A Brief Study
Leadership, Motivation and the Case of Alex & Stephanie: A Brief Study
The case of Alex and Stephanie (Robbins & Judge, 2010, pp. 712-714) and their experiences in motivation and subordination while working for their respective bosses throws to light some very interesting facts about the theories of motivation and leadership. The case presents to us two individual Alex and Stephanie who are working at a local supermarket and come from pretty similar backgrounds and needs. Both are students in the state university and work to make ends meet and help pay tuition fees. The experiences of the two individuals, working for the same organization while coming from similar needs for a job are however contrastingly different. Stephanie is upbeat and cheerful while at work and very happy with the job she does. She is glad to be working for her boss Jonathan who is widely admired for his friendly nature and relaxed management style. Meanwhile, Alex grumbles and constantly complains about his boss Dan and is generally unhappy with his job.
In this essay we shall try to analyze the reasons as to why the two have such contrasting experiences at work. The methodology adopted is to assess the leadership and motivation styles in the two sets of boss employee relationship of Alex-Dan and Stephanie-Jonathan. We shall draw from two leadership theories and two motivational theories and try to implement on Dan and Jonathan to figure out the reasons for why Alex is unhappy while Stephanie likes her job.
Leadership Theories
Tannenbaum and Schmidt Leadership Continuum
Tannenbaum and Schmidt (1973) developed a leadership theory which presented the different leadership behaviors available to managers when making a decision on a continuum. The range of leadership behavior varied on the degree of authority exercised by the bosses on the subordinates, or on the contrary, the degree of freedom permitted by them to their subordinates in handling of a problem or making a decision. The continuum discussed as many as seven behaviors of leadership ranging from absolute authority to zero authority and conversely zero freedom to absolute freedom from left to right. The type of manager making a decision on his own and announcing it to his subordinates is more autocratic and referred to as a boss-centered leader. The types of managers permitting more freedom to the subordinates and allowing them to function within limits are more diplomatic and regarded as subordinate-centered leaders. The reasons for why different individuals display different behaviors in leadership can be put down to 3 factors or forces: Forces within the manager, forces within the subordinates and the forces in the situation. Forces within the manager come from his values, level of confidence he has on subordinates, personal leadership strengths and tolerance for ambiguity (Certo & Certo, 2012). The forces in subordinates refer to the degree of influence that the subordinates might have on the leader. The forces in situation may be the organizational structure, time available to make a decision and complexity of the problem.
In the case of Dan and Jonathan, one can clearly see that the two are exact opposites of each other in terms of the autocracy exercised or freedom permitted. While Dan orders Alex around to take smaller lunch break and instructs him to do a certain job without consulting with him, Jonathan lets his subordinates take initiative and reorder ingredients running low on stock from the vendors. The behavior displayed by Dan is of a boss-centered leader while Jonathan is a very subordinate centered leader. The case also suggests that Dan lets personal forces of values overcome his leadership duties. He offers better pay and work to a subordinate less experienced than Alex just because she might offer a nice comment on his shirt. This tells us that Dan favors few over the others for reasons not exactly professional. It also indicated that level of confidence Dan has on Alex is fairly low and Alex hardly has any influence over his boss.
Hersey-Blanchard Life Cycle Theory of Leadership
This theory links leadership styles with various situations to ensure effective leadership (Certo & Certo, 2012). The theory is based on the maturity level of the subordinate, leader task behavior and leader relationship behavior. The maturity of the follower refers to the experience he/she has in doing a particular and is defined by ability of the followers to perform their job independently, take initiative and desire for success and does not depend upon the age of the follower (Certo & Certo, 2012). The task behavior of the manager refers to the level of task related instructions, training and supervision that he/she should have on the subordinate. The relationship behavior refers to the personal relationship between the leader and the follower and indicates the level of personal engagement the leader might have with the follower. The theory suggests that the style of leadership should follow a cycle that reflects the maturity level of the followers. It should begin from of high task/low relationship when the maturity of a new employee is low. The next stage is of high task/high relationship where the relationship between the leader and the follower grows and mutual trust, friendliness and respect are established between the two. Next stage is of low task/ high relationship as the follower requires lesser supervision and freedom to do the task as he/she seems fit are permitted. Finally it comes to low task/low relationship where the level of maturity of the follower reaches a maximum. Now the follower can work without close supervision and encouraged to take initiative and do things his/her own way and achieve success.
Dan pays little heed to this life cycle theory and this is the reason perhaps is seen as an inefficient manager. In spite of Alex having two years of experience in produce section, Dan closely monitors his work and points towards the low stock of apples on the shelf. Dan also has a very poor degree of personal relationship with Alex, evident from snide comments he passes on him being in college and not knowing how to tell time. The life cycle theory would suggest that Alex not be micromanaged the way Dan does. Meanwhile Jonathan lets Stephanie run the culinary section the way she wants and encourages her to find ways to sell their expensive stuff. He even offers incentives to achieve targets. Thus Jonathan exercises low task/low relationship model that accurately depicts the maturity level of Stephanie.
Motivation Theory
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs
The Maslow Hierarchy of Needs developed by Abraham Maslow (1943) talks about five basic needs arranged in a hierarchy of importance that the individuals strive towards to satisfy. The most basic needs are the physiological needs of food, air, water and rest etc. Next comes the need for security and safety. This is followed by the social need for love, companionship and friendship. This need is followed by the need of esteem. It refers to the desire for respect and divided in two categories: self respect and the respect from others. It is only after the fulfillment of need of esteem that a human being desires to or is motivated towards achieving the pinnacle of the hierarchy and emphasizes satisfying self actualization needs. This is where he/she strives to reach his/her maximum potential.
Sadri and Bowen (2011) believe that the theory, in spite of being old and without any research base, is still a very relevant tool in gauging the levels of motivation in a workplace. The first two needs of an individual are largely met by the pay and benefits that an organization provides to an employee. Sadri and Bowen (2001) also believe that virtually every employee starting a new job has pay as the highest priority and starts at the bottom of the hierarchy. It is from ere that he/she hopes to fulfill the other four needs in that particular order to remain motivated.
It is easy to tell that Stephanie is much more motivated and thus generally happy than Alex while working at the supermarket. The reason for this can be argued to be the non fulfillment of many needs of Alex. It seems that Alex is reasonably content with his pay, as evident from the satisfaction expressed for earning more than Jean who has spent 7 years as an employee. The physiological and safety needs are thus fulfilled. There is evidence that his social needs are being fulfilled by lunch breaks and conversations with Stephanie. However, his needs of esteem are clearly violated and undermined. Dan bosses him around and passes snide and insulting remarks to him on his college level education and intelligence. It is clear that Dan does not respect Alex at all and act like a ‘jerk’ as Stephanie remarked. This has an obvious effect on Alex’s morale and he seems discontent with his work and leader. Meanwhile Stephanie thrives at the supermarket and due to her boss allowing her more freedom at doing her job, she feels respected and strives towards self actualization. It is evident from her will to try and sell the 10 bottles of expensive truffle oil which also has a monetary incentive attached to it. Thus she does better that Alex in terms of pay, while taking initiative at the workplace and seeks self actualization.
The Porter-Lawler Theory of Motivation
The Porter-Lawler theory of motivation says that the needs of an individual are the cause of human behavior and the extent to which effort is expended is determined by the value of the rewards and the probability of it being realized. The motivation process under this theory talks of three characteristics that are involved in the process:
1. The perceived value of the award is gauged by both intrinsic and extrinsic rewards
2. The extent to which the task is accomplished depends on two thing: the perception of the individual about the requirements for the task and his ability to perform it
3. The perception of the degree of fairness of reward is associated with the amount of satisfaction received.
The theory talks about effort that an individual puts to accomplish a task and says that it is based on the complexity of the task and the ability of the individual. The theory also says that the rewards are one of the reasons for the motivation of employee and can be both intrinsic and extrinsic, i.e. personal satisfaction or a prize associated with it. The level of satisfaction is also linked to the fairness of the value o the award.
Applying these theories one can see why Alex is unhappy with his job. Alex is unhappy with the type of job that he does. The job of stocking apples is mundane and requires no special skills. Thus the job can be easily accomplished, but still isn’t. This is because of the perceived value associated with it. Alex gains no personal satisfaction from this work. The extrinsic value is also pretty worthless to getting a sticker saying “good job”. Consequently he derives very little satisfaction from doing what he does. Stephanie meanwhile is highly motivated as her job is challenging and has rewards associated which are of significant value. She is responsible for convincing buyers to buy expensive uncommon items by showcasing various exotic recipes that make use of such ingredients. She likes cooking and people commenting on her culinary skills and welcomes this challenge. The rewards are of personal satisfaction on people appreciating her cooking skills and sale of expensive items. It also has monetary incentives of as much as $75 on selling 10 bottles of truffle oil. She draws a lot of satisfaction from what she does and thus stays highly motivated.
The application of four theories, two each on leadership and motivation show as to why different individuals might have different experiences in the same workplace. Leadership plays a major role towards employee satisfaction and morale. It is also the duty of the leaders to ensure the workforce remains highly motivated to ensure high levels of productivity. Jonathan acts as an able leader under whom Stephanie thrives to achieve success and seek self actualization. Under the arrogant and autocratic work ethics of Dan, Alex suffers a lack of motivation and remains grumpy while at work.
References
Certo, S.C. & Certo, S.T. (2012). Modern Management: Concepts and Skills.(12th ed.). New York: Prentice Hall.
Maslow, A.H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50, 370-396.
Robbins, S.P. & Judge, T.A. (2010). Organizational Behavior. (12th ed.). New York: Pearson/Prentice Hall Publishing.
SADRI, G., & BOWEN, R. (2011). Meeting EMPLOYEEE requirements: Maslow's hierarchy of needs is still a reliable guide to motivating staff. Industrial Engineer: IE, 43(10), 44-48.
Tannenbaum, R., & Schmidt, W. H. (1973). How to choose a leadership pattern. Harvard Business Review, 51(3), 162-180.
