Motivation- Improving Staff Performance

Further to the previous blog exploring what motivation actually is, this topic can be further expanded upon by examining the many theories written on motivation. These theories can be separated into two groups: Concept Theories and Process Theories.

Concept theories are primarily based on attempting to explain the specific things that motivate individuals within the work place. Such theories identify ‘people’s needs and their relative strengths, and the goals they pursue in order to satisfy these needs,’ (Mullins, 2010 p.260). Process theories, conversely, are focused on identifying the variables that make-up motivation in terms of a ‘rational cognitive process,’ illustrating the relationship between said variables, (changingminds.org). Therefore, these theories primarily look at how an individual’s behaviour is ‘initiated, directed and sustained,’ (Mullins p.260), in terms of motivation.

The primary difference between Concept and Process theories is that the former are focused on emphasising the nature of personal needs and, particularly, it what is that motivates people, whereas Process theories concern the actual process of motivation.

To further understand the theory behind motivation, I have chosen to research staff motivation undertaken by the company Lloyds TSB. Lloyds state within their company aims that their focus is on providing motivation to individuals based on personal needs: “We’re all different, and our needs change over time. So, a school leaver has different needs to new parents, who have different needs to people without children,” (lloydstsbjobs.com). Lloyds therefore operates a reward scheme called 'Flavours,' in order to cater to all various motivational needs.This shows their understanding of the principles of Concept theories, and the differentiation of the nature of personal needs between individuals.

Lloyds employ many different methods of motivating their employees, the foremost being added cash incentives and bonuses on top of employee salaries, to motivate them in performing effectively within their job roles. One method of providing employees with bonuses is defined as a ‘flexible benefits cash sum (4% of salary) which is added to your pay and which you can 'invest' in the benefits you want - or to take as cash.’ Employees are further allowed to exchange job perks, such as vacation days, for cash sums. The incentive of money is further enforced by the company’s promise to contribute to employee pension funds ‘over and above’ their own, motivating employees with security after retirement.

In turn, Lloyds further provide ‘discounted offers’ on their own products and also holidays, car hire and health clubs. This along with options for private dental and health care for employees and their families, allows the company to provide staff with financial security along with satisfaction of basic needs such as health, further enforced through the provision of ‘life assurance, critical illness… and personal accident insurance’ cover, in order to motivate staff to perform their jobs to the best of their abilities.

Lloyds also motivate their employees through the use of flexible working, to help ‘strike the right balance between work-life and home.’ Allowing staff to work at hours more suitable for them encourages them to fulfil their job roles with more efficiency and focus, as they are more motivated to complete the tasks at hand at times more suitable for them.

Analysing these provisions from a critical point of view, many of Lloyd’s choice of motivational techniques seem to be in line with Expectancy theories of motivation, particularly that of Porter and Lawler. Mullins (2010) illustrates that Expectancy theories focus on the relationship between ‘effort expected and perceived level of performance,’ and the expectation that reward is related to performance. Porter and Lawler portrayed this idea through the following motivation model:

Porter and Lawler insinuate that individuals make choices/decisions about their behaviour and act rationally in that process, and that their level of effort and drive is unique to them. Thus, the model above, in short, depicts that the level of effort is directly relational to work performance, which in turn is proportional to the level of reward received, and such ideas can be readily attributed to Lloyd’s motivation methods.

The main motivational technique Lloyds employs that is in line with this process theory is the use of cash incentives and bonuses for good work. This motivates the employees in terms of the fact that they are likely to increase effort within their daily roles in order to receive such incentives. This means that they are likely to increase the quality of their performance, which in turn reaches the end result of them receiving rewards for their efforts in the form of cash sums. This motivation chain of effort relating to performance, and in turn relating to reward, is an exact illustration of the ideas conveyed Porter and Lawler’s motivation model.

Alternatively, it could be argued that the rest of Lloyds TSB’s motivational methods do not satisfactorily relate to this process theory. This is due to the fact that the remainder of the motivational benefits the company provides are not dependant on performance, but on a person merely being an employee of Lloyd’s, such as the free dental care and discounts. This means that staff may not perform at their best because, as is expressed within Porter and Lawler’s Expectancy model, there is no reward for increased effort- the motivational perks are provided so long as the employees have their jobs. Thus, this could have the effect of employees only doing the bare minimum required to keep their jobs and enjoy company benefits, and shows Lloyds TSB is not utilising the Expectancy theory as productively as it could be.

Conclusively, my research has shown me that the level of motivation within an organisation has a direct impact on staff performance, and various methods, in the form of process theories can be utilised to increase staff performance, such as in the case of Lloyds TSB. However, failure to utilise such methods effectively can result in lack of motivation and staff not performing as productively as they could be, which is detrimental to a company’s operations, and has shown me the value of improving and enhancing motivation to improve the performance of staff within an organisation.

References,

Mullins, Laurie J. (2010) Management and Organisational Behaviour. 9^th ed. Essex: Pearson

ChangingMinds.org [n.d] Motivation [online]. Available from: http://changingminds.org/explanations/motivation/motivation.htm [Accessed 29 October 2010]

Lloydstsbjobs.com [n.d] Rewarding you [online]. Available from: http://www.lloydstsbjobs.com/rewarding-you.asp [Accessed 29 October 2010]

Lloydstsbjobs.com [n.d] Flavours [online]. Available from: http://www.lloydstsbjobs.com/flavours.asp [Accessed 29 October 2010]

Motivation

Motivation

Motivation is the internal desire humans have to fulfil instinctive needs, and is a utensil required in everyday life in order to achieve personal goals and aspirations.  It is described as consisting of ‘internal and external factors that stimulate energy in people to apply continuous and consistent effort in attaining a goal.’ (Businessdictionary.com).

Motivation can be analysed in many different ways and has inspired various theories which are dedicated to evaluating it. The theory that I feel is most relevant to myself is Abraham Maslow’s concept of the hierarchy of needs. The principles of this theory entail a person having a hierarchy of needs they wish to fulfil, where motivation is based on wishing to accomplish the next level of need once the requirements of the previous level have been satisfied. The idea is also put forward that higher levels cannot be fulfilled until lower levels of needs are met. As stated in Management and Organisational Behaviour, Maslow’s basic preposition is that people are wanting beings, and what they want depends on what they already have. (Mullins, 2007 p.260), thus justifying the hierarchy of needs.

The above diagram illustrates the various levels of need which Maslow believed all people aspire to. Physiological needs are basic wants such as food and shelter, and Maslow’s theory suggests that the higher levels of safety and social needs cannot be met until this is acquired. However, this level of need illustrates how subjective the hierarchy can be. For example, the need for food and shelter is very easily met in a first world country such as Great Britain, which therefore reduces the significance of this level of need within the hierarchy. However, a person within a poverty-stricken country is more likely to aspire to the physiological level of need.

In turn, once this level of need is met, the theory suggests a person will aspire to fulfil Safety needs. This, in terms of a corporate environment, for example, could refer to an employee’s want of job security in order to ensure they have a consistent means of income. A person will not be able to aspire to the next level of Social needs until such issues have been resolved, as they will not be deemed to be at the same level of importance. However, once Safety needs have been met, Maslow suggests a person will aspire to fulfilling Social needs. Such needs depict a personal desire for interaction, e.g. to be part of a group, for instance, where they can emotional wants can be met with like-minded individuals. Such a sense of belonging is likely to boost an individual’s confidence, whereby they look to enhancing their self-esteem.  Within this level of need, a person will want recognition and to further their achievements to give them a sense of self accomplishment. This need for self-respect involves the desire for confidence, independence and freedom, (Mullins, 2007). Henceforth, such a level of confidence motivates people to seek Self-Actualisation, where they can develop to their full potential. Here they are suggested to be finally content, for example, in terms of job satisfaction. They have reached the point where they have achieved everything they are capable of achieving, as the theory portrays the fact that once a person has fulfilled a lower need, achieving it motivates them no longer. Thus, ‘a satisfied need is no longer a motivator.’ (Maslow 1943).

My personal motivation for starting my degree course stems from the need I have to prove myself academically. I feel that achievement at the highest place of education will allow me to do this, as the opportunity I have for independent learning and self-reliance mean that the credit I could get in managing to achieve academically will be all the more rewarding. In turn, these wants are also what will motivate me for the next three years, as it will be my desire to gain a good grade at the end of my degree that will drive me to work hard within my course. For these reasons, I feel my desires relate to the Self Esteem level of need within Maslow’s hierarchy, as I am looking to gain achievement and recognition through my degree. However, I also feel that the fact that my desires are more relatable to the Self Esteem level of need brings up the question of how reputable Maslow’s hierarchy is in terms of the order of needs. As a new student, I feel that I have not yet managed to satisfy social or safety requirements, due to the university and my peers still being relatively unknown to me. This means that I have therefore not conformed to Maslow’s order of needs or his theory that progression to the next level of need can only occur once the previous one has been fulfilled.

On a different note, this previous summer I received my A level results, and was dismayed to find out that I hadn’t done as well as I’d hoped within my Maths A level. In contrast to me being highly motivated to achieve academically, failing to do so was a high de-motivator, as I had failed to achieve satisfy my requirements for needs of Self Esteem, as present in Maslow’s hierarchy. This caused me to drop down to the Safety level of need, as I was worried my grade would damage my prospects of employment. However, as de-motivated I was in terms of finding a job, I was also partially frustrated on the Self Esteem level that I hadn’t managed to do myself justice and perform to my full capabilities. This had the contrasting effect of driving me to view my goal of doing well within my degree with even more focus and determination, which means that I may still be categorised as aspiring to fulfil the Self Esteem level of need within Maslow’s Hierarchy, as my failing has motivated me to do better academically within my degree, in order to prove my capabilities.

Conclusively, I feel that although Maslow’s theory is largely correct, the rigid order the needs are placed in do not reflect, in my opinion, how needs are categorised by people in real life, where personal desire is influenced by individual and personal motivators. However, analysing my experiences against Maslow’s theory has allowed me to understand the workings and value of motivation as a tool and how it is utilised to achieve desired goals.

References,

Mullins, Laurie J. (2010) Management and Organisational Behaviour. 9^th ed. Essex: Pearson

BusinessDictionary team, Motivation definition [online]. Businessdictionary.com. Available from: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/motivation.html [Accessed 10 October 2010].

Maslow, A. H. (1943). A Theory of Human Motivation. Psychological Review 50, 370-96