The traditional frame of mind which was often adopted by managers can be summed up as “Man is primarily motivated by economic incentives and will do that which gets him the greatest economic gain”(Organizational Psychology by Schein). This idea is further iterated by McGregors theory X where he describes man as “…inherently lazy and must therefore be motivated by outside incentives”. We must also note that aside from financial gain there are several other factors that affect human motivation; McClelland’s theory highlights the need for achievement, power and affiliation, and this is just a sample of the huge range of factors that affect motivation in the workplace.
Vroom's Expectancy Model suggests that people choose certain behaviors because they anticipate that particular behaviors will lead to one or more desired outcomes and that other behaviors will lead to undesirable outcomes. Its basis centres on the natural human belief that effort will be rewarded, and it highlights the repercussions when hard work does not bring its just fruits. The theory identifies three important expectations that individuals bring to the workplace, “Expectancy, Instrumentality and Valence”. The combined effects these factors provides an effective tool in work situations.
Expectancy is the first factor, and I think it is largely dependent on the confidence of the individual. An individual who has a belief in their own skills and ability to complete a task will meet the challenge with enthusiasm if the other determining factors are favourable. It is therefore important that managers assign workers to tasks that are suited to them. However the problem facing Mega Manufacturing is not based at this stage, we already know that the workers at Mega Manufacturing possess the necessary skills to operate the new die-cutter “Look, Mr. Nowall, we know how to make this new die-cut work”
The second determinant of motivation is “Instrumentality” which poses the question “If I accomplish a task will I attain the required outcome?” The doctrine that human nature is rational-economic derives ultimately from the philosophy of hedonism, which argued that people act to maximise their self interest (Organizational Psychology by Schein) Workers must feel that the old saying “You get back what you put in” is a reliable guideline to follow. While this statement portrays a grim image of human nature it is the basis around which motivation revolves. “What’s in it for us?”
The final assumption of the expectancy theory is valence which “pertains to the perceived strength of the reward that will result from the performance. Workers must feel that the effort they contribute is justified by the rewards that they receive. If the final reward is small, the motivation will be small, even if expectancy and instrumentality are both high. “If we work the machine so the die cut doesn’t break (and, yes, we know how to do it), then the productivity standards go up for us without us getting any benefit from it.”
Vrooms theory is in keeping with the old saying, “You can take a horse to the water but you can’t make him drink”, and this sums up the problem that Mega Manufacturing are facing. Their employees have the necessary skills and the necessary technology to carry out this task but are refusing to co-operate. The assumptions proposed by Vroom, offer an explanation with regard to the problems at Mega Manufacturing.
Achievement, recognition, work itself and responsibility are factors of satisfying experiences (The Motivation to Work by Herzberg et al) The die-cutters at Mega Manufacturing are “the most skilled workers in the factory and in the shoe industry in general”. This signifies their importance to the organisation and would suggests that they have should have a certain sense of pride in their work. Why, then have they drawn the line with regard to the implementation of this new production method? I feel that Vroom’s Expectancy Theory is the key to understanding the psychological barriers that are causing the Die-Cutters to resist the use of the new technology. It is evident that a failure of communication has occurred in this work environment. Management are not aware of the attitudes of their employees, Job Fischer’s statement “What’s in it for us?” pertains directly to the instrumentality aspect of Vroom’s theory. The die-cutters attitude towards the new cutters was unenthusiastic because their desired outcomes would not be achieved. They are no longer content, because the implementation of the new technology will not result in any personal gain for them. They are expected to implement the new technology, thus solving the production problem by reducing wastage and increasing productivity but at the same time remain satisfied. Through the companies Piece-Rate scheme the workers have developed a link between effort, performance and finally reward. “… workers were paid by how many pieces they cut per hour…”
The die-cutters have succeeded in finding a solution to the production method crisis, and are willing to exert extra effort in order to implement this method, but they are blatantly aware that this effort will go unrewarded. “If we work the machine so that the die-cut doesn’t break (and yes we know how to do it), then the productivity standards go up for us without us getting any benefit from it. Why should we? There is clearly a breakdown in communication here, while management feel that the design of the Die-Cut is at fault they are unaware that the underlying problem is actually a lack of motivation among their workers.
It is the “performance to outcome” expectancy that poses the problem for Mega Manufacturing. We know that expectancy is high, because the workers possess the necessary skills to carry out the task, however a lack of Instrumentality is the clear barrier to the implementation of the new method. Vroom’s theory suggests that levels of motivation can be directly related to the levels of expectancy, Instrumentality and Valence. This theory can be suitably applied in this situation. According to Pratkanis & Turner 1994, attitudes about one’s job including job satisfaction is critically important to the functioning of work organisations. In order to optimise efficiency and maximise profits Mega Manufacturing must implement the new production method as quickly as possible. In order to achieve this they must satisfy the “performance to outcome” expectancy of their employees.
Employee satisfaction is critical to the development of any organisation and has been thoroughly explored in many psychological theories due to its importance and implications for managers. The catch phrase “Happy workers work harder” is a vital message that all companies should take into account and is especially pertinent to Mega Manufacturing. In order to increase efficiency and productivity, it is vital that the management at Mega Manufacturing devise a scheme to coax the workers to adopt the new production method. The managers need to adopt an appropriate incentive scheme and combine this with the most suitable working conditions in order to maximise the efficiency of the workers and the technology.
Mega Manufacturing has already introduced a piece-rate scheme, which has increased productivity but has also resulted in high levels of wastage. This does however show the companies willingness to introduce new ideas into the workplace and invest financially in the hope of a long-term gain. Motivation is the set of processes that stimulate, guide and sustain human behaviour towards accomplishing some goal (Principles of Organisational Behaviour: an Irish Text by Morley, Moore, Heraty, and Gunnigle). The goal for Mega manufacturing is to maximise performance whilst minimising wastage. Their piece-rate system already achieves high levels of performance but I think that it could be altered so that workers are also rewarded on reducing wastage. This would encourage the workers to be more careful when making the cuts while sustaining the high productivity levels.
The company could also introduce individual incentives whereby the workers who prove most efficient would be rewarded. Perhaps a bonus could be given each month to the employee whose production to wastage ratio is lowest. This would prove expensive due to the bonus itself and the investment that would be needed to monitor production closely enough, so as to attain the necessary figures. However the increase in profits that would result from the new production method would justify this investment. “If we can’t be more efficient and keep our costs down, we’ll be out of business soon.”
Both these suggestions incorporate the ideas suggested by Locke’s Goal Theory. The Basic premise of goal theory is that people’s goals or intentions play an important part in determining behaviour (Management and Organisational Behaviour by Laurie J Mullins). People strive to achieve goals in order to satisfy their emotions and desires; this factor coupled with the financial gain that the workers would receive would create enough motivation to solve the problem faced by Mega Manufacturing. Whilst financial rewards are a controversial incentive to offer workers they are in my opinion the single greatest contribution to motivation. The individual awards system would also introduce a sense of pride and achievement into the work place. Although this competitive aspect could have repercussions, I feel that if the system is properly controlled and monitored by management it will work well.
These suggestions may resolve the current problem that Mega Manufacturing are facing but we must not forget that a lack of communication was the primary reason that this problem arose in the first place. Clearly management at Mega Manufacturing need to encourage workers to discuss their concerns and any innovative ideas they may have, so as to predict future problems and thus prevent them from affecting the workings of the organisation.
The cutters have power because their skills are vital to the success of the organisation. The management have failed to evaluate the die-cutters correctly and therefore they have disrupted the productivity of the organisation. Recent contributions such as Vaill (1982), Perry (1984), Moss-Kanter (1983) and Quinn Mills (1991) consequently highlight the need to empower employees in an attempt to make the organisation more effective. (Principles of Organisational Behaviour: an Irish Text by Morley, Moore, Heraty, and Gunnigle) It is vital that management recognise the importance of each individual employee at Mega Manufacturing. Their future success will be determined by the management’s willingness to understand the workers needs and attitudes. Both parties must work together to recognise and eliminate future problems that could hinder productivity and place the organisations future in jeopardy.
Bibliography
Books
Schein E. H. Organizational Psychology, (3rd Edition), Prentice Hall International Editions.
Morley M., Moore S., Heraty N. & Gunnigle P. (1998)Principles of Organisational Behaviour: an Irish Text. Dublin: Gill & Macmillan Ltd.
Mullins L. J. (1993) Management and Organisational Behaviour (3rd Edition) London: Pitman Publishing
Herzberg et al (1959) The Motivation to Work (2nd Edition) New York: John Wiley & Sons
Websites
A profile of Victor H. Vroom. Retrieved December 16th, 2003 from http://mbe.yale.edu/faculty/professors/vroom.html
