Introduction
The Positive Psychological Capital (PsyCap) self-assessment is used to determine an individual’s positive state and is dependent on four components: efficacy, resiliency, hope, and optimism. How high (or low) one’s PsyCap is aids in determining how satisfied the individual is with his or her job and is a predicator in job performance as well. Efficacy refers to how confident a person is when striving to achieve a goal. Resiliency is how an individual deals with adversity or conflict and how effectively he or she is able to “bounce back” from it. Hope is characterized as a feeling of determination. Optimism refers to the internal belief that a positive desired outcome will occur. My PsyCap assessment results were as follows: 16 points in efficacy and hope indicating a high level of positive psychological capital, and 14 points in resiliency and optimism indicating moderates level of positive psychological capital. Overall I have a relatively high level of positive psychological capital which means that I more likely to perform well in jobs and experience high levels of job satisfaction.
Intrinsic and Extrinsic Theory
There are numerous theories that attempt to understand and explain what motivates employees to perform well or poorly in their occupations. The extrinsic and intrinsic theory analyzes internal and external factors that play a role in determining what motivates an individual. According to Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions, “Intrinsic motivation is defined as the doing of an activity for its inherent satisfactions rather than for some separable consequence” (Ryan & Deci, 2000, p. 56). Meaning that an individual will engage in activity for the sole purpose of gaining satisfaction from it rather than from the reward or recognition he or she might receive as a result of performing well. “Intrinsically motivated activities” are those that satisfy an individual’s psychological needs and where satisfaction is derived solely from engaging in the activity (Ryan & Deci, 2000).
Intrinsic motivations have a positive impact on job performance because it affects how the individual perceives the task. An employee that is intrinsically motivated is more likely to perform a task simply because he or she gains satisfaction from it. This reduces the amount of research a manager has to do to motivate employees because they are already motivated internally to perform well and need little to no outside reinforcement; unlike extrinsic motivators which require managers to understand what motivates employees to some degree.
On the other hand, an individual might be motivated by external factors to perform well, which is referred to as extrinsic motivation. According to the same article, “Extrinsic motivation is a construct that pertains whenever an activity is done in order to attain some separable outcome” (Ryan & Deci, 2000, p. 60). With this, an employee is motivated to do something because of the rewards he or she might acquire as a result of positive performance rather than the satisfaction he or she gains from engagement (intrinsic motivation).
Extrinsic motivations can have a positive or negative impact on job performance depending on how well a manager is able to provide the correct motivators to employees. Outcomes that are perceived as appealing or valuable to employees are more likely to motivate them to perform well. If employees see no value in an outcome, they are likely to perform extrinsically motivated actions with, “resentment, resistance, and disinterest” (Ryan & Deci, 2000). On the flipside, employees may be willing to perform an activity which depicts their perceived value or utility of the task (Ryan & Deci, 2000).
Expectancy Theory
The expectancy theory is another theory that attempts to explain motivations that affect employee job performance. The Victor Vroom expectancy theory is the belief that and individual’s effort will result in the achievement of a desired outcome (Scholl, 2002). The theory assumes that an individual’s behavior is motivated by conscious decisions that he or she makes among different alternatives to obtain a desired outcome (Summary of Expectancy Theory, 2015). It is a behavioral process that examines how people are motivated to make decisions (Scholl, 2002). These decisions are influenced by a variety of internal and external factors but ultimately aim to maximize the individual’s pleasure while minimizing pain (Summary of Expectancy Theory, 2015).
In reference to job performance this theory aids in predicting how high or low an employee’s job performance is likely to be. The theory is based on factors such as: “personality, skills, knowledge, experience and abilities” (Summary of Expectancy Theory, 2015) all of which combine to predict how an employee will perform while on the job. If an individual believes that performing at a high level will lead to a valued outcome (earning a higher wage, job promotion, etc.) then he or she is more likely to perform at a high level. However, if an employee does not believe that the outcome is valuable, he or she is less likely to perform at a high level.
Real World Example
I worked at a restaurant that was undergoing several management changes and an overall shift in how the restaurant operated. Many people were fired and others were promoted, so naturally there was a sense of fear amongst employees. Accompanied with this fear was the high level of stress that the job encompassed as customer satisfaction and fast service was crucial to the company’s success. The amount of employees on duty was reduced to a minimum in effort to decrease cost; however, this added more stress to the staff. Many employees began resigning because they did not perceive the outcome—payment (which was minimum wage)—as sufficient especially when combine with long hours. The added stress also diminished the internal satisfaction many employees initially received from the job. The new management was very strict and more concerned with high performance rather than understanding and motivating the employees to perform well. I believe that the restaurant would have higher performing employees if management took time to understand how employees were motivated and searched for ways to provide extrinsic rewards (other than payment) to motivate employees.
Reference
Ryan, M. R., & Deci, L. E. (2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and
New Directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology 25, 54–67 Retrieved from
doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
Scholl, R. (2002). Motivation: Expectancy Theory. The University of Rhode Island. Retrieved
Summary of Expectancy Theory (2015). Value Based Management.net. Retrieved from
http://www.valuebasedmanagement.net/methods_vroom_expectancy_theory.html
