PART TWO – INDIVIDUAL BEHAVIORS AND PROCESSES IN
ORGANIZATIONS
Chapter Six – Motivating Behavior with Work and Rewards
Overview
Chapter 5 described a variety of perspectives on motivation. But no single theory or model completely
explains motivation—each covers only some of the factors that actually result in motivated behavior.
While using the actual theories as tools or frameworks, managers need to understand various operational
procedures, systems, and methods for enhancing motivation and performance.
Figure 6.1 illustrates a basic framework for relating various theories of motivation to potential and actual
motivation and to operational methods for translating this potential and actual motivation into
performance. The left side of the figure illustrates that motivated behavior can be induced by satisfying
various specific needs or through various processes such as perceptions of inequity, expectancy
relationships, and reinforcement contingencies.
These need-, process-, and learning-based concepts result in the situation illustrated in the center of the
figure—a certain potential exists for motivated behavior directed at enhanced performance. Managers
may need to take certain steps to translate the potential for motivation directed at enhanced performance
into real motivation and enhanced performance.
The right side of Figure 6.1 names some of the more common methods used to enhance performance.
This chapter covers these six methods: job design, employee participation and empowerment, flexible
work arrangements, goal setting, performance management, and organizational rewards.
Learning Outcomes
After studying this chapter, students should be able to:
1. Identify and describe different approaches to job design and relate each to motivation.
2. Discuss employee participation, empowerment, and flexible work arrangements and identify how
they can impact motivation.
3. Describe the goal setting theory of motivation and discuss broader perspectives on goal setting.
4. Discuss performance management and its role in motivation.
5. Describe how organizations use various kinds of rewards to motivate employees.
Real World Challenge: Orchestrating Outcomes
Summary: New York–based Orpheus Symphony doesn’t play with a conductor, yet flawlessly completes
a complex work without the artistic and managerial leadership of someone who directs rehearsals and
stands at a podium waving an authoritative baton. “For us at Orpheus,” explains executive director
Graham Parker, “it’s the way we make the music that’s the difference.” Orpheus holds to the principle that
its product—the music performed for audiences—is of the highest quality when its workers—the
musicians—are highly satisfied with their jobs. All professional orchestra musicians, of course, are
highly trained and skilled, but make no mistake about it: A lot of them are not very happy workers.
Orchestra players rank top in motivation but rank below federal prison guards in terms of general
satisfaction with their jobs and satisfaction with growth opportunities.
Real World Challenge: An orchestra leader has asked you how to imitate the Orpheus’s success. After
reading this chapter you will have some suggestions on how to do this.
Real World Response: The first principle in what is now known as the “Orpheus Process” is this: “Put
power in the hands of the people doing the work.” A core team of players selected by the orchestra from
each instrument section plans and leads rehearsals for a given piece of music.
The Orpheus Process consists of five elements designed to put this principle into practice:
1. Choosing leaders: Each piece of music receives a core leadership team responsible for the final
performance reflecting “a unified vision.”
2. Developing strategies: With an ultimate goal of ensuring “an overall interpretive approach to the
music,” the full orchestra rehearses various approaches to the music.
3. Developing the product: Rehearsals refine chosen pieces in a collaborative process, whose
success depends on mutual respect. The group looks for solutions to problems, not opinions.
4. Perfecting the product: The group previews the performance to a mock audience and receives
feedback on final adjustments.
5. Delivering the product: After performing for an audience, members further offer suggestions for
refinements.
Chapter Outline
I. JOB DESIGN IN ORGANIZATIONS
Job design is an important method managers can use to enhance employee performance.
Job design can be defined as how organizations define and structure jobs.
The first widespread model of how individual work should be designed was job specialization.
A. Job Specialization
Frederick Taylor, the chief proponent of job specialization, argued that jobs should be
scientifically studied, broken down into small component tasks, and then standardized across all
workers doing those jobs.
On the surface, job specialization appears to be a rational and efficient way to structure jobs.
In practice, however, performing those jobs can cause problems, foremost among them the
extreme monotony of highly specialized tasks.
A worker numbed by boredom and monotony may be less motivated to work hard and more
inclined to do poor-quality work or to complain about the job. For these reasons, managers
began to search for job design alternatives to specialization.
B. Basic Alternative to Job Specialization
Managers initially developed two alternative approaches, job rotation and job enlargement.
These approaches, along with job enrichment, remain common today.
1. Job Rotation
Job rotation involves systematically shifting workers from one job to another to sustain
their motivation and interest.
Job rotation does not entirely address long-term issues of monotony and boredom and may
decrease efficiency.
At the same time, job rotation is an effective training technique because a worker rotated
through a variety of related jobs acquires a larger set of job skills. Thus, there is increased
flexibility in transferring workers to new jobs.
Many U.S. firms now use job rotation for training or other purposes, but few rely on it to
motivate workers.
2. Job Enlargement
Job enlargement, or horizontal job loading, is expanding a worker’s job to include tasks
previously performed by other workers.
The logic behind this change is that the increased number of tasks in each job reduces
monotony and boredom.
Unfortunately, job enlargement also failed to have the desired effects. Generally, if the
entire production sequence consisted of simple, easy-to- master tasks, merely doing more
of them did not significantly change the worker’s job.
3. Job Enrichment
Job rotation and job enlargement seemed promising but eventually disappointed managers
seeking to counter the ill effects of extreme specialization.
Job enrichment is based on the two-factor theory of motivation, which is discussed in
Chapter 5. That theory contends that employees can be motivated by positive job-related
experiences such as feelings of achievement, responsibility, and recognition. To achieve
these, job enrichment relies on vertical job loading—not only adding more tasks to a job, as
in horizontal loading, but also giving the employee more control over those tasks.
AT&T, Texas Instruments, IBM, and General Foods have all used job enrichment
successfully. However, some companies have found job enrichment to be cost ineffective,
and others believe that it simply did not produce the expected results.
Some of the criticism is associated with flaws in the two-factor theory of motivation on
which job enrichment is based. Because of these and other problems, job enrichment is not
as popular as it was a few years ago.
C. The Job Characteristics Theory
The job characteristics theory uses five motivational properties of tasks and three critical
psychological states to improve outcomes.
The theory, diagrammed in Figure 6.2 and developed by Hackman and Oldham, focuses on the
specific motivational properties of jobs.
At the core of the theory is the idea of critical psychological states. These states are presumed
to determine the extent to which characteristics of the job enhance employee responses to the
task.
The three critical psychological states are:
1. Experienced meaningfulness of the work: the degree to which the individual experiences
the job as generally meaningful, valuable, and worthwhile
2. Experienced responsibility for work outcomes: the degree to which individuals feel
personally accountable and responsible for the results of their work
3. Knowledge of results: the degree to which individuals continuously understand how
effectively they are performing the job
If employees experience these states at a sufficiently high level, they are likely to feel good
about themselves and to respond favorably to their jobs.
Hackman and Oldham suggest that the three critical psychological states are triggered by the
following five characteristics of the job, or core job dimensions:
1. Skill variety: the degree to which the job requires a variety of activities that involve
different skills and talents
2. Task identity: the degree to which the job requires completion of a “whole” and an
identifiable piece of work; that is, the extent to which a job has a beginning and an end with
a tangible outcome
3. Task significance: the degree to which the job affects the lives or work of other people,
both in the immediate organization and in the external environment
4. Autonomy: the degree to which the job allows the individual substantial freedom,
independence, and discretion to schedule the work and determine the procedures for
carrying it out
5. Feedback: the degree to which the job activities give the individual direct and clear
information about the effectiveness of his or her performance
Figure 6.2 shows that these five job characteristics, operating through the critical psychological
states, affect a variety of personal and work outcomes:
High internal work motivation (that is, intrinsic motivation),
High-quality work performance,
High satisfaction with the work, and
Low absenteeism and turnover.
The figure also suggests that individual differences play a role in job design.
Much research has been devoted to this approach to job design. Research has generally
supported the theory, although performance has seldom been found to correlate with job
characteristics.
Several apparent weaknesses in the theory have also come to light.
First, the measures used to test the theory are not always as valid and reliable as they should be.
Further, the role of individual differences frequently has not been supported by research.
Finally, guidelines for implementation are not specific, so managers usually tailor them to their
own particular circumstances.
II. EMPLOYEE PARTICIPATION AND INVOLVEMENT
Employee motivation can also be enhanced in some cases through the use of participation and
empowerment. In a sense, participation and empowerment are extensions of job design because
each fundamentally alters how employees in an organization perform their jobs.
Participation occurs when employees have a voice in decisions about their own work.
Empowerment is the process of enabling workers to set their own work goals, make decisions, and
solve problems within their spheres of responsibility and authority.
Thus, empowerment is a somewhat broader concept that promotes participation in a wide variety of
areas, including but not limited to work itself, work context, and work environment.
The role of participation and empowerment in motivation can be expressed in terms of both the
need-based perspectives and the expectancy theory discussed in Chapter 5. By participating in
decision making, employees may better understand the linkage (instrumentality) between their
performance and the rewards they want most.
A. Areas of Employee Participation
Based on their own expertise and experience with their tasks, workers might be able to improve
their own productivity.
It might also help to let workers make decisions about administrative matters, such as work
schedules.
Furthermore, employees are getting increasing opportunities to participate in broader issues of
product quality. Involvement of this type has become a hallmark of successful Japanese and
other international firms, and many U.S. companies have followed suit.
B. Approaches to Participation and Empowerment
The basic motive has been to better capitalize on the assets and capabilities inherent in all
employees. Thus, many managers today prefer the term “empowerment” to “participation”
because it implies a more comprehensive level of involvement.
One method some firms use to empower their workers is the use of work teams. This method
grew out of early attempts to use what Japanese firms call “quality circles.” This is a group of
employees who voluntarily meet regularly to identify and propose solutions to problems related
to quality.
Work teams are collections of employees empowered to plan, organize, direct, and control their
own work.
The other method some organizations use to facilitate employee involvement is to change their
overall method of organizing.
The basic pattern is for an organization to eliminate layers from its hierarchy, thereby becoming
much more decentralized. Power, responsibility, and authority are delegated as far down the
organization as possible, so control of work is squarely in the hands of those who actually do it.
Technology also helps organizations empower workers by making better and timelier
information available to everyone in the organization. Increased responsibility does not
motivate everyone. Nonetheless, empowerment can be an important management tool to
increase the motivation of many employees.
Practical ways to empower others include:
Articulating a clear vision and goals
Fostering personal mastery experiences to enhance self-efficacy and build skills
Modeling successful behaviors
Sending positive messages and arousing positive emotions in employees
Connecting employees with the outcomes of their work and giving them feedback
Building employee confidence by showing competence, honesty, and fairness
Regardless of the specific technique used, however, empowerment only enhances
organizational effectiveness if certain conditions exist.
First, the organization must be sincere in its efforts to spread power and autonomy to lower
levels of the organization.
Second, the organization must be committed to maintaining participation and empowerment.
Third, the organization must be systematic and patient in its efforts to empower workers.
Finally, the organization must be prepared to increase its commitment to training.
Global Issues: Participation Around the World
Summary: Some people think U.S. businesses pioneered the use of work teams. Not true. In the mid-
1970s, Swedish (at the time) automaker Volvo used a new process of moving platforms with partially
assembled cars from one team area to another. Team members worked to complete a long list of tasks,
without direct supervision, setting their own pace and schedule. Volvo’s logic was by empowering
employees; they will produce higher-quality products.
Japanese automakers also used teams long before their U.S. counterparts. Japanese firms use a team-
oriented approach, based on participation and empowerment. Their approach is often cited as a factor in
the global dominance of Japanese automobile companies, especially related to product quality.
A key reason these approaches have worked so well in Sweden and Japan is the close connection between
performance and rewards. Most U.S. work systems are built around individual contributions, individual
performance and individual rewards. In a work team, rewards and recognition are provided based on
team performance rather than individual performance. As a result, it is in the best interest of all team
members to work together as productively as possible.
III. FLEXIBLE WORK ARRANGEMENT
Beyond the actual redesigning of jobs and the use of employee involvement, many organizations
today are experimenting with a variety of flexible work arrangements.
Among the more popular are variable work schedules, flexible work schedules, extended work
schedules, job sharing, and telecommuting.
A. Variable Work Schedules
Employees locked into a standard work schedule may find it necessary to take a sick or
vacation day to handle routine personal business. On a more psychological level, some people
may feel so powerless and constrained by their job schedules that they grow resentful and
frustrated.
To help counter these problems, one alternative some businesses use is a compressed work
schedule. An employee following a compressed work week schedule works a full forty-hour
week in fewer than the traditional five days.
One problem with this schedule is that if everyone in the organization is off at the same time,
the firm may have no one on duty to handle problems or deal with outsiders on the off day. On
the other hand, if a company staggers days off across the workforce, people who don’t get the
more desirable days off (Monday and Friday, for most people) may be jealous or resentful.
Another problem is that when employees put in too much time in a single day, they tend to get
tired and perform at a lower level later in the day.
A popular schedule some organizations are beginning to use is called a “nine-eighty” schedule.
Under this arrangement, an employee works a traditional schedule one week and a compressed
schedule the next, getting every other Friday off.
Finally, a special form of compressed work schedule is job sharing. In job sharing, two part-
time employees share one full-time job.
Job sharing may be desirable for people who only want to work part time or when job markets
are tight. For its part, the organization can accommodate the preferences of a broader range of
employees and may benefit from the talents of more people.
B. Extended Work Schedules
An extended work schedule is one that requires relatively long periods of work followed by
relatively long periods of paid time off.
These schedules are most often used when the cost of transitioning from one worker to another
is high and there are efficiencies associated with having a small workforce.
While the specific number of hours and days and the amount of vacation time vary, most of
these job settings are characterized by long periods of work followed by an extended vacation
plus premium pay. Offshore drilling platform workers at ExxonMobil, for instance, generally
work every day for five weeks and then have two weeks off.
C. Flexible Work Schedules
Another popular alternative work arrangement is flexible work schedules, sometimes called
flextime. Flextime usually gives employees more personal control over the hours they work
each day.
Figure 6.3 illustrates how flextime works. The workday is broken down into two categories:
flexible time and core time. All employees must be at their workstations during core time, but
they can choose their own schedules during flexible time.
The major advantage of this approach, as already noted, is that workers get to tailor their
workday to fit their personal needs.
On the other hand, flextime is more difficult to manage because others in the organization may
not be sure when a person will be available for meetings other than during the core time.
Some organizations use a plan in which workers set their own hours but then must follow that
schedule each day. Others allow workers to modify their own schedule each day.
D. Alternative Workplaces
Another recent innovation in work arrangements is the use of alternative workplaces.
The most common version of this approach is usually called telecommuting – allowing
employees to spend part of their time working off-site, usually at home.
On the plus side, many employees like telecommuting because it gives them added flexibility.
Some employees also feel that they get more work done by staying at home because they are
less likely to be interrupted.
Organizations may benefit for several reasons as well: (1) they can reduce absenteeism and
turnover since employees will need to take less “formal” time off, and (2) they can save on
facilities such as parking spaces because fewer people will be at work on any given day.
On the other hand, although many employees thrive under this arrangement, others do not.
Some feel isolated and miss the social interaction of the workplace. Others simply lack the self-
control and discipline to work from home.
Managers may also encounter coordination difficulties in scheduling meetings and other
activities that require face-to-face contact.
IV. GOAL SETTING AND MOTIVATION
From a motivational perspective, a goal is a meaningful objective.
Goals are used for two purposes in most organizations. First, they provide a useful framework for
managing motivation.
Second, goals are an effective control device (control meaning the monitoring by management of
how well the organization is performing).
Social learning theory perhaps best describes the role and importance of goal setting in
organizations. People’s degree of pride at reaching their goals or disappointment at not reaching
their goals is affected by their self-efficacy, the extent to which they feel that they can still meet
their goals even if they failed to do so in the past.
A. Goal-Setting Theory
The research of Edwin Locke and his associates most clearly established the utility of goal-
setting theory in a motivational context.
Locke’s goal-setting theory of motivation assumes that behavior is a result of conscious goals
and intentions. Therefore, by setting goals for people in the organization, a manager should be
able to influence their behavior.
Given this premise, the challenge is to develop a thorough understanding of the processes by
which people set their goals and then work to reach them. In the original version of goal-setting
theory, two specific goal characteristics—goal difficulty and goal specificity—were expected to
shape performance.
1. Goal Difficulty
Goal difficulty is the extent to which a goal is challenging and requires effort.
If people work to achieve goals, it is reasonable to assume that they will work harder to
achieve more difficult goals. But a goal must not be so difficult that it is unattainable.
A substantial body of research supports the importance of goal difficulty. Reinforcement
also fosters motivation toward difficult goals.
2. Goal Specificity
Goal specificity is the clarity and precision of the goal.
Some goals, such as those involving costs, output, profitability, and growth, can easily be
stated in clear and precise terms. Other goals, such as improving employee job satisfaction
and morale, company image and reputation, ethical behavior, and social responsibility, are
much harder to state in specific or measurable terms.
Like difficulty, specificity has been shown to be consistently related to performance.
Locke’s theory attracted widespread interest and research support from both researchers
and managers, so Locke, together with Gary Latham, eventually proposed an expanded
model of the goal-setting process.
The expanded model, shown in Figure 6.4, attempts to capture more fully the complexities
of goal setting in organizations. The expanded theory argues that goal-directed effort is a
function of four goal attributes: difficulty and specificity (previously discussed), and
acceptance and commitment.
Goal acceptance is the extent to which a person accepts a goal as his or her own.
Goal commitment is the extent to which he or she is personally interested in reaching the
goal.
Factors that can foster goal acceptance and commitment include participating in the goal
setting process, making goals challenging but realistic, and believing that goal achievement
will lead to valued rewards.
The interaction of goal-directed effort, organizational support, and individual abilities and
traits determines actual performance.
As a result of performance, a person receives various intrinsic and extrinsic rewards that in
turn influence satisfaction.
B. Broader Perspectives on Goal Setting
Some organizations undertake goal setting from the somewhat broader perspective of
management by objectives, or MBO. The MBO approach is essentially a collaborative goal-
setting process through which organizational goals systematically cascade down through the
organization.
A successful MBO program starts with top managers’ establishing overall goals for the
organization. After these goals have been set, managers and employees throughout the
organization collaborate to set subsidiary goals.
First, the overall goals are communicated to everyone. Then each manager meets with each
subordinate. The manager acts as a counselor and helps ensure that the subordinate develops
goals that are verifiable.
Finally, manager and subordinate ensure that the subordinate has the resources needed to reach
his or her goals. The entire process flows downward as each subordinate manager meets with
his or her own subordinates to develop their goals.
During the time frame set for goal attainment (usually one year), the manager periodically
meets with each subordinate to check progress. It may be necessary to modify goals in light of
new information, to provide additional resources, or to take some other action.
At the end of the specified time period, managers hold a final evaluation meeting with each
subordinate. At this meeting, manager and subordinate assess how well goals were met and
discuss why.
C. Goal Setting Challenges
Research has demonstrated fairly consistently that goal difficulty and specificity are closely
associated with performance.
A few studies have shown the importance of acceptance and commitment, but little is currently
known about how people accept and become committed to goals. Goal-setting theory may also
focus too much attention on the short run at the expense of long-term considerations.
From the broader perspective, MBO remains a very popular technique. The technique’s
popularity stems in part from its many strengths.
For one thing, MBO clearly has the potential to motivate employees because it helps implement
goal-setting theory on a systematic basis throughout the organization. It also clarifies the basis
for rewards, and it can stimulate communication. Performance appraisals are easier and more
clear-cut under MBO. Further, managers can use the system for control purposes.
However, using MBO also presents pitfalls, especially if a firm takes too many shortcuts or
inadvertently undermines how the process is supposed to work. Sometimes, for instance, top
managers do not really participate; that is, the goals are actually established in the middle of the
organization and may not reflect the real goals of top management.
MBO also has a tendency to overemphasize quantitative goals to enhance verifiability. Another
potential liability is that an MBO system requires a great deal of information processing and
record keeping since every goal must be documented. Finally, some managers do not really let
subordinates participate in goal setting but instead merely assign goals and order subordinates
to accept them.
Research suggests that MBO can actually do many of the things its advocates claim but that it
must also be handled carefully. Properly used, MBO can also be an effective approach to
managing an organization’s reward system.