Jagenburg 1
1.
When using the expectancy theory to analyze Harrah’s incentive pay program we can
find several strengths and some weaknesses. The first part of the expectancy theory that I am
going to look at is expectancy, which according to Colquitt et al. (2019) is defined as believing
that putting in high levels of effort will result in successful performance. Additionally, it is a
subjective probability that ranges from 0 to 1, with 0 being no chance of completing it. In other
words, if you work had enough and put in enough effort you will complete your task
successfully. For Harrah’s employees, the task was to increase customer satisfaction. Their
customer service was graded using a letter grade from A to F. More specifically, the task for each
department was to convert 4% of non-As to As (DeLong & Vijayaraghavan, 2003). Basically, if
they started out with 10% As they would need to increase to 14% As in order to successfully
complete their task.
Based on the above evidence we can determine that in terms of expectancy, the incentive
pay program has both a strength and a weakness to it, however, it all depends on what the current
level of customer satisfaction is. For the purpose of explaining the strength let us assume that X
department at Harrah has 10% As. In order to complete their task they need 14% As. The
probability of this happening if department X puts in a high level of effort will most likely be 1
or very close to it, due to the starting point being so low. In other words, the employees would be
confident that they could complete it successfully. If this was the case for Harrah, the incentive
pay program would serve as great motivation for the employees at Harrah’s. This claim is
supported by Colquitt et al. when they state “you’ll be more motivated to work on the
assignment (…) if you’re confident that trying hard will allow you to complete it successfully”
Jagenburg 2
(2019, p 165). Basically, because the employees believe that the probability of them completing
the task successfully is higher they will be more motivated.
In order to explain why the incentive pay program also have a weakness let us assume a
complete opposite scenario from the above mentioned. Let us assume that department Y at
Harrah has 96% As. In this scenario they would need to increase to 100% As to complete their
task successfully. The probability of this happening would certainly be considered close to 0,
obviously not impossible, but there would be very little chance of this happening. As a result the
workers in department Y would be extremely doubtful that even if they put in high levels of
effort that they would complete the task successfully. Essentially, the incentive pay program
would be hurting the motivation of the employees in department Y. This is supported by Colquitt
