Vroom's Expectancy Theory

Vroom's expectancy theory assumes that behaviour

results from conscious choices among alternatives whose
purpose it is to maximize pleasure and to minimize pain.
Vroom realized that an employee's performance is based
on individual factors such as personality, skills,
knowledge, experience and abilities. He stated that effort,
performance and motivation are linked in a person's
motivation. He uses the
variables Expectancy , Instrumentality and Valence to
account for this.
Expectancy is the idea that increasing the amount of
effort will increase performance (if I work harder then I will
perform better.) This is affected by:
1. Having the right resources available (e.g. raw
materials, time)
2. Having the right skills to do the job
3. Having the necessary support from the boss and
peers
Instrumentality is the idea that if you perform better, then
the outcome will be achieved. (If I perform well, there I will
achieve the desired outcome.) This is affected by:
1. Clear understanding of the relationship between
performance and outcomes – e.g. the rules of the
reward 'game'
2. Trust in the people who will take the decisions on who
gets what outcome
 3. Transparency of the process that decides who gets
what outcome
Valence is the perceived value the employee puts on the
outcome. For the valence to be positive, the person must
prefer attaining the outcome than not attaining it. (If
someone is mainly motivated by money, he or she might
not value offers of additional time off)
Vroom's expectancy theory works on perceptions, so even
if a motivation tactic works with most people in the
organisation, it doesn't mean that it will work for
everybody.

Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs

Abraham Maslow developed the Hierarchy of Needs
model in 1940-50s USA, and the Hierarchy of Needs
theory remains valid today. Maslow's ideas surrounding
the Hierarchy of Needs, concerning the responsibility of
employers to provide a workplace environment that
encourages and enables employees to fulfil their own
unique potential (self-actualization), are today more
relevant than ever.
Each of us is motivated by needs. Our most basic needs
are inborn, having evolved over tens of thousands of
years. Abraham Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs helps to
explain how these needs motivate us all. Maslow's
Hierarchy of Needs states that we must satisfy each need
in turn, starting with the first, which deals with the most
obvious needs for survival itself. Only when the lower
order needs of physical and emotional well-being are
satisfied are we concerned with the higher order needs of
influence and personal development. Conversely, if the
things that satisfy our lower order needs are swept away,
we are no longer concerned about the maintenance of our
higher order needs.
1. Biological and Physiological needs - air, food,
drink, shelter, warmth, sex, sleep, etc.
2. Safety needs - protection from elements, security,
order, law, limits, stability, etc.
3. Belongingness and Love needs - work group,
family, affection, relationships, etc.
4. Esteem needs - self-esteem, achievement, mastery,
independence, status, dominance, prestige,
managerial responsibility, etc.
5. Self-Actualization needs - realising personal
potential, self-fulfillment, seeking personal growth and
peak experiences.

Frederick Taylor and Scientific Management

Taylor's philosophy focused on the belief that making
people work as hard as they could was not as efficient as
optimizing the way the work was done.
In 1909, Taylor published "The Principles of Scientific
Management." In this, he proposed that by optimizing and
simplifying jobs, productivity would increase. He also
advanced the idea that workers and managers needed to
cooperate with one another. This was very different from
the way work was typically done in businesses
beforehand. A factory manager at that time had very little
contact with the workers, and he left them on their own to
produce the necessary product. There was no
standardization, and a worker's main motivation was often
continued employment, so there was no incentive to work
as quickly or as efficiently as possible.

Four Principles of Scientific Management

Taylor's four principles are as follows:
1. Replace working by "rule of thumb," or simple habit and
common sense, and instead use the scientific method to
study work and determine the most efficient way to
perform specific tasks.
2. Rather than simply assign workers to just any job, match
workers to their jobs based on capability and motivation,
and train them to work at maximum efficiency.
3. Monitor worker performance, and provide instructions
and supervision to ensure that they're using the most
efficient ways of working.
4. Allocate the work between managers and workers so
that the managers spend their time planning and
training, allowing the workers to perform their tasks
efficiently.

Herzberg Two Factor Theory of Motivation

This theory, also called the Motivation-Hygiene
Theory or the dual-factor theory, was penned
by Frederick Herzberg in 1959. This American
psychologist, who was very interested in
people’s motivation and job satisfaction, came up with the
theory. He conducted his research by asking a group of
people about their good and bad experiences at work. He
was surprised that the group answered questions about
their good experiences very differently from the ones
about their bad experiences. Based on this, he developed
the theory that people’s job satisfaction depends on two
kinds of factors. Factors for satisfaction (motivators /
satisfiers) and factors for dissatisfaction (hygiene factors
/ dissatisfiers).

Performance, recognition, job status, responsibility and

opportunities for growth all fall under motivators/
satisfiers.

Hygiene factors/dissatisfiers are about salary,

secondary working conditions, the relationship with
colleagues, physical work place and the relationship
between supervisor and employee.

In his theory, Herzberg claims these factors function on

the same plane. In other words, satisfaction and
dissatisfaction aren’t polar opposites. Taking away an
employee’s dissatisfaction – for example by offering a
higher salary – doesn’t necessarily mean the employee
will then be satisfied. The employee is just no longer
dissatisfied.
4 different combinations can exist at work:

1: High hygiene and high motivation

This is the ideal situation. Employees are very motivated
and barely have any complaints.

2: High hygiene and low motivation

Employees have few complaints, but they’re not really
motivated, they see their work simply as a pay check.
3: Low hygiene and high motivation
Employees are motivated, their job is challenging, but they
have complaints about salary or work conditions.

4: Low hygiene and low motivation

This is the worst possible situation, employees are not
motivated and have a lot of complaints.

Expectancy Theory Porter & Lawler

Porter and Lawler (Lyman W Porter and Edward E Lawler)
used Victor Vroom’s Expectancy Theory as a foundation
to develop their expectancy model. Similar to Vroom’s
theory Porter and Lawler concluded that an individual’s
motivation to complete a task is affected by the reward
they expect to receive for completing the task. However
Porter and Lawler introduced additional aspects to the
expectancy theory as they felt that Vroom's theory was too
simple.
Intrinsic And Extrinsic Rewards Aspects

Porter and Lawler categorized the reward as intrinsic and

extrinsic
 Intrinsic rewards are the positive feelings that the
individual experiences from completing the task e.g.
satisfaction, sense of achievement.
 Extrinsic rewards are rewards emanating from outside
the individual such as bonus, commission and pay
increases.
Porter and Lawler's Expectancy Theory Model suggested
that an individual's view regarding the attractiveness and
fairness of the rewards will affect motivation.

McGregor's XY Theory of Management

McGregor's ideas suggest that there are two fundamental
approaches to managing people. Many managers tend
towards Theory X, and generally get poor results.
Enlightened managers use Theory Y, which produces
better performance and results, and allows people to grow
and develop.
Theory X - 'Authoritarian Management' Style
 The average person dislikes work and will avoid it if
he/she can.
 Therefore most people must be forced with the threat
of punishment to work towards organisational
objectives.
 The average person prefers to be directed; to avoid
responsibility; is relatively unambitious, and wants
security above all else.
Characteristics of an X-theory manager
Perhaps the most noticeable aspects of McGregor's XY
Theory - and the easiest to illustrate - are found in the
behaviours of autocratic managers and organizations
which use autocratic management styles.
What are the characteristics of a Theory X manager?
Typically some, most or all of these:
 Results-driven and deadline-driven, to the exclusion
of everything else
 Issues threats to make people follow instructions
 Unconcerned about staff welfare, or morale
 One-way communicator
 Withholds rewards, and suppresses pay and
remunerations levels
 Does not invite or welcome suggestions.
Theory Y - 'Participative Management' Style
 Effort in work is as natural as work and play.
  People will apply self-control and self-direction in the
pursuit of organisational objectives, without external
control or the threat of punishment.
 Commitment to objectives is a function of rewards
associated with their achievement.
 People usually accept and often seek responsibility.
 The capacity to use a high degree of imagination,
ingenuity and creativity in solving organisational
problems is widely, not narrowly, distributed in the
population.
 In industry, the intellectual potential of the average
person is only partly utilised.

Theory Z - William Ouchi

Theory Z is not a Mcgregor idea and as such is not
Mcgregor's extension of his XY theory.
Theory Z was developed by William Ouchi, in his book
1981 ' Theory Z: How American Business can meet the
Japanese Challenge '. William Ouchi is a professor of
management at UCLA, Los Angeles, and a board member
of several large US organisations.
Theory Z is often referred to as the 'Japanese'
management style, which is essentially what it is. It's
interesting that Ouchi chose to name his model 'Theory Z',
which apart from anything else tends to give the
impression that it's a Mcgregor idea. One wonders if the
idea was not considered strong enough to stand alone
with a completely new name... Nevertheless, Theory Z
essentially advocates a combination of all that's best about
Theory Y and modern Japanese management, which
places a large amount of freedom and trust with workers,
and assumes that workers have a strong loyalty and
interest in team-working and the organisation.

The Great Man Theory

The Great Man Theory of leadership posits that great

leaders are born, not made or trained. Individuals are born
with certain traits or characteristics, and these
characteristics are different in natural-born leaders
compared to others or are only present in such leaders.
These specific traits or characteristics enable them to lead
people while they shape the pages of history.

The special characteristics leaders in general and great

leaders in particular are born with that others don’t have
include: charm, intelligence, intuition, judgement, courage,
aggressiveness, persuasion, etc. According to Thomas
Carlyle, these can’t be learned; someone either possesses
these traits or doesn’t. Such characteristics are fixed in the
family’s genes and are passed on from generation to
generation. Examples of great leaders that also had these
characteristics are: Mao Zedong, Gandhi, Abraham
Lincoln, Mahatma Gandhi, Alexander the Great, Adolf
Hitler etc. These people are credited with having innate
qualities and divine inspiration that helped them reach
great heights. They weren’t trained in leadership nor were
they given the opportunity to improve their leadership skills
during their lives. Something in their anatomy, personality
or physiology set them apart from the common folk.
Furthermore, the instinctive drive to take on leadership
roles is thought to have made these great men successful.

Trait Theory

Trait theory is an extension of the Great Man theory of

leadership which states that leaders are born, not made.
Trait theory agrees upon the same and specifies different
personality traits of leaders that distinguish them from non-
leaders. Like the Great man theory, it also states that
leaders cannot be developed and they have inherited
characteristics to become successful leaders. This theory
explains those traits or characteristics in detail. The theory
also differentiates between leaders and subordinates by
assuming that an individual having a leadership role would
have a few more traits than their subordinates. Leaders
can be more confident, extrovert, charming, etc.

Different assumptions on which Trait theory of leadership

is based are:
 Individuals have leadership traits by birth.
 A specific set of traits are responsible for specific
behavior pattern.
 This behavior pattern is irrespective of the situation i.e.
doesn’t change according to the situation.
Adams’ Equity Theory
Balancing Employee Inputs and Outputs

Adams' Equity Theory calls for a fair balance to be struck

between an employee's inputs (hard work, skill level,
acceptance, enthusiasm, and so on) and an employee's
outputs (salary, benefits, intangibles such as recognition,
and so on).
According to the theory, finding this fair balance serves to
ensure a strong and productive relationship is achieved
with the employee, with the overall result being contented,
motivated employees.
Clayton Alderfer modified
Maslow's hierarchy of needs into three categories:
existence, relatedness, and growth (ERG). ...
The theory suggests that managers will need to help
regressing employees see the importance of their pursuit
of higher needs to their personal growth.

Acceptance Theory to Authority

Management theorist Chester Barnard believed
organizations need to be both effective and efficient.
Effective means meeting organizational goals in a timely
way. Efficient, in his opinion, means the degree to which
the organization can satisfy the motives of its employees.
Kurt Lewin theorized a three-stage model of change that
is known as the unfreezing-change-refreeze model that
requires prior learning to be rejected and
replaced. Lewin's theory states behavior as "a dynamic
balance of forces working in opposing directions." The
Kurt Lewin, change theory model, is based around a 3-
step process (Unfreeze-Change-Freeze) that provides a
high-level approach to improvement. It gives a manager or
other change agent a framework to implement a change
effort, which is always very sensitive and should be as
seamless as possible.

The Kurt Lewin change theory or model can help a

leader do the following three steps:

 Make a radical change (innovation)

 Minimise the disruption of the structure’s operations
 Make sure that the amendment is adopted
permanently.

The Blake Mouton Managerial Grid

Leading People and Producing Results

The Blake Mouton Managerial Grid is based on two

behavioral dimensions:
 Concern for People: this is the degree to which a
leader considers team members' needs, interests and
areas of personal development when deciding how best
to accomplish a task.
 Concern for Results: this is the degree to which a
leader emphasizes concrete objectives, organizational
efficiency and high productivity when deciding how best
to accomplish a task.
Blake and Mouton defined five leadership styles based on
these, as illustrated in the diagram below.
Figure 1 – The Blake Mouton Managerial Grid

Let's take a look at each quadrant in detail.

Impoverished Management – Low Results/Low People

The Impoverished or "indifferent" manager is mostly

ineffective. With a low regard for creating systems that get
the job done, and with little interest in creating a satisfying
or motivating team environment , his results are
inevitably disorganization, dissatisfaction and disharmony.
Produce-or-Perish Management – High Results/Low
People

Also known as "authoritarian" or "authority-compliance"

managers, people in this category believe that their team
members are simply a means to an end. The team's
needs are always secondary to its productivity.
This type of manager is autocratic, has strict work rules,
policies and procedures, and can view punishment as an
effective way of motivating team members. This approach
can drive impressive production results at first, but low
team morale and motivation will ultimately affect people's
performance, and this type of leader will struggle to retain
high performers.

Middle-of-the-Road Management – Medium

Results/Medium People

A Middle-of-the-Road or "status quo" manager tries to

balance results and people, but this strategy is not as
effective as it may sound. Through continual compromise,
he fails to inspire high performance and also fails to meet
people's needs fully. The result is that his team will likely
deliver only mediocre performance.

Country Club Management – High People/Low Results

The Country Club or "accommodating" style of manager is

most concerned about her team members' needs and
feelings. She assumes that, as long as they
are happy and secure, they will work hard.
What tends to be the result is a work environment that is
very relaxed and fun, but where productivity suffers
because there is a lack of direction and control.

Team Management – High Production/High People

According to the Blake Mouton model, Team management

is the most effective leadership style. It reflects a leader
who is passionate about his work and who does the best
he can for the people he works with.
Team or "sound" managers commit to their organization's
goals and mission, motivate the people who report to
them, and work hard to get people to stretch themselves
to deliver great results. But, at the same time, they're
inspiring figures who look after their teams. Someone led
by a Team manager feels respected and empowered, and
is committed to achieving her goals.

Likert 4 Management Leadership Styles

Style-1: Exploitative-Authoritative Leadership Style

In Exploitative-Authoritative Leadership Style; the
manager has no confidence or trust in subordinates.
Subordinates feel no freedom to discuss things about the
job with their superior.
In solving job problems, manager seldom gets ideas and
opinions of subordinates.
Style-2: Benevolent-Autocratic Leadership Style
In Benevolent-Autocratic Leadership Style; the manager
has condescending confidence and trust in subordinates,
motivates with rewards and some punishments, permits
some upward communication, solicits some ideas and
opinions from subordinates and allows some delegation of
decision making but with close policy control.
Style-3: Consultative Leadership Style
Consultative Leadership Style indicates that Manager has
substantial but not complete confidence and trust in
subordinates but still wishes to keep control of decisions.
Subordinates feel free to discuss things about the job with
their superior. The manager gets ideas and opinions and
tries to make constructive use of them.
Style-4: Democratic Leadership Style
In the Democratic Leadership Style, the manager has
complete confidence and trust in subordinates and allows
them direct equal participation in decision making.
Subordinates also feel completely free to discuss things
about the job with their superior. The manager always
asks subordinates for their ideas and opinions and makes
constructive use of them.
Likert found style 3 and 4 as high producing while styling 1
and 2 as low producing. Likert also suggested extensive
and intensive leadership training at all levels of
management to move into style-4 as early as possible.