Employees enjoy better satisfaction, greater quantity and quality of their output from their job environment and less absenteeism when they feel valued and genuinely recognized for their efforts. Motivation programs help employees’ understanding of their input in fulfilling the duty of the team to the organization. Motivation plans can also aid in attracting and retaining top value staff. Elements that play a key role in motivation vary from an individual to another. They include challenging work, recognition, employee participation, job security and good compensation.
Due to the complication of the human and the associates’ aspects of motivation, many experts over the years have come up with a couple of motivation theories. These theories try to discover, comprehend the aspects that influence and arouse an employee’s enthusiasm level. They aim to find these elements that act as driving force behind their work ethics and overall productivity (Eby & Allen, 2012). The following are the key theories developed to explore motivation issue. The first motivational theory is the Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs which argues that motivational needs vary from the basic physiological needs like food and security to self-fulfillment, personal growth and development. Maslow’s theory delves more into customer’s motivation factors therefore it is inappropriate to this employee motivation case. The second theory, Victor Vroom’s Expectancy theory, expresses a link flanked by expected results and reward.
The motivational levels that Vroom puts forward, investigates the level of the urge of an employee to achieve an outcome i.e. if they want something badly enough, they will put efforts to achieve it. Vroom’s theory takes a look on only the element of reward or compensation leaving the other seemingly vital elements of a motivation plan. 2McGregor’s Theory X, Theory Y Model is another vital contributor in motivation theories. This theory says there are two models of managing and motivating individuals. These models are X and Y. Model X involves authoritarian management styles. The styles typically presume the normal person loathes work and will find a way to avoid it when they can. For this reason, they should threaten them with consequences for them focus toward the organization’s goals. The X model also assumes employees are unmotivated, irresponsible, and prefer to be directed.
Theory Y encompasses participative management style. This model argues efforts towards work come naturally as work and play. It goes on to say people will exercise self-control and direct themselves in pursuit of the company’s goals without external influence. The model also says commitment to meet the objectives is as a result of the rewards associated with their accomplishment. The model states skills of having high level of imagination, ingenuity and creativity in solving organizational problems are widely and evenly distributed in the population and intellectual potential of individuals is under utilized. Managers who use the Model Y produces better performance and results, and allow people to grow and develop in their roles. The theory’s assumptions in both models are extreme in a practical world therefore, not applicable in the case of our company Star (Eby & Allen, 2012).
In light of our company –Star which specializes in custom jewelry, the theory that adequately supports our motivational plan is Herzberg’s Hygiene model. It argues in line with its enlisted two main factors that an employee considers when it comes to motivation. The theory tries directly to explore ways to motivate employees drawing some key conclusions that act as a benchmark for good motivational practice. The theory’s results show certain distinctiveness of a job that is directly related to job satisfaction or dissatisfaction. The first aim of the theory is to eradicate the factors of dissatisfaction or what Herzberg calls hygiene factors.
These hygiene factors include poor and obstructive company policies, inefficiency, unsupportive, and intrusive supervision, inexistence of culture of respect and dignity for all members of staff and teams and poor non-competitive wages. The second aim of the theory is to create conducive conditions for job satisfaction. Herzberg refers to this as job enrichment and aims to give more contentment in individual’s job environment. The goal of Herzberg is to offer employees opportunities for excelling, recognition of their inputs, assignment of huge responsibilities, and a chance to progress in the firm’s hierarchy through in-house promotions. This theory gels well with our motivation plans as the first aim calls for eradication of dissatisfaction factors and promotes motivation drivers of good work environment, job security and good compensation (Tobin, 2003). Also the theory’s second aim calls for promotion of job satisfying.
These factors include of assigning employee challenging work in form of responsibility, giving them recognition for their efforts, promoting their participation and generally encouraging personal development. With Star currently enjoying relatively high jewelry sales, implementing this theory will be the perfect fit in addressing its underlying problems. This implementation will take the form of designing a motivation plan that advocates removal of hygiene factors and encouraging job enrichment in Star’s work environment. The motivation plan will eliminate the existing defects which are attributed to delayed delivery of jewelry orders and increased overhead costs.
In many surveys conducted on human resource practitioners in organizations it was established that most are unable to keep the minimum wage employees solely because of the pay. They have to offer some additional remuneration to minimum-wage staff because they were incapable of keeping them with the pay alone. Many have tried to maintain and stimulate such workers to improve their performance through enticements, such as bonuses, gifts or job promotions. So how do you motivate the minimum wages service worker happy and productive? At Star, using the Herzberg’s Hygiene model, proposed ways for employee motivation are; the crafting of a conducive environment for work fulfillment by linking personnel to the organizational goals. The connection is achieved by giving them bigger responsibility and recognizing their contributions in meeting the organization’s goal. It’s easy for employees to become unenthusiastic when they can’t see their impact on the end product (Chambers & Humble, 2012). The feeling that your efforts and hard work is valuable to the organization is a great motivator. The second option is the reduction of dissatisfaction by fixing poor and obstructive policies that discourage involvement of workers in the work-related resolutions. When drafting changes in policies and benefits, Star should seek the workers’ opinions as they are the implementing agents. Thirdly, Star should provide an opportunity for its employees to attain personal growth, educational benefits, training and internal promotions that are key conditions for job satisfaction and are good for both workers and their organizations.
Communication behavior attitudes and culture are all factors that are important enablers of high performance of teams in organizations. These factors affect groups output in some ways, both positive and negative (Milner, 2005). Culture for instance, if not intertwined with corporate strategy can lead to a decrease in loyalty, little or no motivation and high employee turnover. Healthy behaviors and attitudes convey pleasure and a sense of purpose to human resources, leading to improved yield and better understanding of team’s goals. Strategy, overall organizational output, and culture are all closely correlated. High achieving businesses and teams view culture as a facilitator in performance and creates customs to support and allow staff to carry out those goals. Culture of education, for instance, cultivate interests and research, and may help growth of the skills needed to run a business. A culture of collaboration results in high-performing teams.
Through monitoring and evaluating factors that jointly contribute to a group’s success, problem solving a team is able to solve its specific problems. It also enables it achieve effective team performance. The factors in question are unity, communication, groupthink, evenness, person character and stability.
In the team, I had a great experience working jointly with the other group member. Way of consensus helped us choose the team leader. It was established that the team leader ought to be a person who greatly exhibits the following characteristics and abilities: problem solver, decisiveness, motivator, good communications and organization skills (Turner, 2001). The team met three times in the course of the assignment. The challenges in this project weren’t profound as such with inability of some members to attend all the sessions for some reasons and mild consensus issues being the only challenges which were eventually ironed out. I was not enthusiastic with the team work process. However, considering the expediency I was able to gain from the team project, I will be much motivated to go into the team assignment in future. The most essential lesson learned from this experience is the understanding that a group sharing a common path can steadily achieve its goals much easier.
References
Chambers, I., & Humble, J. (2012). Plan for the Planet: A business plan for a sustainable world. Burlington, VT: Gower Pub Co.
Eby, L. T., & Allen, T. D. (2012). Personal relationships: The effect on employee attitudes, behavior, and well-being. New York: Routledge Academic.
Miner, J. B. (2005). Organizational behavior I. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
Tobin, V. J. (2003). Facilitating exercise behaviour change: A self-determination theory and motivational interviewing perspective.
Turner, M. E. (2001). Groups at work: Theory and research. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
