First developed by Yale School of Management professor Victor Vroom in 1964, the expectancy theory of motivation attempts to explain what keeps employees working. Its underlying principle is that employees perform in work situations because they expect to receive a direct reward, a factor called expectancy. Their performance is tied to both the degree to which they think they'll be rewarded, which is a factor called instrumentality, and the degree to which they want the reward, which is called valance.
Thus, Vroom’s Expectancy Theory has its roots in the cognitive concept, i.e. How an individual processes the different elements of motivation. This theory is built around the concept of valence, instrumentality, and Expectancy and, therefore, is often called as VIE theory. The algebraic representation of Vroom’s Expectancy theory is. ADVERTISEMENTS: Some of the most important theories of motivation are as follows: 1. Maslow’s Need Hierarchy Theory 2. Herzberg’s Motivation Hygiene Theory 3. McClelland’s Need Theory 4. McGregor’s Participation Theory 5. Urwick’s Theory Z 6. Argyris’s Theory 7. Vroom’s Expectancy Theory 8. Porter and Lawler’s Expectancy Theory.
Understanding this theory is key in small businesses, many of which frequently run lean and, as such, could greatly benefit from having a well-motivated and highly productive workforce. The model underlying the expectancy theory states that Motivation is equal to Expectancy multiplied by Instrumentality multiplied by Valance. Under the theory, if any of the factors are zero, the employee will be unmotivated. However, in the real world, employees work hard at times even if they're not sure they'll get the reward they hope for. As such, research included in the 'Oxford Handbook of Motivation' implies that the equation should be additive: Motivation equals Expectancy plus Instrumentality plus Valance. One of the expectancy theory's greatest strengths is also one of its greatest weaknesses.
The theory is inherently rational, assuming that employees always act purely out of self-interest and their desire for reward. However, the theory also omits the possibility that an employee may be motivated by other factors. Many employees are motivated to do the right thing or to be team players, regardless of the reward. Because the theory doesn't account for this, it can lead to an employer missing out on an excellent motivational tool. The expectancy theory looks at every motivational factor as a stand-alone event. Under the theory's worldview, employees work on a project for a certain reward, then go on to the next one for the next reward. It, however, doesn't take into account an employee who does the right thing on a project or two because of a desire to get promoted to meet her long-term career plan.
That employee is motivated by a reward, but she's not motivated by a reward tied to a project. This makes the expectancy theory weak at predicting long-term patterns of behavior. Employees usually don't walk into their managers' offices with neatly typed lists of the rewards they want, sorted in order of how bad they want them. However, the expectancy theory assumes that managers have access to employee instrumentality and valance factors. Without knowing exactly what employees want and how bad they want it, it becomes very hard to anticipate how motivated they will be to take on a task, even if a reward is offered.
Sales contests are a microcosm of this. Invariably, the prize gets a few producers excited while the rest tune the contest out and achieve limited, if any, productivity gains.
This happens because, in the real world, managers don't always know how to motivate each member of their teams. Ultimately, expectancy theory has a core problem: instead of describing the complexities of employee motivation, it uses complex language to describe a simplistic view of why employees try. In plain English, it says that employees work hard to get something in return. However, it misses the rest of the story, which is that employees work hard to get something in return, but that something might come down the line in a way that's unrelated to the project on which they worked hard in the first place.
ADVERTISEMENTS:Porter and Lawler Model of Motivation: Assumptions, Elements and Significance!Lyman Porter and Edward Lawler came up with a comprehensive theory of motivation, combining the various aspects that we have so far been discussing and using two additional variables in their model. Though built in large part on Vroom’s expectancy model. Porter and Lawler’s model is a more complete model of motivation.
This model has been practically applied also in their study of managers. This is a multi variate model which explains the relationship that exists between job attitudes and job performance. Assumptions:This model is based on four basic assumptions about human behaviour. ADVERTISEMENTS:(i) As mentioned above, it is a multi variate model. According to this model, individual behaviour is determined by a combination of factors in the individual and in the environment.(ii) Individuals are assumed to be rational human beings who make conscious decisions about their behaviour in the organisations.(iii) Individuals have different needs, desires and goals.(iv) On the basis of their expectations, individuals decide between alternate behaviours and such decided behaviour will lead to a desired outcome. Elements:The various elements of this model are explained in the following figure:1. Effort:Effort refers to the amount of energy which a person exerts on a job.
Value of Reward:First of all people try to figure out whether the rewards that are likely to be received from doing a job will be attractive to them. This is referred to as valence in Vroom’s theory. A person who is looking for more money, for example, extra vacation time may not be an attractive reward. If the reward to be obtained is attractive or valent then the individual will put extra efforts to perform the job.
Otherwise he will lower his effort. Perceived Effort Reward Probability:In addition, before people put forth any effort, they will also try to assess the probability of a certain level of effort leading to a desired level of performance and the possibility of that performance leading to certain kinds of rewards. Based on the valence of the reward and the effort reward probability, people can decide to put in certain level of work effort. ADVERTISEMENTS:Effort leads to performance. The expected level of performance will depend upon the amount of effort, the abilities and traits of the individual and his role perceptions. Abilities include knowledge, skills and intellectual capacity to perform the job.
Traits which are important for many jobs are endurance, pre-servance, and goal directedness. Thus, abilities and traits will moderate the effort- performance relationship.In addition, people performing the jobs should have accurate role perception which refers to the wav in which people define for the jobs. People may perceive their roles differently.
Only those, who perceive their roles as is defined by the organization, will be able to perform well when they put forth the requisite effort. Rewards:Performance leads to certain outcomes in the shape of two types of rewards namely extrinsic rewards and intrinsic rewards. Extrinsic rewards are the external rewards given by others in the organization in the form of money, recognition or praise. Intrinsic rewards are internal feelings of job sell esteem and sense of competence that individuals feel when they do a good job. Satisfaction:Satisfaction will result from both extrinsic and intrinsic rewards. However, for being satisfied, an individual will compare his actual rewards with the perceived rewards if actual rewards meet or exceed perceived equitable rewards, the individual will feel satisfied and if these are less than the equitable rewards, the individual will feel dissatisfied.
Significance of the Porter and Lawler Model. ADVERTISEMENTS:Porter and Lawler model is a departure from the traditional analysis of satisfaction and performance relationship. In practice, we find that motivation is not a simple cause and effect relationship rather it is a complex phenomenon.This model is of great significance to managers since it sensitises them to focus their attention on the following points to keep their employees motivated:1. Match the abilities and traits of individuals to the requirements of the job by putting the right person on the right job.2.
He should carefully explain to the subordinates their roles or what they must do to be rewarded. Then he must make sure that they understand it. Prescribe in concrete terms the actual performance levels expected of the individuals and these levels should be made attainable.4.
To achieve and maintain motivation, the appropriate reward must be associated with successful performance.5. Make sure that the rewards dispensed are valued by the employees. Thus, he should find out what rewards are attractive to the employee and see if such rewards can be given to him.Porter and Lawler model has definitely made a significant contribution to the better understanding of work motivation and the relationship between performance and satisfaction. But even then, to date, it has not made much impact on the actual practice of human resource management.