need help

Contact Info: 541-737-6651 or [email protected]

I interviewed Mr. Lawrence Houston, who owns and operates ESP Studio. The company is located in Memphis Tennessee, and Mr. Lawrence has approximately six employees working under his supervision. According to Mr. Lawrence, his primary role as a leader is to motivate the following behaviors: attendance, task performance (viz., high-quality music) and organizational citizenship. He stated, “My employees are not only expected to be at work on time, but our clients also expect them to be fully present and engaged in their work. In doing so, they are better prepared to ensure customer satisfaction. And, although they were hired primarily to engineer and produce music, I am relentless in my attempts to motivate them to perform other duties such as promoting ESP products and services that we offer.”

As a way of motivating task behaviors, Mr. Lawrence uses extrinsic rewards. For example, his sound engineers receive 15% of service charges when customers purchase studio time. To compensate for the fact that his employees do not earn hourly wages (or salary), engineers also receive 85% of the cost of beats produced and sold at the studio. Additionally, Mr. Lawrence uses intrinsic motivators to encourage high-quality music and organizational citizenship behaviors. He stated, “I always try to avoid micromanaging my employees. ‘Your beats, your mixes, your sound.’ That’s what I always communicate to my employees.” In other words, employees at ESP have high autonomy, considering that they can create the music that they intrinsically enjoy with little input from Mr. Lawrence regarding how they should engineer and/or produce tracks.

Employees at ESP wear many hats. Sound engineers are asked to take photos (at the studio or surrounding nightclubs), video producers are asked to design CD covers, and his DJs often advertise products and services offered at ESP without any commission. I asked about the effectiveness of these job enlargement approaches to motivating employees, and he said excitedly, “They love it! I think it makes them feel important although I don’t pay them anything extra beyond the tips they can receive.” He then claimed that their jobs are enriched due to the role they play in promoting the success of Mr. Lawrence’s artists. For instance, employees volunteer their expertise to engineer and produce tracks, and the DJs are always finding opportunities for his artists to perform. In sum, Mr. Lawrence uses extrinsic and intrinsic rewards, job enlargement, and job enrichment to motivate his employees to be present at work, create high-quality music, and perform behaviors that go beyond their job description. Mr. Lawrence did point out that it is often challenging to encourage sound engineers to come to work on days in which no sessions are booked. As a result, he had to employee three sound engineers to ensure that someone was always available for walk-ins, which required finding opportunities for them all to earn a paycheck.

I concur with Mr. Lawrence regarding the effectiveness of his approaches to motivating employees. According to job characteristics theory, employees tend to experience their work as meaningful when they are afforded the opportunity to utilize a wide range of skills (i.e., high task variety), see the fruits of their labor (high task identity), and perceive their work as having a significant impact on others (high task significance). The theory posits that the extent to which work is thought to be meaningful or having a purpose is directly related to employees’ level of motivation. This suggests that employees at ESP should be highly motivated, considering that they wear many hats, are involved in projects (or services) from start to finish, and are in a position to help customers (including Mr. Lawrence’s artists) realize their dreams. Moreover, employees are doing what they love and have complete control over the music that they inspire to create. Due to this high level of job autonomy, job characteristics theory suggests that Mr. Lawrence’s employees would be even more motivated because they feel accountable for work outcomes. Porter-Lawler’s model further supports the notion that his employees will be motivated because Mr. Lawrence provides merit-based extrinsic rewards and has created an intrinsically motivating work environment. However, it is unclear whether he provides his employees positive and developmental feedback. This could be a critical limitation of his approach to motivating employees. A key premise of job characteristic theory is that knowledge of results is a critical determinant of work motivation. Thus, I would recommend timely and consistent feedback, and that Mr. Lawrence has the courage to not only provide positive feedback but constructive feedback as well.

Also, I got the sense that Mr. Lawrence treats all employees the same, though he did not explicitly say he does. I would strongly discourage this practice and recommend that he first ensure that his employees have the knowledge, skills, and desire for growth necessary to become immersed in challenging work – or modify his approach to match employees’ needs and abilities. There was also no mention of setting SMART goals. Drawing on arguments proposed by goal-setting theory, I would recommend that Mr. Lawrence set specific and difficult goals for his employees rather than taking a “do your best” approach. In doing so, it is highly likely that his employees will approach work strategically and put forth the effort and time necessary to create high-quality music. Thus, although Mr. Lawrence uses effective motivating practices, as supported by job characteristics theory and research, he could greatly improve his initiatives by providing developmental feedback, setting SMART goals, and taking into account that what works for most employees may not work for all employees.