Similar to Herzberg – Theory X suggests that people work for extrinsic reasons, Theory Y suggests that people work for the intrisic benefits work brings.


“Work is as natural for humans as rest and play”


There is also a Theory Z – Ouchi, aligned more closely to the japanese style environment typified by: Long term employment Slow promotion Company specific skills with a specialised career path Participative decision making by consensus Broad concern for welfare Emphasis on trust Type I - Pink


Motivation 1.0 = survival Motivation 2.0 = punishments and rewards Motivation 3.0 = Type 1 behaviour – The satisfaction of the activity – The third drive “the performance of the task” 3.0 requires Autonomy, over what, when, who, and how Mastery, becoming better at something that matters Purpose – A cause greater than themselves Atlassian – Fedex days If-then rewards can do more harm than good – particularly for conceotual tasks ROWE Results Only Work Environment – Best Buy Carrots and sticks still effective for rule or routine based work The Sawyer effect – turning work into play (and vice versa The Candle experiment – demonstrates functional fixedness Draws on the academic work of Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Douglas McGregor, Peter Drucker, Gary Hemel, Edward Deci, Carol Dweck




Valence = the anticipated satisfaction from an outcome Expectancy = The expectation that effort will lead to performance Instrumentality = The belief that performance will lead to reward If an employee either does not care about getting a raise (Valence=0), does not think that harder work will lead to higher performance (expectancy=0) or thinks that better performance will not be rewarded (instrumentality=0) the motivational force will be 0. Where: V=sum of the Valences of all outcomes


Effort = (E→P)x∑[(P→O)xV]

DECIDING ON THE ATTRACTIVENESS OF ALTERNATIVE BEHAVIOUR, TWO TYPES OF EXPECTANCIES TO BE CONSIDERED Effort – performance [E>P] that given amount of effort will result in achieving intended level of performance Performance – outcome [P>O] perception that a given level of performance will actuallky lead to related outcomes





Changes to inputs = work less hours or reduce amount or quality of work Changes to outcomes = push for better pay, promotion etc Cognitive distortion of inputs = distorted belief about hard they are really working or relevance of a qualification. Leaving the field = resigning or absenteeism Acting on others = get others to lower their inputs Comparing the object of comparison = maintaining comparison of a colleague recently promoted Managers can change outcomes – pay etc or instigate somebody to transfer/leave. Managers must be aware of the importance of employees perceptions and recognise the need to treat people fairly and equitably


Goal theory [goal setting] Peoples’ goals or intentions play important part in determining behaviour People strive to achieve goals in order to satisfy their emotions and desires Goal difficulty and the extent of a persons commitment to acheiving the goal regulates the level of effort expended Application:: Specific performance goals should be identified and set in order to maintain motivation Goals should be challenging but realistic Accurate and timely feedback is more likely to lead to high performance Goals may be set by managers or by the individual Management by objectives is an example of goal setting setting realistic goals [appraisals]






Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful