Motivating Employees And Job Satisfaction

Motivating Employees And Job SatisfactionThe body of stimulate in the modern economies has made an understanding of the psychology of pauperism and air gaiety as a tombst unmatched comp angiotensin-converting enzyment of business and management syllabuses. The aim of the study is two-fold Firstly, literature re checks for the want theories and Theories on commerce pleasure. Secondly, the relationships amidst employee motif and craft merriment.Motivation theories clarifying the importance of shouting employees adopts at crap, the attitude of employers towards their product lines, the basis for studying the motivatingal implications of perceived unfairness and injustice in the work, how rewards be given to sort and relations betwixt reenforcement and look.Theories on transaction rapture clarifying the aspects that impact directly on levels of romp bliss, how people be influenced by how satisfactory they believe other workers atomic number 18 with the h omogeneous job, satisfaction is determined by a discrepancy between what one wants in a job and what one has in a job, the born(p) for dispositions that cause them to admit tendencies toward a received level of satisfaction.The relationship between employee motivation and job satisfaction has indicated that numerous variables of a personal, job and organisational nature influence the level of motivation and job satisfaction that employees experience in the workplace. This includes peoples necessarily with regard to their work and the work environment, as well as the nature and content of their jobs, and the working conditions under which they cause their daily lines.List of AcronymsList of FiguresMaslows hierarchy of haves Figure 2.1 P4List of evadesTable of ContentsAcknowledgement -Abstract --List of Acronyms ---List of Figures 6List of Tables 6Table of Content 61. Chapter 1 Introduction 11.1 research problem 11.2 Importance of study 11.3 Research questions 12. Chapter 2 Mo tivation and theoretical background x2.1 Motivation everywhereview x2.2 Definitions of employee motivation x2.3 Theories of motivation x2.3.1 Needs-based theories x2.3.2 Two-factor hypothesis x2.3.3Cognitive theories x2.3.3.1 candor surmise x2.3.3.2 Expectancy possible action x2.3.3.3 Goal-setting possible action x2.3.4 reinforcer theories x2.4 Motivation Composite summary x3. Chapter 3 Job satisfaction x3.1 Job satisfaction overview x3.2 Definitions of job satisfaction x3.3Theories on job satisfaction x3.3.1 Two-factor guess x3.3.2 Social influence theory x3.3.3 Affect theory x3.3.4 Equity theory x3.3.5 Dispositional theory x3.3.6 Job characteristics model x3.4 Creating job satisfaction x3.4.1 Work environment x3.4.2 Career education programs x3.4.3 Employee motivation x3.5 Measuring job satisfaction x3.6 Job satisfaction Composite summary x4. Chapter 4 The Relationship between Motivating Employees and Job satisfaction x4.1 The effect of motivating employees on Job satis faction x4.2 How can mangers increase employee Job Satisfaction x5. Chapter 5 Conclusion and Recommendation x5.1. Conclusion x5.2. Recommendation xReferences 2Chapter 1 IntroductionResearch ProblemA sorting of factors motivate people at work, some of which are tangible, such(prenominal) as money, and some of which are intangible, such as a sense of achievement. Although employees derive satisfaction from their work, or places of work, for distinguishable reasons, this study was concerned specific every last(predicate)y with the investigation of the relationship between levels of satisfaction and the motivation of employees at work.The primary point of de revealure is that the succeeder of any organization is heavily dependent on the inputs of its workforce, and that such inputs are determined to a large extent by personal characteristics, and by those facets of peoples work environments that motivate them to invest more than physical and mental energy into their work. In this w ay the organizations objectives are pursued and met. Motivation and job satisfaction are therefore regarded as key determinants of organizational success.Importance of studyThis study demonstrated the importance of employee motivation and job satisfaction in organizational capability and trenchantness. craft has come to realize that a cause and satisfied workforce can deliver powerfully to the bottom line.It is crucial for any organization, and particularly for those in maturation countries with limited skills resources, such as Egypt, to ensure that it develops and retains a loyal, dedicated, committed and able workforce on a consistent basis. Loyal employees who are satisfied with the work that they do and with the culture of the organization they are employed by, and who are consequently motivated to continue their relationship with that organization.Finck, Timmers and Mennes (1998) emphasized that only when employees are excited and motivated by what they do, will business excellence be achieved.1.3. Research questionsWhat is employees motivation?Why employees need motivation?What is job satisfaction?How to create job satisfaction?How to measure employees job satisfaction?What is the relationship between employee motivation and job satisfaction?Chapter 2 Motivation and theoretical background2.1 Motivation overviewIn the watercourse business environment, organizations in all industries are experiencing rapid change, which is accelerating at enormous speed. To be successful in a b differentiateless, competitive global environment, companies must be sure to work hard on especially the people side of their business (Khan, 1997). This view is supported by Finck et al. (1998), who stated that companies must recognize that the human factor is becoming often more beta for organizational survival, and that business excellence will only be achieved when employees are excited and motivated by their work. In addition, difficult luck, such as violence, traged y, and fear and job insecurity create severe stress in employees and result in stifled workplace performance.The issue of what motivates employees has set a practical and theoretical agenda for organizational psychologists since the start of the 20th century. Baron (1991, p.9) described motivation as one of the almost pivotal concerns of modern organizational research. Van Niekerk (1987) emphasized this point by stating that productivity is a function of both the motivation and the ability of an employee. Therefore, if motivation equals zero, so does productivity. Since employee performance is a joint function of ability and motivation, one of managements primary tasks, therefore, is to motivate employees to perform to the best of their ability.In the field of organizational psychology, work motivation is approached from some(prenominal) angles. For example, some researchers feel work motivation study should start with an examination of the determine of employees, since their va lues determine their needs, and their needs ultimately determine their sort. A crucial problem for others in contemporary organization theory and research is how best to conceptualize and assess individual differences in motivational tendencies (Kanfer Ackerman, 2000).Sempane et al. (2002) noted that organizations range highly complex companionable structures because of their dynamic nature. Employees, who are role players in them, render them competitive through their involvement and commitment. The relationship between organization and employee is characterized by a high level of mutual interdependence, as both parties impact on the others potential for success. Employee motivation and job satisfaction become crucial elements in this relationship. Extensive research has sh take in that employee motivation and job satisfaction are not brought about in isolation, but rather respond to organizational variables such as structure and working conditions (Schneider Snyder, 1975).2.2 Definitions of employee motivationWalker (1980) stated that studies over the years have sh consume little relationship between measures of job satisfaction and performance outputs. passing satisfied workers may be poor performers, whereas highly dissatisfied workers may be good performers. Several variables influence the relationship between job satisfaction and job performance although no direct causal relationships between these have been identified as yet. However, it appears that motivation might account for much of the link between an employees job satisfaction and job performance. Motivation, therefore, closes the satisfaction-performance loop, and has to do with a set of interrelated factors that explain an individuals behavior, holding constant the variables controlled or influenced by management, as well as by individual skills, abilities and knowledge.The term motivation is derived from the Latin term movere, which means to move. A great many definitions of the motivatio n construct have been postulated over the several decades during which this multi-faceted concept has been researched. The rich variety in perspectives on the topic of motivation is illustrated below.Beach (1980) saw motivation as a willingness to expend energy to achieve a goal or reward. This author took somewhat of a behaviorist approach in stating that behavior that is perceived to be rewarding will be repeated, whereas behavior that goes unrewarded or is punished, tends to be extinguished. Beach (1980) did, however, recognize intrinsic motivation as related to the job content and as that which occurs when people perform an activity from which they derive satisfaction from simply engaging in the activity itself.Van Niekerk (1987) saw work motivation as the creation of work circumstances that influence workers to perform a trusted activity or task of their deliver free will, in order to reach the goals of the organization, and simultaneously satisfy their own needs. Du Toit (19 90) added that three groups of variables influence work motivation, namely individual characteristics, such as peoples own interests, values and needs, work characteristics, such as task variety and business, and organizational characteristics, such as its policies, procedures and customs.It is interesting to note that the concept of organizational commitment has come to partly replace that of motivation within the field of organizational behavior (Lewicki, 1981). While the concept of motivation is linked to individualistic and task-centered reward systems, commitment seems to be linked to the identification of employees with a collective, that is, in terms of corporate values and norms. As such, management is concerned with cultivating motivation towards realizing the mission and goals of the organization, which are far above the ambitions and goals of any individual in it.2.3 Theories of motivationMotivation research draws on a large number of theoretical perspectives. Although some of these appear to be less influential than when they were originally postulated, such as Maslows hierarchy of needs theory (Wicker Wiehe, 1999), their contributions as foundation layers and inspirations for subsequent theories are still evident and acknowledged.According to Petri (1996) the vast array of motivation theories are based, in essence, on differing approaches to the origins or sources of motivation, e.g. energy, heredity, learning, social interaction, cognitive processes, activation of motivation, homeostasis, hedonism or growth motivation. Depending on the particular approach adopted, motivation theories are frequently classified into three categories, namely needs-based, cognitive, and incur and reinforcement theories (Baron et al., 2002).2.3.1 Needs-based theoriesOne of the most often-quoted motivation theories is that of Abraham Maslow, which he introduced in 1943 (Van Niekerk, 1987). The basic tenet of the theory is that people are motivated by their quest t o satisfy their needs, or deficiencies, which may be grouped in five dollar bill categories, and that these needs occur in a specific hierarchy, where lower order needs have to be satisfied before those of a higher order nature (Gouws, 1995). Maslow (1968, p.153) asserted that gratification of one basic need opens consciousness to domination by another. Maslows need hierarchy is portrayed in Figure 2.1.maslows-hierarchy-of-needs.jpgFigure 2.1 Maslows hierarchy of needsNeeds hierarchy theory has had a positive impact on organizations, as it has focused attention on the importance of addressing employees needs at work (Spector, 2003). In addition, one of its main constructs, the self-actualization concept, has become very popular with especially managers and executives who have accepted this high-level need as a potent motivator (Schultz Schultz, 1998).2.3.2 Two factor theoryFrederick Herzbergs well-known and controversial theory of motivation was postulated in 1954, and developed from his work to determine the attitude of workers towards their jobs (Gouws, 1995). As such, it was originally intended to be a job satisfaction theory, but over time it was its motivational aspects that attracted most attention (Baron et al., 2002). Beach (1980) was of the opinion that this theory constitutes more of a work motivation than general human motivation theory.The basic assumption of Herzbergs theory is that motivation originates from the job itself, and not from other external characteristics, and that those factors tending to job satisfaction (motivators) are separate and distinct from those leading to job dissatisfaction (hygienics/maintenance factors) (Herzberg, 1966).The hygiene factors, which may be equated with Maslows lower order needs, are placed along a continuum, from a state of dissatisfaction, to no dissatisfaction. These factors involve circumstances surrounding the task which do not lead to job satisfaction, but prevent dissatisfaction, if maintained ade quately. Examples of these maintenance factors include the level of supervision, job status, work circumstances, service conditions, remuneration and interpersonal relationships (Herzberg, 1966).Motivators, on the other hand, have a direct positive effect on the work situation, and lead to improved productivity. They may be equated with Maslows higher order needs, and are also placed along a continuum from a highly motivated to a highly unmotivated state. Aspects of the job itself, e.g. level of recognition, pleasure of performance, increase responsibility, and opportunities for advancement and promotion, serve as motivators (Herzberg, 1966).2.3.3 Cognitive theories2.3.2.1 Equity theoryEquity theory was first introduced by Stacy Adams in 1965. Its basic tenet is that people are motivated to achieve a condition of equity / fairness in their dealings with other people, and with the organizations they work for.People make judgments or comparisons between their own inputs at work, e.g. their qualifications, experience and stew, and the outcomes they receive, e.g. pay and fringe benefits, status and working conditions. They then assign weights to these inputs and outputs according to their relevance and importance to themselves. The summed total produces an output / input ratio, which is the key issue in terms of motivation. If a persons output / input ratio is equal to that of another person, equity exists. A state of inequity leads to tension, which the individual tries to reduce by changing one or more elements of the ratio, e.g. increase or reduce his effort. Perceived inequity by the person is therefore the basis for motivation (Baron et al., 2002).This theory helped to provide the basis for studying the motivational implications of perceived unfairness and injustice in the workplace. It also laid the foundation for more recent theories on distributive (how much is allocated to each person) and procedural justice (how rewards and job requirements are determi ned) (Cropanzano Folger, 1996). In a meta-analysis of many of these theories,2.3.3.2 Expectancy theoryThe original thinking piece of tail what has come to be known as expectancy theory, or Vrooms Expectancy-Valence-Instrumentality (VIE) theory, can be traced back to the theorizing of Tolman and Levin in 1932 and 1938 respectively (Petri, 1996). Vroom was, however, the first scholar to boom on this thinking in a motivational context in 1964 (Gouws, 1995). Since its origins in the psychological theorizing of some 60 years ago, the expectancy theory has been presented in many variations. Common to all versions is the basic tenet that people base their behavior on their beliefs and expectations regarding future events, namely those maximally advantageous to them (Baron et al., 2002).Essentially, the theory explains how rewards lead to behavior, through focusing on internal cognitive states that lead to motivation. In other words, people are motivated to action if they believe those b ehaviors will lead to the outcomes they want. The said cognitive states are termed expectancy, valence and instrumentality (Spector, 2003).2.3.3.3 Goal-setting theoryGoal-setting theory was first proposed by Edwin Locke in 1968. Spector (2003) described this perspective on motivation as the assumption that peoples behavior is motivated by their internal intentions, objectives or goals in other words, by what people consciously want to achieve.According to Locke and Henne (1986) goals affect behavior in four ways They direct attention and action to those behaviors which a person believes will achieve a particular goal They mobilize effort towards reaching the goal They increase the persons persistence, which results in more time spent on the behaviors infallible to attain the desired goal They motivate the persons search for efficient strategies for goal attainment.This theory has an intuitive appeal because of its clear relevance to the workplace (Schultz Schultz, 1998). It is cu rrently one of the most popular theories informing organizational approaches to employee motivation (Spector, 2003).2.3.4 Reinforcement theoriesReinforcement theories, which assume that peoples behavior is determined by its perceived positive or negative consequences (Baron et al., 2002) are based on the Law of Effect Hulls drive theory elaborated on this idea and suggested that effort was the mathematical product of drive, multiplied by habit, and that habit were derived from behavior reinforcement.The consequences of behavior may be tangible, such as money, or intangible, such as praise (Spector, 2003). In this regard, reinforcement theory was highly influential in firmly establishing the ideas relating to incentive and reward systems that are applied in most organizations today. As such, it provided the basis for the notion that rewards should be contingent with individual units of productivity (Schultz Schultz, 1998).As a motivation theory, reinforcement theory has fallen somew hat out of favor, as it merely describes relations between reinforcement and behavior, but gives little insight into motivational processes, e.g. whether or not a person wanted a specific reward, or why. Nevertheless, its relative popularity in the workplace is maintained by research that has shown that rewards can be highly effective in the enhancement of job performance (Spector, 2003).2.4 Motivation Composite summaryEach of the theories covered has contributed substantially towards current perspectives on and understanding of the concept of motivation in the workplace. The needs theories, for example, are largely responsible for organizations recognition that peoples behavior at work is motivated by highly individualized innate needs and desires (Van Niekerk, 1987). Achievement-orientated people are, for example, driven by a much stronger need for power, affiliation and achievement than most other people (Schultz Schultz, 1998). For this reason, employers need to ensure that the y invest the necessary time and effort to assess the personal needs of individual employees, and customize their jobs and working environments accordingly (Walker, 1980). Due to their innate need to produce good work and develop themselves, most employees do not need constant supervision and direction and may, in fact, find such actions very demotivating. In addition, people need to experience their work as meaningful and challenging, and therefore require considerable input on the part of management to ensure a high tier of job enrichment on a continual basis (Beach, 1980).The cognitive theories of motivation have helped employers to understand that, apart from their motivation being driven by innate needs, employees also apply deliberate conscious thought to their behavior at work. Organizations are aware that people evaluate their inputs on the job against what they receive in return, and that they should therefore pay attention to the equitability between employee delivery and reward (Cropanzano Folger, 1996). It is also prudent for organizations to offer a range of benefits, which may be acquired through different levels of performance, to allow employees to set themselves challenging goals that they may attain via differing means they may perceive as instrumental towards those goals (Spector, 2003).Once employees have met the requirements of their own jobs, and attained certain goals, they expect certain rewards to follow. In this regard, reinforcement theories have contributed much towards the establishment of a wide array of reward and performance incentives systems applied in organizations all over the world today (Beach, 1980).Clearly, the theorizing of many an author and researcher over the years has resulted in the increased ability of organizations to transform these theories into practical and effective measures to address a highly complicated aspect of organizational psychology, namely the motivation of human behavior at work, and to ensure or ganizational success and profitability in the process.Chapter 3 Job satisfaction3.1 Job satisfaction overviewThe concept of job satisfaction enjoys increasing attention from organizations these days, since its importance and pervasiveness in terms of organizational lastingness has been firmly established quite some time ago. Managers now feel morally responsible for maintaining high levels of job satisfaction among their staff, most probably primarily for its impact on productivity, absenteeism and staff turnover, as well as on union activity (Arnold Feldman, 1986). Organizations recognize that having a workforce that derives satisfaction from their work contributes tremendously towards organizational effectiveness and ultimate survival. Job satisfaction is regarded as related to important employee and organizational outcomes, ranging from job performance to health and longevity (Spector, 2003).The importance of job satisfaction in the workplace is underscored by its inextricable connection to a persons entire purport. Since a persons job is an all-important part of his life, it follows that job satisfaction is part of life satisfaction. The nature of the environment outside of the job directly influences a persons feelings and behavior on the job . Schultz and Schultz (1998) emphasized that people spend one trinity to one half of their waking hours at work, for a period of 40 to 45 years, and that this is a very long time to be frustrated, dissatisfied and unhappy, especially since these feelings carry over to family and social life, and affect physical and emotional health. A concept with such tremendous effect on personal and organizational life clearly deserves a corresponding amount of attention.3.2 Definitions of job satisfactionA great many definitions of the concept of job satisfaction have been formulated over time. Arnold and Feldman (1986) described job satisfaction as the amount of overall affect that individuals have toward their job. Since a job has many characteristics, job satisfaction is necessarily a summation of worker attitudes regarding all these. The good features are balanced against the bad, so that the overall job satisfaction is perceived as high or low. It appears that job satisfaction may be studied from two slightly different perspectives. Firstly, job satisfaction may be treated as a single, overall feeling towards a persons job. Alternatively, researchers may focus on the different aspects that impact upon a job, e.g. its rewards and social environment, and even characteristics of the job itself, such as its content. It is believed that this latter view permits a more comprehensive picture of job satisfaction, as an individual typically experiences different levels of satisfaction across different job aspects (Spector, 2003).3.3 Theories on job satisfaction3.3.1 Two-factor theoryTwo-factor theory relates to job satisfaction as well as it does to motivation, and posits that the things that provide empl oyees with satisfaction at work are not the same as those that bring about dissatisfaction. This is Herzbergs theory of satisfiers and dissatisfiers, or the positive and negative aspects of the job. Dissatisfiers do not lead to job satisfaction, but prevent dissatisfaction if properly maintained, for example, agreeable service conditions. Satisfiers, on the other hand, impact directly on job satisfaction, for example, positive promotion aspects elevate levels of job satisfaction (Gouws, 1995).3.3.2 Social influence theorySocial influence theory holds that people are influenced by how satisfied they believe other workers are with the same job (Van Vuuren, 1990). New employees may, for example, change their initial misgivings about their job when they discover that others performing the same tasks are satisfied with their work. In this sense social influence theory may share certain common features with equity theory.3.3.3 Affect theoryEdwin A. Lockes Range of Affect Theory (1976) is arguably the most famous job satisfaction model. The main premise of this theory is that satisfaction is determined by a discrepancy between what one wants in a job and what one has in a job. Further, the theory states that how much one values a given facet of work (e.g. the degree of autonomy in a position) moderates how satisfied/dissatisfied one becomes when expectations are/arent met. When a person values a particular facet of a job, his satisfaction is more greatly impacted both positively (when expectations are met) and negatively (when expectations are not met), compared to one who doesnt value that facet. To illustrate, if Employee A values autonomy in the workplace and Employee B is indifferent about autonomy, then Employee A would be more satisfied in a position that offers a high degree of autonomy and less satisfied in a position with little or no autonomy compared to Employee B.3.3.4 Equity theoryEquity theory stipulates that people generally want to receive what they consider a fair or true return for their efforts at work. Greater satisfaction is experienced if they perceive the return or reward they receive as equitable. These perceptions may be based on previous or vicarious experience, or on peoples observations of other employees, for example (Van Vuuren, 1990). Job satisfaction in this regard is related to the motivation to achieve a condition of equity or fairness in peoples dealings with others.3.3.5 Dispositional theoryAnother well-known job satisfaction theory is the Dispositional Theory. It is a very general theory that suggests that people have innate dispositions that cause them to have tendencies toward a certain level of satisfaction, regardless of ones job. This approach became a notable explanation of job satisfaction in light of evidence that job satisfaction tends to be stable over time and across careers and jobs. Research also indicates that identical correspond have similar levels of job satisfaction. A significant model that narrowed the scope of the Dispositional Theory was the Core Self-evaluations Model, proposed by Timothy A. valuate, Edwin A. Locke, and Cathy C. Durham in 1997. Judge et al. argued that there are four Core Self-evaluations that determine ones disposition towards job satisfaction self-esteem, general self-efficacy, locus of control, and neuroticism. This model states that higher levels of self-esteem (the value one places on his/her self) and general self-efficacy (the belief in ones own competence) lead to higher work satisfaction. Having an internal locus of control (believing one has control over herhis own life, as opposed to outside forces having control) leads to higher job satisfaction. Finally, lower levels of neuroticism lead to higher job satisfaction (T.A, E.A C.C, 1997).3.3.6 Job characteristics modelHackman Oldham proposed the Job Characteristics Model, which is astray used as a framework to study how particular job characteristics impact on job outcomes, inclu ding job satisfaction. The model states that there are five core job characteristics (skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, and feedback) which impact three critical psychological states (experienced meaningfulness, experienced responsibility for outcomes, and knowledge of the actual results), in turn influencing work outcomes (job satisfaction, absenteeism, work motivation, etc.). The five core job characteristics can be combined to form a motivating potential score (MPS) for a job, which can be used as an index of how likely a job is to affect an employees attitudes and behaviors. A meta-analysis of studies that assess the framework of the model provides some support for the validity of the JCM ( J.R G,R, 1976).3.4 Creating job satisfaction3.4.1 Work environmentA positive work environment is not only important for our physical, mental and emotional health, but is also important for the results that we produce for the company. The better we feel at work, the m ore likely we will take pride in our job activities and be loyal towards our place of tradeWays to create a positive working environmentAccept the right positionBe a positive personTake responsibilityCommunicate with your managerBe social3.4.2 Career development programsIn organizational development (or OD), the study of career development looks atHow individuals manage their careers within and between organizations and, how organizations structure the career progress of their members, it can also be tied into succession planning within some organizations. the lifelong psychological and behavioural processes as well as contextual influences shaping ones career over the life span. As such, career development involves the persons creation of a career pattern, decision-making st