch times c. Encouraged to make suggestions for changes in all phases of the policy and oper-

ations 5. Feedback from the job itself. Salespeople were

a. Encouraged to keep personal records of their own sales volume b. Encouraged to keep a sales/customer ratio c. Reminded that establishing a good rapport with customers is also a success; they

were told that if the potential customer leaves with a good feeling about the store and its employees, the salesperson has been successful

6. Feedback from agents. Salespeople were encouraged to a. Observe and help each other with techniques of selling b. Seek out information from their boss and relevant departments on all phases of

their jobs c. Invite customer reactions and thoughts concerning merchandise, service, and so

forth

Both the salespeople’s functional (conversing with customers, showing merchandise, han- dling returns, and so forth) and dysfunctional (socializing with coworkers or visitors, idly

FIGURE 6.8. Specific Guidelines for Redesigning Jobs for the More-Effective Practice of Human Resource Management

Core Job Characteristics Guidelines for Practice

Provide cross-training SKILL VARIETY

Expand duties requiring more skills

Give projects a deadline for completion TASK IDENTITY

Form self-contained work modules

TASK SIGNIFICANCE Communicate importance of the job

Enhance image of the organization

AUTONOMY

FEEDBACK

Empower to make decisions

Give more responsibility and accountability

Implement information systems

Supervisors give objective, immediate information on how the employee is doing

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

158 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

standing around, being gone for no legitimate reason) performance behaviors moved in the desired directions, and a subanalysis also indicated they were more satisfied. A control group of salespeople, with everything else the same except that they did not have their jobs redesigned, showed no change in their performance behaviors. Thus, this study provided evidence that the job characteristics approach can be practically applied with desirable per- formance and satisfaction results.124 Many well-known companies have actually imple- mented job design changes in accordance with the job characteristics model. For example, in terms of building in autonomy in jobs, well-known firms in the hospitality (e.g., Disney, Ritz Carlton) and retail industries allow their frontline employees to “make it right” for the “guest”/customer at any cost. For instance, at the very successful Container Stores, every salesperson has a key to the till in order to make any decision the customer needs.

MOTIVATIONAL APPLICATION THROUGH GOAL SETTING

As indicated, the other major motivational application technique besides job design is goal setting. Goal achievement is a factor that influences the success levels of individual employees, departments and business units, and the overall organization. A goal is a per- formance target that an individual or group seeks to accomplish at work. Goal setting is the process of motivating employees by establishing effective and meaningful performance targets. It is often given as an example of how the field of organizational behavior should progress from a sound theoretical foundation to sophisticated research to the actual appli- cation of more effective management practice.

Theoretical Understanding of Goal Setting

Although a paper by Locke is usually considered to be the seminal work on a theory of goal setting,125 he suggests that it really goes back to scientific management at the turn of the century. Locke credits its first proponent, Frederick W. Taylor, with being the “father of employee motivation theory,”126 and he says that Taylor’s use “of tasks was a forerunner of modern-day goal setting.”127

Although Locke argues that the expectancy theories of work motivation discussed ear- lier originally ignored goal setting and were nothing more than “cognitive hedonism,”128

his theoretical formulation for goal setting is very similar. He basically accepts the pur- posefulness of behavior, which comes out of Tolman’s pioneering cognitive theorizing, and the importance of values, or valence, and consequences. Thus, as in the expectancy theories of work motivation, values and value judgments, which are defined as the things the individual acts on to gain and/or to keep, are important cognitive determinants of behavior. Emotions or desires are the ways the person experiences these values. In addition to values, intentions or goals play an important role as cognitive determinants of behavior. It is here, of course, where Locke’s theory of goal setting goes beyond expectancy theories of work motivation, because people strive to attain goals in order to satisfy their emotions and desires. Goals provide a directional nature to people’s behavior and guide their thoughts and actions to one outcome rather than another. The individual then responds and performs according to these intentions or goals, even if the goals are not attained. Conse- quences, feedback, or reinforcement are the result of these responses.Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 6  MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 159

IAP PR

OO FS

Research Evidence on the Impact of Goal Setting

Locke’s theory has generated considerable research. In particular, a series of labora- tory studies by Locke and his colleagues and a series of field studies by Locke’s frequent coauthor Gary Latham and other colleagues have been carried out to test the linkage between goal setting and performance.129 Over the past 20 years, numerous studies have been conducted to refine and extend goal-setting theory and practice. Locke and Latham summarized the work on goal setting and task motivation and performance as follows:

With goal-setting theory, specific difficult goals have been shown to increase perfor- mance on well over 100 different tasks involving more than 40,000 participants in at least eight countries working in laboratory, simulation, and field settings.… The effects are applicable not only to the individual but to groups, organizational units, and entire organizations.130

Specifically, Locke and Latham relate goals to performance and satisfaction in the model shown in Figure 6.9. The following sections give more detail on this model and a summary of the extensive research that makes goal-setting theory and application a proto- type evidence-based approach for the field of organizational behavior.

The Importance of Specific Goals

Specific goals have been found to be more effective than vague or general goals, such as “do your best,” as well as no goals at all. Specific goals result in higher levels of perfor- mance. For instance, salespeople should have goals in dollar amounts or units of volume, production departments should have targeted and defined goals in terms of numbers, per-

FIGURE 6.9. Model for Relating Goals to Performance and Satisfaction

Source: Adapted from Edwin A. Locke and Gary P. Latham, “Building a Practically Useful Theory of Goal Setting and Task Motivation,” American Psychologist, Vol. 57, No. 9, 2002, p. 714.

Core of Goals Specificity Difficulty

Moderators Goal commitment Goal importance Self-efficacy Feedback Task complexity

Performance Satisfaction

Mechanisms Choice/direction Effort Persistence Strategies

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

160 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

specific metrics and dates rather than things such as “try as hard as you can” or “try to do better than last year.”

The Importance of Difficult and Challenging Goals

Besides clearly stated goals, performance targets should also be challenging rather than easy or routine. At the same time, goals should be reachable and not so difficult that pursuing them becomes frustrating. The accompanying OB in Action: Using Stretch Goals gives some practical guidelines.

Recent research indicates some moderators of the relationship between goal difficulty and subsequent performance. Two forms of feedback can enhance goal achievement: (1) process feedback and (2) outcome feedback. Process feedback is related to information as to how the individual or unit is proceeding in attempting to reach the goal, whereas out- come feedback is information related to and stated in terms of the actual goal itself.131

Other researchers have investigated the role that competition plays in moderating the goal difficulty–performance relationship, but results have been mixed. One study revealed that the lack of competition combined with difficult goals led to higher performance, whereas another found no effects related to competition.132

In still another research stream, perceived goal difficulty had negative effects on self- reports of job performance. In other words, an employee who thought a job was highly dif- ficult reported performing at a lower level. However, goal difficulty, when combined with

Goal setting is widely recognized as a technique to improve performance. However, there are a number of problems associated with the indiscriminate use of ambitious goals. Steven Kerr, a noted organizational behavior researcher and former chief learning officer at both General Electric and Goldman Sachs, has noted that many organizations fail to effectively use what he calls “stretch goals.” The goals are set very high, but the needed support to accomplish them is often miss- ing. For example, top management may ask their peo- ple to increase output by 25% but fail to provide them with the knowledge, tools, and means to reach such ambitious goals. As a result, the only way that people can meet these new and demanding challenges is by working longer—often on their own time. In fact, notes Kerr, everywhere in America people are working evenings and weekends in order to meet the goals that the organization has set for them. This is not necessary, however, if the enterprise carefully examines what needs to be done and how it has to occur. Kerr recommends three rules that can help organizations create stretch goals and reach them without exhausting and burning out their human resources. These include (1) do not set goals that

overly stress people; (2) if goals require people to stretch, do not punish them if they fail; and (3) if they are being asked to do things that they have never done before, give them whatever tools and help are avail- able. How should goals be set? Kerr believes that easy goals are too simple and do not improve performance and that difficult goals may be so difficult that people cannot attain them—so they give up. Stretch goals force them to go beyond what they are accustomed to doing, and thus improve performance, but, impor- tantly, they are also attainable. At the same time, the organization has to be willing to reward the personnel for attaining the stretch goals. How can this be done? One way is with money. Financial rewards are very direct and encourage individuals to continue their efforts. However, if management decide that they will give back to those involved one-third of the perfor- mance gain (i.e., gainsharing), they must stick to this and not back down when big gains are realized. If organizations follow these simple suggestions of using stretch goals and pay for performance, they can increase their productivity and employees can be chal- lenged and rewarded for their efforts.

OB IN ACTION: USING STRETCH GOALS

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 6  MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 161

IAP PR

OO FS

goal clarity, led to increased reports of effort, which in turn led to more positive self-reports of performance in the same study.133

Goal Acceptance, Participation, and Commitment

Specific goals are most likely to affect performance when employees accept and are committed to them. This ownership and acceptance of goals are best accomplished through a participative process.134 Self-commitment can be given to assigned goals as well as to personal or self-set goals, especially when goals are equivocal. Commitment tends to run higher when goals are specific as opposed to general or broad. Monetary incentives can also increase commitment to goals if the goals are perceived as being achievable.135

Some of the mixed results and complexity on the moderating role of goal commitment may be due to measurement problems that recent research may help solve for the future.136

Self-Efficacy and Goals

As will be given detailed attention in Chapter 7, self-efficacy is the perception or belief of the individual that he or she can successfully accomplish a specific task, and it is asso- ciated with goal commitment.137 People exhibiting higher levels of self-efficacy tend to set more challenging personal goals and are more likely to achieve them, and commitment to self-set personal goals is normally also higher than commitment to goals set by others (imposed goals).138 Self-efficacy is also related to imposed goals. Some individuals may reject imposed goals, but if they have self-efficacy still maintain high personal goals. Fur- ther, if the imposed goal is impossible, personal goals and self-efficacy may be reduced, along with performance.139

Objective and Timely Feedback

Studies have also found objective and timely feedback is preferable to no feedback and, as noted earlier, can be related to the process used to achieve a goal or the content (degree of achievement) of the goal. It is probably fair to say that feedback is a necessary but not sufficient condition for successful application of goal setting.140 In one research study it was found that daily feedback had positive influences on both productivity and employee satisfaction,141 and in another study feedback on progress toward individual and team goals greatly affected the decisions being made.142 “Just in time” information gath- ered through technology found in today’s “expert systems” can also be effectively used to provide timely feedback.143

Other Moderators in Goal Setting

Although the application guidelines from goal-setting theory and research are proba- bly as direct as any in the entire field of organizational behavior, there are still some other moderating variables. Besides commitment, importance, self-efficacy, and feedback shown in Figure 6.9 and discussed above, it should be noted that task complexity144 (also noted in the Locke and Latham model as indicated in Figure 6.9) and others are found in the literature, and there are some contradictory findings. For example, a study by Latham and Saari revealed that a supportive management style had an important moderating effect, and that, contrary to results in previous studies, specific goals did not lead to better perfor-Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

162 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

mance than a generalized goal such as “do your best.”145 However, other studies have found a significant relationship between goal levels and performance.146 Leader style may also affect goal commitment. Recent research revealed that an interaction between leader- member exchange and goal commitment accounted for a significant amount of variance in the performance level of a sales force.147 Another analysis indicated that there are also some unexplored areas, such as the distinction between quantity and quality goals,148 that may limit and make the application of goal setting more complex.

A Word of Caution Regarding Goal Setting

In the words of Ambrose and Kulik, who conducted a comprehensive review of goal- setting research, there are boundary conditions that surround the relationships between goal setting and performance that should be carefully noted for effective application.149

First, one study noted that goals can narrow an individual’s focus to perform only behaviors directly associated with goal attainment, at the cost of other desirable behaviors. This type of tunnel vision was revealed in a study in which students were given a specific goal of correcting the grammar on a recruiting brochure. They did so at the expense of improving the content of the brochure. Those with a more general goal (e.g., make it better) worked on both the content and the grammar.150 Furthermore, difficult goals increase the level of risk managers and employees are willing to take, and this increase may be counter- productive.151 Also, a study found that goals inhibited subjects from helping others who were requesting assistance, which has implications for teamwork.152 Other studies have found that difficult goals may lead to stress, put a perceptual ceiling on performance, cause the employees to ignore nongoal areas, and encourage short-range thinking, dishonesty, or cheating.153 However, Locke and Latham do provide specific guidelines of how these potential pitfalls can be overcome by better communication, rewards, and setting exam- ples.154

Recently, the argument has been made for the value of learning goals versus perfor- mance outcome goals. Setting very ambitious “stretch goals” to increase the numbers with- out providing the means to attain these goals may lead to not only stress and burnout, but also unethical behavior. As Seijts and Latham point out, “in situations where primarily the acquisition of knowledge and skills rather than an increase in effort and persistence is required, a specific challenging learning rather than an outcome goal should be set.”155 On balance, however, there has been very impressive evidence for the positive impact of set- ting specific, difficult goals that are accepted and of providing feedback on progress toward goals.

Other Performance Management Application Techniques Associated With Goal Setting

Much of the discussion so far has been directly concerned with goal-setting theory, research findings, and application for performance improvement of an individual manager or work unit. Besides goal setting per se, because of its demonstrated relationship to per- formance, a related approach recently given attention is goal orientation, originally con- ceptualized by Carol Dweck through her research on children. She found a dispositional personality dimension related to pursuing goals in achievement situations that could be characterized as (1) learning goal orientation (those who want to develop competence by mastering challenging situations) and (2) performance goal orientation (those who want to Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 6  MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 163

IAP PR

OO FS

demonstrate and validate competence by seeking favorable judgments).156 Although con- ventional wisdom would indicate the superiority of performance goal orientation, consid- erable recent research in the field of organizational behavior over the past decade indicates otherwise.157 A summary of this research concluded that a learning goal orientation has a positive impact on work-related behaviors and performance.158 This learning goal orienta- tion is especially relevant to effective performance in today’s environment that requires proactive, problem-solving responses to setbacks, service quality, creativity and openness to new ideas, and adaptation to new and changing situations.159

More recently Dweck has evolved the learning goal orientation into what she calls a “growth mindset” (people who have the belief that their basic qualities can be developed through their efforts) and the performance goal orientation into a “fixed mindset” (those who believe their qualities are set and have an urgency to prove themselves over and over).160 She uses infamous celebrity CEOs known for having a devastating effect on their firms such as “Chainsaw” Al Dunlop of Scott Paper and Sunbeam, Jerry Levin and Steve Case of AOL Time Warner, and Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling of Enron as examples of those having a fixed mindset. By contrast, those who led their firms to dramatically successful turnarounds such as Jack Welch, when he was at the pinnacle of General Electric, Lou Ger- stner at IBM, and Anne Mulcahy at Xerox are good representatives of having a growth mindset. In concluding, Dweck observed,

Jack, Lou and Anne—all believing in growth, all brimming with passion. And all believing that leadership is about growth and passion, not about brilliance. The fixed- mindset leaders were, in the end, full of bitterness, but the growth-minded leaders were full of gratitude. They called their workers the real heroes.161

Besides goal orientation or mindset, there are also other performance management techniques related to goal setting. One is benchmarking, which is a form of goal setting, though it is meant to be more inclusive and is often portrayed as part of total quality man- agement. Benchmarking is the process of comparing work and service methods against the best practices and outcomes for the purpose of identifying changes stated as specific goals that will result in higher-quality output. Importantly, benchmarking incorporates the use of goal setting to set targets that are pursued, identified, and then used as the basis for future action. The benchmarking process involves looking both inside and outside the organiza- tion for ways of improving performance.

With benchmarking, the idea is to enable the organization to learn from others and then to formulate specific change goals based on procedures and work assignments that have been observed in world-class organizations. Companies that have effectively used benchmarking include IBM and Magnavox. IBM benchmarked its efforts in comparison to Xerox, Motorola, 3M, Hewlett-Packard, and some Japanese firms that used just-in-time inventory controls. Magnavox benchmarked a series of HR practices, which they turned into 14 training measures that are now commonly called metrics, again with strong evi- dence of success.

A stretch target or goal, discussed in the earlier OB in Action, is another currently popular technique associated with goal setting. Stretch targets may be defined as objec- tives or goals that force organizations to significantly alter their processes in ways that involve a whole new paradigm of operations.162 In a manner similar to benchmarking, stretch targets seek to integrate and align the internal operation and culture with external best practices. Examples of stretch targets include enhancing motivation, performance, and creative decision making through specific numbers, percentages, and dates.Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

164 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

One area of application associated with goal setting with international implications is that of goal source. Questions remain as to how to implement goal-setting programs across cultures. During a goal-setting program, subordinates often receive information from a supervisor or leader. If that leader (the goal source) is distrusted, the message may be rejected. If the leader or goal source is trusted, goal acceptance and commitment and per- formance may be higher. One study conducted in England confirmed that English workers, who were more likely to trust a shop steward than a supervisor due to several key historical and cultural reasons, did indeed accept goals and perform at higher rates when the steward helped deliver the goals.163 This goal source impact applied in a cross-cultural environ- ment would suggest that, depending on cultural dimensions such as power distance, home country nationals involved in the goal-setting process may have more of an impact on home country employees than would expatriates or those from another country home office.

Impact on the Psychological Contract

Goal setting can be used to create psychological contracts with employees. In any exchange situation at work, there are both formal and informal expectations regarding what is given and what should be received in return. Imposing new goals may violate existing views of what is present in the psychological contract, creating either resistance to the pro- gram or a renegotiation of the rewards to be received. Note that any linkage between goals and performance has a psychological contract implied in the relationship. Organizations that routinely demand higher performances yet fail to respond with rewards to their people can expect increasingly negative responses and reactions.164

A number of other instances of contract violations may inhibit the success rates of goal setting. These violations include restructuring, downsizing, increased reliance on tempo- rary workers, and globalization. Goal setting in part constructs a social role at work that is intertwined with other elements of a psychological contract.165 Consequently, successful applications of goal-setting programs must account for how resulting processes will affect existing psychological contracts of employees.166

SUMMARY

Motivation is probably more closely associated with the micro perspective of organiza- tional behavior than is any other topic. A comprehensive understanding of motivation includes the need–drive–incentive sequence, or cycle. The basic process involves needs, which set drives in motion to accomplish incentives (anything that alleviates a need and reduces a drive). The drives, or motives, may be classified into primary and secondary cat- egories. The primary motives are unlearned and physiologically based. Common primary motives are hunger, thirst, sleep, avoidance of pain, sex, and maternal concern. Secondary motives are learned and are most relevant to the study of organizational behavior. The needs for power, achievement, affiliation, security, and status are major motivating forces in the behavior of organizational participants.

Besides the various needs, motivation can also be broken down into its source— extrinsic and intrinsic. Extrinsic motives are the visible consequences external to the indi- vidual (e.g., money), usually contingently administered by others, to motivate the individ- ual. Intrinsic motives are internal to the individual, and are self-induced to learn, achieve, or in some way better oneself.Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 6  MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 165

IAP PR

OO FS

When the theories are specifically focused on work motivation, there are both histori- cally important and contemporary approaches. The older Maslow and Herzberg models attempt to identify specific content factors in the employee (in the case of Maslow) or in the job environment (in the case of Herzberg) that are motivating. Although such a content approach has surface logic, is easy to understand, and can be readily translated into prac- tice, the research evidence points out some definite limitations. There is very little research support for these models’ theoretical basis and predictability. The trade-off for simplicity sacrifices true understanding of the complexity of work motivation. On the positive side, however, these historically important models have given emphasis to important content factors that were largely ignored by the human relationists. In addition, the Herzberg model is useful as an explanation for job satisfaction and as a point of departure for practical application to enrich jobs.

The contemporary process theories provide a much sounder theoretical explanation of the complexity of work motivation. The expectancy model of Porter and Lawler help explain the important cognitive variables and how they relate to one another in the process of work motivation. The Porter-Lawler model also gives specific attention to the important relationship between performance and satisfaction. Porter and Lawler propose that perfor- mance leads to satisfaction, instead of the human relations assumption of the reverse. The research literature is generally supportive of such expectancy models, but conceptual and methodological problems remain. Unlike the older content models, these expectancy mod- els are relatively complex and difficult to translate into actual practice.

Another contemporary approach to explaining work motivation is equity theory. This theory is based on perceived input–outcome ratios of oneself compared to relevant other(s). Like the expectancy models, equity theory can lead to increased understanding of the complex cognitive process of work motivation but also has the same limitation for pre- diction and control in the practice of human resource management. More recently, this equity theory has been applied to the analysis of organizational justice in the workplace. Other relevant cognitive understanding of motivation comes from attribution theory (i.e., internal versus external locus of control and stability, consensus, consistency, and distinc- tiveness attributions). Finally, control and agency theories, coming from other disciplines, are briefly discussed as representative of other approaches receiving research attention in organizational behavior.

The last part of the chapter deals with two of the most important application areas of work motivation: job design and goal setting. Although the concern for designing jobs goes back to the scientific management movement at the turn of the twentieth century, the recent concern for human resource management as a competitive advantage has led to renewed interest in, and research on, job design. The older and simpler job enlargement and rotation approaches have given way to first a job enrichment approach and then a job characteristics approach that relates to psychological or motivational states leading to improved employee satisfaction and performance. Characteristics such as skill variety, task identity, task signif- icance, autonomy, and feedback have been found by research to be related to employee sat- isfaction and quality of work. The other major application technique for work motivation of goal setting has become a showcase for evidence-based management.

Basing his approach on a cognitive perspective, Locke has a well-developed goal-set- ting theory of motivation. This theory emphasizes the important relationship between goals and performance. Laboratory and field studies have verified this relationship. In particular, the most effective performance seems to result when specific, difficult goals are accepted and when feedback on progress and results is provided. An alternative theoretical perspec- tive is goal orientation (fixed and growth mindsets), and an extension and systematic appli-Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

166 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

cation of the goal-setting approach are benchmarking and stretch targets. The chapter concludes with the impact that goal setting may have on the psychological contract. To be successful, the human resources must also benefit and receive a return (reward) in order to not breach the psychological contract.

QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION AND REVIEW

1. Briefly define the basic motivation process and the two types of needs. What are some examples of each type of need?

2. What is the difference between an intrinsic and an extrinsic motive? Can both operate at the same time? If so, how?

3. In your own words, briefly explain Maslow’s theory of motivation. Relate it to work motivation and Herzberg’s model.

4. What is the major criticism of Herzberg’s two-factor theory of motivation? Do you think it makes a contribution to the better understanding of motivation in the work- place? Defend your answer.

5. In your own words, briefly explain the Porter-Lawler model of motivation. How do performance and satisfaction relate to each other?

6. Briefly give an example of an inequity that a manager of a small business might expe- rience. How would the manager strive to attain equity in the situation you describe?

7. How does equity theory relate to procedural justice? Why is this so important to today’s employees?

8. What is attribution theory? How can locus of control be applied to workers and man- agers?

9. What two major attribution errors or biases have surfaced? Give an example of each. 10. Briefly describe control theory and agency theory. What implications can these two

theories have for work motivation? 11. What are the core job characteristics in the Hackman-Oldham model? How do you

calculate the motivating potential of a job? How would a professor’s job and a jani- tor’s job measure up on these characteristics? Be specific in your answer.

12. In your own words, describe the theory behind goal setting. What has the research generally found in testing goal setting?

13. How does goal setting relate to goal orientation, benchmarking, stretch targets, and psychological contracts?

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 6  MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 167

IAP PR

OO FS

There are a number of ways in which organiza- tions are trying to apply techniques to improve performance. For example, redesigning tradi- tional, bureaucratic organizations and specialized jobs has emerged as a way to enhance employee satisfaction and performance. This can be done by restructuring the organization so that it is a more enjoyable, pleasant place in which to work. This is actually being accomplished in a number of dif- ferent ways in the real world.

At Inhale Therapeutic Systems, a small start- up company in northern California that focuses on novel drug-delivery technology, everyone, including the president of the company, sits in large cubicles (they call them “bullpens”) with four other people of various ranks and functions. There are no walls or barriers between any of them. This arrangement forces people to talk to each other, while limiting the amount of time they spend gossiping, and reduces the need to write memos and use e-mail—as, in most cases, the people to whom these messages would be directed are sitting in the same bullpen. Every nine months the company reshuffles everyone and assigns new bullpen partners. This arrangement has seemed to promote teamwork and reduce office politics.

At West Bend Mutual Insurance Company top management decided to make the workplace as comfortable as possible for people. Manage- ment put money where their mouth was by pur- chasing equipment that allows those in certain workstations to adjust the temperature, fresh air, and noise levels. Researchers from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute have studied the impact of these changes and concluded that those who are allowed to control their own climate are at least 3 percent more productive than those who are not. The company management believe that these pro- ductivity increases are even higher, probably more in the range of 5 to 10 percent. In addition, the novel workstations have become an asset in recruiting and retaining workers.

Other companies are approaching the moti- vation challenge by asking: What else can we do to make the organization an enjoyable place to work? At Sun

Microsystems, some members of top man- agement are asking an even more radical ques- tion. Noting that many of their employees are never in the office because they are out in the field with clients or working from home, they ask: Why should we heat, cool, and clean offices when so few people ever use them? This has led man- agement to consider reducing office space; if per- sonnel who never come to the office need to get together for occasional meetings or face-to-face interactions, they can rent space at hotels or con- ference centers. Although this may not be the route Sun eventually takes, it does show that the old way of having everyone in their office from 9 to 5 may become a thing of the past.

An interesting issue that is beginning to emerge concerns “too much of a good thing.” Is it possible that the new work arrangements such as those at Inhale Therapeutic Systems or West Bend Insurance will result in facilitating so much interaction that people become overstimulated or distracted? Moreover, the changes that are being made today may soon be outmoded by changes in tomorrow’s technology, resulting in the need to reorganize the workplace again. On the positive side, however, some work design experts note:

The good news … is that those involved in forg- ing the new workplace realize there is no ideal, no cookie-cutter workplace template they can plop on top of organizations. And it’s a rare alternative-office space that doesn’t get adapted as trial runs reveal elements that don’t work or could work better. “One thing we’ve realized is that not only must we assess what’s possible but how far and how fast it can move.” That would seem to signal an end to the age of the corporate “edifice complex” and a new era of workspaces that work.

1. How does redesign of jobs lead to improved performance and job satisfaction? In your answer include a discussion of Figure 6.2.

2. How do the examples in this case relate to the job characteristics model as discussed in this chapter?

3. Are we likely to see more workplace rede- sign in the future? Why or why not?

REAL CASE: Making It a Nice Place to Work

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

168 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

Pat Riverer is vice president of manufacturing and operations of a medium-size pharmaceutical firm in the Midwest. Pat has a Ph.D. in chemistry but has not been directly involved in research and new-product development for 20 years. From the “school of hard knocks” when it comes to manag- ing operations, Pat runs a “tight ship.” The com- pany does not have a turnover problem, but it is obvious to Pat and other key management person- nel that the hourly people are putting in only their eight hours a day. They are not working anywhere near their full potential. Pat is very upset with the situation because, with rising costs, the only way that the company can continue to prosper is to increase the productivity of its hourly people.

Pat called the human resources manager, Carmen Lopez, and laid it on the line: “What is it with our people, anyway? Your wage surveys show that we pay near the top in this region, our conditions are tremendous, and our fringes choke a horse. Yet these people still are not motivated. What in the world do they want?” Carmen replied: “I have told you and the president time after time that money, conditions, and benefits are not enough. Employees also need other things to motivate them. Also, I have been conducting

some random confidential interviews with some of our hourly people, and they tell me that they are very discouraged because, no matter how hard they work, they get the same pay and opportuni- ties for advancement as their coworkers who are just scraping by.” Pat then replied: “Okay, you are the motivation expert; what do we do about it? We have to increase their performance.”

1. Explain the “motivation problem” in this organization in terms of the content models of Maslow and Herzberg. What are the “other things” that the human resources manager is referring to in speaking of things besides money, conditions, and fringe bene- fits that are needed to motivate employees?

2. Explain the motivation of the employees in this company in terms of one or more of the process models. On the basis of the responses during the confidential interviews, what would you guess are some of the expectancies, valences, and inequities of the employees in this company? How about Pat?

3. How would you respond to Pat’s last ques- tion and statement if you were the human resources manager in this company?

You are in charge of a small department and have three subordinates—Tom, Dick, and Harry. The key to the success of your department is to keep these employees as motivated as possible. Here is a brief summary profile on each of these subordi- nates.

Tom is the type of employee who is hard to figure out. His absenteeism record is much higher than average. He greatly enjoys his family (a wife and three small children) and thinks they should be central to his life. The best way to describe Tom is to say that he is kind of a throwback to the hippie generation and believes deeply in the val- ues of that culture. As a result, the things that the company can offer him really inspire him very lit- tle. He feels that the job is simply a means of

financing his family’s basic needs and little else. Overall, Tom does an adequate job and is very conscientious, but all attempts to get him to do more have failed. He has charm and is friendly, but he is just not “gung-ho” for the company. He is pretty much allowed to “do his own thing” as long as he meets the minimal standards of perfor- mance.

Dick is in many respects opposite from Tom. Like Tom, he is a likable guy, but unlike Tom, Dick responds well to the company’s rules and compensation schemes and has a high degree of personal loyalty to the company. The problem with Dick is that he will not do very much inde- pendently. He does well with what is assigned to him, but he is not very creative or even depend-

Organizational Behavior Case: What Do They Want?

Organizational Behavior Case: Tom, Dick, and Harry

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 6  MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 169

IAP PR

OO FS

able when he is on his own. He also is a relatively shy person who is not very assertive when dealing with people outside the department. This hurts his performance to some degree because he cannot immediately sell himself or the department to other departments in the company or to top man- agement.

Harry, on the other hand, is a very assertive person. He will work for money and would read- ily change jobs for more money. He really works hard for the company but expects the company also to work for him. In his present job, he feels no qualms about working a 60-hour week, if the money is there. Even though he has a family and is supporting his elderly father, he once quit a job cold when his employer didn’t give him a raise on

the premise that he was already making too much. He is quite a driver. A manager at his last place of employment indicated that, although Harry did do an excellent job for the company, his personality was so intense that they were glad to get rid of him. His former boss noted that Harry just seemed to be pushing all the time. If it wasn’t for more money, it was for better fringe benefits; he never seemed satisfied.

1. Can you explain Tom’s, Dick’s, and Harry’s motivations by one or more of the work- motivation models discussed in this chapter?

2. How, if at all, would equity theory apply to the analysis of the motivations of Tom, Dick, and Harry?

Kelly Sellers is really fed up with his depart- ment’s performance. He knows that his people have a very boring job, and the way the techno- logical process is set up leaves little latitude for what he has learned about vertically loading the job through job enrichment. Yet he is convinced that there must be some way to make it more interesting to do a dull job. “At least I want to find out for my people and improve their perfor- mance,” he thinks.

The employees in Kelly’s department are involved in the assembly of small hair dryer motors. There are 25 to 30 steps in the assembly process, depending on the motor that is being assembled. The process is very simple, and cur- rently each worker completes only one or two steps of the operation. Each employee has his or her own assigned workstation and stays at that particular place for the entire day. Kelly has decided to try a couple of things to improve per- formance. First, he has decided to organize the department into work teams. The members of

each team would be able to move the worksta- tions around as they desired. He has decided to allow each team to divide the tasks up as they see fit. Next, Kelly has decided to post each team’s performance on a daily basis and to reward the team with the highest performance by giving them a “rubber chicken” award that they can dis- play at their workbenches. The production man- ager, after checking with engineering, has reluctantly agreed to Kelly’s proposal on a trial basis.

1. Do you think Kelly’s approach to job rede- sign will work? Rate the core job dimensions from the Hackman-Oldham model of Kelly’s employees before and after he redesigned their jobs. What could he do to improve these dimensions even more?

2. What will happen if this experiment does not work out and the production manager forces Kelly to return to the former task design?

Organizational Behavior Case: The Rubber Chicken Award

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

170 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

Jackie Jordan is the regional manager of a state human services agency that provides job training and rehabilitation programs for the hearing impaired. Her duties include supervising counsel- ors as well as developing special programs. One of the difficulties that Jackie has had was with a project supervisor, Kathleen O’Shean.

Kathleen is the coordinator of a three-year federal grant for a special project for the hearing impaired. Kathleen has direct responsibility for the funds and the goals of the project. The federal agency that made the grant made continuance of the three-year grant conditional on some “demon- strated progress” toward fulfilling the purpose of the grant. Jackie’s problem with Kathleen was directly related to this proviso. She repeatedly requested that Kathleen develop some concrete goals for the grant project. Jackie wanted these goals written in a specific, observable, and mea- surable fashion. Kathleen continually gave Jackie very vague, nonmeasurable platitudes. Jackie, in

turn, kept requesting greater clarification, but Kathleen’s response was that the work that was being done was meaningful enough and took all her time. To take away from the work itself by writing these specific goals would only defeat the purpose of the grant. Jackie finally gave up and didn’t push the issue further. One year later the grant was not renewed by the federal government because the program lacked “demonstrated prog- ress.”

1. Do you think Jackie was right in requesting more specific goals from Kathleen? Why or why not?

2. Do you think the federal government would have been satisfied with the goal-setting approach that Jackie was pushing as a way to demonstrate progress?

3. Would you have handled the situation differ- ently if you were Jackie? How?

Organizational Behavior Case: Specific Goals for Human Service

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .