PART 1: THEORIES OF MOTIVATION
How does motivation relate to communication? The underlying issue is that of contentment. When employees are content with their work environment, the progress they are making with their assignments and the prospect of desirable rewards, they will naturally have happier demeanors. Satisfied employees with positive moods are more receptive to communicating with managers, coworkers, clients and customers. They are therefore better employees.
Since employees respond best to communication when they are content with their positions, the key factor is to determine a methodology to achieve this level of happiness and satisfaction. The following motivation theories strive to increase employee contentment.
Expectancy Theory
Through the Expectancy Theory, or Social Learning Theory, behavior is generated by the anticipation of reward and the perceived value of the outcomes that drive the direction of the behavior. Originally put forth in the 1930’s, the Expectancy Theory is most commonly known as an as aspect of motivational research from Victor Vroom’s[1] 1964 book Work and Motivation.
Individuals understand that their performance contributes to the possibility of desired rewards, and consider two questions when choosing a behavior. The first question concerns the value to the individual of the proposed action. How valuable is Goal A compared to Goal B? The main factor involved is making a conscious choice between two alternatives as to which will provide the greater reward to the individual. The second question concerns the attainability of the reward. Goal A may be preferred over Goal B due to the greater value of the reward. However, what is the likelihood that one will be successful in reaching the preferred goal or obtaining the reward? This idea of “likelihood” is explained by Vroom as valence. Valence refers to the strength of one’s desire for a certain outcome.
To reiterate, the Expectancy Theory explains human behavior by considering (a) the apparent reward resulting from a specific action and (b) the likelihood that the reward can be achieved.
The following five principles are inherent in Expectancy Theory:
-
People have reasons for what they do.
-
Whatever people choose to do, they do it to gain something they believe is good for them.
-
Whatever goal people choose must be seen as attainable.
-
The conditions under which the job is done can affect its value to employees or their expectation of success.
-
Managers can increase the value of the goal, employees’ expectations of reaching it, and enhance the situation surrounding the performance.
(Quick, 1988)
The Managerial Grid
The second theory contemplates the relationship between management and leadership. In order for managers to connect well with their employees, they need to be aware of their individual styles of leadership. How can managers go about understanding their own personal styles? One way is to use the managerial grid. The grid describes the relationship of a manager’s concern for production contrasted with his or her concern for people. A concern for production has to do with the amount of effort spent on the product or service the organization is offering. Concern for people concentrates on building positive interactions with people, enhancing the self-esteem of employees and providing a pleasant and welcoming environment.
A (1, 9) Country Club Management: Thoughtful attention to needs of people for satisfying relationships leads to a comfortable friendly organization atmosphere and work tempo.
B (9, 9) Team Management: Work accomplishment is from committed people; interdependence through a “common stake” in organization purpose leads to relationships of trust and respect.
C (5, 5) Organization Management: Adequate organization performance is possible through balancing the necessity to get out work with maintaining morale of people at a satisfactory level.
D (1, 1) Impoverished Management: Exertion of minimum effort to get required work done is appropriate to sustain organization membership.
E (9, 1) Authority-Obedience: Efficiency in operations results from arranging conditions of work in such a way that human elements interfere to a minimum degree.
(Blake & Mouton, 1964)
Country Club Management (1,9) reflects the style of managers who work hard not to offend employees. These bosses are compassionate and understanding and regard work conditions and work environments as high priorities. They convey expectations as requests and suggestions and may even apologize for having expectations. Personal loyalty and company morale are valued. There is no need for unhappiness because they feel there has to be a way to meet everyone’s needs. The motto of these bosses could be, “we are one big happy family”. Communication flows horizontally and it is mostly social rather than work related. Concern for people is high and concern for production is low.
On the opposite end of both spectrums is Authority-Obedience (9,1) which represents a task oriented person who maintains that getting the job done is the highest priority. There is no place for workers to express themselves and their needs since doing so could get in the way of completing work on schedule. This manager imposes rules and rigid operating procedures on everyone and does not have any regard for employee input. Information flow is downward which keeps employees fully aware of what they can and cannot do. Since concern for production is so high and concern for people so low, employees are forced to focus on the job at hand and repress any feelings they may have of anger and resentment.
Organization Management (5,5) describes a bureaucratic manager who conforms to traditions, rules and regulations. Standards of performance are minimal; they do not promote excellence but also do not tolerate poor work. Goals are discussed with employees, yet they focus on organizational objectives rather than personal goals. Compromise is the optimal solution for conflicts since the majority of the manager’s effort goes into maintaining conditions as they have always been. With little exertion, managers seek to keep up a steady balance between concern for people and concern for production.
Managers who have little concern for production or people fall into the category of Impoverished Management (1,1). They care about protecting themselves, keeping their job and collecting paychecks. Their tactics are to act as messengers, simply passing on information from higher management to the employees. As merely messengers, they can say “don’t blame me, this is what they want done”. When conflicts arise, they do not get involved and let others work things out. These managers do not expect very much out of the employees and in turn, give little of themselves.
The optimal leadership style is Team Management (9,9). These managers believe that there is a strong connection between people and production. People want to be effective in their work and so these managers create working conditions that are conducive to employee input. They make sure employees know what is required of them and let them have a say in decisions that affect them. Well informed employees are more productive since they understand organizational goals. Through communication, motivation and commitment will flourish. Managers are resources for the employees and gaining their trust is essential. Conflicts are inevitable when people work together. Yet, these conflicts provide the opportunity to improve upon the past and should be faced in an open and honest atmosphere. A high level of concern for people and production provides the backbone for this style of management.
Applying the lessons of the grid
After the 1964 publication of Blake and Mouton’s book The Managerial Grid, a popular trend for managers from different organizations was to join together for weeklong seminars to learn the concepts of the grid. Their first assignment was to identify areas in which they assumed their management styles fit in the grid. Most managers classified themselves as Team Management (9,9) but were surprised when participants critiqued their styles and labeled them as less than the ideal 9,9.
Once managers realized how their styles were perceived by peers from other organizations, they were able to gain a broader perspective on the ways in which those styles were perceived by their own employees. Frequently, the managers’ opinions of personal leadership were in contrast to employees’ beliefs about their leadership. The seminars bridged the gap between the differing perceptions, and helped to improve communication between management and employees.
The grid seminars were very influential on the corporate culture of the 1960s and 1970s. New terms were used such as “team building”. This term signified a group of people working collaboratively with group objectives agreed upon by everyone. Up until then, managers interpreted “teamwork” as meaning “if you work for us, you should be a team player” (Quick, 1988). This older definition generally meant to act in compliance with what you were assigned to do in order to contribute to the good of the company.
Although the concept of grid seminars is not popular today, it should not be considered as a passing fad in management development. It introduced to organizations the ideas of interpersonal group relations, which then provided the springboard for more extensive research and experimentation on progressive management methods.
Employee Empowerment
The third theory seeks to empower employees by giving them greater decision- making control over their work assignments. Employees have the responsibility to define the content of their jobs as well as the quality of their work. Within that responsibility, employees possess the authority to make their own decisions surrounding their work and correct problems that may arise.
Employee Empowerment requires managers to drop their roles as traditional supervisors in terms of delegating tasks and controlling employees’ steps in completing a task. A more coach like style should be adopted. Managers must first equip employees with the information and knowledge that enables them to contribute to the organization’s success. For instance, managers could meet with employees and review donations received for the current month. Further, they could talk about the trends of the yearly cycle of donations and explain which months receive the most number of donations. Managers must emphasize that by having the authority to make decisions, employees will share the responsibility for organizational outcomes. Reinforcing the magnitude of an empowered employee’s accountability to the organization is an essential task for managers.
Empowerment can be a matter of degree. Managers do not have to hand over the judgment of every task to the employees. For instance, an employee in an advertising agency may have autonomy over all creative aspects of designing an advertisement, while the manager reserves the right to determine the circulation of that particular ad.
In order to implement the concept of empowerment, managers must first examine the distinctions between job content and job context. Job content refers to the tasks necessary in carrying out a job. Job context is broader and refers to reasons for doing the job and ways in which the job fits into the mission and goals of the organization.
In addition managers should be aware that the implication of decision-making is more than simply making choices. It is a five stage process with each stage progressively increasing the employees’ decision-making authority. The authority level is lowest at the first stage when the employees are only allowed to identify the problem. Employee authority increases to stage two when employees are granted opportunities to discover alternative solutions. The third stage allows them to evaluate the pros and cons of those alternatives and stage four permits them to select the desired solution. Finally, stage five gives employees the responsibility to implement and follow up on the impact of their decision (Ford & Fottler, 1995).
To help managers understand the varying strategies for empowerment and the five stages of decision-making, the following grid will be utilized.
Horizontally, employees’ authority over job content increases with their level of involvement in the decision-making process. Vertically, employees’ authority and involvement in decision-making over job context increases. The five stages mentioned earlier illustrate the levels of involvement.
Point A, no discretion, represents a job that is designed and monitored by someone other than the employees. While the employees may give input on identifying problems, they have no decision-making power over the solutions. Routine and repetitive jobs such as assembly line work are traditionally associated with this point.
Point B, task setting, gives the employees complete authority regarding job content. They are empowered to make every decision regarding the best ways to complete the tasks and will be motivated by this independence to find their work more enriching and satisfying. Thus, performance will be improved. Management retains control over assigning the goals to the tasks yet allows the employees to discover the best way to reach them.
Point C, participatory empowerment, is common with work teams. These teams are given limited control as to why a certain job needs to be done and the best way to go about doing it. Within job content and context, they identify problems, propose solutions and present positive and negative aspects of those solutions. Choosing the best solution lies with the managers.
Point D, mission defining, is the most unusual strategy. Employees have the authority to decide on the scope and purpose of a project without having any input on how that project will be carried out. Take the example of a building maintenance department. The individual gardeners could be given the choice of whether or not they think that the various gardens around the building are looking shabby and if new flowers should be planted. They may also have the opportunity to decide where to buy the flowers and which flowers to buy. They will decide, should bulbs be planted or fully grown flowers? However, after the objectives of the project are in place the maintenance management will determine when the new flowers will be planted, where to plant them and the overall presentation of the new gardens.
Point E, self-management, signifies the highest degree of employee empowerment. Employees are given total authority for both job content and job context. They have equal involvement in developing and carrying out the goals of the organization. Before changing over to self-management, it is crucial for managers to have considerable faith in their employees’ abilities to meet the needs of the organization. This is because self-management can blur the lines between manager and employee to the point where the input of a manager could carry no more weight than the input of an employee. For this reason, few companies operate with full employee self-management.
Beginning in small increments is a key element in transitioning to a culture of employee empowerment. It is most logical to start with job content. In the beginning, employees could be given the opportunity to propose steps for completing a task. At each step, management would address issues that came about and assess whether the employees were ready to move to the next stage of self empowerment.
An example regarding AT&T’s Hotel Billing Information System provides an interesting illustration of employee empowerment, which most resembles Point E, self- management. In 1981, Ed Murdock, district manager for operator services for AT&T in Phoenix, Arizona, attended a company seminar on innovative work systems. The seminar described techniques to increase employee involvement.
AT&T was planning to open a new office in Tempe and Murdock took the opportunity to use the techniques from the seminar to arrange the new office without supervisors. AT&T had always had a tradition of close supervision and this was a huge risk for Murdock (Boyett & Conn, 1991).
Murdock decided there would be one manager who would handle administrative and personnel matters. This manager was to be a resource person and a mentor rather than an overseer of the employees’ work.
Day-to-day operating decisions were made by a six person office committee. This committee hired the one hundred operators for the Tempe office. They wrote a statement of purpose based on self-management and problem solving through teamwork. True to the beliefs of employee equality, this office committee rotated every six months. From developing training programs for new employees to creating task forces, the office committee took care of all of the tasks that would normally be handled by supervisors and managers.
The experiment at AT&T lasted nearly three years, from 1983 – 1985. While the system was not around for very long, it was considered to be a success. Compared to other departments, absenteeism was low, there were fewer employee grievances and customer complaints decreased. In addition, the operators in the Tempe office met or exceeded company-wide measurements on customer satisfaction and call volume. Employees declared that the experimental system was more satisfying and less stressful than their experiences at previous jobs.
Likert’s Principle of Supportive Relationships
The final theory is derived from Rensis Likert’s[2] 1967 book The Human Organization: Its Management and Value. The book emphasized a management style in which people were more likely to carry out decisions if they had a participatory role in the process of making them. This theory supports the idea that the key to positive interaction consists of maintaining an individual’s self worth and importance. Working towards organizational objectives can help individuals realize their personal goals.
Four systems of leadership were presented in The Human Organization: Its Management and Value.
System 1 – Exploitative Authoritative. Subordinates are not trusted by management. They are not at liberty to discuss issues and problems with supervisors and communication strictly flows downward from upper management. Motivation is instilled through threats, fears and sporadic rewards. Decisions and goals are generated from upper management.
System 2 – Benevolent Authoritative. Master and servant relationships are played out between managers and employees. While more rewards are given than in System 1 and there is slightly better upward communication, employees are given little autonomy over their work projects.
System 3 – Consultative. Employees are consulted before management makes decisions on problems. However, employees may feel that their contributions are not always taken seriously. Upward communication is encouraged but employees are cautious to divulge unfavorable information.
System 4 – Participative Group. Employees are trusted by management and are seen as willingly working towards organizational objectives. Every work level is involved in discussing and deciding upon issues that concern their level. Communication flows up, down and across and the workers participate in setting the goals that they will work to achieve.
Likert favored System 4, the “participative group” because of its commitment to giving the decision-making power to the people who know the most about the issues. Employees are trusted by management and thus do not hesitate to share constructive feedback and opinions. Peer group collaboration and loyalty prevail in a System 4 environment. It is to each person’s benefit to share any information and expertise that could help others in the organization.
The three basic concepts of Likert’s System 4 include: (1) the principle of supportive relationships, (2) the use of group decision-making and group methods of supervision, and (3) high performance goals for the organization (Quick, 1988).
CAclubindia
