Process Theories of motivation

 Process (or cognitive) theories of motivation focus on conscious human decision processes as an explanation of motivation. The process theories are concerned with determining how individual behavior is energized, directed, and maintained in the specifically willed and self-directed human cognitive processes. Process theories of motivation are based on early cognitive theories, which posit that behavior is the result of conscious decision-making processes. The major process theories of motivation are expectancy theory, equity theory, goal-setting theory, and reinforcement theory.

1. Vroom’s Expectancy Theory

Vroom (1964) suggested that motivation is a product of three factors: expectancy, one’s estimate that effort will lead to successful performance; instrumentality, one’s estimate that performance will result in certain outcomes or rewards; and valence, the extent to which expected outcomes are attractive or unattractive.

This relationship is stated in the following formula:

Expectancy × Instrumentality × Valence = Motivation

• Expectancy: Expectancy is the strength of belief that one’s work-related effort will result in a given level of performance. For example, a person selling insurance policies may know from experience that volume of sales is directly related to the number of sales calls made. Expectancies are stated as probabilities and range from 0.0 to 1.0. In some situations, employees may believe that they can unquestionably accomplish the task (p =1.0). In other situations, they expect that even their highest level of effort will not result in the desired performance level (p = 0.0). Normally, employee estimates of expectancy lie somewhere between the two extremes.

• Instrumentality: Instrumentality represents the employee’s belief that a specific performance level will lead to specific outcomes or rewards. This belief is stated as a probability ranging from 0.0 to 1.0. Thus, if an employee sees that promotions are usually based on performance data, instrumentality will be rated high. However, if the basis for such decisions is unclear or managerial favoritism is suspected, a low instrumentality estimate will be made.

• Valence: Valence refers to the strength of a person’s preference for receiving a reward. It is the anticipated satisfaction or dissatisfaction that an individual feels toward an outcome. It ranges from positive to negative. Outcomes have a positive valence when they are consistent with our values and satisfy our needs; they have a negative valence when they oppose our values and inhibit need fulfillment. Valence for a reward is unique to each employee and is thus a reflection of individual differences. For example, if an individual has a strong need for social interaction, working alone from home will have a strong negative valence. On the other hand, if a person prefers solitary activities and has a high desire to excel, working away from home with opportunities for career advancement may have a strong positive valence.

2. Equity Theory

Equity theory (Adams, 1963) suggests that individuals engage in social comparison by comparing their efforts and rewards with those of relevant others. The perception of individuals about the fairness of their rewards relative to others influences their level of motivation. Equity exists when individuals perceive that the ratio of efforts to rewards is the same for them as it is for others to whom they compare themselves. Inequity exists when individuals perceive that the ratio of efforts to rewards is different for them than it is for others to whom they compare themselves.

Equity Theory Equity theory (Adams, 1963) suggests that individuals engage in social comparison by comparing their efforts and rewards with those of relevant others. The perception of individuals about the fairness of their rewards relative to others influences their level of motivation. Equity exists when individuals perceive that the ratio of efforts to rewards is the same for them as it is for others to whom they compare themselves. Inequity exists when individuals perceive that the ratio of efforts to rewards is different for them than it is for others to whom they compare themselves.

3. Goal-Setting Theory

The goal-setting theory was developed primarily by Locke and Latham (1990). It posits that people will be motivated to the extent to which they accept specific, challenging goals and receive feedback that indicates their progress toward goal achievement.

The basic components of goal-setting theory are:

• Goal acceptance – Effective goals need to be accepted by employees. Goals that are not personally accepted will have little capacity to guide behavior. A powerful method of obtaining acceptance is to allow employees to participate in the goal-setting process. Communicating the purpose and necessity of the goal also ensures greater commitment to the goal.

• Specificity – Specific goals often involve clear, measurable quantitative targets for improvement in the behavior of interest. Research indicates that specific performance goals are much more effective than those in which a person is told to “do your best.”

• Challenge – Challenging goals are difficult but not impossible to attain. They cause people to raise the intensity and persistence of their work effort and fulfill a person’s achievement and self actualization needs when they are met. Empirical research supports the proposition that goals that are challenging are more motivational than goals that are relatively easy to achieve.

• Feedback – Feedback is any information that people receive about the consequences of their behavior. It is central to goal-setting because it communicates what behaviors are appropriate or necessary in a particular situation. An effective feedback is specific, relevant, timely, credible and sufficiently frequent.

Subcribe on Youtube - IGNOU SERVICE

For PDF copy of Solved Assignment

WhatsApp Us - 9113311883(Paid)