Perhaps the most basic motivation strategy that managers can use is to communicate well with organization members. Effective manager–subordinate communication can satisfy such basic human needs as recognition, a sense of belonging, and security. For example, such a simple managerial action as attempting to become better acquainted with subordinates can contribute substantially to the satisfaction of each of these three needs. For another example, a message praising a subordinate for a job well done can help satisfy the subordinate’s recognition and security needs.

As a general rule, managers should strive to communicate often with other organization members, not only because communication is the primary means of conducting organizational activities but also because communication is a basic tool for satisfying the human needs of organization members.27

Another motivation strategy involves managers’ assumptions about human nature. Douglas McGregor identified two sets of assumptions: Theory X involves negative assumptions about people that McGregor believes managers often use as the basis for dealing with their subordinates (e.g., the average person has an inherent dislike of work and will avoid it whenever he or she can). Theory Y represents positive assumptions about people that McGregor believes managers should strive to use (e.g., people will exercise self-direction and self-control in meeting their objectives).28

The Theory X/Theory Y debate should resonate for managers across many work settings.29 McGregor implies that managers who use Theory X assumptions are “bad” and that those who use Theory Y assumptions are “good.”30 William Reddin, however, argues that production might be increased by using either Theory X or Theory Y assumptions, depending on the situation the manager faces: “Is there not a strong argument for the position that any theory may have desirable outcomes if appropriately used?” The problem is that McGregor considered only the ineffective application of Theory X and the effective application of Theory Y. Reddin thus proposes a Theory Z—an effectiveness dimension that implies that managers who use either Theory X or Theory Y assumptions when dealing with people can be successful, depending on their situation.31

The basic rationale for using Theory Y rather than Theory X in most situations is that managerial activities that reflect Theory Y assumptions generally are more successful in satisfying the human needs of most organization members than are managerial activities that reflect Theory X assumptions. Therefore, activities based on Theory Y assumptions are more apt to motivate organization members than are activities based on Theory X assumptions.32

Job Design

A third strategy that managers can use to motivate organization members involves designing the jobs that organization members perform. The following sections discuss earlier and more recent job design strategies.

Earlier Job Design Strategies

A movement has long existed in American business to make jobs simpler and more specialized to increase worker productivity. The idea behind this movement is to make workers more productive by enabling them to be more efficient. Perhaps the best example of a job design inspired by this movement is the automobile assembly line. The negative result of work simplification and specialization, however, is job boredom. As jobs become simpler and more specialized, they typically become more boring and less satisfying to workers, and, consequently, productivity suffers.

Job Rotation

The first major attempt to overcome job boredom was job rotation—moving workers from job to job rather than requiring them to perform only one simple and specialized job over the long term.33 For example, a gardener would do more than just mow lawns; he might also trim bushes, rake grass, and sweep sidewalks.

Although job rotation programs have been known to increase organizational profitability, most of them are ineffective as motivation strategies because, over time, people become bored with all the jobs they are rotated into.34 Job rotation programs, however, are often effective for achieving other organizational objectives, such as training, because they give individuals an overview of how the various units of the organization function. Job rotation can also be an effective procedure for reducing absenteeism—a significant problem in some organizations.35

Job Enlargement

Another strategy developed to overcome the boredom of doing very simple and specialized jobs is job enlargement, or increasing the number of operations an individual performs in order to enhance the individual’s satisfaction with work. According to the job enlargement concept, the gardener’s job would become more satisfying as such activities as trimming bushes, raking grass, and sweeping sidewalks were added to his initial activity of mowing grass. Although some research supports the contention that job enlargement does make jobs more satisfying, other research does not.36 Still, job enlargement programs are more successful at increasing job satisfaction than are job rotation programs.

A number of other job design strategies have evolved since the development of job rotation and job enlargement programs. Two of these more recent strategies are job enrichment and flextime.

Job Enrichment

Frederick Herzberg concluded from his research that the degrees of satisfaction and dissatisfaction organization members feel as a result of performing a job are two different variables determined by two different sets of items.37 The items that influence the degree of job dissatisfaction are called hygiene, or maintenance, factors, whereas those that influence the degree of job satisfaction are called motivating factors (motivators). Hygiene factors relate to the work environment, and motivating factors relate to the work itself. The items that make up Herzberg’s hygiene and motivating factors are presented in Table 14.1.

Dissatisfaction: Hygiene or Maintenance Factors	Satisfaction: Motivating Factors
1. Company policy and administration	1. Opportunity for achievement
2. Supervision	2. Opportunity for recognition
3. Relationship with supervisor	3. Work itself
4. Relationship with peers	4. Responsibility
5. Working conditions	5. Working conditions
6. Salary	6. Personal growth
7. Relationship with subordinates

Herzberg believes that when the hygiene factors of a particular job situation are undesirable, organization members will become dissatisfied. Making these factors more desirable—for example, by increasing salary—will rarely motivate people to do a better job, but it will keep them from becoming dissatisfied. In contrast, when the motivating factors of a particular job situation are compelling, employees usually are motivated to do a better job. People tend to be more motivated and productive as more motivators are built into their job situations. During periods of economic recession or high unemployment, many workers are dissatisfied, either because they are doing the work of several people as the result of layoffs in their organization or because they feel “trapped” by a boring job they cannot afford to leave because of the difficulty of finding a new one.38

The process of incorporating motivators into a job situation is called job enrichment.39 Early reports indicated that companies such as Texas Instruments and Volvo had notable success in motivating organization members through job enrichment programs. More recent reports, even though they continue to support the value of job enrichment, indicate that for a job enrichment program to be successful, it must be carefully designed and administered.40

Many management theorists espouse views that seem consistent with Herzberg’s hygiene factor–motivator concept. David Pink, for example, believes that pay in itself is not a motivator. Instead, Pink claims that motivation comes from three different sources: autonomy (the ability to direct one’s own life), mastery (continuous improvement at something an individual regards as important), and purpose (to contribute to something larger than one’s self).41

Job Enrichment and Productivity

Herzberg’s overall conclusions are that the most productive organization members are those involved in work situations that have both desirable hygiene and motivating factors. The needs in Maslow’s hierarchy that desirable hygiene factors and motivating factors generally satisfy are shown in Figure 14.6. Esteem needs can be satisfied by both types of factors. An example of esteem needs satisfied by a hygiene factor is a private parking space—a status symbol and a working condition evidencing the employee’s importance to the organization. An example of esteem needs satisfied by a motivating factor is an award given for outstanding performance—a public recognition of a job well done that displays the employee’s value to the organization.

Flextime

Another more recent job design strategy for motivating organization members is based on a concept called flextime.42 Perhaps the most common traditional characteristic of work in the United States is that jobs are performed within a fixed, eight-hour workday. However, this tradition has recently been challenged. Faced with motivation problems and excessive absenteeism, many managers have turned to scheduling innovations as a possible solution.43

The main purpose of these scheduling innovations is not to reduce the total number of work hours but rather to give workers greater flexibility in scheduling their work hours. The main thrust of flextime, or a flexible working hours program, is that it allows workers to complete their jobs within a workweek of a normal number of hours that they schedule themselves.44 The choices of starting and finishing times can be as flexible as the organizational situation allows. To ensure that flexibility does not become counterproductive within the organization, however, many flextime programs stipulate a core period of the day during which all employees must be on the job.

A fourth strategy that managers can use to motivate organization members is based on a concept known as behavior modification. As stated by B. F. Skinner, the Harvard psychologist considered by many to be the father of behavioral psychology, behavior modification focuses on encouraging appropriate behavior by controlling the consequences of that behavior.46 According to the law of effect, behavior that is rewarded tends to be repeated, whereas behavior that is punished tends to be eliminated.

Although behavior modification programs typically involve the administration of both rewards and punishments, it is rewards that are generally emphasized because they are more effective than punishments in influencing behavior. Obviously, the main theme of behavior modification is not new.

Another strategy that managers can use to motivate organization members is based on the work of Rensis Likert, a noted management scholar.56 After studying several types and sizes of organizations, Likert concluded that management styles in organizations can be categorized into the following systems:

• System 1 —This style of management is characterized by a lack of confidence or trust in subordinates. Subordinates do not feel free to discuss their jobs with superiors and are motivated by fear, threats, punishments, and occasional rewards. Information flow in the organization is directed primarily downward; upward communication is viewed with great suspicion. The bulk of all decision making is done at the top of the organization.

• System 2 —This style of management is characterized by a condescending, master-to-servant–style confidence and trust in subordinates. Subordinates do not feel free to discuss their jobs with superiors and are motivated by rewards and actual or potential punishments. Information flows mostly downward; upward communication may or may not be viewed with suspicion. Although policies are made primarily at the top of the organization, decisions within a prescribed framework are made at lower levels.

• System 3 —This style of management is characterized by substantial, though not complete, confidence in subordinates. Subordinates feel fairly free to discuss their jobs with superiors and are motivated by rewards, occasional punishments, and some involvement. Information flows both upward and downward in the organization. Upward communication is often accepted, though at times it may be viewed with suspicion. Although broad policies and general decisions are made at the top of the organization, more specific decisions are made at lower levels.

• System 4 —This style of management is characterized by complete trust and confidence in subordinates. Subordinates feel completely free to discuss their jobs with superiors and are motivated by such factors as economic rewards, which are based on a compensation system developed through employee participation and involvement in goal setting. Information flows upward, downward, and horizontally. Upward communication is generally accepted—but even when it is not, employees’ questions are answered candidly. Decision making is spread widely throughout the organization and is well coordinated.

A number of firms make a wide range of money-based compensation programs available to their employees as a form of motivation. For instance, employee stock ownership plans (ESOPs) motivate employees to boost production by offering them shares of company stock as a benefit. Managers are commonly given stock bonuses as an incentive to think more like an owner and ultimately do a better job of building a successful organization. Other incentive plans include lump-sum bonuses—one-time cash payments—and gain-sharing, a plan under which members of a team receive a bonus when their team exceeds a goal. All of these plans link pay closely to performance.57 Many organizations have found that by putting more of their employees’ pay at risk, they can peg more of their total wage costs to sales, which makes expenses more controllable in a downturn.58 Whatever approach a monetary incentive program takes, it is important that it be accompanied by communication to all employees, describing the organization’s business goals and explaining how employees’ behavior contributes to accomplishing those goals.59

Comarco CEO Sam Inman found an innovative way to use monetary incentives to inspire motivation among his employees: He eliminated the annual review and automatic pay raises. Instead, Inman now distributes awards and raises on a random basis, after an employee has achieved a goal or delivered a project. Employees of Comarco, the maker of universal charge adapters, have also received on-the-spot rewards like gift certificates, plane tickets, and vacations for jobs well done.60

A firm can also use nonmonetary means to keep its employees committed and motivated. For instance, some companies have a policy of promoting from within. They go through an elaborate process of advertising jobs internally before going outside the company to fill vacancies. Another nonmonetary incentive emphasizes quality, on the theory that most workers are unhappy when they know their work goes toward producing a shoddy product.61