Citing example from the Palm Toy tutorial case study, and with reference to academic literature, discuss the intrinsic and extrinsic factors that contribute to my understanding of work motivation and evaluate critically the extent to the link between motivation and organizational performance.
Work motivation is an ensemble of internal and external forces which could initialize the work behavior, determining its direction,form, intensity and duration which is concerned with positive incentives and avoid negative incentives in the workplace (Pinder 2008). There are an array of theories that were put forward by organizational scholars. For instance, Maslow’s Need-based theories which focus on fulfilling employees’ needs, Vroom’s Expectancy theory which is related to the function of individual’ expectation, Herzberg’s TWO-FACTOR theory which is known as Motivation-hygiene theory and Adams’ Equity theory which demonstrates the relationship between equity and motivation (Hellriegel 2004).
Additionally, the correlation between motivation and organizational performance has always been an unresolved discussion. Research shows that motivation is related to individual performance which directly affect the outcomes of companies and can be influenced positively or negatively (Micle 2009). While on the other hand, other researchers have suggested that there is negligible relationship between motivation and organizational performance(Bolton 2005). Taking the example of the Palm Toy tutorial case study, this essay firstly illustrates intrinsic factors and extrinsic factors in terms of work motivation, then focuses on the close relationship between motivation and organizational performance.
There are a variety of factors which contribute to comprehend work motivation. This paper divides factors into two parts- intrinsic factors and extrinsic factors. First of all, with regard to internal aspects, in the case of the Palm Toy company, workers are motivated at a high level when they have access to provide their suggestions and make plans by themselves.To be precise, employees tend to show more initiative and possess self value achievement which is the highest level of Maslow’ hierarchy of needs(Maslow 1943). Then, based on the Expectancy theory studied by Victor H. Vroom in 1964, it can be understood that if workers harbor the idea that they have competence to finish their work objectives they will perform effectively with high motivation because they know that there is high probability to achieve the goal (Bandura 1986).
That is to say, workers in Palm company decide the speed of belt according to their expectancy and valence so that they work with enthusiasm and as a result, production increased. Moreover, turning to the external factors, firstly, working conditions are a significant aspect. Precisely, working conditions are closely bound up with job satisfaction,when people work in a comfortable working environment they are willing to contribute more (Babic and Bakotic 2013). For example, according to tutorial case after buying fans the sense of happiness of workers boosted, consequently, employees were motivated with satisfaction. By contrast, according to the theory by Herzberg in 1968, working conditions,as hygiene and contextual factor, should be attended to as a way of minimizing job dissatisfaction instead of increasing satisfaction (Rusu 2013).
Meanwhile, equity should be considered as an indispensable part of motivation (Traupmann 1978). Based on the Adams Equity theory, it can be seen that employees strive for fairness and justice by comparing adequate rewards and the compensation for their contributive inputs (Kinicki and Kreitner 2001). And workers are inclined to be motivated working in a fair circumstance by a sense of equity otherwise they tend to become anxious (Kinicki and Kreitner 2001). To be precise , as it is mentioned in Palm Toy company ,workers in other plants may feel unfair because of different earnings which can be regarded as negative inequity. In conclusion, work motivation contains intrinsic factors and extrinsic factors which can help me understand it.
As to the correlation between motivation and organizational performance. Performance is linked to motivation. Research shows that performance = motivation * ability which presents that performance is affected by motivation and ability (Norman and Clifford 1974). Meanwhile, ability is generally fixed so that motivation would play an important role to performance. In other words, there is a positive correlation between performance and motivation. However, there are a large number of other crucial variables which have an impact on the outputs, weakening the influence from motivation. For instance, task design, technology, environment factors and other social factors(Kinicki and Kreitner 2001). In addition, based on the Goal setting theory studied in 1968 by Locke, it can be understood that setting a reasonable and appropriate goal facilitates individuals in focusing their efforts in a specified direction efficiently and consequently intensifying the organizational productivity. Precisely, motivation will be generated when goals are acceptable and individuals tend to make more efforts to achieve the goals.
Furthermore, research shows that 90% of field studies and laboratory involving challenging and specific goals lead to high performance and productivity ( Locke and Shaw 1981). By contrast, anxiety would be presented when employees are confronted by a high degree of challenging and difficult goals or the equivalents. In other words, although individuals work with a high level of motivation high performance could still not be guaranteed (Kleinbeck 1900).
Moreover, payment could be regarded as an essential motivation which could lead to high performance (Heneman 1988). That is to say, workers are willing to contribute more as a result of monetary incentives which are regulated in a complete payment system. Conversely, studies shows that paying an worker too much may have adverse effects on their work performance. As a matter of fact they tend to generate less output than fairly paid employees (Sundheim 2013). To recapitulate, motivation is closely bound up with organizational performance.
In conclusion, need of self-actualization, employees’ expectancy,working conditions and equity in the workplace contribute to a relatively profound and deep understanding of work motivation which could be divided into external factors and internal factors. Then, even though there are some other variables(task design, technology, environment factors and other social factors) which would affect the influence of motivation (Kinicki and Kreitner 2001), the performance formula (performance = motivation * ability), the goal-setting theory and payment system could support that there is a strong link between motivation and organizational performance. In the future, taking good advantages of the correlation between motivation and organizational performance effectively, organization productivity would be enhanced significantly.
Pinder, C. 2008. Work motivation in organizational behavior . New York: Psychology Press. Hellriegel,D. 2004. Organizational Behavior. London: Thomson. Micle,M. 2009. Organizational climate,progress factor in motivation-performance relationship. Bucharest: Romanian Academy Publishing House. Bolton, S. 2005. Emotion Management in the Workplace. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Maslow,A. 1943. A Theory of Human Motivation. Psychological Review [Online] Available at: http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Maslow/motivation.htm [ Accessed: August 2000]. Bandura, A. 1986. Social foundation of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Bakotic, D and Babic, T. 2013. Relationship between Working Conditions and Job Satisfaction. International Journal of Business and Social Science 4(2), pp 206-213. Rusu,G.2013. Human resource motivation: an organizational performance perspective,Phd Thesis, Technical University of Iasi. Traupmann,J. 1978. A longitudinal study go equity in intimate relationships. PhD Thesis, University of Wisconsin. Kinicki, A. and Kreitner, R. 2001. Organizational Behavior. New York: Mc Graw Hill. Norman, A. and Clifford,A. 1974. Performance=Motivation*Ability: An integration-theoretical analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology [Online] Alailable at: http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=buy.optionToBuy&id=1975-07303-001 [Accessed: November 1974]. Locke, E. and Shaw,K. 1981. Goal Setting and Task Performance. Psychological Bulletin. [Online] Available at: http://datause.cse.ucla.edu/DOCS/eal_goa_1981.pdf [ Accessed: 29 September 1981]. Kleinbeck,U.1990.Work motivation. Hillsdale:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Heneman, R.1988. The relationship between pay-for-performance perceptions and pay satisfaction. PhD thesis, The Ohio State University. Sundheim,K. 2013. What Really Motivates Employees? [Online].Available at: http://www.forbes.com/sites/kensundheim/2013/11/26/what-really-motivates-employees/ [Accessed: 26 November 2013].