understanding employee

7/29/2019 Understanding Employee

1/7

Understanding Employee Motivation

James R. Lindner

Research and Extension Associate

The Ohio State UniversityPiketon Research and Extension CenterPiketon, Ohio

Internet address: [email protected]

Introduction to Motivation

At one time, employees were considered just another input into the production of goods andservices. What perhaps changed this way of thinking about employees was research,

referred to as the Hawthorne Studies, conducted by Elton Mayo from 1924 to 1932

(Dickson, 1973). This study found employees are not motivated solely by money and

employee behavior is linked to their attitudes (Dickson, 1973). The Hawthorne Studiesbegan the human relations approach to management, whereby the needs and motivation of

employees become the primary focus of managers (Bedeian, 1993).

Motivation Theories

Understanding what motivated employees and how they were motivated was the focus ofmany researchers following the publication of the Hawthorne Study results (Terpstra,

1979). Five major approaches that have led to our understanding of motivation are

Maslows need-hierarchy theory, Herzbergs two- factor theory, Vrooms expectancytheory, Adams equity theory, and Skinners reinforcement theory.

According to Maslow, employees have five levels of needs (Maslow, 1943): physiological,

safety, social, ego, and self- actualizing. Maslow argued that lower level needs had to be

satisfied before the next higher level need would motivate employees. Herzbergs workcategorized motivation into two factors: motivators and hygienes (Herzberg, Mausner, &

Snyderman, 1959). Motivator or intrinsic factors, such as achievement and recognition,

produce job satisfaction. Hygiene or extrinsic factors, such as pay and job security, producejob dissatisfaction.

Vrooms theory is based on the belief that employee effort will lead to performance and

performance will lead to rewards (Vroom, 1964). Rewards may be either positive or

negative. The more positive the reward the more likely the employee will be highlymotivated. Conversely, the more negative the reward the less likely the employee will be

motivated.
http://cokroaminoto.wordpress.com/2007/10/28/understanding-employee-motivation/http://cokroaminoto.wordpress.com/2007/10/28/understanding-employee-motivation/


2/7

Adams theory states that employees strive for equity between themselves and otherworkers. Equity is achieved when the ratio of employee outcomes over inputs is equal to

other employee outcomes over inputs (Adams, 1965).

Skinners theory simply states those employees behaviors that lead to positive outcomeswill be repeated and behaviors that lead to negative outcomes will not be repeated (Skinner,1953). Managers should positively reinforce employee behaviors that lead to positive

outcomes. Managers should negatively reinforce employee behavior that leads to negative

outcomes.

Motivation Defined

Many contemporary authors have also defined the concept of motivation. Motivation has

been defined as: the psychological process that gives behavior purpose and direction

(Kreitner, 1995); a predisposition to behave in a purposive manner to achieve specific,

unmet needs (Buford, Bedeian, & Lindner, 1995); an internal drive to satisfy an unsatisfiedneed (Higgins, 1994); and the will to achieve (Bedeian, 1993). For this paper, motivation is

operationally defined as the inner force that drives individuals to accomplish personal and

organizational goals.

The Role of Motivation

Why do we need motivated employees? The answer is survival (Smith, 1994). Motivated

employees are needed in our rapidly changing workplaces. Motivated employees help

organizations survive. Motivated employees are more productive. To be effective,managers need to understand what motivates employees within the context of the roles they

perform. Of all the functions a manager performs, motivating employees is arguably themost complex. This is due, in part, to the fact that what motivates employees changes

constantly (Bowen & Radhakrishna, 1991). For example, research suggests that asemployees income increases, money becomes less of a motivator (Kovach, 1987). Also, as

employees get older, interesting work becomes more of a motivator.

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to describe the importance of certain factors in motivatingemployees at the Piketon Research and Extension Center and Enterprise Center.

Specifically, the study sought to describe the ranked importance of the following ten

motivating factors: (a) job security, (b) sympathetic help with personal problems, (c)personal loyalty to employees, (d) interesting work, (e) good working conditions, (f) tactful

discipline, (g) good wages, (h) promotions and growth in the organization, (i) feeling of

being in on things, and (j) full appreciation of work done. A secondary purpose of the study

was to compare the results of this study with the study results from other populations.


3/7

Methodology

The research design for this study employed a descriptive survey method. The targetpopulation of this study included employees at the Piketon Research and Extension Center

and Enterprise Center (centers). The sample size included all 25 employees of the targetpopulation. Twenty-three of the 25 employees participated in the survey for a participationrate of 92%. The centers are in Piketon, Ohio.

The mission of the Enterprise Center is to facilitate individual and community leader

awareness and provide assistance in preparing and accessing economic opportunities in

southern Ohio. The Enterprise Center has three programs: alternatives in agriculture, smallbusiness development, and womens business development. The mission of the Piketon

Research and Extension Center is to conduct research and educational programs designed

to enhance economic development in southern Ohio. The Piketon Research and ExtensionCenter has five programs: aquaculture, community economic development, horticulture,

forestry, and soil and water resources.

From a review of literature, a survey questionnaire was developed to collect data for the

study (Bowen & Radhakrishna, 1991; Harpaz, 1990; Kovach, 1987). Data was collectedthrough use of a written questionnaire hand-delivered to participants. Questionnaires were

filled out by participants and returned to an intra-departmental mailbox. The questionnaire

asked participants to rank the importance of ten factors that motivated them in doing theirwork: 1=most important . . . 10=least important. Face and content validity for the

instrument were established using two administrative and professional employees at The

Ohio State University. The instrument was pilot tested with three similarly situated

employees within the university. As a result of the pilot test, minor changes in wordselection and instructions were made to the questionnaire.

Results and Discussion

The ranked order of motivating factors were: (a) interesting work, (b) good wages, (c) full

appreciation of work done, (d) job security, (e) good working conditions, (f) promotionsand growth in the organization, (g) feeling of being in on things, (h) personal loyalty to

employees, (i) tactful discipline, and (j) sympathetic help with personal problems.

A comparison of these results to Maslows need-hierarchy theory provides some interesting

insight into employee motivation. The number one ranked motivator, interesting work, is aself-actualizing factor. The number two ranked motivator, good wages, is a physiological

factor. The number three ranked motivator, full appreciation of work done, is an esteem

factor. The number four ranked motivator, job security, is a safety factor. Therefore,according to Maslow (1943), if managers wish to address the most important motivational

factor of Centers employees, interesting work, physiological, safety, social, and esteem


4/7

factors must first be satisfied. If managers wished to address the second most importantmotivational factor of centers employees, good pay, increased pay would suffice. Contrary

to what Maslows theory suggests, the range of motivational factors are mixed in this study.

Maslows conclusions that lower level motivational factors must be met before ascending

to the next level were not confirmed by this study.

The following example compares the highest ranked motivational factor (interesting work)

to Vrooms expectancy theory. Assume that a Centers employee just attended a staff

meeting where he/she learned a major emphasis would be placed on seeking additionalexternal program funds. Additionally, employees who are successful in securing funds will

be given more opportunities to explore their own research and extension interests

(interesting work). Employees who do not secure additional funds will be required to work

on research and extension programs identified by the director. The employee realizes thatthe more research he/she does regarding funding sources and the more proposals he/she

writes, the greater the likelihood he/she will receive external funding.

Because the state legislature has not increased appropriations to the centers for the next twoyears (funds for independent research and extension projects will be scaled back), the

employee sees a direct relationship between performance (obtaining external funds) and

rewards (independent research and Extension projects). Further, the employee went to work

for the centers, in part, because of the opportunity to conduct independent research andextension projects. The employee will be motivated if he/she is successful in obtaining

external funds and given the opportunity to conduct independent research and extension

projects. On the other hand, motivation will be diminished if the employee is successful inobtaining external funds and the director denies the request to conduct independent research

and Extension projects.

The following example compares the third highest ranked motivational factor (full

appreciation of work done) to Adamss equity theory. If an employee at the centers feelsthat there is a lack of appreciation for work done, as being too low relative to another

employee, an inequity may exist and the employee will be dis-motivated. Further, if all the

employees at the centers feel that there is a lack of appreciation for work done, inequitymay exist. Adams (1965) stated employees will attempt to restore equity through various

means, some of which may be counter- productive to organizational goals and objectives.

For instance, employees who feel their work is not being appreciated may work less or

undervalue the work of other employees.

This final example compares the two highest motivational factors to Herzbergs two-factor

theory. The highest ranked motivator, interesting work, is a motivator factor. The second

ranked motivator, good wages is a hygiene factor. Herzberg, Mausner, & Snyderman(1959) stated that to the degree that motivators are present in a job, motivation will occur.

The absence of motivators does not lead to dissatisfaction. Further, they stated that to the


5/7

degree that hygienes are absent from a job, dissatisfaction will occur. When present,hygienes prevent dissatisfaction, but do not lead to satisfaction. In our example, the lack of

interesting work (motivator) for the centers employees would not lead to dissatisfaction.

Paying centers employees lower wages (hygiene) than what they believe to be fair may

lead to job dissatisfaction. Conversely, employees will be motivated when they are doinginteresting work and but will not necessarily be motivated by higher pay.

The discussion above, about the ranked importance of motivational factors as related to

motivational theory, is only part of the picture. The other part is how these rankingscompare with related research. A study of industrial employees, conducted by Kovach

(1987), yielded the following ranked order of motivational factors: (a) interesting work, (b)

full appreciation of work done, and (c) feeling of being in on things. Another study of

employees, conducted by Harpaz (1990), yielded the following ranked order ofmotivational factors: (a) interesting work, (b) good wages, and (c) job security.

In this study and the two cited above, interesting work ranked as the most importantmotivational factor. Pay was not ranked as one of the most important motivational factorsby Kovach (1987), but was ranked second in this research and by Harpaz (1990). Full

appreciation of work done was not ranked as one of the most important motivational factors

by Harpaz (1990), but was ranked second in this research and by Kovach (1987). The

discrepancies in these research findings supports the idea that what motivates employeesdiffers given the context in which the employee works. What is clear, however, is that

employees rank interesting work as the most important motivational factor.

Implications for Centers and Extension

The ranked importance of motivational factors of employees at the centers provides usefulinformation for the centers director and employees. Knowing how to use this information

in motivating centers employees is complex. The strategy for motivating centers

employees depends on which motivation theories are used as a reference point. IfHertzbergs theory is followed, management should begin by focusing on pay and job

security (hygiene factors) before focusing on interesting work and full appreciation of work

done (motivator factors). If Adams equity theory is followed, management should begin by

focusing on areas where there may be perceived inequities (pay and full appreciation ofwork done) before focusing on interesting work and job security. If Vrooms theory is

followed, management should begin by focusing on rewarding (pay and interesting work)

employee effort in achieving organizational goals and objectives.

Regardless of which theory is followed, interesting work and employee pay appear to beimportant links to higher motivation of centers employees. Options such as job

enlargement, job enrichment, promotions, internal and external stipends, monetary, and

non-monetary compensation should be considered. Job enlargement can be used (by


6/7

managers) to make work more interesting (for employees) by increasing the number andvariety of activities performed. Job enrichment can used to make work more interesting and

increase pay by adding higher level responsibilities to a job and providing monetary

compensation (raise or stipend) to employees for accepting this responsibility. These are

just two examples of an infinite number of methods to increase motivation of employees atthe centers. The key to motivating centers employees is to know what motivates them and

designing a motivation program based on those needs.

The results presented in this paper also have implications for the entire CooperativeExtension Sysyem. The effectiveness of Extension is dependent upon the motivation of its

employees (Chesney, 1992; Buford, 1990; Smith, 1990). Knowing what motivates

employees and incorporating this knowledge into the reward system will help Extension

identify, recruit, employ, train, and retain a productive workforce. Motivating Extensionemployees requires both managers and employees working together (Buford, 1993).

Extension employees must be willing to let managers know what motivates them, and

managers must be willing to design reward systems that motivate employees. Surveyresults, like those presented here, are useful in helping Extension managers determine what

motivates employees (Bowen & Radhakrishna, 1991). If properly designed reward systems

are not implemented, however, employees will not be motivated.

References

Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in

experimental social psychology. New York: Academic Press.

Bedeian, A. G. (1993). Management (3rd ed.). New York: Dryden Press.

Bowen, B. E., & Radhakrishna, R. B. (1991). Job satisfaction of agricultural educationfaculty: A constant phenomena. Journal of Agricultural Education, 32 (2). 16-22.

Buford, J. A., Jr., Bedeian, A. G., & Lindner, J. R. (1995). Management in Extension (3rd

ed.). Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University Extension.Buford, J. A., Jr. (1990). Extension management in the information age. Journal of

Extension, 28 (1).

Buford, J. A., Jr. (1993). Be your own boss. Journal of Extension, 31 (1).Chesney, C. E. (1992). Work force 2000: is Extension agriculture ready? Journal of

Extension, 30 (2).

Dickson, W. J. (1973). Hawthorne experiments. In C. Heyel (ed.), The encyclopedia of

management, 2nd ed. (pp. 298-302). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.Harpaz, I. (1990). The importance of work goals: an international perspective. Journal of

International Business Studies, 21. 75-93.

Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. B. (1959). The motivation to work. NewYork: John Wiley & Sons.

Higgins, J. M. (1994). The management challenge (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan.

Kovach, K. A. (1987). What motivates employees? Workers and supervisors give different


7/7

answers. Business Horizons, 30. 58-65.Kreitner, R. (1995). Management (6th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, July 1943.

370-396.

Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and Human Behavior. New York: Free Press.Smith, G. P. (1994). Motivation. In W. Tracey (ed.), Human resources management and

development handbook (2nd ed.).

Smith, K. L. (1990). The future of leaders in Extension. Journal of Extension, 28 (1).Terpstra, D. E. (1979). Theories of motivation: borrowing the best. Personnel Journal, 58.

376.

Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley.This article is online at Journal of Extension.

http://cokroaminoto.wordpress.com/2007/10/28/understanding-employee-motivation/

http://www.joe.org/joe/1998june/rb3.php
http://www.joe.org/joe/1998june/rb3.html.http://www.joe.org/joe/1998june/rb3.html.http://cokroaminoto.wordpress.com/2007/10/28/understanding-employee-motivation/http://www.joe.org/joe/1998june/rb3.html.http://cokroaminoto.wordpress.com/2007/10/28/understanding-employee-motivation/

understanding employee

Documents