Free Motivation Essay Sample

[Professor]
[School]
It was over forty years ago that Leibenstein argued that “for different reasons, individuals and commercial institutions typically work neither as effectively nor as hard as they can (Cristini 2011).” The visualized motivation is a major factor of X- effectiveness. Ever since the creation of Leibenstein’s study, the argument about what motivates real employees in real organizations (Cristini, 2011) began. This argument is alongside the premise that people’s administration should pivot on vow rather than power (Cristini, 2011). This premise must be the case since there is given a sudden influx of modern management systems and dynamic work practices directed at strengthening the employees’ dedication to work through extensive empowerment and involvement.
Motivating employees is highly important as it contributes to the company’s performance. When companies strengthen motivation and is enhanced by incentives and recognition programs, the company sees returns. According to Cristini (2011), this interpretation invited a significant amount of consideration and is now reinforced by comprehensive evidence. In contrast, the more precise problem of whether the novel administrative systems strengthen employees’ internal or the external motivation has not been thoroughly studied. However, it is directly related to the organizational costs. The event, by which workers are in the newer practice, give a higher degree of action only to the level that they take part. This case is in the form of productivity advances because of their involvement, and greater monetary payments are varied from the scenario in which committed workers are more eager to work merely for the job’s sake. It can be concluded that the former scenario of innovative systems can be seen mainly as extrinsic motivators. The latter describes the authenticity of intrinsic motivators.
Cristini (2011), noted that there are at least two causes why this discrepancy is significant. The first cause lies on the so-called ’hidden prices of rewards.’ These rewards are external interferences, particularly in the form of dependent monetary rewards may be negative reinforcers, which can partly or wholly take over an individual’s intrinsic motivation. This outcome has been evidently present in the field of cognitive psychology. This premise is at present studied within an extended major agent archetype where unequal factors between the agent and the principal are the conditioned arrangement for this scenario to happen. The following cause is that, even in the lack of presence of the taking over effects, intrinsic and extrinsic motivations typically identify with different work actions and ideals. According to Etzioni, in 1971 as noted again by Cristini (2011), the economic power of the commercial institution weakens intrinsic motivation. This power can also purchase only a ‘numbered’ type of dedication to the organization.
The above mentioned discussion is also supported by the content and process theories. Content theories according to Stoltz and Bolger, concentrate on the variables within an individual that empower, sustain, stop, and direct behavior. The theory focuses on the particular needs that motivate employees. The theory gives light on individual needs in elucidating job behavior, rewards processes, and job satisfaction. This scenario is based on the premise that deficiencies in individual needs promote tension within a person and initiate a behavioral answer. This fact goes to say that when individuals are not satisfied, they will look for ways to satisfy this need. Meaningful rewards more than the monetary can enhance an employee’s performance in the organization. Supervisors may recognize an individual’s contribution to the company’s growth (Stoltz and Bolger, n.d.).
Process theories, on the other hand, give meaning and evaluation of how behavior is directed, stopped, sustained and energized. Four process theories are known in the system. These are:

• Reinforcement

• Expectancy
• Equity
• Goal Setting
Using this theory, employers may contribute to an employee’s motivation by giving
‘numbered’ rewards to each and every accomplishment of the individual. These rewards may pertain to the form of monetary bonuses or productivity bonuses as discussed by Cristini (2011).
As Cristini (2011) discussed, it was revealed that practices that involved empowerment allowed for an essential empowerment in the provisions of higher job independence. There is greater will, reduced repetitiveness and reduced supervision on the job that can improve both the sense of fitting and the commitment to the organization. Such systems, such as team working, and combined meetings that have leeway on procedures and tasks, directly affect one’s commitment. This event may take effect by strengthening employees’ intrinsic motivation. On the other hand, their indirect effects, which affect commitment through job quality and wage effect, are somewhat smaller.
It was also revealed that employees tend to connect to a lower degree of intrinsic motivation in their bordering assistance role. In the event, that the employees are faced with decisions concerning their commitment to the organization is at a higher degree when their identification with the firm’s values is concerned. Results have indicated that the weight linked to intrinsic motivation increases alongside an employee’s educational attainment.
In contrast to the finest empowerment systems, the relative wage helps in holding employees but cannot affect their commitment. In addition, monetary rewards, if dependent on the performance, meaningfully take out intrinsic motivation, in line with the current experimental studies. These effects are specifically damaging on an employee’s dedication to the company and are only partly compensated by the wage when rewards are contingent on the individual performance.
A profounder investigation into the taking out effects supports the idea that no matter, when a contingent reward identifies the crowding out or the crowding in, is contingent to how it is seen by the employee. Specifically, results indicate that the use of conditional rewards for stock jobs is viewed as a means of power or as a sign of ineffective job attributes. Then the crowding out of intrinsic motivation happens. For a more difficult task, conditional rewards are not viewed as negative motivators. In the course of individual appraisals, the conditional rewards also raise employees’ internal motivation. This course is constant with the premise that they are seen as genuine signs of trust on the organization’s side (Cristini, 2011).
Motivation is the willingness to exert high levels of effort to make a contribution in achieving organizational goals. The level of motivation is conditioned by the satisfaction of certain individual needs. According to Gray (2000, p 1), motivation focuses on psychological systems. This motivation affects the direction, arousal and continuity of behavior. Although there is an agreement in different studies about the three components of motivation, the place of motivation and the nature of motivation in the workplace is still a subject of a long and standing study.
Different theories were tried, subdued and tested at a step that left industrial practice a few steps behind different researchers. As supported by Gray (2000), the word motivate is widely utilized in the framework of management as a verb that entails something that is done by a group or person to another. Another suggested inference of motivation is that the motivated individuals need to be encouraged to exert an effort or to do an a certain action that is something that they would not otherwise do. Motivation truly is an ideal that is vital to the growth of organizations. This fact was identified by Lawler as he states that the individual behaviors are not an exception and motivated voluntary actions (Gray, 2011). For certain, other facets are also considered to affect the growth of companies. This event being questions such as Why do some individuals work hard? Why do people go to work? Show that performance, and the exerted effort at work are identified by temperament, motivation, and ability.
Although these interactions are often hard to comprehend, relationships between these facets are possible to develop everyday strategies and models that concentrate particularly on motivation without disregarding the presence of other factors (Gray, 2000).
As mentioned in the above paragraphs, there are a number of relating factors that could elicit a behavior. These are according to Gray (2000, p. 1):

• Heredity

• Environment
• Interactions between factors (learning)
These facets somehow impact an individual’s action and characteristics such ass his motives, personality, attitude affect, knowledge, beliefs, abilities, and skills. As an effect, it produces the strength and appeal of effort, and the persistence of goal-directed actions over the course of time. However, most theories on motivation are not purported to foresee performance rather, it should predict decisive systems and voluntary action. This effect means that organizational researchers and managers will find it difficult to answer to their needs in formulating theories for motivation. It is argued that motivation does not have a definite meaning if it is interpreted merely as a general label that recognizes types of dependent and independent variable connections (Gray, 2000).
The degree to which motivation may be an outcome of environmental factors of outside manipulation or of different internal systems is still explored through different theories found in the literature. This scenario is supported by Muchinsky (2006, p. 381) wherein he stated that the motivation can be abstracted along the lines of intensity, direction, and persistence. Each aspect is connected with different issues and ideas. In the workplace setting, each facet is greatly relevant to both the employer and the employee.
The third dimension reported by Muchinsky (2006, p. 381) is persistence that entails a sustained energy over the course of time. It is occupied with the duration of the exerted energy. Studies have discovered only a few about this dimension. But, it is still good to note that it is the current focus of most motivational theories at present. A career is a field of a related series of tasks by which employees channel their energies over a certain course. Companies will mostly want workers who will persevere through the easy and difficult times. Likewise, individuals would want careers that will maintain their interests in the long run.
It must then again be noted that these three dimensions of motivation has direct effects on both the individual and the organization as a whole.
There are certain theories that support Muchinsky’s discussion of motivation. The following are theories that strengthen an employee’s motivation:

• Need Hierarchy Theory – This theory discusses that the main source of motivation are needs

• Equity Theory – This theory examines the ratio of inputs and outcomes.
• Expectancy Theory – This theory highlights the relationship between the exerted efforts of a person and the performance that results to the extended effort.
In its practical application to marketing, marketing motivation plays an essential role. Without the motivation of employees, it would be problematic to device internal marketing. As in the case of external marketing, organizations use the motivational marketing premise so that customers buy the products continuously. Motivational marketing according to Mishra and Sinha (2014) brings the loyalty of customers. However, to start with the outward growth, internal marketing is important. Motivation, the retention and attraction of employees, happen through this concept. Service-oriented employees, who are internally motivated, could drive the best results for the company thus driving more sales of the product.

Bibliography

Ball, B. (2012). A Summary of Motivation Theories. 1st ed. [ebook] Available at: http://www.yourcoach.be/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/A-summary-of-motivation-theories1.pdf [Accessed 7 Jan. 2015].
Cristini, A. (2011). Employees’ motivation and high performance workplace practices. University of Bergamo.
Gray, R. (2000). Workplace motivation a review of the literature. 1st ed. [ebook] Kumpania Consulting. Available at: http://rodericgray.com/workplacemotivation.pdf [Accessed 7 Jan. 2015].
HMI Performance Incentives, (n.d.). The Importance of Employee Motivation. [online] Massachusettes: HMI Performance Incentives. Available at: http://www.gamechangingpartnerships.com/white-papers/HMI_whitepaper_importance_employee_motivation.pdf [Accessed 7 Jan. 2015].
Lai, E. (2011). Motivation: A Literature Review. Pearson. [online] Available at: http://images.pearsonassessments.com/images/tmrs/Motivation_Review_final.pdf.
Mishra, T. and Sinha, S. (2014). Employee motivation as a tool to implement internal marketing.International Journal of Commerce, Business and Management, 3(5), pp.2319-2828.
Motivation. (n.d.). 1st ed. [ebook] Available at: http://www.iese.edu/es/files/IRCO-CrossCultural-motivation_tcm5-6119.pdf [Accessed 7 Jan. 2015].
Muchinsky, P. (2006). Psychology applied to work. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth.
Rodda, A. (1997). Motivation in the Workplace. [online] Available at: http://heyroth.tripod.com/angela/examples/motivationpaper.pdf [Accessed 7 Jan. 2015].
Stotz, R. and Bolger, B. (n.d.). Content and Process Theories of Motivation. [online] Available at: http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.incentivemarketing.org/resource/resmgr/imported/Sec%201.4.pdf [Accessed 7 Jan. 2015].