Motivation

Valence is a subjective value attached to an incentive of reward. People attach a valence to an incentive because they believe it satisfies some of their needs. Since it is subjective, people differ in the value they attach to a given incentive. For example, one person may attach a high value to a promotion, while another person can avoid it. The former may like it because it brings money and power, while the latter dislikes it because it means more responsibility or the headaches of dealing with other people's problems.

Also since it is subjective, managers have little control over the valences their employees attach to organizational incentives. However, managers can influence the valence if incentives by matching rewards to employee needs. Valence usually increases when (1) an employee has strong needs, (2) the incentive matches one or more needs, and (3) the size of the incentive is large enough to satisfy the aroused needs. For example, an employee will probably attach a high valence to money if (1) he or she has a strong economic need, (2) money used as an incentive, and (3) the size of the monetary incentive is sufficiently attractive.

Performance-Reward Instrumentality

Instrumentality refers to the ralationship between performance and raward. People ask, "Will I be rewarded if I perform the job well?" If the answer is affirmative, they will be motivated to exert an effort and increase the level of task performance. If the answer is negative, their motivational efforts will be reduced. As with valence, the measures of instrumentality can be positive or negative. If people perceive that their performance is generally rewarded, the perceived instrumentality will be positive. If they perceive that performance does not make any difference to their rewards, or if poor performers are rewarded as much as or more than high performers, the instrumentality will be low.Since perceived instrumentality is a subjective judgment, managers do not have direct control over it. But they can positively influence their subordinates' perception of the instrumental relationship by matching rewards to rerformance and by communicating this fact effectively to the subordinates. For example, managers can improve instrumentality by using performance-contingent pay systems such as piece rates, merit rates, or performance bonuses, and by managing such systems fairly.

Effort-Perfirmance Expectancy

Expectancy is the belief that effort leads to performance. It is a subjective feeling that people attach to the likehood of accomplishing a task. They may ask, "Can I perform and accomplish the task goal?" "How much effort would the task reqiure?" If they feel there is a close relationship between their effort and task accomplishment, expectancy will be favorable. However, if the task is too simple or too complex relative to their ability, then they may feel that their effort is not related to task performance.

Like other motivational concepts, expectancy is subjective; people attach varying expectancies to an outcome. A task may seem simple to some but not to others. A person's ability and personality influence his or her effort-performance expectancy. Competent and secure individuals tend to perceive expectancy more positively than incompetent and pessimistic individuals.

Managers have no direct control over how their employees perceive the chance of achieving an outcome or task, but they can influence the employee's expectancies positively by matching people to jobs. When people are matched with jobs, employees can utilize their job skills and energies effectively. Consequently, effort-performance expectancy will be increased.

III.DEVELOPING MOTIVATIONAL PRINCIPLES

Managers can improve the valence, instrumentality, and expectancy employees place in their job situations by (1) matching rewards to needs, (2) natching rewards to performance, and (3) matching job to employees.

The strength of expectancy theory lies in the fact that it accomodates three theories of individual behavior (needs, reinforcement, and perception) and that it can be operationalized. We have seen a set of motivational principles from expectancy theory and now I'll try to explain how these principles can be applied in organizational settings.

Matching Rewards to Employee Needs

By matching rewards to needs, management can increase not only the valence of rewards but also the level of employee satisfaction. How can management match rewards to needs? There are a few things that managers can do:

1. Figure out what employees want. Managers can ask their employees what kinds of rewards they prefer. This information can be used to select appropriate rewards. People want different things from their jobs, and matching rewards to these needs increases the valence of the rewards.

2. Find people who value rewards. The match between rewards and needs can be achieved by finding people who may value what the organisation may offer. Some organizations are limited in their ability to offer a variety rewards. In this case the organization needs to attact people who can be motivated by what it can offer. For example, if the only things a company can offer is money, it should hire people who are striving for economic need saticfaction.

Matching Rewards to Performance

By relating organizational rewards to job performance, management can increase the chances of attaining both individual and organizational goals. This strategy favorably affects the performance-reward instrumentality. There are several things that managers can do in this effort.