Expectancy Theory and its implications for employee motivation

Academic Leadership: The Online Journal Academic Leadership: The Online Journal

Volume 6

Issue 3

Summer 2008

Article 8

7-1-2008

Expectancy Theory and its implications for employee motivation Expectancy Theory and its implications for employee motivation

Isaac Mathibe

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.fhsu.edu/alj

Part of the Educational Leadership Commons, Higher Education Commons, and the Teacher

Education and Professional Development Commons

Recommended Citation Recommended Citation

Mathibe, Isaac (2008) "Expectancy Theory and its implications for employee motivation,"

Academic

Leadership: The Online Journal

: Vol. 6: Iss. 3, Article 8.

DOI: 10.58809/CUMG4502

Available at: https://scholars.fhsu.edu/alj/vol6/iss3/8

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Peer-Reviewed Journals at FHSU Scholars Repository.

It has been accepted for inclusion in Academic Leadership: The Online Journal by an authorized editor of FHSU

Scholars Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected].

academicleadership.org

http://www.academicleadership.org/1508/expectancy-theory-and-

its-implications-for-employee-motivation/

Academic Leadership Journal

INTRODUCTION

The significance of employee motivation as the panacea of productivity in organizations is illustrated by

the volumes of literature on motivation and human productivity. For example, social theorists are of the

view that employees are motivated by their needs and they develop through and in relationship with

others (Dawson, 1993). The implication of the preceding statement is that when there is synergy

between employees’ needs and organizational needs, they – employees – will be more acquiescent to

productive tendencies than when their needs are not gratified. Invariably, the balancing of employees’

labour with their social needs and expectations is necessary in all organizations, and consequently

Vaida (2003) states that incentives are used to reward outstanding performance and to sustain

efficiency in work processes. Furthermore, Hoy and Miskel (1991:191) concur that incentives include

money, power and idyllic investments as well as general incentives that are non-material. However, an

over-emphasis on incentives and monetary gain overlooks the fact that people make decisions about

their own behaviour. Boje and Rosile (2004) thus conclude that motivation theories – which accentuate

incentives more than other motivators – incorporate the death wish since social control

instrumentalities, valences, and need strengths are manipulated by managers to induce employees’

productivity. In addition, the “one shoe fits all” approach of giving incentives may not have the desired

effect because of the uniqueness of employees’ needs, personalities and behaviour.

One of the assumptions of the Expectancy Theory is that people make decisions among alternative

plans of behaviour based on their perceptions [expectancies] of the degree to which a given behaviour

will lead to desired outcomes. Typically, in employment relations transactions such as payment for

services rendered occur between employers [providers of reward and recognition] and employees

[service providers] (Dawson, 1993). Other things being equal, Robinson (1992) argues that there is a

link between transactional leadership and Stimulus-Response theories because incentives [in the form

of a reward, salary, award etcetera] are used to ensure the reproduction and repetition of desired

responses and outcomes in organizations. However, it is observed that in most transactional

relationships the power and authority of managers are absolute and incontestable to the extent that

employees become automatons in the production system. As a result, those who are viewed to be

productive get the rewards while those who are identified not to be productive and competitive are

pushed out of the system (Hemming, 1980).

There is a subtle link between expectancy, effort, productivity and reward. Werner (2002, p.335) states

that a person will exert a high effort if he/she believes there is reasonable probability that the effort will

lead to the attainment of an organizational goal, and the attainment of the organizational goal will

become an instrument through which that person will attain his/her personal goals. If this is the case

with employees, one would thus conclude that organizational goals will be elevated above personal

goals, and this may account for the use of incentives and rewards to recognize the effort made by

employees. In the same vein, the Beehive Survey found out that whilst over 60% of organizations in

South Africa recognized that pay is just one way to motivate employees, less than 40% created long-

term incentives across all levels (Sacht et al, 2003). One may argue that inadequate monetary benefits

may lead to discontentment and disenchantment that are illustrated by shoddy work and a high labour

turnover in some organizations. For example, the Salary Moves and Labour Trends Beehive Survey –

conducted by Deloitte and Touché in South African organizations in 2003 – indicated that labour

turnover [as a result of dissatisfaction with salaries and incentives] was 15% among key specialists

and 17% for general monthly paid employees (Brindle, 2003).

From the preceding discussion it can be deduced that there is a relationship between pay and

incentives and cognitive dissonance theories which propound that productivity is a result of the

perceived difference between what is expected or desired as fair and reasonable reward – individual

motivation and what is experienced in the job situation – organizational incentives. The following

discussion will provide an in-depth discussion on Expectancy Theory as documented in literature

sources.

LITERATURE STUDY

The literature study entailed a critical perusal of literature sources using the following key words which

have a bearing on the topic: motivation; intrinsic motivation; extrinsic motivation; expectancy theory;

locus of control; internal locus of control; external locus of control; goals; potential; effort; equity and

outcome. The following discussion will focus on the definition of concepts and how they link with

expectancy theory, motivation and locus of control.

Definition of concepts

Motivation

According to Passer and Smith (2004, p.327) the concept “motivation” refers to a process that

influences the direction, persistence and vigour of goal-directed behaviour. In the same vein, Coetsee

(2003, p.17) states that the term “motivation” refers to the interaction between forces within an

individual and his/her environment. Kreitner and Kinicki (2007, p.236) are of the view that in the present

context motivation represents psychological processes that cause the arousal, direction, and

persistence of voluntary action. Similarly, Werner (2002, p.326) describes motivation as being

intentional [a person makes a choice to act] and directional [indicating the presence of a driving force

aimed at attaining a specific goal]. Applied in the work situation, motivation implies the willingness of

individuals and teams to exert high levels of effort to attain organizational goals, conditioned by the

effort’s capability to satisfy individual and team needs (Coetsee, 2003). From the preceding discussion

it can be deduced that there is no single and universal definition for the concept “motivation”. However,

Boje and Rosile (2004) regard motivation as a repressive and puritanical ideology, a way to

manipulate performance (and satisfaction), where visions of self-actualisation, (higher) need

gratification and true happiness are fulfilled in acts of work. Boje and Rosile’s view may seem too

negative to ponder, but the rise of capitalism has been propelled by high intensity motivation

programmes which at times turned people into production fanatics.

Locus of control

According to Lefcourt (1976), the term “locus of control” is a generalised expectancy for internal as

opposed to external control of reinforcements. In the same vein, Coetsee (2003) states that locus of

control refers to what one ascribes responsibility or blames for what is happening in one’s life. The

dichotomy between external and internal loci of control is aptly captured by Rotter (1975) when he

states that internality and externality represent two ends of a continuum, not as either/or typology. A

locus of control indicates the influence that circumstances/environment or individual characters/traits

have on directing people’s activities. Research indicates that people perform better when they have a

moderate to strong internal locus of control. In addition, Coetsee (2003, p.104) contends that managers

with an internal locus of control are comfortable with participative management styles while managers

with external locus of control are more authoritarian. The position of the locus of control is significant

because all things being equal, people will either see themselves as masters of their destiny or victims

of circumstances. However, the latter being true, Maltby, Day and Macaskill (2007) are of the opinion

that people with an external locus of control tend to be more stressed and prone to clinical depression.

Furthermore, external locus of control makes people vulnerable to manipulation and open to abuse

since externals would depend largely on the reinforcement by significant others for everything they do.

Conversely, internals are more at peace with themselves and they take responsibility for their mistakes

and successes. The following discussion on elements of the expectancy theory is linked to locus of

control.

Elements of the Expectancy Theory

1 Goals/expectations

Many people who study trends in performance and motivation in industries tend to agree that goal-

setting and explication generates confidence in the workforce. Clarifying the meaning of goals is

necessary for forging a shared understanding of what the organization wants to accomplish. It suffices

to state that goals assist in focusing the energy of workers towards attainment of organizational visions,

and Coetsee (2003 p.108) contends that top performing people are goal-directed. It may be concluded

that goal-setting ensures focus on common values, raising of expectations about what ought to be

achieved and what can be achieved, growing commitment to improving quality, greater confidence of

stakeholders in the work of an organization, and capturing the vision of the organization within

manageable short-term goals (Hargreaves & Hopkins, 1991, p.78; Coetsee, 2003, pp.108-110).

Inasmuch as it is evident that goals enable employees to focus on achievement of organizational vision,

fundamental aims and strategic objectives, Dawson (1993, p.248) argues that goal-setting ensures

development of quality assurance indicators for job performance. The assumption here is that when

employees know and understand what is expected from them [the goals], when those expectations are

to be met [the timeframe], and how those expectations should be met [ modus operandi], they will be

motivated to achieve those goals within the set timeframes. Evidently, the proliferation of reciprocal

determinism implies that unlocking of potential is a prerequisite for employees’ productivity.

2 Unlocking potential

The term potential refers to “possible, as opposed to actual; capable of becoming or latent excellence

or ability that may or may not be developed” ( Dictionary.com Unabridged v1.1). Coetsee (2003, p.121)

defines potential as being able to achieve something such as goals or to become something. From the

preceding definition of the term “potential” it is noteworthy to state that potential is latent

[hibernating/hiding/incubated] excellence which need to be developed, unlocked or unfurled. Mabale

(2004) aptly states that one of the most important functions in organizations is to ensure appropriate

unfolding of potential and its optimum utilisation. Table 1, as adapted from Robinson (1992), provides

a summary of essentials for unlocking potential.

Table 1 Essentials for unlocking employees’ potential

Communicating The manager keeps his or her team members up-to-

date and in the picture on a regular basis

Horses for courses The manager allocates work in ways that match staff

members’ capabilities and preferences

Valuing differences The manager encourages respect, trust and

understanding between team members

Work standards The manager sets realistic and clear standards for job

performance.

Participative decision

making

When it is appropriate the manager makes sure that

she/he involves team members in those decisions that

would affect them and their performance.

It is assumed that unlocking of potential is linked to empowerment. The term “empowerment” means

giving power, authority and influence which lead to the growth process and changes that are never

ending and self-initiated ( Wikipedia, the free encyclopaedia, 2008, p.2). Unfolding potential also

implies that work should be allocated with due consideration of employees’ skills, aptitude and abilities

[horses for courses] in order not to set them up for failure. Coetsee (2003, p.122) thus concludes that

the levels of unlocking potential are ability to cope; believing in successful outcomes; and commitment

to the realization of goals since when people are empowered they have the confidence to attempt

anything.

3 Effort

According to Your Dictionary.com (sv “effort”), the term effort implies the using of energy to get

something done, exertion of mental strength, a try, a product or result of working or trying. In the same

vein, Coetsee (2003, p.98) is of the view that effort leads to achievement of the longings to be fulfilled –

goals or expectations – which epitomize performance and the outcomes that generate a feeling of

success. Effort is related to the action of trying, exertion of strength or endeavour. In most cases effort

is linked to a series of actions that have to be performed as indicated by grouping of tasks and the

division of work, allocation of duties, authority and responsibility without abdicating responsibility,

relationships between people, collaboration and coordination as well as forged common objective or

motive to achieve goals (Van der Westhuizen, 1999, p.163).

4 Equity

The direct definition of the term “equity” in Accounting – as a school subject – refers to the extent to

which assets have been funded by the owner (Kew, Mettler, Walker & Watson, 2007, p.32). While this

definition seems far-fetched in Organizational Behaviour, the relevance of the concept should be

understood from the perspective of the equity theory which focuses on fairness and justice. The Equity

theory is based on the view that employees should receive their fair share for input – aggregated as

skills and effort – for the attainment of organizational outcomes (Drafke & Kossen, 1998). Equity

focuses on equivalence of [the owner’s] input and [the organization’s] output. While Vroom used the

term valence to refer to positive or negative values people place on outcomes (Kew et al., 2007,

p.249), Porter and Lawler used the term value of reward to indicate that people desire a combination of

outcomes and rewards for what they put into their jobs (Werner, 2002, p.336). It is noted that

incongruence and imbalances between the input the output provides ground for inequity and de-

motivation. In the same vein, Kew et al. (2007, p.243) contend that feelings of inequity revolve around a

person’s evaluation of whether he or she receives adequate rewards to compensate for his or

contributive inputs. Striking a balance or maintaining a state of equilibrium between input and output is

essential for enhancing performance.

5 Performance

Commitment and engagement are critical components for performance. According to Coetsee (2003,

p.139), performance is the realisation of goals and meeting of expectations. On the other hand, Kew et

al. (2007, p.243) define performance management as a continuous cycle of improving job performance

with goal-setting, feedback, coaching, rewards and positive reinforcement. The significance of goal-

setting for improving employees’ performance has been discussed. According to Kew et al. (2007,

p.139), the following points are necessary for feedback in a high-performance institution: focus on

performance not personalities; give specific feedback linked to learning goals and performance

outcome goals; give feedback as soon as possible; give feedback for improvement, not just results;

and pair feedback with clear expectations for improvement.

Performance feedback should be based on accurate and credible data. In this fashion, employees will

understand criteria used for performance evaluation and be more prepared to accept

recommendations for improvement of performance. Elements of the Peak Performance Model such as

capacity to perform, commitment to performance, and motivating climate (Coetsee, 2003, p.140) are

therefore critical for enhancing performance. Additionally, managers play an important role in

sustaining employees’ commitment to perform their jobs because alienation to products of production,

low morale and lack of commitment which are indicators of job dissatisfaction, may set in if the

elements Coetsee alludes to are neglected. The following discussion focuses on the link between

forces in an individual and organizational forces in motivation.

The link between the individual forces and the organizational forces [Assumption 1] and its implications

on motivation

Just as Lawler and Porter focused on value of outcomes in the form of rewards, Charlton (2000) notes

that extrinsic and intrinsic rewards have reciprocal motivational effects since they represent effective

methods of energising, promoting and maintaining employees’ behaviour. Schultz (2004, p.277) also

notes that a reward is first and foremost a people issue: it is about motivating them, reshaping and

refocusing their behaviours, and inducing them to accept organizational values. Nevertheless, one

should be cognisant of the fact that rewards may or may not have a motivating effect on the basis of

their attractiveness to the individual. For this reason, Mayo’s conclusions in the Hawthorne Experiments

on motivation were that employees’ are motivated by more than pay and conditions. In some cases, the

need for recognition and a sense of belonging may be important motivators which influence

employees’ groups and teams to perform beyond expectations (Shah & Shah, 2008, p.5).

It is essential to note that motivation ensures voluntary unfolding of employees’ talents and potential for

the benefit of the organization. To this end, Dawson (1993, p.61) regards motivation as the extent to

which employees acknowledge the legitimacy of and seek to achieve organizational objectives and

interests. The significance of this argument is that the expectancy theory predicts that employees will

be motivated when they believe that putting in more effort will yield better job performance. In the same

vein, better job performance will lead to organizational rewards, such as an increase in salary or

benefits, and these predicted organizational rewards are valued by employees.

Environmental factors

The external environment represents factors outside organizations that affect personal functioning and

it includes technological acceleration, the effect of social and other groups outside the work

environment; and individuals constantly compare personal progress with personal achievement in

organizations (Van Dyk, 2002, p.26). All things being equal, the job context environment is the task

environment within which an individual functions, and employees who interact with their work

environments – not only being defined by such environments but also defining such environments –

have a higher degree of motivation than those who accept the status quo and let the work environment

define them. Similarly, Passer and Smith (2004, p.444) contend that the likelihood that people will

engage in particular behaviours in given situations is influenced by two factors: expectancy and

reinforcement value. Passer and Smith’s view makes sense for people with an external locus and

employees with a strong internal locus of control. In the same vein, Bandura regards reciprocal

determinism as a situation where internal determinants and external determinants interact and cohere

to enhance employee motivation (Burger, 2004 p.388). The view expressed by Bandura’s reciprocal

determinism addresses questions whether employees define the work environment or the work

environment defines the employees. Subsequently, Van Dyk (2002, p.25) concludes that just as

individuals can only meet their expectations and needs by joining organizations, they translate their

expectations into personal goals before they join organizations.

The preceding discussion clearly indicates that people are not victims of their environments [as

arguments for external locus always infer], but they are masters, inventors and creators of new vistas for

their lives [as it is always stated in arguments for internal locus]. Werner (2002, p.355) rightly observes

that people strive towards maturity – through unfolding of their potential – in their work since they

experience growth in the context of their work. One would therefore expect creation of the following

conditions in order to improve employees’ motivation:

· Communication: managers explain expectations and the organization’s performance standards

(Dawson, 1993);

· Listening: managers listen to employees’ views regarding expectations on performance standards

(Hargreaves & Hopkins, 1991);

· Encouragement: managers provide encouragement in order to motivate and inspire employees to

improve performance and aspire for quality (Chetty, 1997);

· Agreement: managers forge collective agreements on performance standards and operational

strategies (Sono, 2002); and

· Reporting: managers provide feedback on successes and levels of performance of employees as a

strategy for improving the quality of production (Van der Westhuizen, 2002).

The creation of an environment that is appropriate for personal growth and development provides

enough motivation for working in an organization. When conditions in the organization do not satisfy an

employees’ physiological, safety and security, acceptance, love and self actualisation needs

employees tend to become demotivated, lethargic, unproductive and grumpy.

Expectations

Employers and employees have expectations when they come into an employment relationship. Kotter

(1976, p.93) contends that the first group of expectations represents what an individual expects to

receive from an organization and what the organization expects to give the individual while the second

group of expectations includes what an individual expects to offer the organization and what the

organization expects to receive from the individual. The two types of expectations defined above

indicate a give-and take relationship which is intended to create a win-win situation for employees and

organizations. According to Van Dyk (2002, p.33), expectations are contained in psychological

contracts which Porter et al. (1975, p.109) regard as the “dynamics of organization-individual

interactions”, and cooperative contracts. Similarly, Kreitner and Kinicki (2007, p.190) define a

psychological contract as an individual’s perception about the terms and conditions of a reciprocal

exchange with another party. Schein (1980, p.77) aptly summarizes the value of expectations when he

states:

… it is my central hypothesis that whether a person generates commitment loyalty, and enthusiasm for

the organization and its goals… depends to a large measure on two conditions: (1) the degree to which

his own expectations of what the organization will provide him with what he owes organization match

with what the organization’s are of what it will give and get; (2) assuming there is agreement on

expectations what actually is to be exchanged…

It can be construed that it is necessary for employers and employees to communicate their

expectations.

Esteem

According to Robinson (1992), people want to be secured, to be in control, to seek meaning in the

work they do, and to be in winning teams rather than losing teams. The points raised by Robinson are

essentials for employees’ esteem needs. In addition, employees are more likely to identify with the

organization when they have worked there for a long time; the organization is well-known in public

[accessibility]; they know who their competitors are and how their organization is distinct from these

competitors [comparative fit]; and when the employees are at work discussing issues related to their

work place [normative fit] (Turner, 1999). The satisfaction of esteem needs builds congruence between

the employee’s self-concept and self-esteem. An employee whose esteem needs are assuaged is

confident in his or her work, and he or she can operate at higher levels of motivation even if valences

and contingencies for motivation are minimal. Similarly, Dawson (1993, p.65) notes that every

employee needs to be accepted as a valued member of a social grouping in order to build his/her

confidence within a community of peers.

Criteria for Motivation

Effective leadership

The term “leadership” has different interpretations, and only a few will be provided. The World Book

Dictionary (1989, sv ‘leadership’) defines the concept “leadership” as “control; being in charge”.

According to Webster’s New World Encyclopaedia (1990, sv ‘leadership’) the concept “leadership”

refers to “a process or technique of managing, organising and operating a business.” According to

Prinsloo (1991, p.135), the concept “leadership” implies “inducing stakeholders to act for certain goals

that represent values and motivations as well as aspirations and expectations of school managers and

stakeholders.” Moorhead and Griffin (1989, p.347) define the concept “leadership” as:

… The use of non-coercive influence to direct and co-ordinate activities of group members towards

goal accomplishment. Leadership is the set of characteristics attributed to those who are perceived to

employ such an influence effectively…

A few essential points can be lifted from the preceding definitions such as inducing, control, being in

charge etcetera. However, the definition that carries more weight is the one provided by Moorhead and

Griffin, “non-coercive influence”. Leadership implies making people do what the leader wants, but this

is not done in an aggressive manner. Managers are value-directed, and they understand where the

organization wants to go [vision], and they point out the direction to their followers. Invariably, machines,

materials, methods, markets, and money (five m’s) do not provide leadership, even though they are

important for the growth and development of an organization (Mabale, 2004), and without effective

leadership the factors such as money, equipment, people, and machinery are sterile and useless

(Kroon, 1990, p.87). It is in this context that Robinson (1992) states:

… A leader is not appointed because he knows everything and can make every decision. He is

appointed to bring together the knowledge that is available and then to create the prerequisites for the

work to be done. He creates systems that enable him to delegate responsibility for day-to-day

operations…

Through the astute leadership that is provided in an organization, employees may develop a positive

work ethic. In such organizations, employees are willing to achieve organizational objectives and

targets because they know what is expected of them. One may conclude that effective leaders do not

only blaze the trail and clear stumbling blocks that could hamper productivity; they also set high

standards for job performance.

Goal-setting and attainment of objectives

Organizational goals direct the actions of both the employers and employees. As a result, the setting of

simple and specific goals which have measurable outcomes assists employees to know clearly what

they are supposed to do. In addition, organizations should set attainable and realistic goals for

employees and not set employees up for failure with unrealistic expectations. There is therefore sense

in what Pascale and Athos (1981) in The Art of Japanese Management, as cited in Mwosa (1987),

noted when they wrote:

… Managerial reality is not an absolute; rather, it is socially and culturally determined across all cultures

and in all societies. Human beings coming together to perform certain collective acts encounter certain

problems that are related to establishing, directing, co-coordinating and motivating. Culture affects how

these problems are perceived and how they are resolved. Social learning also establishes horizons of

perception…

Managers are expected to set goals which are within the employees’ performance range, and that is

why the potential, aptitude, abilities, skills, knowledge and values of employees should be considered

before one is engaged to do the work. For example, employing a traditional and conservative Catholic

in an abortion clinic may not be advisable – on moral and value-consideration – even if that person is a

highly skilled surgeon. It is also necessary to bear in mind that goal-setting should also anticipate the

outcomes to be attained. Commitment to the tasks at hand becomes easier when one has a mental

construct of what the end of the product of the whole undertaking will be. Coetsee (2003, p.175) states

that aligned commitment is the extent to which employees understand and live the shared vision of the

organization.

Unlocking/Unfolding of potential and effort

Mathibe (1998) notes that in line with industrial needs for productivity and competitiveness,

competencies and skills acquisition are the sine qua non for task performance in present-day

production systems. The words of Frederick Taylor of getting “the right man for the right job” are

relevant here because organizations that want to gain competitive advantage over competitors need

skilled and well-trained employees. Additionally, employees that are skilled and trained for the jobs do

not feel threatened, either by the changes, the job itself or new entrants – who happen to be well-trained

and skilled in the jobs – into the job market. Skill obsolescence in the face of globalization and

technological advancements also increases the need for unfolding of potential and development

diverse skills in employees. Multi-skilling is the buzz-word in many organizations since it is assumed

that it generates a highly developed form of work intensification, flexibility, inter-changeability and

mobility in the workforce (Tomaney, 1990, p.37).

Organizations need workplace practices that unlock potential in order to enable them to be productive.

One may argue that job performance [effort] requires interaction, synergy and symmetry between the

intellect [the head], emotions [the heart] and skills [the hand].

Equity, valences and incentives

The Expectancy Theory is based on the assumption that people are motivated to behave in ways that

produce desired and valued outcomes (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2007, p.246). This view is closely linked to

Skinner’s Operant Conditioning because on both occasions an individual or operant is responsible for

the outcome or reinforcement which leads to the repetition of desired behaviors. Mwamwenda (1995)

explains that reinforcement follows the repetition of a desired behavior [outcome] after a stimulus [input]

has been provided. The link with Pavlov’s dog which salivated also indicates that stimuli may be

generalized just as in the case of employees getting promotion or bonuses at particular intervals for the

work they did well. Robinson (1992) contends that effective motivation depends on a concern for ethical

values and when duties, responsibilities and formal relationships are appropriately planned, organized

and controlled. It suffices to state that ambivalence about the conditions in an organization may

generate despondency and lack of motivation (Heystek, 2002), even if an organization has attractive

incentive schemes and salary structures. One has to caution though, while dependence on incentives

schemes to enhance employees’ motivation may ensure efficiency in the short-term, in the long-term

one may proof to be an ineffective mechanism for sustainability in the business. For example, in

organizations that set production targets as in mining – employees work long hours [over-time] – which

may compromise safety standards – just to reach the target and to get the bonuses. Fatalities – in the

mines – have been recorded due to this practice, and such mines were forced to close for some time

in order to upgrade their safety.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

An empirical study on the relevance of the expectancy theory for employee motivation was conducted

at Rustenburg Section of Anglo Platinum. Due to time constraints, the researchers used quantitative

research methods for data collection and they distributed questionnaires to 50 contractor facilitators in

Part-Time ABET. The questionnaire has two sections: Section dealing with biographical data, and

Section B dealing with questions arranged in the 4 point Linkert Scale. The data that were collected

was analyzed and recorded in a Table 2 showing rank, the mean and standard deviation

Table 2: Mean Score rating

Rank Item No Item Mean SD

2 1 Management provides strong Leadership

to employees

4.51 0.57

8 2 Management has a high expectation for

employees’ performance

3.99 0.15

4 3 Employees’ productivity is continuously

assessed to ensure quality in performance

4.27 0.45

1 4 Employees are exposed to an appraisal

system in order to identify and close gaps

in performance

4.65 0.56

3 5 All employees understand the vision,

values and mission statement of the

organization

4.30 0.49.

8 6 Employees’ training and development

programmes are linked to the needs of

employees and the organizations

3.99 0.15

6 7 There is constant feedback on

performance and the stakeholders are

informed about successes of the

organizations

4.04 0.53

4 8 The organization uses a management

information system to record employees’

performance

4.27 0.45

7 9 The organizations has a developmental

plan for each employee

4.02 0.40

8 10 The organization has a well-developed

incentive programme for recognition of

performance

3.99 0.15

Discussion

There is a link between facilitators’ motivation and the leadership that is provided in ABET. It is

interesting to notice that respondents rated item 4 at number 1 with the mean at 4.65 and the standard

deviation at 0.56. According to the respondents, employees are exposed to an appraisal system in

order to identify and close gaps in performance. From the preceding discussion it can also be

concluded that through placement tests, unbundling of unit standards and the integrated learning and

assessment programme [ILAP] gaps in performance are identified and closed. However, options rated

eight: item 10 “the organization has a well-developed incentive programme for recognition of

performance”, item 2 “management has a high expectation for employees’ performance” and item 6

‘employees” training and development programmes are linked to the needs of employees and the

organization” indicate sources of de-motivation. In relation to item 10, one may argue that the money

paid to facilitators is comparable with the best in the market. However, when one considers the fact that

these facilitators are contractors with no extra benefits there is room for discontentment since none of

them has job security. Similarly, item 2 suggests that the respondents are of the opinion that

management does not have high expectations for their performance. As some of the facilitators

explained, the company does not value their services and that is why they are not given long-term

contracts and full-time employment hence their response with the mean at 3.99 and the standard

deviation of 0.15

Findings

Managers understand where the organization wants to go [vision], and they point out the direction to

their followers. As a result, managers develop communication networks and channels for dissemination

of organizational vision, values, mandates and goals to as a strategy for mobilization of employees’

energy and enthusiasm. In addition, the empirical investigation indicated that management provides

strong leadership to employees. Strong leadership implies that aligning diverse views towards a

common vision and programme of action. Just as organizational goals direct the actions of both the

employers and employees, the role of management is to communicate organizational goals and

procedures, to strengthen group cohesion and organizational effectiveness. On the other hand,

respondents indicated that all employees understand the vision, values and mission statement of the

organization.

Employees that are skilled and trained for the jobs do not feel threatened, either by the changes, the job

itself or new entrants – who happen to be well-trained and skilled in the jobs – into the job market.

Similarly, lack of motivation from respondents may be ascribed to the Company’s lack of planning for

employees’ capacity building and empowerment. Incentives and extrinsic rewards enhance motivation

are important since employment relations are based on transactions such as payment for services

rendered which occur between employers [providers of employment and reward] and employees

[service providers]. In the same vein respondents indicated their lack of motivation and poor response

to the lack of the lack of a well-developed incentive programme for recognition of performance.

Recommendations

Managers should explain the vision, values and missions/goals of the organizations to their

subordinates in order to win their confidence and commitment to organizational goals. Such

explanations should also cover issues such as incentive schemes the organization provides,

developmental opportunities as well as performance standards that are expected. One should also

stress the importance of communication in leadership since it dispels all fears and misunderstandings

that may develop between management and employees. Organizational goals should be explained to

all employees as strategy for getting their buy-in. When employees know the goals of the organization

they serve, they can then be expected to work towards the realization of such goals. In this respect,

employees should be able to walk the talk and not just end at the rhetoric of “talking about the walk”.

SMART goals should thus be developed; work shopped and implemented in order to inspire the

employees and to indicate to them what management’s expectations are.

There is a need for intensive and expansive programmes aimed at unfolding employees’ potential.

Skilled and empowered people are always confident workers. As such, people development is very

important in most organizations that regard themselves as learning organizations. A learning

organization recognizes that it exists in the midst of a developing and changing world, and as a result

investment in the unfolding of employees’ potential is regarded as a not-negotiable necessity.

Unfolding of potential is not only undertaken for improved work performance, it is also undertaken as a

strategy for countering skill obsolescence that typifies technological development and advancement. In

spite of the negative hype against extrinsic rewards, they still remain one source of motivation that

people with an external locus relate to. A case in point, there are indications that external rewards

Google gives to its employees may be ascribed for its status throughout the world as the best

employer. One may therefore argue that there is a need for organizations to provide schedules of

reinforcement in order to sustain employees’ levels of motivation.

Conclusion

The success of every organization, society and country depends on the direction and Leadership that is

provided. Similarly, experience in, and knowledge of contemporary management and Leadership

approaches is necessary for upholding the notion of efficacy, quality and motivation in organizations. In

the same vein, competitive organizations are led by people who understand that people empowerment

raises productivity, operational autonomy and innovation. However, there are economists who argue

that organizations cannot grow and expand if employees’ are poorly skilled, de-motivated and oblivious

of organizational goals. On the same note, there are indications that when people have appropriate

skills for job performance, and when they understand the rules of the globalised and globalizing industry

such as ours, their productive capacity will increase.

References list

Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D. & Akert, R. M. 2005. Social Psychology. New Jersey: Pearson

Boje, D . & Rosile, G. A. 2004. Death, Terror and Addiction in motivational theory. In: Brewis, J.,

Linstead, S., Boje, D & O’Shea, A. (Eds.), Passion, of organizing. Copenhagen: Copenhagen

Business.

Brindle, T. 2003. Re-aligning the workplace. In: The Star, 5 February 2003.

Burger, J. M. 2004. Personality. Belmont: Thompson.

Charlton, G. 2000. Human habits of effective organizations. Pretoria: Van Schaik.

Chetty, C. 1997. The school effectiveness movement: origins. The Curriculum Journal, 8(1): 45.

Coetsee, L.D. 2003. Peak performance and productivity. Potchefstroom: Van Schaik.

Davis, J & Wilson, S.M. 2003. Development and knowledge economy. In: Brown, R [Ed].

Universities and development. London:Association of Commonwealth Universities.

Dawson, T. 1993. Principles and practice of modern management. Kent:Hodder & Stoughton.

Drafke, M. W. & Kossen, S.1998. The human side of organizations. Massachusetts: Addison.

Hargreaves, D. H. & Hopkins, D. 1991. The empowered school. London: Cassel.

Heystek, J. 2002. The role of consultant heads in New Visions Programme. Nottingham: NCSL.

Hoy, W. K. & Miskel, C. G. 1991. Educational Administration. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Kotter, J. P. 1976. The psychological contract. California Management review, XV(3): 91-99.

Kreitner, R. & Kinicki, A. 2007. Organizational Behaviour. Boston:McGraw-Hill.

Kroon, J. 1990. General management. Durban: Haum.

Lefcourt, H. M. 1976. Locus of control: current trends in theory and research. New Jersey:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Mabale, B. J. 2004. Optimisation of educators’ potential in primary schools. Unpublished MEd.

Dissertation. Mafikeng: North West University.

Maltby, J., Day, L. & Macaskill, A. 2007. Personality, individual differences and intelligence. Harlow:

Pearson Prentice-Hall.

Mathibe, I. R. 1998. The development, character and effect of education in a technocratic age.

Unpublished M.Ed Dissertation. Pretoria:Unisa.

Moorhead, G. & Griffin, R. W. 1989. Organizational behaviour. Boston: Houghton Muffin.

Mwamwenda, T. S. 1995. Educational Psychology: An African Perspective. Durban: Butterworths.

Mwosa, J. L. 1987. Concepts of development. In: Ndengwa, P., Muretheili, L. P. & Greene, R. H.

(Eds.) Management for development. Nairobi: Oxford

Pascale, R. T. & Athos, A. G. 1981. The Art of Japanese management. New York: Simon &

Schuster.

Passer, M.W. & Smith, R.E. 2004. Psychology: the science of mind and behaviour. 2

Ed.

Boston:McGraw-Hill.

Porter, L. W., Lawler, E. E. & Hackman, J. R. 1975. Behaviour in organizations. New York:

McGraw-Hill.

Robinson, J. 1992. Managing after the superlatives. Kent: Tudor.

Rotter, J. B. 1966. Generalised expectancies of internal versus external control of reinforcement.

Psychological monographs, 80(whole no. 609).

Sacht, T. 2003. The Beehive model. Equity Skills News and Views, 2(14). 15 September 2003.

Schein, E. H. 1980. Organizational psychology. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Schultz, H. B. 2004. Compensation management. In: Nel, P.S., Gerber, P.D., Van Dyk, P.S.,

Haasbroek, G.D., Schultz, H.B., Sono, T & Werner, A. Human Resources Management and

Leadership. London: Oxford

Shah, K & Shah, PJ. 2008. Theories of motivation. http://cc.msnscache.com/cache.aspx?

q=730207054490265&mkt=en-ZA&lang=en-ZA…

Sono, T. 2002. Cultural diversity and change management. Nel, P.S., Gerber, P.D., Van Dyk,

P.S., Haasbroek, G.D., Schultz, H.B., Sono, T & Werner, A. Human Resources Management and

Leadership. London: Oxford

The World Book Dictionary, 1989.

Tomaney, J. 1990. the reality of workplace flexibility. Capital and class, 40: 29 – 60.

Turner, TC. 1999. Some current issues in Research on Social Identity and Self-categorisation

Theories. In: Ellemers, N., Spears, R. & Doosje, B. (Eds.), Social Identity. Oxford:Blackwell

Van der Westhuizen, P.C. 1999. Effective Educational Management. 9

Impression.

Pretoria:Kagiso

Van Dyk, P. S. 2002a. The functional systems and efficiency approaches to human resources

management and leadership. In: Nel, P.S., Gerber, P.D., Van Dyk, P.S., Haasbroek, G.D., Schultz,

H.B., Sono, T & Werner, A. Human Resources Management and Leadership.

London:Oxford

Van Dyk, P. S. 2002b. definition of scope of human resources management. In: Nel, P.S.,

Gerber, P.D., Van Dyk, P.S., Haasbroek, G.D., Schultz, H.B., Sono, T & Werner, A. Human Resources

Management and Leadership. London:Oxford

Walton, R. E. 1985. From control to commitment. Boston: Harvard Business School.

Webster’s New World Encyclopaedia. 1990. Sv ‘leadership’ p.103. London: PPrentice-Hall.

Werner, A. 2002. Leadership. In: Nel, P.S., Gerber, P.D., Van Dyk, P.S., Haasbroek, G.D.,

Schultz, H.B., Sono, T & Werner, A. Human Resources Management and Leadership.

London:Oxford

Wikipedia, the free encyclopaedia. 2008. Empowerment. http://cc.msnscache.com/cache.aspx?

q=73146331305670&mkt=en-ZA&lang=en-ZA… 2008/04/23.

Your Dictionary.com. Definition of effort from YourDictionary.com. http://www.yourdictionary.com/effort.

2008/04/23.

1 The male reference – he – is used to include both males and females.

VN:R_U [1.9.11_1134]