Introduction

• Work motivation can be described as „the desire to take action.“

• Definition: „[…]psychological processes that direct, energize and maintain action towards a task, role or project.“

Core theoretical perspectives on work motivation

Work Motivation

Endogenous process theories

Expectancy theory

Equity Theory

Exogenous cause theories

Job design

Goal setting theory

Hybrid perspective

Self-determination theory

Endogenous Process Theories: psychological mechanisms explaining motivation inside epmloyees‘ heads

Exogenous Cause Theories: contextual influences on work motivation that can be changed and altered

Hybrid Perspective: equivalent emphasis on endogenous and exogenous causes

Expectancy Theory

• Employees choose to invest effort in courses of action by weighing their relative utilities probabilities of achieving desired outcome

influence on effort: if one of these beliefs is missing, course of action will not be seleceted!

Effort: 1.) Expectancy Effort will lead to performance

2.) Instrumentality performance will lead to outcomes

3.) Valence outcomes are important or valued

Expectancy Theory

• Focus: within-person-decision that employees make about whether, where and how to invest their time and energy

• Controversies & unanswered questions: Expectancy, instrumentality and valence leave consinderable variance unexplained Theory of planned behavior

Theory of planned behavior

• Planned actions are caused by intentions as a micro-mediator of the belief-behavior-relationship

Intentions: function of perceived behavioral control over: 1.) behavior, 2.) attitudes towards behavior 3.) subjectives norms about behavior.

Comparison Planned behavior Theory and Expectancy Theory

Perceived behavioral control Expectancy beliefs (planned behavior) (expectancy theory)

Employees‘ judgement about whether they are capable of performing if they expend effort

Behavior evaluated favorably instrumentality & valence beliefs

Behavior will lead to favorable outcome

Comparison Planned behavior Theory and Expectancy Theory

Planned behavior theory adds subjective norms or social expectations and pressure to engage in the behavior

Personal outcomes but also social reward (appproval,

respect, community) or social punishment (disapproval, disrespect, alienation)

Limitations of Expectancy Theory• Over calculative: caricature of how employees make

decisions and experience motivation (Who actually calculates

probablities?) incorporation of „hot“ affective components which influence expectancy, instrumentality and valence judgements

• No specification of nature and source of variations in employees‘ beliefs and judgements (enjoying experience of expending effort; performance itself as reward even without external outcomes)

• No explanation of how employees update and change their beliefs over time

Conclusion Expectancy Theory

• Focus on identifying key psychological forces that guide decisions about effort and understanding their consequences

• Diagnosing and resolving motivational problems in organizations

• NOT focussing on specifying causes or fluctuations

Equity Theory Placing motivation in a social context

• Central assumption: employees are motivated, when their inputs (effort, knowledge, skill, loyalty..) are matched by outcomes

(pay, bonuses, benefits, recogntion) which creates a sense of equity or fairness

Equity Theory

Outcomes ≠ Input Distress, perception of inequity employee tries to reduce

distress

Feeling under-rewarded: reduction of input, attempting to reduce other‘s inputs, seeking to increase their outcomes, aiming to decrease coworkers outcomes

Feeling over-rewarded: increasing inputs or reducing outcomes

Judgement of equity

• Evaluation of input-outcome ratios through comparisons

Possible comparisons: 1. Outcome vs. Input (Input = effort, ability, seniority)

2. Input-outcome ratios and other input-outcome ratios (including my past i.-o. ratios and other people‘s i.-o. ratios)

Social comparison motivation suffers, when others are perceived to maintain more favorable i.-o. ratios

Over- and under-rewarding employees can be detrimental to motivation.

Negative motivational and behavioral effects of under-reward inequity

Mixed results about consequences of over-reward inequity

New approach: including understanding individual differences in equity sensivity

Equity preferences

benevolent

Preferring a lower input-outcome

ratio compared to othersUnder-reward

inequity leads to higher

motivation than for equity

sensitive/entitled

employees

Equity sensitive

Preferring an equal input-

outcome ratio compared to

others

entitled

Preferring a higher input-

outcome ratio compared to

others

Perceiving distress when receiving lower outcomes than coworkers

Competing predictions between equity and expectancy theory

Perceived under-reward inequity

Equity Theory: high instrumentality feeling under-rewarded distress caused by perceived inequity reduction of effort to create a more appropriate balance between input and outcome

Expectancy Theory: high instrumentality feeling under-rewardedmotivation to achieve higher performance confidence, that higher performance will result in outcomes they feel they deserve

Competing predictions between equity and expectancy theory

Equity Theory

High instrumentality

Feeling under-rewarded

Distress caused by perceived inequity

Reduction of effort to create a more appropriate balance

between input and outcomes

Expectancy Theory

High instrumentality

Feeling under-rewarded

Motivation to achieve higher performance

confidence, that higher performance will result in outcomes they feel they

deserve