SBenegaL

Blog

  • Social Exchange and Equity Theory – 2

    In the last byte, we began our discussion on the social exchange and equity theory. We shall continue this discussion in this byte.

    Committed relationships could be seen as having a positive intensity for the parties involved, while the Calculated would typically be between low positive or low negative intensity but the alienated relationships may characterize with high negative intensity.

    Calculated involvement is based on the notion of social exchange in which each party in the relationship depends on certain things of the other and contributes accordingly to the exchange.  Business partnerships and commercial transactions are examples of this. They are found to be working well when both parties involved, this relation will have a positive orientation. When losses occur, or conflicts arise, the relationship has a negative orientation.

    This could be explained by the model developed by J P Campbell et all in their book – Managerial Behavior, Performance and Effectiveness!

  • Social Exchange and Equity Theory

    In the last byte, we looked at the positive energy and full engagement theory and attempted to understand it. In today’s byte, we will look at Social Exchange and Equity theory and attempt understanding it.

    Social exchange theory is based on a central premise: that the exchange of social and material resources is a fundamental form of human interaction. The focus of this theory is that Individuals interact for profit or the expectation of it. Power and Exchange are important considerations in understanding human behavior. Simply put, we could present the behavior of an individual as follows:

    Behavior (Profits) = Rewards of interaction – Costs of Interaction.

    The difference between the Equity and Exchange theories could be looked at as below:

    • Exchange theory is based on the principle that we enter into relationships in which we can maximize the benefits to us and minimize our costs.
    • Equity theory, a variation of exchange theory, holds that exchanges between people have to be fair and balanced so that they mutually give and receive what is needed.  
    The basic theory of extend by Amitai Etzioni who developed three categories of exchange relationships between people:
    1. Committed Involvement
    2. Calculated Involvement
    3. Alienated Involvement.
    We shall attempt to continue understanding the discussion on social exchange theory over the next few bytes.

  • Eustress

    In the last byte, we looked at the criticism on Two-Factor Theory. In today’s byte, we look at Eustress and its influence in motivation.

    Eustress can be defined as a pleasant or curative stress. It is the healthy, normal stress that sometimes gets us to perform to the best of our ability. Research has found that, it is Eustress that enables athletics perform better in competition, it also synchs with one’s attempt to delivering a speech. This positive stress ensures that the speaker is prepared well for the speech and takes greater care to deliver the speech well.

    Eustress is part of the new discipline of positive organizational scholarship that includes study on investing in strengths, finding positive meaning of work displaying courage and principled action and drawing on positive emotions at work. This approach to work enhances hope and optimism and there by health for people at work. The focus in these studies is on the individual’s interpretation of events as a source of motivation.

    Eustress is a manifestation of this broad, positive perspective – people begin to see opportunities when they would otherwise have felt obstacles, they begin to interpret the barriers as challenges in their path. The pressure tends to keep them motivated and not frustrate them in their daily activities.

    We shall continue the discussion on positive energy and full engagement in the next byte.

  • Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory – Criticism

    In the last byte, we looked at Herzberg’s 2 factor theory. In today’s byte, we look at some of the criticisms for the theory.

    While the distinction between the motivational and hygiene factors is interesting to understanding the applicability of motivation theory directly in the design of the organization; there are certain criticisms that have to be noted:

    There exist some factors that cannot clearly be classified into hygiene factors or motivational factor. We have already looked at salary as an example for this dichotomy. It the situational influence that gets the influence defined as a motivational factor or a hygiene factor. This is the first criticism concerning the classification of factors.

    Individual differences like age, sex, social status, education or occupational levels also influence to what extent these factors have an impact. These individual differences are not considered in the theory.

    When we look at organizations, they typically have an internal flow process that would determine what sort of feelings an individual would develop toward the factors. This aspect too is not considered in the 2 factor theory.

    The technique used to identity has been from the critical-incidents method or research, and most of the work here has been done by Herzberg and his students. This is again a criticism sited by experts.

    In spite of these criticisms, the 2 factor theory is extremely useful in the design of work.

  • Hygiene Factor

    In the last byte, we looked at the role Motivation Factors played. In today’s blog, we look at Hygiene Factors and attempt to understand them.

    Hygiene Factors are said to be a work condition that relates to dissatisfaction caused by discomfort or pain. The job dissatisfaction could be either due to the absence of the factor completely, or it’s presence to an insufficient level. Some of these hygiene factors are: Company Policy and Administration, Supervision, Interpersonal Relations, Working Conditions, Salary, Status and Security. These factors are related to the context of a job and may be considered to be support factors.

    If we look at these factors closely, we realize that these are factors which do not really motivate people to work harder and achieve more. They definitely affect the person’s discontent. Excellent hygiene factors generally result in an employee being “not dissatisfied” and this would add in to the reduction in the number of complaints about the contextual considerations. When these hygiene factors are low and poor in quality – the general complaints like “poor supervision”, “poor medical benefits” are head about.

    Even if these hygiene factors are not up to the mark, there are instances where people are completely motivated to perform their tasks. This is generally when the motivational factors are pretty strong and this influence on the employee is higher. This might look surprising! However, the dichotomy gets sorted out when we realize that the two factors – motivational and hygiene are independent of each other.

    Hygiene factors are important to a certain threshold level, but beyond the threshold they do not play a very significant role. The motivational factors on the other hand, are essential to enhance the employee motivation to excel at work.

  • Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory – 2

    In the last byte, we began looking at Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory and began understanding the Motivation Factors. In today’s byte, we will continue the discussion on Motivation Factors and then understand about Hygiene Factors.

    Continuing on the discussion of Motivation Factors, we would fist begin with identifying a few of these factors – achievement, recognition of achievement, work itself, responsibility, advancement, growth etc. The presence of these factors leads to superior performance in the employees. This input is factored in, when designing the compensation packages for employees. It is not merely the financial benefits that are always offered to employees as a reward mechanism, involving these into the reward mechanism could prove extremely motivating for the employees.

    There is however and interesting dimension of Salary here – salary could be extremely motivation to certain degree; however it is only to a certain level. If the salary is not up to a certain expected mark for the employee, it could in fact be de-motivating – in such a scenario, salary also acts as a hygiene factor! This nature of salary is pretty unique!

    Motivation factors lead to a positive mental health and challenge people to grow, contribute to work environment, and invest themselves in the organization.

    Research has indicated that the absence of these motivational factors will not create dissatisfaction; however it lead to lack of satisfaction. Motivational factors are found to be more important than the hygiene factors, since they directly affect the motivational drive of a person towards completing a job well. When they are absent, the person is de-motivated to perform well and achieve excellence.

  • Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory

    In the last byte, we looked at the summary of the various need theories. In today’s byte, we look at Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory and attempt to understand it better.

    If we look at our job, there are certain situations where we are extremely content and satisfied with the work we do, while there are certain activities which we are extremely dissatisfied with. In fact it is not the complete job itself but certain aspects of it which makes us feel satisfied or dissatisfied with the job. Herzberg studied this to a greater detail and formulated the Two Factor Theory.

    Those work conditions that relate to the satisfaction of the need for psychological growth – are called motivational factors. Those work conditions that relate to dissatisfaction caused by discomfort or pain are called hygiene factors. This classification originates from the observation that, people have two sets of needs – one that relates to avoidance of pain and one relates to the desire for psychological growth. Thus, motivational factors are related to job satisfaction, while the hygiene factors are related to job dissatisfaction.

    We shall initiate a discussion on the Motivational Factors now, which we shall continue in the next byte:

    Herzberg says that job satisfaction is produced by building the motivational factors into a job. This process is called Job Enrichment. Some of these motivational factors are: Responsibility, Achievement, Recognition, Advancement and the work itself. The presence of such factors enhances the performance of an individual.

  • Summarizing the relations between Motivation Theories

    In the last byte, we looked at the need for affiliation and the need for autonomy. Given that we have discussed a number of need based theory, we could summarize it in the following diagram. 


  • Need for Affiliation, Autonomy

    In the last byte, we looked at the need for power as a source of motivation. In today’s byte, we look at the need for affiliation and how it forms a source of motivation and the need for autonomy.

    The Need for Affiliation concerns itself with people’s interest in establishing and maintaining warm, close intimate relationship with other people. People with high need for affiliation express their emotions and feelings to others and expect the same in return from others. These people feel disturbed when there are conflicts and complication in their relationships, and generally work through any barrier in their closeness to people. This nature of theirs gets them to be very close and personal with others, they emphasize friendship and companionship.

    Managers could need to understand this need of the employees who work under him/her to really be able to leverage their ability and keep them motivated.

    Moving beyond the need of affiliation, researcher Murray identified another need – the need for autonomy. This represents the desire for independence and freedom from any constraints. The people who have high need for autonomy like to work alone and to control the pace of work. They dislike bureaucracy – rules, regulations and procedures. Entrepreneurs are generally found to fall into the category of people who have a pretty high need for autonomy.