How do organisations motivate their employees in different ways?
Organisations employ various strategies to motivate their employees, recognising that motivation is a critical determinant of employee engagement, performance, and retention (Robbins & Judge, 2023). Two dominant theoretical perspectives underpin these approaches: Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs and Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory.
Maslow’s theory posits that individuals are motivated by a hierarchy of needs, from physiological to self-actualisation (Maslow, 1943). Organisations, therefore, attempt to satisfy these varying needs (Wahba & Bridwell, 1976). For instance, fair remuneration and secure working conditions meet physiological and safety requirements. Social needs are addressed by fostering team spirit and camaraderie, while esteem and self-actualisation needs are met through opportunities for professional development, recognition, and career progression.
On the other hand, Herzberg's theory distinguishes between hygiene factors (salary, job security) and motivators (achievement, recognition, responsibility) (Herzberg et al., 1993). Organisations must adequately address hygiene factors to prevent dissatisfaction while leveraging motivators to stimulate engagement and productivity.
However, these theories have been critiqued for their universalistic assumptions, overlooking individual differences and cultural contexts (Hofstede, 1984). Modern organisations increasingly adopt a more personalised approach to motivation, recognising that what motivates one individual may not necessarily motivate another (Robbins & Judge, 2023). This involves regular performance reviews, employee surveys, and open communication channels to understand individual motivations and aspirations.
While traditional theories provide a helpful starting point, motivating employees in contemporary organisations requires a nuanced and flexible approach (Pinder, 2015). This involves considering individual differences, evolving work arrangements, and cultural contexts (Hofstede, 1984). Motivating employees can significantly enhance organisational performance and competitiveness (Robbins & Judge, 2023).
References
- Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B.B. (1993). The motivation to work. Transaction Publishers.
- Hofstede, G. (1984). Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values. SAGE.
- Maslow, A.H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346
- Pinder, C.C. (2015). Work motivation in organisational behaviour (2nd ed.). Routledge.
- Robbins, S.P., & Judge, T.A. (2023). Organisational behaviour (19th ed.). Pearson.
- Wahba, M.A., & Bridwell, L.G. (1976). Maslow reconsidered: A review of research on the need hierarchy theory. Organisational Behaviour and Human Performance, 15(2), 212–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(76)90038-6
What are the differences between satisfaction, motivation, employee engagement, and work engagement?
Satisfaction, motivation, employee engagement, and work engagement are distinct yet interconnected concepts within the framework of human resource management. Understanding these differences is critical to fostering a productive and harmonious workplace environment.
Satisfaction refers to an employee’s contentment with their job and work environment (Spector, 1997). It is often measured by how employees feel their needs and expectations are met. However, satisfaction does not necessarily imply motivation or engagement.
Conversely, motivation is the internal or external drive that prompts individuals to act or behave in a certain way. It is a psychological process that involves needs, desires, and ambitions (Ryan & Deci, 2000). While satisfaction might be a by-product of motivation, an individual can be satisfied but unmotivated.
Employee engagement, a subset of employee engagement, specifically relates to employees' enthusiasm and dedication towards specific tasks and job responsibilities (Kahn, 1990). It is characterised by vigour, absorption, and commitment.
The practical application of understanding these differences is crucial in developing effective HRM strategies. For instance, managers can enhance satisfaction by improving working conditions or rewards, while motivation may be boosted through challenging tasks or recognition. Engagement, requiring a deeper emotional connection, may necessitate a more comprehensive approach, including fostering a positive organisational culture and providing growth opportunities (Bakker & Demerouti, 2008).
Through research and reflection, it becomes evident that these distinct concepts are deeply interconnected. A holistic approach, considering all aspects, will ultimately lead to a more engaged, motivated, and satisfied workforce. This understanding is pivotal in leading and developing people effectively (Truss et al., 2013).
References
- Bakker, A.B., & Demerouti, E. (2008). Towards a model of work engagement. Career Development International, 13(3), 209–223. https://doi.org/10.1108/13620430810870476
- Kahn, W.A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692–724. https://doi.org/10.5465/256287
- Ryan, R.M., & Deci, E.L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54–67. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
- Spector, P.E. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, causes, and consequences. SAGE Publications.
- Truss, C., Shantz, A., Soane, E., Alfes, K., & Delbridge, R. (2013). Employee engagement, organisational performance and individual well-being: Exploring the evidence, developing the theory. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(14), 2657–2669. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2013.798921
