University of Phoenix 1

Week 4: Group Incentives

Group Incentives
Ms. Annie Fongheiser
Week 4
Frederick . P!ige" #!h!r!h $o%&es" 'yron Mo(%ey" #revor )!ckson
University of Phoenix *
Team Results
As ! te!& three out of the four &e&(ers scored !(ove ! ++ ,hich e-u!%ed high
&otiv!tion !nd one te!& &e&(er scored in the ./0++ scoring r!nge ,hich e-u!%ed &oder!te
&otiv!tion. #hese resu%ts ,ere conducted (!sed on ! survey of -uestions" ,hich !sked re%!tive
-uestions !(out you !nd ,orking ,ith others. 1n ! scoring (!sis of 1 through /" */ different
-uestions ,ere !sked ,hich det!i%ed ho, !n individu!% sees the&se%ves ,orking ,ith te!&
&e&(ers !nd different &otiv!tion!% -uestions re%!ted to,!rds te!& !ctivities.
#he incentives I identified in &y !ssign&ent ,ere intrinsic &otiv!tion!% f!ctors such !s
psycho%ogic!% needs. 2eeve *33+ st!tes" 2It e&erges spont!neous%y fro& psycho%ogic!% needs
!nd inn!te strivings for gro,th. When peop%e !re intrinsic!%%y &otiv!ted" they !ct out of interest"
2for the fun of it"4 !nd for the sense of ch!%%enge the !ctivity !t h!nd provides.4 I !& &ore
&otiv!ted (y the intern!% f!ctors such !s sense of (e%onging" pride in &yse%f !nd pride in &y
o(5ective. I (e%ieve th!t success ,i%% co&e (ec!use those intrinsic &otiv!tors ,i%% he%p &e
!chieve success" not necess!ri%y the extrinsic f!ctors" such !s &oney.
Team Incentives
After re!ding the &e&(ers of #e!& 6 individu!% p!pers e!ch of the &e&(ers ,i%% !gree
th!t #e!& 6 is intrinsic!%%y &otiv!ted one ,!y or !nother. #e!& 6 &e&(ers disp%!y ! good
(!%!nce of individu!% diversity ,ithin their ,riting techni-ues !nd the ,!y e!ch &e&(er o(t!ins
his or her person!% !nd te!& go!%s. A%though there !re different ro!ds to t!ke to o(t!ining the
go!%7 no one ,!y is right or ,rong !s %ong !s the over!%% go!% is the s!&e for te!& &e&(ers !nd
it gets !cco&p%ished.
Motiv!tion ste&s fro& ! v!riety of things ,h!t &otiv!tes one person &!y not (e of
interest to !nother th!t is ,hy &u%tip%e incentives &!y (e i&p%e&ented into &otiv!ting group
University of Phoenix 8
&e&(ers !ccording%y. #he first &e&(er of #e!& 6 fee%s th!t his intrinsic &otiv!tion ste&s fro&
his person!% psycho%ogic!% needs. $e st!tes th!t he is &ore &otiv!ted (y the intern!% f!ctors such
!s ! sense of (e%onging !nd h!ving pride ,ithin hi&se%f. $e !%so (e%ieves th!t success ,i%% co&e
(ec!use intrinsic &otiv!tors ,i%% he%p hi& to !chieve success" not the extrinsic f!ctors such !s
&oney.
#he second &e&(er of #e!& 6 st!tes he too is intrinsic!%%y &otiv!ted (ut his &otiv!tion
co&es fro& group &otiv!tion.
#he third &e&(er of #e!& 6 (e%ieves her &otiv!tion co&es fro& ,ithin7 her
physio%ogic!% needs !s ,e%% !s her interperson!% needs shou%d (e &et ,hen (eing re,!rded. #his
&e&(er pr!ctices the 9chut:;s #heory of Interperson!% <eeds. #he need for inc%usion !nd
!ffection does not &!tter to this person" ho,ever the need for contro% is. #his individu!% is very
p!ssion!te !nd he!d strong she &!neuvers %ike ! %e!der ,ithin her group7 this individu!%
According to =ng%e(erg !nd Wynn >*313? 2put the groups; go!% !he!d of her o,n needs4>p. /?.
#his person (e%ieves ! si&p%e recognition or pr!ise ,i%% (e suit!(%e for re!ching the groups go!%.
9o&ething !s si&p%e !s s!ying 2Good )o( or @ou ock4 ,i%% (e 5ust !s good !s ! &onet!ry
re,!rd ,e%% not ex!ct%y (ut to so&e degree.
#he fourth &e&(er of #e!& 6 (e%ieves th!t he is intrinsic!%%y &otiv!ted !s ,e%%. $e is
&otiv!ted (y individu!% ch!%%enges !nd his re,!rd is !chieved through !cco&p%ish&ents !nd
co&p%etions of pro5ects. $e !%so t!kes pride in his ro%e ,ithin the group. $is &otiv!tion is
intern!% !nd purposefu% in not dis!ppointing the group. #he te!& &e&(er (e%ieves th!t the te!&
is on%y !s strong !s its ,e!kest %ink !nd he is &otiv!ted to not (e this %ink. $e g!ins s!tisf!ction
fro& kno,ing th!t he gives 133A in !%% ende!vors !nd this is f!r &ore re,!rding to hi& th!n !ny
other type of co&pens!tion or extrinsic &otiv!ting f!ctors.
University of Phoenix 4
Two proposed Incentives
Group 6 chief re,!rd is &ore of ! group re,!rd predic!ted on the intrinsic &otiv!tion
!t ,ork theories set forth (y Benneth #ho&!s >1?. $e descri(es &e!ningfu%ness" choice"
co&petence !nd progress !s its chief &otiv!tors !nd re,!rds.
Me!ningfu%ness0 cou%d (est (e descri(ed !s the group;s re%ent%ess pursuit of
!cco&p%ishing ! desired outco&e to p!ss this c%!ss ,ith ! &ore th!n !de-u!te gr!de. #h!t is !
very ,orthy t!sk.
6hoice C =veryone h!s the !(i%ity !nd !uthority to decide ho, t!sks !re !%%oc!ted !nd
c!rried out. #his !%%o,s for everyone to p!rticip!te !nd h!ve i&p!ct on the finished product. #his
!%%o,s !nd pro&otes %e!dership of e-u!% st!tures reigning ,ithin the c!&p.
6o&petence0 #he higher -u!%ity of ,ork is high%ighted (y the !dded pressure one puts on
onese%f not to (e the s%!cker in the group. #his on%y ,orks ,hen its individu!%s possess higher
%eve%s of !ccount!(i%ity !nd pride. #he te!& &e&(ers do not h!ve !ny pro(%e&s co&p%i&enting
or encour!ging individu!% &e&(ers ,hen !ppropri!ted or needed.
Progress0 <ot on%y the fee%ing !ssoci!ted ,ith !cco&p%ish&ents" (ut the inn!te
kno,%edge th!t the group !s ,e%% !s one h!s e%ev!ted h!ving experienced such !n experience.
Intrinsic it0se%f &e!ns (ui%t0in &otiv!tion.
A%% four of these !re considered person!% senses. In this type of group setting c!n tr!ns%!te
into so &uch &ore. Group !cco&p%ish&ents !re pushed to forefront. A ,e%% 0orchestr!ted
experience in the %e!rning genre; noted.
Achieving Desired Results
=!ch of the incentives %isted !(ove contri(ute to #e!& 6 !cco&p%ishing its desired
resu%ts. =!ch &e&(er of the group possesses &e!ningfu%ness !nd ! sense of purpose. #hese
University of Phoenix /
ch!r!cter tr!its provide focus !nd deter&in!tion to,!rd e!ch !nd every pro5ect (efore us. #his
focus ,i%% en!(%e the te!& to !cco&p%ish t!sks on ti&e ,hi%e producing high -u!%ity products.
A%%o,ing e!ch te!& &e&(er to h!ve choices !nd e-u!% input cre!tes !n !t&osphere of
trust. #rust in one !nother en!(%es !n environ&ent of %itt%e to no strife" !%%o,ing progress to
continu!%%y (e &!de (y the group !s ! ,ho%e. #his incentive is not to (e t!ken %ight%y. Ac-uiring
trust ,ithin !ny group is one of the h!rdest !chieve&ents to !cco&p%ish. $o,ever" once
!cco&p%ished" the te!& is !(%e to re%y on one !nother to !cco&p%ish his or her individu!% t!sks
re%!ted to the over!%% pro5ect !nd re&!in di%igent on individu!% portions.
According to =ng%e(erg D Wynn >*313?" ! study sho,ed !pproxi&!te%y 43A of
e&p%oyees in <orth A&eric! h!s never (een recogni:ed for their incredi(%e perfor&!nces. #his
kind of %!ck of !ppr!is!% %o,ers group &or!%e !nd p!rticip!tion. #he co&petence incentive
suggested !(ove ,ou%d re&edy this scen!rio. #e!& 6 (e%ieves th!t !ckno,%edging e!ch of its
&e&(ers for ! 5o( ,e%% done ,ou%d incre!se individu!% &or!%e" decre!se ch!nces of %!ck of
p!rticip!tion" !nd !(ove !%%" sho, the individu!% th!t his or her h!rd ,ork is !ppreci!ted !nd
deserving of pr!ise in so&e inst!nces. With !%% incentives considered" the pro(!(i%ity of
!chieving desired resu%ts is very high !nd shou%d (e o(t!ined.
University of Phoenix E
eferences
=ng%e(erg" I. <. D Wynn" F. . >*313?. Working in groups. >/
th
ed.?. 'oston" MA:
Pe!rsonGA%%ynD '!con.