Employee Motivational Theories and Concepts Essay

Numerous theories on the character of employee motivation fool been bring on and published for the better part of this degree centigrade. While early employers thought of their workers as just another stimulant drug into the return of goods and services (Lindner, 1998), employees were becoming increasingly dis genial with working conditions and malevolent management. As post-war, take tensions mounted in the 1920s, employers needed to change their approach to employee relations if they were to avoid costly, and sometimes violent, labor strikes. Early motivational theories set the pieceation for the modernisement of 20th century concepts, including the move to get Googled and motivational techniques found on business strengths found in the corporate toolbox.Early Motivational TheoriesGeorge Elton Mayo, an Australian-born psychologist and Harvard Professor, began signifi tail assemblyt seek in 1927 in an attempt to demonstrate that employees, if appropriately cause, argon to a greater extent prolific and can achieve greater return by means of appropriate world relationship management techniques (Trahair & Zaleznik, 2005). This research, referred to as the Hawthorne Studies, found that employees are not totally motivated by fiscal gain, but also by the behaviour and attitude of their supervisors.During these studies, the employees responded positively to the mere particular that they were receiving attention from their supervisor as a subject of the experiment. In his article, Gordon Marshall (1998) noted that the term Hawthorne center is now widely used to refer to the behavior-modifying effects of being the subject of social investigation, regardless of the context of the investigation. More generally, the researchers concluded that supervisory expressive style greatly affected worker productivity (para. 1) and that enhanced productivity therefore depends on management sensitivity to, and manipulation of, the serviceman relations of produ ction (para. 2). This represented a dramatic paradigm disruption for employers and theorists alike.Subsequent to the completion of the infamous Hawthorne Studies, five primary motivational theories have developed that have increased the understanding of what truly motivates employees. They are Maslows need-hierarchy, Hertzbergs two- cipher system, howls expectancy theory, Adams equity theory, and Skinners reinforcement theory. Maslow identified that employees, in general, have five primary levels of inescapably that include psychological (e.g. air, food, shelter), safety (e.g. security, order, stability), belongingness (e.g. love, family, relationships), esteem (e.g. achievement, status, responsibility), and self-actualization (McLeod, 2007). Maslow further noted that, in order to earmark motivation, the lower levels would need to be satisfied in the beginning one progressed to the higher levels.Hertzberg classified motivation into two, distinct factors. He believed that inali enable factors (or motivators) produce job satisfaction through achievement and recognition piece of music extrinsic (or hygiene) factors produce dissatisfaction. He identified extrinsic factors to be associated with salary and perceived job security, or lack thereof. Vroom theorized that demonstrated political campaign would lead to performance which, in turn, would lead to reward (either positive or banish). The more positive the reward the more highly motivated the employee would be. To the contrary, negative rewards would result in a lesser motivated employee.Adams found that employees necessity to ensure that there is a sense of fairness and equity amongst themselves and their co-workers. He believed that equity is achieved when employees are contributing, in terms of input and output, at the same rate. Skinners theory was likely the virtually simplistic, He established that employees will repeat behaviors that lead to positive outcomes and eliminate or minimize behavior s that lead to negative outcomes. He conceived that, if managers positively reinforce desire behavior, it would lead to positive outcomes and that managers should negatively reinforce employee behavior that leads to negative outcomes (Lindner, 1998). crowd together R. Lindner, Professor of Management and Research at Ohio State University, has conducted extensive research on this topic. In his paper accord Employee Motivation, he further extrapolated on the five theories, providing a comparative analysis, and offering a summary exposition that focuses on the psychological process and inner force associated with the accomplishment of ad hominem and arrangemental goals (Lindner, 1998). 20th Century ConceptsIn addition to studying habitual theories associated with employee motivation, Lindner (1998) includes the methodology and outcomes of an independent study, conducted at Ohio State University, that sought to rank the grandness of ten motivating factors. The results of this stud y were compelling with interesting work rank as number one over other more usually identified motivators, such as wages and job security. In equivalence these results with Maslows hierarchy of needs, among others, he found that the results are mixed, with the highest ranked factor (interesting work) being one of self-actualization and contrary to Maslows findings (Lindner, 1998).This presents a divergent result that challenges Maslows assumption that the lower needs must be satisfied before a person can achieve their potential and self-actualize (McLeod, 2007, para.16). This does not negate Maslows work, but rather demonstrates that a natural exploitation may have taken place with the modern workforce repayable to the progression of motivation strategies. This is a credit to the work of early theorists, and a call to arms for those that continue this research. Get Googled that history has tho to definitively answer the question, what is the better method(s) to motivate employ ees? The imprecise answer continues to be it depends. many an(prenominal) another(prenominal) achieverful organizations incorporate a variety of programs aimed at motivating their employees, based on their specific population. Google Inc., for example, is leading the way to restructure management so that employees can streamline creative ideas that produce blockbuster new products.They are rewarding employees with perks like onsite swimming pools, allowing employees to bring their pets to work, providing onsite child care, and all the discontinue food employees want (How Google Inc. Rewards Its Employees, 2010, Thinking Leaders, para.1). While this may not be realistic for every organization, there is something to be said about the fact that Google, Inc. is consistently ranked by Fortune magazine as the ruff place in the U.S. to work. However there are things that a companionship can do to motivate their employees that are low or no cost and likely already exist in their corpo rate toolbox.The bodied ToolboxMost successful organizations pride themselves on their ability to advocate their product or service to achieve the desired level of profitability. They develop strategic plans, set production goals and persuade their customers that they are best of the best in their field. They are advertisers and peddlers of wares. So what does this have to do with motivation? Robert Hershey, music director of James E. Rogers College of Law at the University of Arizona and contributing author to the ledger of Managerial Psychology, contends that there is a significant correlation between an organizations ability to successfully promote their business and thrive at motivating their employees. He notes that we do not need one more theory of motivation we need better insight into the psychology of advertising. We can take some tried-and-true product advertising techniques that have been found to be effective and use them in a human resources and management context.B ut before we do that, the point must be made that, as a practical matter, our vocabulary and attention require a shift from the motivation jargon of needs, expectancy, two-factor theories, etc., to an emphasis on communications practices, because persuasion requires the transmission system of information (Hershey, 1993). If Hershey is correct, then an emphasis on communication and inclusion would create an environment ripe for employee motivation. One could also argue that, if communication is key, allowing input and empowered decision making is the next logical step to producing a motivated employee. Carolyn Wiley, Professor of Business at Roosevelt University, concurs with this notion and provides the following financial support statements in her article Creating an Environment for Employee Motivation When employees have an opportunity to provide input, this increases their survival rate and their sense of commitment. In many very polished companies, a natural sense of possessi on often develops among the employees.However, as companies grow, feelings of deliverership and commitment start to decline. To increase commitment as the organization grows, managers must change how they define who retains control. Shared decision making is essential twain to company success and employee survival. Workers generally do not resist their own ideas and decisions. Rather, they are motivated to fulfill them. (Wiley, 1992, para.14) While this may seem heavy(a) to traditional leaders, it should not be viewed as surrendering control. Employees that are empowered through inclusion are ambassadors for organizational success.It is only through mutual success that both the employee and company thrive. It seems so simple, but eludes even the most progressive of companies. Most organizations are more inclined to spend thousands of dollars creating recognition programs, expression home office environments, developing bonus structures and hosting employee appreciation events r ather than recognizing that most employees are merely looking to be valued. The same attention that motivated the Hawthorne workers applies to the modern employee who just wants to contribute and receive credit for their effort.Conclusion in that respect is certainly compelling evidence to indicate that employee motivation comes in many forms. Whether one places their belief in the theoretical assumptions of a Maslow or Hertzberg, their financial backing in the creation of a Google-esque environment, or capitalize on their organizational strengths to communicate and persuade, there is clear agreement that the ability to successfully motivate employees is essential for corporate success and sustainability. The concept of positive human relation management has finally taken its place at the principal of organizational strategies and, with it, the evolution of employee motivation.ReferencesTrahair, R. & Zaleznik, A. (2005). Elton Mayo The Humanist Temper. New Brunswick, NJ act Publis hersMarshall, G. (1998). A Dictionary of Sociology Hawthorne Studies. Retrieved from Encyclopedia.com http//www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O88-Hawthornestudies.html Lindner, James R. (1998). Journal of Extension Understanding Employee Motivation. Retrieved from http//www.joe.org/joe/1998june/rb3.phpMcLeod, S. A. (2007). Simply Psychology Maslow Hierarchy of Needs.Retrieved from http//www.simplypsychology.org/maslow.htmlHow Google Inc. rewards its employees. (2010). Retrieved from Thinking Leaders website http//www.thinkingleaders.com/archives/517Hershey, R. (1993). A practitioners view of motivation. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 8(3), 10-10. Retrieved from http//ezproxy.arbor.edu80/login? uniform resource locator=http//search.proquest. com/docview/ 215865845?accountid=13998 Wiley, C. (1992). Create an environment for employee motivation. HR Focus, 69(6), 14-14. Retrieved from http//ezproxy.arbor.edu80/login?url=http//search.proquest.com/ docview/206781828?ac countid=13998