Preview Extract
Chapter7 Motivation Concepts Questions for Review 7-1. What are the three key elements of motivation? Answer: Motivation is the processes that account for an individual’s intensity, direction, and persistence of effort toward attaining a goal – specifically, an organizational goal. The key elements of motivation are: intensity – how hard a person tries;direction – effort that is channeled toward, and consistent with, organizational goals; and persistence – how long a person can maintain effort. 7-2. What are some early theories of motivation? How applicable are they today? Answer: Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Theory;McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y; Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory; and McClelland’s Theory of Needs. Most of the theories have not been proven to be valid, although they form a basis for the contemporary theories that are used by managers today. 7-3. What are the similarities and differences between self-determination theory and goal-setting theory? Answer: Self-determination theory proposes that people prefer to feel they have control over their actions, so anything that makes a previously enjoyed task feel more like an obligation than a freely chosen activity will undermine motivation. Much research on self-determination theory in OB has focused on cognitive evaluation theory, which hypothesizes that extrinsic rewards will reduce intrinsic interest in a task. When people are paid for work, it feels less like something they want to do and more like something they have to do. Goal-setting theory states that specific and difficult goals, with self-generated feedback, lead to higher performance. According to Edwin Locke, goals tell an employee what needs to be done and how much effort is needed. Research shows that specific goals increase performance, but some goals may be too effective and can actually undermine adaptation and creativity. 7-4. What are the key principles of self-efficacy theory, reinforcement theory, equity theory, and expectancy theory? Answer: Self-efficacy theory, also known as social cognitive theory or social learning theory, refers to an individual’s belief that he or she is capable of performing a task. Individuals with high self-efficacy have greater confidence in their ability to succeed. Albert Bandura proposed that self-efficacy can be increased through enactive mastery, vicarious modeling, verbal persuasion, and arousal. Self-efficacy theory and goal-setting theory don’t compete, but rather complement each other. Reinforcement theory argues that behavior is a function of consequences. Unlike goal-setting, which is a cognitive approach, reinforcement theory takes a behaviorist view and sees behavior as environmentally-caused. Although it is not strictly a theory of motivation because it does not address what initiates behavior, it does provide an analysis of what controls behavior. According to research, reinforcement is an influence on behavior, but not the only one Equity theory argues that individuals compare their job inputs and outcomes with those of others and then respond to eliminate any inequities. Expectancy theory says that the strength of a tendency to act in a certain way depends on the strength of an expectation that the act will be followed by a given outcome and on the attractiveness of that outcome to the individual. The theory focuses on three relationships: effort-performance, performance-reward, and rewards-personal goals. 7-5. Why is employee job engagement important to managers? Answer: One key to understanding employee engagement is the degree to which an employee believes it is meaningful to engage in work. Another factor is a match between the individual’s values and those of the organization. Leadership behaviors that inspire workers to a greater sense of mission also increase employee engagement. One of the critiques of engagement is that the construct is partially redundant with job attitudes like satisfaction or stress. Engagement may also predict important work outcomes better than traditional job attitudes. Other critics note there may be a “dark side” to engagement, as evidenced by positive relationships between engagement and work-family conflict. Further research exploring how engagement relates to these negative outcomes may help clarify whether some highly engaged employees might be getting “too much of a good thing.” 7-6. How do the contemporary theories of motivation compare to one another? Answer: Contemporary theories have one thing in common: each has a reasonable degree of valid supporting documentation. This doesn’t mean they are unquestionably right. We call them “contemporary theories” because they represent the current state of thinking in explaining employee motivation. Self-determination theory proposes that people prefer to feel they have control over their actions, so anything that makes a previously enjoyed task feel more like an obligation than a freely chosen activity will undermine motivation. Job engagement refers to the investment of an employee’s physical, cognitive, and emotional energies into job performance. Practicing managers and scholars alike have lately become interested in facilitating job engagement, believing something deeper than liking a job or finding it interesting drives performance. In the late 1960s, Edwin Locke proposed that intentions to work toward a goal are a major source of work motivation. Evidence strongly suggests, that specific goals increase performance, that difficult goals, when accepted, result in higher performance than do easy goals, and that feedback leads to higher performance than does non-feedback. Self-efficacy theory, known also as social cognitive theory and social learning theory, suggests that the higher your self-efficacy, the more confidence you have in your ability to succeed in a task. Self-efficacy can create a positive spiral in which those with high efficacy become more engaged in their tasks and then, in turn, increase performance, which increases efficacy further. Experiential Exercise Organizational Justice Task
Break the class into groups of three or four. 7-7. Each person should recall an instance in which he or she was (a) treated especially fairly and (b) treated especially unfairly. Work-related instances are preferable, but non-work examples are fine too. What do the stories have in common? Answer: To answer the question, we need to first analyze the commonalities between the instances of being treated especially fairly and being treated especially unfairly. Here's how the stories might align: Commonalities between Instances of Being Treated Fairly and Unfairly: 1. Perceived Fairness: In both instances, there is a perception of fairness or unfairness. This perception may be influenced by various factors such as the actions of others, the outcome of a situation, or the perceived intentions behind the treatment. 2. Impact on Emotions: Both situations likely elicited emotional responses from the individuals involved. Being treated fairly may have evoked positive emotions such as satisfaction, gratitude, or loyalty, while being treated unfairly may have led to negative emotions such as anger, frustration, or resentment. 3. Evaluation of Justice: Individuals may have evaluated the fairness of the treatment based on principles of distributive justice (fairness of outcomes), procedural justice (fairness of procedures followed), and interactional justice (fairness of interpersonal treatment). The presence or absence of these elements can influence perceptions of fairness. 4. Effects on Behavior: The way individuals were treated, whether fairly or unfairly, likely influenced their subsequent behavior. Being treated fairly may lead to increased motivation, commitment, and willingness to cooperate, while being treated unfairly may result in decreased morale, motivation, and trust in the organization or individuals involved. 5. Contextual Factors: The specific context in which the instances occurred may have played a role in shaping perceptions of fairness. This could include factors such as organizational culture, power dynamics, norms, and individual differences in values and beliefs. By examining these commonalities, we can gain insights into how perceptions of fairness are formed and the impact they have on individuals and organizations. This exercise can help participants develop a deeper understanding of organizational justice and its importance in promoting positive workplace relationships and outcomes. 7-8. Spend several minutes discussing whether the instance was more distributive, procedural, informational, or interpersonal in nature. What was the source of the fair/unfair treatment? How did you feel, and how did you respond? Answer: Certainly, let's delve into how individuals might discuss their experiences of fair or unfair treatment in terms of distributive, procedural, informational, or interpersonal justice: Distributive Justice: • Participants might consider whether the outcome of the situation was perceived as fair or unfair in terms of the distribution of rewards, resources, or outcomes. For example, if one member received a promotion or recognition while others with similar performance did not, this could be seen as an issue of distributive justice. Procedural Justice: • Discussion could focus on the fairness of the procedures followed in making decisions or resolving conflicts. Participants might reflect on whether they were given a voice, treated with respect, and whether decisions were made transparently and consistently. For instance, if there were biases in the promotion process or if disciplinary procedures were not followed properly, this could indicate procedural injustice. Informational Justice: • Consideration could be given to the fairness of the communication process surrounding the treatment received. Participants might assess whether they were provided with adequate information, explanations, and feedback regarding the decision or action taken. If information was withheld, misrepresented, or not effectively communicated, this could contribute to feelings of unfairness. Interpersonal Justice: • Participants might explore the interpersonal aspects of the treatment received, focusing on the fairness of the behavior and treatment by others involved. This could include considerations of respect, dignity, and politeness in interactions. Instances of favoritism, disrespect, or abusive behavior could be indicative of interpersonal injustice. Source of Fair/Unfair Treatment: • Participants could discuss who or what was responsible for the fair or unfair treatment they experienced. This might involve identifying specific individuals, organizational policies or practices, or external factors that influenced the situation. Feelings and Responses: • Individuals could share their emotional reactions to the fair or unfair treatment and how they responded to it. This might include feelings of satisfaction, happiness, frustration, anger, or disappointment. Responses could range from expressing grievances, seeking redress, adjusting behavior, or even leaving the situation altogether. By engaging in this discussion, participants can deepen their understanding of the different dimensions of organizational justice and how they manifest in real-life experiences. It can also foster empathy and awareness of the impact of fairness or unfairness on individuals within the organizational context. 7-9. Each group should develop a set of recommendations for handling the unfair situations in a fairer manner. Select a leader for your group who will briefly summarize the unfair instances, along with the group’s recommendations for handling them better. The discussion should reflect the four types of justice discussed in this chapter (distributive, procedural, informational, and interpersonal). Answer: Certainly! Here's how the group leader might summarize the unfair instances and the group's recommendations for handling them in a fairer manner, considering distributive, procedural, informational, and interpersonal justice: Summary of Unfair Instances: • In our group, we discussed instances where members felt unfairly treated in various ways. These included situations such as unequal distribution of workload and recognition, lack of transparency in decision-making processes, inadequate communication regarding changes in policies or procedures, and disrespectful behavior from colleagues or superiors. Recommendations for Handling Unfair Situations: Distributive Justice: • To address issues of unequal workload distribution and recognition, we recommend implementing transparent performance evaluation systems that are based on objective criteria. This ensures that rewards and opportunities are distributed fairly according to individuals' contributions and achievements. Procedural Justice: • Regarding the lack of transparency in decision-making processes, we suggest establishing clear and consistent procedures for making important decisions within the organization. This includes involving relevant stakeholders, providing opportunities for input and feedback, and ensuring that decisions are communicated openly and fairly to all affected parties. Informational Justice: • To improve communication regarding changes in policies or procedures, we propose enhancing information-sharing channels within the organization. This could involve regular updates through multiple communication platforms, such as emails, meetings, and intranet portals, to ensure that everyone has access to relevant information in a timely manner. Interpersonal Justice: • Finally, in addressing disrespectful behavior from colleagues or superiors, we emphasize the importance of promoting a culture of respect and professionalism within the organization. This can be achieved through training programs on diversity, inclusion, and interpersonal communication skills, as well as establishing clear guidelines and consequences for inappropriate behavior. Conclusion: • In conclusion, by addressing these recommendations, organizations can foster a more just and equitable work environment where all members feel valued, respected, and treated fairly in their interactions and experiences. This approach ensures that fairness is upheld across all dimensions of organizational justice, promoting a positive and supportive workplace culture for everyone involved. Ethical Dilemma The New GPA In the college classroom, is an A the new B? Grade inflation is of particular concern in graduate programs, where it is not uncommon for 75 percent of grades to be As. Infact, the most frequent grade given in U.S. universities is an A, by 43 percent. This percentage has risen from 30percent 20 years ago, representing a significant increase. And at Harvard, the average grade is an A-. While this may sound like a great place to be, there is a powerful downside to grade inflation. If an A- is the new class average, the crowding of grades at the top end of the scale can sap away the student’s motivation to work hard. Organizations also have a tougher time of evaluating candidates ’transcripts if grades are inflated, which means they mustrely more on results of standardized tests, often ones which were taken in high school, that may not reflect a student’s current or best capabilities. Professors too maybe less motivated to accurately assess and teach students through strong grading feedback that would help students learn. There is no easy solution to the phenomenon of grade inflation. In a culture where “everyone does it,” schools that take a stand against grade inflation produce students with potentially lower grades—but no less education—than their peers. These students may not be able to standout in the increasingly competitive job market even when they are equally prepared. Over time, their schools will not be able to boast of the accomplishments of their graduatesin terms of grades and employment placements. No longer will these schools look as attractive to potential students, so enrollment and thus revenue will suffer, endangering the institution’s ability to teach. Therefore, eliminating grade inflation poses powerful disincentives, and few if any colleges have successfully tried it. There is much more motivation for organizations, schools, professors, and students to continue grade inflation practices, even though they may be wrong. Questions 7-10. How could you manage an engineered downgrade to C as an average? Answer: Grade creep is a common phenomenon. It is a major problem and has been tackled in different ways by different institutions in a variety of contexts. The conundrum here is that the restructuring or rebalancing the average grade is bound to adversely affect at least one cohort of students. At the same time, all cohorts following the change can rightly claim that they have also been disadvantaged by the change. The only real solution, therefore, is to radically restrict the whole grading system and establish moveable-grade parameters that only allow a certain percentage to attain higher grades in each cohort. 7-11. If an employer can no longer distinguish between candidates on the basis of grades, how can they distinguish between them? Answer: Employers facing a landscape of grade inflation must adapt their hiring strategies to differentiate between candidates effectively. Here are some approaches they can take: 1.Focus on Other Metrics: If grades are no longer reliable indicators of academic performance, employers can turn to other metrics such as internships, extracurricular activities, project work, research experience, and relevant certifications. These can provide insights into a candidate's practical skills, work ethic, and dedication. 2.Standardized Tests: While not perfect, standardized tests like the GRE, GMAT, or specific industry-related exams can offer a standardized measure of aptitude and knowledge in certain areas. These tests can serve as supplementary tools to evaluate candidates alongside other criteria. 3.Interviews and Assessments: Conducting thorough interviews and skills assessments can help employers gauge candidates' abilities, problem-solving skills, communication skills, and cultural fit within the organization. This direct interaction provides valuable insights beyond what can be gleaned from a transcript. 4.References and Recommendations: Seeking references from professors, mentors, or previous employers can offer additional perspectives on a candidate's abilities, work ethic, and character. Recommendations can provide valuable context that supplements academic transcripts. 5.Portfolio Review: For positions requiring creative or technical skills, employers can request portfolios showcasing candidates' work, such as writing samples, design projects, coding projects, or artwork. Reviewing tangible examples of past work can help assess a candidate's proficiency and creativity. 6.Performance-based Assessments: Employers can design simulated tasks or case studies relevant to the job role and observe how candidates perform. This can provide a more accurate representation of their capabilities in real-world scenarios. 7.Holistic Evaluation: Instead of relying solely on academic achievements, employers can adopt a holistic approach to candidate evaluation, considering a combination of factors such as relevant experience, demonstrated skills, personality fit, and potential for growth. By diversifying their evaluation methods and focusing on a range of indicators beyond grades, employers can effectively distinguish between candidates and identify the most suitable talent for their organizations. 7-12. State funding of many schools has decreased dramatically over the years, increasing the pressure on administrators to generate revenue through tuition increases and other means. How might this pressure create ethical tensions among the need to generate revenue, student retention, and grading? Answer: The pressure on administrators to generate revenue through tuition increases and other means can indeed create ethical tensions, particularly when it intersects with student retention and grading practices. Here's how: 1. Financial Pressures vs. Educational Quality: Administrators may feel compelled to increase tuition fees and attract more students to ensure the financial sustainability of the institution. However, this pressure to generate revenue can conflict with the institution's commitment to providing high-quality education. Grade inflation may be seen as a way to retain students by ensuring high graduation rates and positive student feedback, even if it compromises academic standards. 2. Student Retention vs. Academic Integrity: Institutions rely on student retention for financial stability and reputation. The fear of losing students to competing institutions may lead administrators to implement policies that prioritize retaining students over maintaining academic integrity. Grade inflation could be perceived as a way to keep students satisfied and enrolled, even if it means compromising the rigor of academic assessment. 3. Grading Practices and Ethical Standards: The pressure to maintain revenue streams may influence professors' grading practices. They may feel compelled to inflate grades to ensure positive student evaluations and avoid complaints that could impact enrollment. This compromises the ethical responsibility of educators to provide fair and accurate assessments of student performance. 4. Impact on Employment and Reputation: Institutions may prioritize maintaining high employment placements and a positive reputation to attract prospective students. Grade inflation may be viewed as a way to enhance the perceived value of the institution by ensuring a high percentage of graduates receive favorable grades and secure desirable employment opportunities. However, this practice can misrepresent the true academic abilities of students and undermine the institution's credibility in the long run. In summary, the financial pressures faced by institutions can create ethical tensions between the need to generate revenue, retain students, and uphold academic standards. It's essential for administrators, educators, and policymakers to carefully consider the implications of these pressures on the integrity of higher education and strive to find a balance that prioritizes both financial sustainability and academic excellence. Sources: A. Ellin, “Failure Is Not an Option,” The New York Times, April 15, 2012, 13–14; A. Massoia,“The New Normal: The Problem of Grade Inflation in American Schools,” The Huffington Post, January12, 2015, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/angelina-massoia/the-new-normal-the-proble_b_6146236. html15; and S. Slavov, “How to Fix College Grade Inflation,” US News, December26, 2013, http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/economic-intelligence/2013/12/26/why-college-grade-inflation-isa-real-problem-and-how-to-fix-it. Teaching Notes Students’ responses will vary significantly. This exercise will produce stimulating discussion in class. No preparation is necessary other than having completed the reading of the chapter. This exercise is applicable to face-to-face classes or synchronous online classes such as Black Board 9.1, Breeze, WIMBA, and Second Life Virtual Classrooms. See http://www.baclass.panam.edu/imob/SecondLife for more information. Case Incident 1 The Demotivation of CEO Pay Quick: How much did your CEO get paid this year? What did any CEO get paid? You may not know the exact amounts, but you probably think the answer is, “Too much money.” According to research from 40 countries that probed the thoughts of CEOs, cabinet ministers, and unskilled employees, we all think leaders should be paidless. Beyond that, we are clueless. Where we err can be calculated by an organization ‘spay ratio, or the ratio between CEO pay and average worker pay. In the United States, for example, the averages 500 CEO is paid 354 times what the lowest-ranking employee makes, for a ratio of 354:1 (eight times greater than in the 1950s). U.S. participants in the study estimated that the ratio between CEOs and unskilled workers was only 30:1! Americans are not alone in making this gross underestimate: Participants from Germany, for instance, estimated a ratio of around 18:1 when the actualis closer to 151:1. In general, people worldwide are unhappy with—and demotivated by—their perception of inequity, even when their estimates of the ratios are far below the reality. Taking the German example further, the ideal ratio of CEO pay to unskilled workers as judged by study participants was around 7:1. To put it all together, then, people think the ratio should be 7:1, believe it is 18:1, and don’t realize it is actually 151:1. For all the countries worldwide in the study, the estimated ratios were above the ideal ratios, meaning participants universally thought CEOs are overpaid. How does this affect the average worker’s motivation? It appears that the less a person earns, the less satisfied the person is with the pay gap. Yet virtually everyone in the study wanted greater equality. The ideal ratio, they indicated, should be between 5:1 and 4:1, whereas they thought it was between 10:1 and 8:1. They believed skilled employees should earn more money than unskilled individuals, but that the gap between them should be smaller. No one in the United States would likely think the 354:1ratio is going to dip to the ideal of 7:1 soon, although some changes in that direction have been suggested. Other countries have tried to be more progressive. The Social Democratic Party in Switzerland proposed a ceiling for the ratio of 12:1, but putting a cap into law was considered too extreme by voters. No countries have yet been able to successfully impose a maximum ratio. Therefore, the job of restoring justice perceptions has fallen to CEOs themselves. Many CEOs, such as Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook and Larry Page of Google, have taken $1 annual salaries, though they still earn substantial compensation by exercising their stock options. In one extreme recent example, Gravity CEO Dan Price cut his salary by $1 million to $70,000,usingthe money to give significant raises to the payment processing firm’s employees. Price said he expects to “see more of this.” In addition, shareholders of some companies, such as Verizon, are playing a greater role insetting CEO compensation by reducing awards when the company underperforms. Sources: J. Ewing, “Swiss Voters Decisively Reject a Measure to Put Limits on Executive Pay,” The New York Times, November 24, 2013, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/25/business/swiss-reject-measure-to-curb-executive-pay.html?_r=0; C. Isidore, “Gravity Payments CEO Takes 90% Pay Cut to Give Workers Huge Raise,” CNN Money, April 15, 2015, http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/14/news/companies/ ceo-pay-cuts-pay-increases/; S. Kiatpongsan and M. I. Norton, “How Much (More) Should CEOs Make? A Universal Desire for More Equal Pay,” Perspectives on Psychological Science 9, no. 6(2014): 587–93; A. Kleinman, “Mark Zuckerberg $1 Salary Puts Him in Elite Group of $1 CEOs,” The Huffington Post, April 29, 2013, www.huffingtonpost.com; and G. Morgenson, “If Shareholders Say‘ Enough Already,’ the Board May Listen,” The New York Times, April 6, 2013, www.newyorktimes.com. Questions 7-13. What do you think is the ideal ratio? Why might the ideal vary from country to country? Answer: The ideal ratio of CEO pay to average worker pay can vary depending on cultural, social, and economic factors within each country. However, a common thread across various studies and public sentiments seems to suggest that the ideal ratio is significantly lower than the current reality. There are several reasons why the ideal ratio might vary from country to country: 1. Cultural Values : Different cultures may place varying levels of importance on equity and fairness in compensation structures. Cultures that prioritize egalitarianism and communal well-being may lean towards lower CEO-to-worker pay ratios. 2. Economic Context : Economic conditions and income inequality levels within a country can influence perceptions of what constitutes fair compensation. In countries with higher income inequality, there may be greater pressure to reduce CEO pay differentials. 3. Government Policies and Regulations : The presence or absence of regulations governing executive compensation can shape perceptions of fairness. Countries with stricter regulations or cultural norms regarding income distribution may favor lower CEO pay ratios. 4. Historical Precedents : Previous standards of pay differentials and societal norms can influence perceptions of what is fair. In some countries, historical trends of greater income equality may contribute to lower ideal ratios. Overall, while the exact ideal ratio may vary, there seems to be a global trend towards advocating for more equitable compensation structures, with a consensus that the current gaps between CEO and worker pay are excessive and unsustainable. 7-14. How does the executive compensation issue relate to equity theory? How should we determine what is a “fair” level of pay for top executives? Answer: There are two viewpoints for application of equity theory to executive compensation. First, the executives themselves will have a perspective based on their compensation in comparison to executives in similar-sized companies and industries. The second view reflects the opinion of the employees in the executive’s company and their perceptions of equity. There is a potential disconnect between the two. The employees will rarely see the inputs to executive compensation, such as comparison to other executives at the same level and with similar responsibilities or specialized skills needed at the top level not available in other personnel in the company. 7-15. The study found that participants thought performance should be essential or very important in deciding pay. What might be the positive motivational consequences for average employees if CEO pay is tied to performance? Answer: Tying CEO pay to performance can have several positive motivational consequences for average employees: 1. Alignment of Goals : When CEO pay is linked to company performance, there is a stronger alignment of goals between executives and employees. Everyone in the organization is incentivized to work towards common objectives that drive success and profitability. 2. Increased Accountability : CEOs and top executives are held accountable for their decisions and actions when their compensation is directly tied to performance metrics. This accountability can lead to more responsible decision-making and a greater focus on long-term growth rather than short-term gains. 3. Recognition of Effort : Performance-based pay structures recognize and reward the efforts of employees at all levels of the organization. When CEOs are rewarded based on the company's overall performance, it acknowledges the contributions of every employee towards achieving success. 4. Motivation to Excel : Knowing that their efforts directly impact the company's bottom line and, subsequently, executive compensation can motivate average employees to excel in their roles. There is a clear link between individual performance and organizational success, which can drive employees to strive for excellence. 5. Fostering a Culture of Meritocracy : Performance-based pay can help foster a culture of meritocracy within the organization, where individuals are rewarded based on their contributions and achievements rather than seniority or favoritism. This can lead to a more motivated and engaged workforce, as employees see opportunities for advancement based on their performance. Overall, tying CEO pay to performance can create a more dynamic and motivated work environment where employees feel valued, recognized, and motivated to contribute to the company's success. Case Incident 2 The Sleepiness Epidemic Ronit Rogosziniski, a financial planner, loses sleep because of her 5 a.m. wake-up call, so she sneaks to her car for a quick lunchtime snooze each day. She is not alone, as evidenced by the comments on Wall Street Oasis, a website frequented by investment bankers who blog about their travails. Should the legions of secret nappers be blessed or cursed by their organizations for this behavior? Research suggests they should be encouraged. Sleep is a problem, or rather, lack of quality zzz’s is a costly organizational problem we can no longer overlook. Sleepiness, a technical term in this case that denotes a true physiological pressure for sleep, lowers performance, and increases accidents, injuries, and unethical behavior. One survey found that 29 percent of respondents slept on the job, 12 percent were late to work, 4 percent left work early, and 2 percent did not go to work due to sleepiness. While sleepiness affects 33 percent of the U.S. population, the clinical extreme, excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS), is fully debilitating to an additional 11 percent. In a vicious cycle where the effects of sleepiness affect the organization, which leads to longer work hours and thus more sleepiness, the reason for the sleepiness epidemic seems to be the modern workplace. Full-time employees have been getting less sleep over the past 30 years as a direct result of longer work days, putting them more at risk for sleep disorders. Sleepiness directly decreases attentions pan, memory, information processing, affect, and emotion regulation capabilities. Research on sleep deprivation has found that tired workers experience higher levels of back pain, heart disease, depression, work with drawal, and job dissatisfaction. All these outcomes have significant implications for organizational effectiveness and costs. Sleepiness may account for $14 billion of medical expenses, up to $69 billion for auto accidents, and up to $24 billion in workplace accidents in the United States annually. Although being around bright light and loud sounds, standing, eating, and practicing good posture can reduce sleepiness temporarily, there is only one lasting cure: more hours of good-quality sleep. Some companies are encouraging napping at work as a solution to the problem, and one survey of 600 companies revealed that 6 percent had dedicated nap rooms. In addition, in a poll of 1,508 workers conducted by the National Sleep Foundation, 34 percent said they were allowed to nap at work. These policies may be a good start, but they are only Band-Aid approaches since more and better sleep is what’s needed. Researchers suggest that organizations should consider flexible working hoursand greater autonomy to allow employees to maximize their productive waking hours. Given the high costs of sleepiness, it’s time for them to take the problem much more seriously. Sources: Based on C. Delo, “Why Companies are Cozying Up to Napping at Work,” CNN (August 18, 2011), (www.management.fortune.cnn.com); D. T. Wagner, C. M. Barnes, V. K. G. Lim, and D. L. Ferris, “Lost Sleep and Cyberloafing: Evidence from the Laboratory and a Daylight Saving Time Quasi-Experiment,” Journal of Applied Psychology 97 (2012), pp. 1068–-1076; and D. Wescott, “Do Not Disturb,” Bloomberg BusinessWeek (April 23–rd-29th, 2012), p. 90. Questions 7-16. Should organizations be concerned about the sleepiness of their employees? What factors influencing sleep might be more or less under the control of an organization? Answer: Yes, organizations should be concerned about the sleepiness of their employees for several reasons: 1. Impact on Performance: Sleepiness significantly impairs cognitive function, memory, attention, and decision-making abilities, which can lead to decreased productivity and performance in the workplace. 2. Safety Concerns: Sleepiness increases the risk of accidents and injuries, both in the workplace and during commuting. This poses a safety hazard not only to the individual but also to their colleagues and the organization as a whole. 3. Health Costs: Sleepiness is associated with various health issues such as heart disease, depression, and chronic pain, leading to increased medical expenses for both employees and employers. 4. Job Satisfaction and Retention: Employees who suffer from sleepiness are more likely to experience job dissatisfaction and burnout, leading to higher turnover rates and increased recruitment and training costs for the organization. Factors influencing sleep that may be more or less under the control of an organization include: 1. Work Hours: Organizations can control the length and scheduling of work hours to ensure that employees have adequate time for rest and recuperation. Offering flexible working hours or telecommuting options can help employees better balance work and personal responsibilities, leading to improved sleep quality. 2. Workload and Stress: High job demands, excessive workload, and job-related stress can interfere with sleep quality. Organizations can implement strategies to manage workload and promote work-life balance, such as setting realistic deadlines, providing adequate resources, and offering stress management programs. 3. Work Environment: Factors such as noise levels, lighting, temperature, and ergonomic conditions in the workplace can affect sleep quality. Organizations can create a conducive work environment by minimizing distractions, providing comfortable workstations, and implementing policies to reduce workplace noise and disruptions. 4. Culture and Policies: Organizational culture and policies play a significant role in shaping employees' attitudes towards sleep and rest. Encouraging a culture of work-life balance, prioritizing employee well-being, and implementing policies that support healthy sleep habits can help improve sleep quality and overall employee health and satisfaction. In conclusion, organizations have a responsibility to address the issue of sleepiness among their employees by implementing policies and practices that promote healthy sleep habits and work-life balance. By recognizing the importance of sleep and taking proactive measures to support employee well-being, organizations can improve performance, safety, and overall organizational effectiveness. 7-17. How might sleep deprivation influence aspects of expectancy theory? How might the incorporation of “nap rooms” for sleep-deprived employees demonstrate aspects of equity theory? Answer: Expectancy theory suggests that the strength of a tendency to act in a certain way depends on the strength of an expectation that the act will be followed by a given outcome and on the attractiveness of that outcome to the individual. It focuses on three relationships: effort-performance; performance-rewards; and rewards-personal goals. Most students will probably suggest that if the employee truly feels that working longer hours will lead to a better reward, they may see some value in sleep deprivation. On the other hand, if the expectation of longer work hours leads to sleep deprivation, an employee’s performance could be negatively affected .Equity theory argues that individuals compare their job inputs and outcomes with those of others and then respond to eliminate any inequities. Being able to utilize a nap room could mean that an employee feels that there is some recognition of effort. On the other hand, one employee may think another is slacking off if the other employee is a heavy user of a nap room. 7-18. Sleep deprivation can be extremely hazardous to health. What are the key health issues and how should an organization seek to manage the problems that arise from sleep deprivation? Answer: Health issues caused by sleep deprivation include heart problems, back pain, and depression. It is vital that an organization considers running routine health-and-lifestyle assessments for their workforce in order to prevent any potential problems. If ignored, the costs can be prohibitive and potentially fatal for employees. My Management Lab Go to mymanagementlab.com for Auto-graded writing questions as well as the following Assisted-graded writing questions: 7-19.In regard to the Ethical Dilemma, do you believe your school has experienced grade inflation? Do you think schools like yours should endeavor to curtail grade inflation? What are the pros and cons for you as a student? Answer: Grade inflation, the phenomenon of higher grades being awarded more frequently over time, is a concern in many educational institutions. Whether a particular school has experienced grade inflation depends on various factors such as grading policies, academic standards, and cultural norms within the institution. Should schools endeavor to curtail grade inflation? This is a complex question with arguments on both sides: Pros of curbing grade inflation: 1. Maintaining Academic Standards: Curbing grade inflation helps to uphold the integrity and rigor of academic standards, ensuring that grades accurately reflect students' achievements and competencies. 2. Preparation for the Real World: Inflated grades may give students a false sense of achievement and competence, which can be detrimental when transitioning to the workforce or further academic pursuits where performance is rigorously evaluated. 3. Fairness and Equity: Addressing grade inflation promotes fairness and equity by ensuring that all students are held to the same academic standards and are judged based on merit rather than inflated grades. 4. Enhanced Learning Motivation: When grades accurately reflect performance, students may be more motivated to engage deeply in their studies, strive for excellence, and seek genuine learning opportunities. Cons of curbing grade inflation: 1. Impact on Students' Opportunities: Curbing grade inflation may result in lower average grades, potentially impacting students' opportunities for scholarships, internships, graduate school admissions, and employment opportunities where GPA is a key consideration. 2. Student Stress and Anxiety: Increased competition for limited higher grades may exacerbate stress and anxiety among students, leading to negative effects on mental health and well-being. 3. Perception of Rigidity: Some students may perceive efforts to curb grade inflation as overly rigid or punitive, leading to disengagement or resentment towards the institution. 4. Resistance from Faculty: Faculty members may resist efforts to curb grade inflation if they perceive it as compromising their academic freedom or if they believe that external pressures (e.g., student evaluations, institutional rankings) incentivize lenient grading practices. In conclusion, while addressing grade inflation is important for maintaining academic integrity and promoting fairness, it requires careful consideration of the potential impacts on students' opportunities, motivation, and well-being. Schools should strive to strike a balance between maintaining academic standards and supporting student success in a holistic manner. 7-20.In considering Case Incident 1, do you think the government has a legitimate role in controlling executive compensation? How might aspects of justice (distributive, procedural, and informational) inform this debate? Answer: The question of whether the government has a legitimate role in controlling executive compensation is a highly debated topic with arguments on both sides. Proponents of government intervention in executive compensation argue that excessive executive pay can lead to inequality, undermine employee morale, and contribute to economic instability. They believe that government regulation is necessary to ensure fairness and protect the interests of shareholders, employees, and society as a whole. On the other hand, opponents argue that executive compensation should be determined by market forces and negotiated between companies and their executives without government interference. They believe that excessive regulation can stifle innovation, discourage entrepreneurship, and drive talent away from the private sector. In considering aspects of justice—distributive, procedural, and informational—these concepts can inform the debate as follows: 1. Distributive Justice: This aspect focuses on the fair distribution of resources and benefits within society. From a distributive justice perspective, government intervention in executive compensation may be justified if it helps to address income inequality and ensure that rewards are distributed more equitably among stakeholders. 2. Procedural Justice: Procedural justice concerns the fairness and transparency of decision-making processes. In the context of executive compensation, government regulations could be designed to ensure that compensation practices are transparent, accountable, and based on objective criteria rather than subjective factors or conflicts of interest. 3. Informational Justice: Informational justice relates to the accessibility and accuracy of information that influences decision-making. In the debate over executive compensation, government intervention may involve improving the disclosure of executive pay practices and providing shareholders and stakeholders with greater access to information about compensation decisions. In conclusion, whether the government has a legitimate role in controlling executive compensation depends on various factors, including societal values, economic considerations, and principles of justice. The debate is complex and multifaceted, and decisions should be informed by careful consideration of distributive, procedural, and informational justice principles. 7-21. My Management Lab Only – comprehensive writing assignment for this chapter. Introduction: Answer: Motivation is a fundamental aspect of human behavior that drives individuals to pursue goals, overcome challenges, and achieve success in both personal and professional endeavors. Understanding the underlying concepts of motivation is essential for managers and leaders to effectively inspire and engage their teams, leading to increased productivity, job satisfaction, and organizational success. In this assignment, we will explore various motivation theories and concepts, analyze their relevance in different organizational contexts, and discuss strategies for applying motivational principles in real-world scenarios. Motivational Theories Overview: 1. Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs : Maslow's theory proposes that individuals are motivated by a hierarchical arrangement of needs, starting with basic physiological needs (e.g., food, shelter) and progressing to higher-order needs such as esteem and self-actualization. Managers can apply this theory by understanding employees' needs and providing appropriate incentives and opportunities for growth and fulfillment. 2. Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory : Herzberg identified two sets of factors influencing motivation: hygiene factors (e.g., salary, working conditions) and motivators (e.g., recognition, achievement). According to this theory, while hygiene factors prevent dissatisfaction, motivators are essential for job satisfaction and intrinsic motivation. Managers can focus on both aspects to create a positive work environment and enhance employee engagement. 3. Expectancy Theory : Expectancy theory posits that individuals are motivated to act based on their expectations of achieving desired outcomes and the perceived value of those outcomes. It emphasizes the importance of clear goals, performance expectations, and rewards linked to performance. Managers can align employee efforts with organizational goals by clarifying expectations, providing meaningful rewards, and fostering a sense of competence and self-efficacy. 4. Goal-Setting Theory : Goal-setting theory suggests that specific, challenging goals lead to higher levels of motivation and performance. It emphasizes the importance of setting clear, achievable goals, providing feedback, and fostering commitment to goal attainment. Managers can use this theory to establish SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound) goals for individuals and teams, encouraging continuous improvement and accomplishment. Application of Motivational Concepts in Organizations: 1. Employee Recognition Programs : Implementing employee recognition programs based on Herzberg's motivators can boost morale, enhance job satisfaction, and foster a culture of appreciation within the organization. 2. Performance Management Systems: Aligning performance management systems with expectancy theory principles can improve employee motivation by linking rewards and recognition to individual and team performance goals, thereby increasing motivation and accountability. 3. Skill Development and Training : Providing opportunities for skill development and career advancement addresses Maslow's higher-order needs for growth and self-actualization. Investing in employee training programs demonstrates organizational commitment to personal and professional development, motivating employees to enhance their skills and contribute to organizational success. 4. Flexible Work Arrangements : Offering flexible work arrangements, such as telecommuting or flexible hours, acknowledges employees' diverse needs and preferences, enhancing job satisfaction and work-life balance. This approach aligns with Maslow's need for esteem and Herzberg's motivators related to work-life balance and autonomy. Conclusion: In conclusion, motivation concepts play a crucial role in driving individual and organizational performance. By understanding and applying theories such as Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory, Expectancy Theory, and Goal-Setting Theory, managers can create motivating work environments, empower employees, and foster a culture of continuous improvement and achievement. By leveraging motivational principles effectively, organizations can enhance employee engagement, satisfaction, and productivity, ultimately contributing to long-term success and competitiveness in today's dynamic business environment. This comprehensive writing assignment provides an overview of key motivation theories and their practical applications in organizational settings. Students can further expand on each theory's implications, provide real-life examples, or analyze case studies to demonstrate their understanding of motivation concepts and their relevance in management practice. Instructor’s Choice Making the Connection Many companies have pay-for-performance programs (e.g., sales incentive programs). In fact, some members of the class may have held similar jobs. If so, ask them to briefly characterize the pros and cons of such positions. What behavior is an organization trying to encourage with such plans? What are the ethical implications for the three main parties: the employee, the customer, and the organization? How does the organization use outcomes such as pay and bonuses to promote high motivation and performance? Student teams could discuss the issues and then get back together for a class discussion. Exploring OB Topics on the Web
1. Motivation the old fashioned way? Read how Bill Mork reenergized his workforce and realized real savings in the process. Go to: http://www.inc.com/magazine/19941101/3187.html and read the article on his company’s success. Choose one classic theory of motivation and one contemporary theory to explain why his program works. Bring your analysis to class. 2. What motivated you to go to college? What is motivating you to stay and succeed? Visit these sites for ideas and tips for being successful and staying motivated during your academic career. http://www.academictips.org/acad/collegemotivation.html http://www.career.arizona.edu/student/choosing-a-career/planning-your-career 3. Stock options are used as management and employee motivators. Are they powerful motivators? Read the article “Reward System: Increasing Performance and Employee Happiness” found on the website listed below. Write a one-page reaction paper on this article. Include your thoughts on what organizations should do when stocks plummetbut they still need to motivate employees. http://www.1000ventures.com/business_guide/crosscuttings/motivating_reward_system.html 4. For brief outlines of classic motivation theories go to: http://www.netmba.com/mgmt/ and http://choo.fis.utoronto.ca/FIS/Courses/LIS1230/LIS1230sharma/motive1.htm Select one theory that you think has application to the job you have now, or a previous job, and write a short description of the job and how the theory was applied. Now look over the class syllabus. What theories of motivation are applicable for the way this class is set up? Again, write a short description and the theory as it’s applied. For example: Paper due on ?/?/201? = Goal-Setting Theory. 5. Read the article found on http://www.cnr.berkeley.edu/ucce50/ag-labor/7research/7calag07.htm concerning piece rate vs. hourly rate for agricultural workers. Write a journal entry or short reaction paper to this article as to what you would do and why as a manager confronting this issue with workers. Solution Manual for Organizational Behavior Timothy A. Judge Stephen P. Robbins 9781292146300, 9780133507645, 9780136124016
