management, organizational policies & practices lecture 10 dr. amna yousaf phd (hrm) university...
TRANSCRIPT
Management, Organizational Policies & PracticesManagement, Organizational Policies & Practices
Lecture 10 Dr. Amna YousafPhD (HRM)
University of Twente, the Netherlands
Recap Lecture 9Recap Lecture 9
Funcations of communication Communication process and model Downward, upward, lateral communication Verbal, written, non verbal communication Formal communication networks Grapevine Choice of channels and channel richness Common barriers to effextive communication Cluture as effective communication barrier
Managing MotivationManaging Motivation
Lecture 10
OutlineOutline
What is motivation Motivation theories
– Maslow’s Need Theory– ERG Theory– Theory X and Theory Y– Two-factor Theory– McClelland’s Theory of Needs– Cognitive Evaluations Theory– Goal Setting Theory
• MBO as application of Goal Setting
– Self-efficacy Theory Implications for Managers
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
What Is Motivation?
Direction
PersistenceIntensity
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Key Elements
1. Intensity: how hard a person tries
2. Direction: toward beneficial goal
3. Persistence: how long a person tries
Key Elements
1. Intensity: how hard a person tries
2. Direction: toward beneficial goal
3. Persistence: how long a person tries
Motivation
The processes that account for an individual’s intensity, direction, and persistence of effort toward attaining a goal.
What is Motivation? What is Motivation?
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Hierarchy of Needs Theory (Maslow)Hierarchy of Needs Theory (Maslow)
Hierarchy of Needs Theory
There is a hierarchy of five needs—physiological, safety, social, esteem, and self-actualization; as each need is substantially satisfied, the next need becomes dominant.
Self-Actualization
The drive to become what one is capable of becoming.
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Maslow’s Hierarchy of NeedsMaslow’s Hierarchy of Needs
E X H I B I T 6–1E X H I B I T 6–1
Lower-Order NeedsNeeds that are satisfied externally; physiological and safety needs.
Higher-Order NeedsNeeds that are satisfied
internally; social, esteem, and self-actualization
needs.SelfSelf
EsteemEsteem
SocialSocial
SafetySafety
PhysiologicalPhysiological
Maslow’s Need Theory-conceptsMaslow’s Need Theory-concepts
Physiological – hunger, thirst, shelter, sex, and other bodily needs
Safety – security and protection from physical or emotional harm
Social – affection, belongingness, acceptance & friendship
Esteem – internal factors such as self-respect, autonomy and achievement and external factors such as status, recognition and attention
Self-actualization – drive to become what one is capable of becoming, achieving one’s potential and self fulfillment
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Assumptions of Maslow’s HierarchyAssumptions of Maslow’s Hierarchy
Movement up the Pyramid
•Individuals cannot move to the next higher level until all needs at the current (lower) level are satisfied.
Maslow Application:
A homeless person
will not be motivated to
meditate!
Maslow Application:
A homeless person
will not be motivated to
meditate!
•Individuals therefore must move up the hierarchy in order
Alderfer’s ERG TheoryAlderfer’s ERG Theory
Existence similar to Maslow’s physiological and safety needs
Relatedness related to social and status needs Growth similar to esteem and self-actualization
needs Unlike Maslow’s theory, individuals can be at all
categories simultaneously
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Theory XTheory XManagers See Workers As…Managers See Workers As…
Disliking WorkDisliking Work
Avoiding ResponsibilityAvoiding Responsibility
Having Little AmbitionHaving Little Ambition
Theory YTheory Y Managers See Workers As…Managers See Workers As…
Enjoying WorkEnjoying Work
Accepting ResponsibilityAccepting Responsibility
Self-DirectedSelf-Directed
Theory X and Theory YTheory X and Theory Y
McGreoger believes theory Y assumptions more valid so managers should encourage participative decision making, responsible and challenging jobs and good group relations
No evidence indicating which assumptions are true or that theory Y environment will lead to more motivated workers
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Herzberg’s Two-Factor TheoryHerzberg’s Two-Factor Theory
Bottom Line: Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction are not Opposite Ends of the Same Thing!
Separate constructs– Hygiene Factors---Extrinsic
& Related to Dissatisfaction
– Motivation Factors---Intrinsic and Related to
Satisfaction
Hygiene Factors:
•Salary
•Work Conditions
•Company Policies
Motivators:
•Achievement
•Responsibility
•Growth
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Comparison of Satisfiers and Dissatisfiers
Comparison of Satisfiers and Dissatisfiers
Factors characterizing events on the job that led to extreme job dissatisfaction
Factors characterizing events on the job that
led to extreme job satisfaction
E X H I B I T 6–2E X H I B I T 6–2
Source: Reprinted by permission of Harvard Business Review. An exhibit from One More Time: How Do You Motivate Employees? by Frederick Herzberg, September–October 1987. Copyright © 1987 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College: All rights reserved.
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Contrasting Views of Satisfaction and DissatisfactionContrasting Views of Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction
E X H I B I T 6–3E X H I B I T 6–3
Critique on two-factor theoryCritique on two-factor theory
Failure blamed to extrinsic factors; success to personal attributes
Ratings used to measure job satisfaction may be contaminated; people may be positive on one scale item but may treat a different response differently
No overall measure of satisfaction utilized; dissatisfaction on one facet but overall satisfaction
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Critique on two-factor theoryCritique on two-factor theory
Herzberg assumed relationship between satisfaction and productivity but no measure of productivity was employed. One needs to assume a strong relationship between the two. – No sufficient empirical backing for the theory as
for the earlier ones– May sound well empirically
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
David McClelland’s Theory of NeedsDavid McClelland’s Theory of Needs
Need for Achievement
The drive to excel, to achieve in relation to a set of standards, to strive to succeed.
Need for Affiliation
The desire for friendly and close personal relationships.
Need for Power
The need to make others behave in a way that they would not have behaved otherwise.
Bottom Line: Individuals have different levels of
needs in each of these areas, and those
levels will drive their behavior
David McClelland’s Theory of NeedsDavid McClelland’s Theory of Needs
Not much evidence for power and affiliation need High achievers perform well when probability of
success .5. – Not attribution to pure chance or least challenge
High achievers are successful entrepreneurs; no links to being effective managers
Effective managers may be linked to high power need and low affiliation need
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Matching High Achievers and JobsMatching High Achievers and Jobs
E X H I B I T 6–4E X H I B I T 6–4
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Cognitive Evaluation TheoryCognitive Evaluation Theory
Cognitive Evaluation Theory
Providing an extrinsic reward for behavior that had been previously only intrinsically rewarding tends to decrease the overall level of motivation.
The theory may only be relevant to jobs that are neither extremely dull nor extremely interesting.
Hint: For this theory, think about how fun it is to read in the summer, but once reading is assigned to you for a grade, you don’t want to do it!
Cognitive Evaluation TheoryCognitive Evaluation Theory
Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation are not mutually exclusive
Managerial implications: rewards contingent on performance?
Extrinsic rewards shift locus of control to external– Tangible rewards undermine performance while
intangible rewards don’t. Support from a number of studies
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Self-concordance – extension of CETSelf-concordance – extension of CET
Intrinsically motivated people are happy even when they cant reach goals as they find the process fun
Extrinsically motivated people don’t get that much happiness even after goal achievement as they don’t find goal satisfying
Implications– Choose jobs carefully– Managers should create work conditions that
enhance intrinsic motivation and not only rely on rewards.
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
E X H I B I T 6–5E X H I B I T 6–5
What Would Herzberg Say? What Would Maslow Say? What Would Herzberg Say? What Would Maslow Say?
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Goal-Setting Theory (Edwin Locke)Goal-Setting Theory (Edwin Locke)
Basic Premise: That specific and difficult goals, with self-generated feedback,
lead to higher performance.
But, the relationship between goals and performance will depend on
•goal commitment
–“I want to do it & I can do it”
–Increased through participatory goals, making them public, specific, top management involvement
Goal-Setting Theory (Edwin Locke)Goal-Setting Theory (Edwin Locke)
• task characteristics (simple versus complex, well-learned versus novel, independent versus interdependent)
• national culture– Goal setting well aligned with north American
cultures– Independent : not too high on power distance– Challenging goals: low in uncertainty avoidance– Performance is important: high in achievement
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Goal Setting in Action: MBO ProgramsGoal Setting in Action: MBO Programs
Management By Objectives Programs
• Company wide goals & objectives
• Goals aligned at all levels
• Based on Goal Setting Theory
Management By Objectives Programs
• Company wide goals & objectives
• Goals aligned at all levels
• Based on Goal Setting Theory
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
What is MBO?What is MBO?
Key Elements
1. Goal specificity
2. Participative decision making
3. An explicit time period
4. Performance feedback
Key Elements
1. Goal specificity
2. Participative decision making
3. An explicit time period
4. Performance feedback
Management by Objectives (MBO)
A program that encompasses specific goals, participatively set, for an explicit time period, with feedback on goal progress.
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Cascading of ObjectivesCascading of Objectives
E X H I B I T 6–1E X H I B I T 6–1
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Linking MBO and Goal-Setting TheoryLinking MBO and Goal-Setting Theory
MBO Goal-Setting Theory
Goal Specificity Yes Yes
Goal Difficulty Yes Yes
Feedback Yes Yes
Participation Yes No(qualified)
MBO and Goal SettingMBO and Goal Setting
MBO emphasizes on participative goal setting In Goal Setting theory goals assigned as well as
participatory can be equally effective
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Why MBOs FailWhy MBOs Fail
Unrealistic expectations about MBO results
Lack of commitment by top management
Failure to allocate reward properly
Cultural incompatibilities
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Self-EfficacySelf-Efficacy
Self Esteem, which is….
Individuals’ degree of liking or disliking themselves.
•An individual’s feeling that s/he can complete a task (e.g. “I know I can!”)
•Enhances probability that goals will be achieved
Not to be confused with:
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Self-Efficacy and Goal Setting Self-Efficacy and Goal Setting
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Four Ways of Increasing Self Efficacy (Bandura)
Four Ways of Increasing Self Efficacy (Bandura)
1. Enactive Mastery
2. Vicarious Modeling
3. Verbal Persuasion
4. Arousal
Note: Basic Premise/Mechanism of Pygmalion and Galatea Effects
Self-EfficacySelf-Efficacy
Mastery Orientation– If you have done a task in the past, your slef
efficacy to perform will be higher Vicarious modeling
– Some one similar to you doing a task increases your confidence of doing it
• some one else loosing weight• Some one of same handicap as you playing golf
Verbal persuasion– Some one convinces you that you have necessary
skills to do some task. Motivational speakers use this tactic
Arousal– Energized state to do a task.
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.
Self-efficacy and Goal SettingSelf-efficacy and Goal Setting
Self efficacy works together with goal setting Self efficacious individuals more likely to work
harder in response to negative feedback and vice versa
© 2007 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved.