Forster N. - Maximum performance (2005)(en)

EMPLOYEE MOTIVATION, EMPOWERMENT AND PERFORMANCE 161

truly unleash the hidden value in its people, it will increase its chances of success. This is particularly true in a world in which intellectual capital and knowledge are increasingly important. Most organizations do not capture this value.

(Charles O’Reilly and Jeffrey Pfeffer, Hidden Value, 2000)

Motivation is one of the most written about, complex, contradictory and, it has to be said, dry topics in organizational and management studies. Theories of motivation and empowerment are largely grounded in the field of psychology where hedonism is seen as an important component of motivation: people, quite naturally, seek to maximize pleasure and minimize discomfort in their daily lives. The more pleasure they experience, the more motivated they should be and vice versa. Dozens of theories and models have been developed and tested over the last 50 years, purporting to describe employee motivation, empowerment and performance. While the empirical support for most of these theories is mixed, they can provide leaders and managers with useful insights into ways of improving employee motivation and performance.

Motivation is derived from the Latin movere, meaning ‘to move’. In common with other terms used in this book, there are dozens of definitions of motivation. Some are long and some are short, but all are variations on the same theme. Motivation, in an organizational context, is defined as the processes that increase or decrease an individual’s desire and commitment to achieve personal and organizational goals. Performance is derived from the archaic French word perfoumer, meaning ‘to carry through in due form’, and is defined here as the successful completion of a task, action or process at work. Empowerment is derived from the Latin word potere, meaning ‘to be able’. While empowerment is often presented as a relatively new idea, this was first documented as long ago as 284 CE, by the Roman Emperor Diocletian, within the context of the decentralization of the Imperial Roman Civil Service (George, 1972). It is defined as the dual process of giving power to followers, while simultaneously developing the skills and competencies they will need to take on new roles and responsibilities. As we’ll see in this and subsequent chapters, attempts merely to introduce empowerment without equipping people with the knowledge and confidence they need to cope with enhanced levels of responsibility and power are doomed to failure. In common with leadership and communication, this means that motivating and empowering others is also a two-way process of mutual influence and causation.

Regardless of the complexities surrounding motivation, it is evident that high levels of motivation are desirable from the point of view of leaders and managers within organizations and individual employees.

162 MAXIMUM PERFORMANCE

It is also important that organizations spend time and effort trying to increase the motivation, performance and productivity of their staff in the current climate of fierce competition and rapid, perpetual change in most organizations. When motivation levels are high in organizations, we usually find cultures where people do their best, enjoy their jobs and perform well at work. Where motivation levels are low in organizations, we invariably find dysfunctional cultures and employees who are indecisive, unhappy and underperforming. As James Carlopio and colleagues have suggested, ‘A workplace with highly motivated staff is alive, energetic, co-operative, flexible and fun to work in. A de-motivated workplace is immediately experienced as sullen and apathetic, is full of conflict, is characterised by absenteeism and lowered productivity, and is unpleasant’ (Carlopio et al., 2001: 312). It has also been known for centuries that leaders who understand the needs of their followers (and are able to fulfil those needs) possess one of the keys to enhancing their motivation and performance levels. This premise forms the basis of the next self-development exercise.

Exercise 4.1

Part 1

There are many factors that have been associated with improving employee motivation and performance. Some of these are listed below. Before reading through the rest of this chapter, please rank the factors that motivate you from 1 to 15, with 1 being the most important and 15 the least important factor. Then consider what motivates your staff or employees at work.

EMPLOYEE MOTIVATION, EMPOWERMENT AND PERFORMANCE 163

Part 2

Did you have any problems filling in the second column? What are the implications of this for your ability to lead and motivate other people at work now and in the future?

What motivational ‘tools’ are missing from this list which leaders and managers might make use of?

Is it possible to ‘motivate’ another person? If so, how do you do this?

This exercise highlights three important – but often overlooked – facts about motivation. First, while we should all have a good understanding of our personal motivations and motivators, we may often secondguess what motivates other people at work. This is the natural consequence of the selective perceptions we have of the world and of other people (as described in Chapters 1 and 3). In practice, this means that we may falsely assume that what motivates us will also motivate other people. At best, this means that we will only ever be successful in motivating some of our followers, those whose motivational priorities broadly correspond with our own. Second, there are at least 30 different ways in which employee motivation and performance can be enhanced at work. How many of these were you able to identify in Exercise 4.1? Third, unless we consciously think about how we motivate other people, it can be very difficult to articulate how we actually do this. If we cannot do this, we will not be able to enhance our ability to motivate others in the future.

164 MAXIMUM PERFORMANCE

The following sections will review a number of theories of motivation and empowerment, divided into two broad categories – content and process. However, throughout this chapter, the focus will be on the practical applications of each of these for leaders and managers. An understanding of these theories can be helpful because each one highlights a number of strategies for enhancing employee motivation and performance (or, to be more accurate, ways of not demotivating people). It is also important to emphasize that each one of these is contextspecific. This means that not all of the motivational principles outlined in this chapter may be relevant to you or your work situation and, as a practising leader/manager, you will already be aware of most of these motivational techniques. But, just as an architect or engineer can design better and more complex structures by having a larger set of conceptual and practical tools, so leader/managers should be in a better position to solve motivation and performance problems amongst their employees, simply by becoming more familiar with these theories and their applications.

Content theories

Content theories provide some insights into people’s needs and help us to understand what people will (and will not) value as work motivators. There are four content theories (Robbins et al., 2001: 195–206). The first, and best known, of these is Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. Maslow was the first researcher to suggest that motivation was the product of human beings striving to satisfy a sequence of needs. These are, in ascending order:

•physiological needs (food, water, shelter, sex and rest),

•safety needs (security and protection from threats from the environment),

•social needs (love, affection, friendship and social interaction with other people),

•esteem needs (attention, recognition, self-respect, achievement, autonomy and status),

•self-actualization (psychological growth, self-expression, self-fulfil- ment and the full realization of individual potential).

Maslow argued that all humans are intrinsically motivated by a desire to satisfy these needs, from the lowest to the highest. As each need is satisfied it becomes less important and the next highest need increases in importance.

EMPLOYEE MOTIVATION, EMPOWERMENT AND PERFORMANCE 165

In a similar vein, Alderfer proposed a three-part hierarchy of needs in his ERG theory: Existence (broadly corresponding to levels 1 and 2 in Maslow), Relatedness (broadly corresponding to levels 3 and 4 in Maslow), and Growth (broadly corresponding to level 5 in Maslow). Alderfer argued that, once a lower-order need is satisfied, there is an increased desire to satisfy a higher-order need and this will increase the longer this need remains unsatisfied. He also argued that, if higherorder needs are not satisfied, lower-level needs may become more desirable, and more than one need may be operating at the same time. The third content theory, Herzberg’s Two Factor theory, proposed an even simpler dichotomy between ‘motivators’ and ‘hygiene’ factors. He suggested that, if hygiene factors such as appropriate pay, good working conditions, good supervision, job security and good relationships with co-workers were not in place, this would lead to dissatisfaction (and poorer work performance over time). On the other hand, motivators such as achievement, responsibility, recognition, advancement and increased competence are all factors that will enhance motivation, and produce better work performance over time (Herzberg, 1995). In common with other aspects of leadership and people management already reviewed in this book, these ideas are not new. Charles Handy describes how ancient African tribes have had cultures that embraced ‘lesser hungers’ and ‘greater hungers’ for centuries, broadly corresponding to lowerand higher-order needs categories in Maslow’s, Alderfer’s and Herzberg’s theories (Handy, 1996: 200).

The fourth content theory is McClelland’s Achievement Motivation theory (McClelland, 1975, 1961; McClelland and Burnham, 1995). This theory focuses on three human needs: (a) need for achievement: a learnt need to excel and succeed in life, (b) need for power: a learnt need to lead and change the behaviours and beliefs of others, (c) need for affiliation: a learnt need for social interaction with others.

McClelland’s pioneering work revealed that intrinsic motivation is far more powerful in promoting performance when compared to extrinsic motivation. An employee can be said to be intrinsically motivated if he or she participates enthusiastically in work activities without receiving any apparent extrinsic rewards. Extrinsic motivation refers to behaviour that is driven by external rewards and stimuli (Deci, 1975). A comparison of the four needs theories is illustrated in Figure 4.1 (p. 166).

166 MAXIMUM PERFORMANCE

Figure 4.1 Content theories of motivation compared

The practical applications of content theories

It was noted earlier that the empirical support for these theories is mixed. This means that their practical applicability in real-life settings has limitations. For example, all four theories assume that individuals have broadly similar needs and desires for power and achievement throughout their working lives. However, changing demographic, cultural and economic trends mean that present-day employees are likely to have a greater variety of needs, compared to the time when these theories were first developed (in each case, more than 30 years ago). Because of their focus on individual needs and motivations, they also overlook contingent factors that can influence motivation and performance, such as organizational cultures, reward systems and leadership styles. They are also culturally specific, with the importance attached to the needs they identified varying between different cultures. Last, no one has yet answered the simple but important question, ‘Is a satisfied employee more motivated than a dissatisfied employee?’ – an issue we will return to shortly. Nevertheless, the value of content theories is that they draw attention to the importance of psychological growth and learning as basic conditions for sustained and lasting job performance. They also emphasize the importance of educating and developing staff, in order to improve motivation and performance. This perspective had a major influence on the Job Redesign movement of the 1970s and Quality of Working Life initiatives in the 1980s.

There are four practical implications of content theories for leaders and managers. If they really want to get the best out of their people, then they should understand the following:

•how to create well-designed work environments that provide people with the opportunities to realize their needs through their

EMPLOYEE MOTIVATION, EMPOWERMENT AND PERFORMANCE 167

work and by contributing to the task performance of their team, department and organization;

•how individual differences will shape the personal needs of their staff, and how these change and evolve over time;

•how these needs shape what different employees expect from their leaders, supervisors, colleagues and subordinates;

•how almost all employees prefer some power and control over their work, and welcome opportunities for personal development and growth at work.

Maslow’s, Alderfer’s and Herzberg’s theories all suggest that poor or badly designed working environments can have a demotivational effect on employees. Remarkably, recent research has shown that as many as 25 per cent of employees continue to be unhappy with their physical work environments (Carlopio et al., 2001: 315). A survey conducted by Graham Kirkwood, director of Melbourne Resource Architecture with the Melbourne Business School, measured how the physical environment can have an impact on business effectiveness. He observed that, ‘The thing I always find is that everyone is unhappy with their current work environment, no matter how good it is’ (cited by Kaplan, 1999). Complaints range from dissatisfaction with air quality and temperature to headaches associated with poor lighting and eye strain caused by the overuse of PCs. Others voice dissatisfaction with overcrowding and a lack of privacy in open plan offices. Collectively these factors can result in lower employee morale and work performance. The Australian Confederation of Trades Unions, who claimed that physical conditions are the second biggest cause of industrial disputes in Australia, backed the findings of this survey (Kaplan, 1999).

In recent years there has been growing interest in creating working environments that can enhance employee well-being and motivation. The design of ergonomically sound offices and buildings is now a multibillion dollar business. The word ‘ergonomic’ is derived from two Greek words, ergo (work) and nomos (laws of). The discipline of ergonomics is concerned with understanding the interactions between people and their working environments, with the aim of improving employee well-being and efficiency. In many industrialized countries there are indications of a revolution in office and building design in order to create environments that encourage brainstorming and regular staff interaction. As the Australian World Square architect, Greg Crone, has observed, ‘the physical environment is one of the most powerful ways to communicate change. When you change people’s physical space it has a big impact on their sense of self-worth, the way they communicate with each other, the way they share information and how the workplace affects their performance’ (cited by Elder, 2001).

168 MAXIMUM PERFORMANCE

An example of the use of ergonomics to increase well-being is the ancient Chinese practice of Feng Shui (pronounced ‘fung shway’). This is based on the theory that one’s chances of success can be enhanced by properly orienting physical surroundings through the use of a bagua (a nine square map). This is used to orient the physical layout of work and home spaces, including in these environments the five elements of water, wood, fire, earth and metal. Other elements include plenty of light and the use of ‘positive energy lines’ (Singh, 2000). The idea of Feng Shui, traditionally the province of Asian Americans, flaky Hollywood actors or New Age junkies, has gained widespread acceptance in western business circles. Amongst the individuals and organizations that use it are the actor Rob Lowe, property millionaire Donald Trump, Oakley, Coty Beauty, Merrill Lynch and Deutsche Bank in the USA, and the ANZ Bank and the Western Mining Corporation in Australia.

The driving belief behind these, and other ergonomic initiatives is to create environments that make people want to come into work. These environments include controlled air temperature and lighting, windows that open and breakout areas with couches and games. Open plan offices are encouraged because this promotes sharing of knowledge and ideas and teamwork is enhanced. However, some private space is still encouraged, with user-friendly technologies, orthopaedically designed chairs and well-planned desk layouts. An example of this is the offices of TXU in Melbourne, designed by Graham Kirkwood, where public meeting spaces are given greater precedence over private offices, desks are accessorized and employees are free to customize their own spaces. Employees have full control over their office environment and, as a consequence, this is constantly evolving: it is not a static place (Kaplan, 1999). In a few companies, even the humble and much derided cubicle is now evolving into ‘ovacles’ organized around a central meeting place. These ovacles are equipped with ceiling canopies, personalized colour schemes, computer-centric layouts, boundary screens for privacy, rolling storage and mobile PC facilities, so staff can set up an ‘office’ anywhere if they want to interact with a group of colleagues (Goldstein, 2000).

Another example of a company that takes ergonomics seriously is one we looked at briefly in Chapter 1, Google, the most successful of all the web search-engine companies during 2000–2004. At ‘The Googleplex’, more than 230 employees enjoy a working environment that includes

A ping-pong table, a pool table, a video arcade game, an ice-cream cooler (free), a snack bar, a restaurant and a free gym. Locker rooms have showers, saunas and washing machines. Hallways are cluttered with plastic balls and Google-decorated scooters and lava lamps. Notice boards feature pictures of Gerry Garcia. The design of the Googleplex is open and colourful. A

EMPLOYEE MOTIVATION, EMPOWERMENT AND PERFORMANCE 169

sound system plays Carlos Santana. Google also has an on-site gourmet chef, doctor, dentist and masseuse, free ice-cream and a weekly hockey game in the car park. A typical daily menu features Portuguese fish stew, mushroom risotto cakes and grilled Florida sea bass with melted fennel and butter sauce. A mobile library van pulls up once a week. All clothing with Google logos is free to employees. The company’s third employee and now Director of Technology, Craig Silverstein, likes to bake fresh bread for his staff. This is a company that regards the well-being of its young employees as being the single most important competitive advantage that it has.

(Abridged from Boulware, 2002)

How do the ergonomics of your company/organization compare to this?

Theories about higher-level motivational needs also have some practical applications. The first concerns the design and scope of jobs. Job design initiatives are concerned with aligning job demands and requirements with employees’ skills, aptitudes and abilities. McClelland’s research on individuals with high needs for achievement indicates that their jobs should encompass a high degree of personal autonomy, regular feedback and an intermediate degree of risk in achieving their work goals. It also indicates that one way that organizations can increase overall motivation levels amongst their employees is to identify and hire recruits who already have high levels of intrinsic motivation and a strong need for achievement. McClelland’s work on high-achievers is particularly relevant to the motivation of full-time professionals. His work indicates that motivating such groups is about providing high-achievers with new challenges, alongside autonomy to choose their work tasks and the methods for completing these. Professionals constantly need new challenges and problems to solve. Self-growth is also important, so they should be allowed opportunities for education and self-development (for example, by doing a part-time MBA, or attending workshops and conferences). Their rewards should be based on some combination of a competitive basic wage and performance and/or skills-based pay (McClelland, 1975, 1961; McClelland and Burnham, 1995). In an environment where there are high levels of self-motivation, an empowered style of leadership is appropriate. In an environment where there are high levels of extrinsic motivation, a command-and-control style of management is usually required.

Content theory research has two other practical implications. The first is that jobs should be made as challenging as possible, and people should be continually encouraged to improve their skills bases, education and knowledge levels. The second is related to the notion of empowerment. The most enjoyable and rewarding jobs are those where employees have as much freedom as possible to carry out their work without direct command-and-control supervision, providing they have adequate skills and knowledge to cope with this. In general,