Evaluate to what extent a) Expectancy Theory and b) Goal Setting Theory can explain motivation at work

Authors Avatar by dadadamin (student)

Evaluate to what extent a) expectancy theory and b) goal theory can explain motivation at work.

Motivation is a very imprecise and multifaceted term that neither in the sciences, nor in practice is used unitarily. In aspects of leadership or human resource management, motivation can be understood as the cognitive decision making process that initiates, energises, directs and maintains the behaviour to achieve a goal or incentive (Huczinski and Buchanan 2010). In explaining motivation, there are content theories, which focus on specific factors that motivate people, and process theories, which attempts to explain the mechanism by which human needs change. In this short paper, I will explain expectancy theory and goal theory, which fall in the category of process theories, and evaluate to what extent these theories can explain motivation at work.

  Being one of the most widely practised motivation theories, V. Vroom’s expectancy theory assumes that motivation is a process in which a person chooses an action among several alternatives that he thinks will result in an outcome of value. Hence, motivation is determined by how attractive the outcome of an action is, and how good the chance of getting a desired outcome by making an effort is. In expectancy theory, there are three main variables. Valence, Instrumentality and Expectancy (VIE). Valence describes the satisfaction the person expects to receive from a particular outcome, rather than the real value the person receives (Vroom 1964). Instrumentality refers to the personal belief or the probability that a good performance will lead to desired outcome and Expectancy describe the expectation that achievement will lead to good performance and organisational rewards. These three variables are put into an equation F = Σ (Valence x Instrumentality x Expectancy). It proposes that a person is motivated by the attractiveness he feels in the relationship of effort, performance and rewards. The three components can be valued each Valence (-1, 0, 1), Instrumentality (0, 1), and Expectancy (0, 1). It predicts that motivation is largest when all the variables are high, but if any one of these is 0, motivation does not arise. Porter & Lawler extended Vroom’s expectancy theory by not just linking achievement with motivation but including that the effort-performance link depends on an individual’s ability, traits and perception of the role. For instance, if a person does not have the ability to tackle a task or does not understand the problem, it will probably not result in good performance although he may put much effort into it. They also assume that intrinsic and extrinsic rewards affect job satisfaction.

Join now!

  Expectancy theory makes it possible to measure the force of motivation, as well as the effort employees put in for a task. However, the systematic content of the theory is complex and difficult to verify. Expectancy theory may clearly explain why some people do not do their best to perform well at work, for example if they think their performance will not lead to the desired outcome or if they do not expect that achievement is attainable even if they put in great effort. But it is doubtful that people always act after carefully examining the pros and cons, ...

This is a preview of the whole essay