How to increase employee motivation?
Although I consider motivation as an internal process of each of us, this is triggered based on the assessment we make of the variables or environmental stimuli, considering our own interests and expectations for them. Therefore, being “motivated” is the result of the interaction of the individual in a given environment, particular and specific in time and context.
In this sense, it is logical to think that motivation has a strong external component, even though we should not ignore the ability of people to motivate themselves. The following paragraphs discuss the how, considering the contributions of the various theories of motivation, companies can address the issue and increase this variable has a positive impact on effort and performance delivered by workers in their jobs.
Consider then, first, to work as a field of human relationship, not only is an exchange of services for remuneration, but also a source of professional and personal satisfaction. Both Maslow and Herzberg theories offer us fairly argued about, even if the theory of “two factors” (Herzberg), can elucidate typical organizational problems related to the topic.
For this, many companies create sophisticated non-monetary compensation as part of the incentive (motivational), even when they have not been able to solve basic aspects of the contractual relationship, wages, working conditions, job security, among others, leading to frustration among managers and the performance levels are not increased. It is clear that while generating instances of “motivation” are not considered situations that are minimal and should exist for the mere fact of creating the relationship, I mean those mentioned above and those that are related to “hygiene factors” that not being present, cause great dissatisfaction, but when present, they generate only “no dissatisfaction”.
Only when these hygiene factors are resolved, companies can motivate their employees with shares of recognition, status, conduct, among others. In other words, the motivation is achieved when companies view their employees as people, regardless of the fact that they are “workers”, specialists in one area or dedicated to a task or discipline, requires considerations of human affairs.
On the other hand, there is interesting to analyze the subjective factor. The workers select the behaviors they consider them to obtain expected results, which are generally associated with certain individual goals. The performance, therefore, relates to the perception of the real scope of the goals and expectations are met. According to Vroom, these arguments are situational, for the specific subjectivity of expectations and individual goals.
Related to this, the motivation will increase if workers perceive that their effort is directly related to the fulfillment of individual goals. If the reward is the same at different levels of performance, efforts will be useless because it does not brings greater benefits and thus performance will decrease. This could explain, among other arguments, the successful implementation of variable pay systems between the modern enterprise.
In addition, workers will appreciate all the actions that implement the business when you link directly to enhance the skills that relate to personal and group performance. In this sense, the relevance of training, for example, is motivational because it allows to increase production and hence revenue.
The motivation of workers will increase, too, when your work environment allows you to meet the needs of Power, Affiliation and / or Accomplishment. Efforts to encourage must be consistent with these profiles.
Many people feel satisfaction when feeling with the authority to make decisions, manage projects, people ultimately be in charge. This profile of worker usually be comfortable in positions of leadership, direction or as independent workers own their own businesses. Identifying this type of profile allows system strengthening career development considering upward mobility.
Another group of workers striving to be part of something, feeling valued by a specific group or be linked to a company (brand) in particular. The pride of belonging is a great motivator that increases performance for “enter” the system and maintains this performance when it is part of it. In this case, companies have a responsibility to strengthen its market position and attach their name to certain aspects valued by people who work there. Also there must be an internal communication plan to confirm the position and prestige of the company among its employees.
Workers need to achieve increased performance when firms value and reward individual contributions and / or group as create jobs with attractive and challenging goals. The redesign of jobs, the formation of high performance teams, focusing on job skills, among others may be viable strategies to motivate these workers.
It is clear that given the differences between these three types of workers, it requires a process of needs identification and classification to design appropriate mechanisms of motivation, since up to anyone with a need for affiliation, or require more complex goals who feel the need for membership, increase job dissatisfaction and lower performance of these workers.
Moreover and interestingly, there is evidence about the power of money as motivating factor that can increase performance, partnership and dedication to the organization (Lawler, 1975, quoted by Chiavenato, 2000). To achieve this relationship effectively, workers must perceive that there is direct relationship between work, effort, and time to receive remuneration for the performance associated with money.
However, we encountered a major obstacle: the performance evaluations. In general, and ignoring the exceptions, these assessments are not built based on position-specific indicators, but rather by general factors and a high level of subjectivity. This prevents decisions for continuous improvement and performance associated with much less compensation. Highlight the fact that many companies have performance appraisal systems quite advanced, more complex and objectivity.
There is consensus in some countries like Chile, evaluations of public sector performance suffers (in general) or specific mechanisms of objectivity focused on personal productivity, with performance incentives. This feature transforms the score on an administrative order to achieve a sense of fairness and equity rather than as a performance enhancer element.
One way to avoid the demotivation of workers is to ensure that there is a perception that the efforts in a job are “fair,” compared with others in the same company (internal equity), and with the same position in the Industry (Competitiveness). Many workers feel their efforts to reduce working more than others who work less and earn the same. Even when they feel they try too hard in relation to the proceeds. The result of both subjective analysis leads frustration even when the worker feels to have no alternative job, or the decision to seek new employment opportunities in other companies or other positions within it.
Succeed if we manage internal equity compensation considering the relative weight of the job, comparing the functions of each of them through a system, for example, scores. This allows not only allocate more objectively wages, but increases the objectivity and the perception of equity among workers.
It is inevitable that workers compare their benefits and salaries with other companies. While this is inevitable, one way to avoid discouragement is to achieve a level of external equity and competitiveness with firms of similar characteristics and the same industry. There are workers in the retail industry who are discouraged when compared with professional peers and the Mining Industry. This comparison is misleading because they are different realities. That companies have to be careful when communicating their motivational messages, much as when searching for valid comparisons.
Another way to avoid discouragement is to consider that within the company are competent and motivated by the work itself (reasons given previously), so assume the “Theory X” (McGregor) as valid for all companies is a error. Leadership styles and control systems must be structured according to the cultural characteristics of the company and its workers. Companies humanized Theory Z (Ouchi) are more consistent, in theory, new trends in human capital management.
Finally, it is interesting to see how we can improve the performance of workers under some questionable practices of morality or ethics, as the psychological pressure exerted by a threat of dismissal in a fragile system of job security. While results are achieved, these have proven to be passengers, unworthy of a society that seeks to develop and inconsistent under the gaze of social responsibility and new trends in human capital management.
