Relation between Involvement and Motivation in Employees - A Differential Study between IT and Manufacturing Industries
Contents
Introduction
Motivating staff may be a critical factor in ensuring that an organization thrives and succeeds in an increasingly competitive environment. The rationale is that, as employees become increasingly motivated to perform in their jobs, the likelihood of their becoming job involved increases significantly. Hence, the researchers postulate the existence of a direct relationship between motivation and job involvement. This suggests an important opportunity, that of using the valuable asset of human capital as a means of enhancing success in a turbulent and dynamic corporate environment.
A new employee has a set of needs as well as a set of expectations of the organization, which change and evolve over time. The extent to which these are satisfied determines the employee’s level of motivation to work. Muchinsky (1990) defines motivation as the individual’s desire to demonstrate a particular behavior and to willingly expend effort. Nelson and Quick (2002) propose that motivation may be defined as the process of arousing and sustaining goal directed behavior. Odendaal and Roodt (2003) define motivation as the process that accounts for the individual’s intensity, direction and persistence in the attainment of a particular goal. Similarly, Greenberg and Baron (2000) and Schultz, Bagraim, Potgieter, Viedge and Werner (2003) define motivation in terms of three things that are related to behavior. First, motivation arouses the energy that drivesthe individual’s behavior, then it directs theindividual to choose the correct behavior for goal attainment, and finally it sustains theindividual’s behavior until the goal has beenachieved and the need is met. Following thesevarious definitions of motivation, the questionarises as to precisely what drives employeesto willingly expend effort and arouses them tobehave in such a way that the goal is attained andthe need is met. Answers to these questions maybe found in several theories of motivation
Introduction
Motivating staff may be a critical factor in ensuring that an organization thrives and succeeds in an increasingly competitive environment. The rationale is that, as employees become increasingly motivated to perform in their jobs, the likelihood of their becoming job involved increases significantly. Hence, the researchers postulate the existence of a direct relationship between motivation and job involvement. This suggests an important opportunity, that of using the valuable asset of human capital as a means of enhancing success in a turbulent and dynamic corporate environment.
A new employee has a set of needs as well as a set of expectations of the organization, which change and evolve over time. The extent to which these are satisfied determines the employee’s level of motivation to work. Muchinsky (1990) defines motivation as the individual’s desire to demonstrate a particular behavior and to willingly expend effort. Nelson and Quick (2002) propose that motivation may be defined as the process of arousing and sustaining goal directed behavior. Odendaal and Roodt (2003) define motivation as the process that accounts for the individual’s intensity, direction and persistence in the attainment of a particular goal. Similarly, Greenberg and Baron (2000) and Schultz, Bagraim, Potgieter, Viedge and Werner (2003) define motivation in terms of three things that are related to behavior. First, motivation arouses the energy that drivesthe individual’s behavior, then it directs theindividual to choose the correct behavior for goal attainment, and finally it sustains theindividual’s behavior until the goal has beenachieved and the need is met. Following thesevarious definitions of motivation, the questionarises as to precisely what drives employeesto willingly expend effort and arouses them tobehave in such a way that the goal is attained andthe need is met. Answers to these questions maybe found in several theories of motivation
References: ANONYMOUS, 2007. Pay and benefits often akey motivation driver, Benefits & CompensationInternational, 37(5): 40. CHUGHTAI, A.A. 2008. Impact of job involvement onin-role job performance and organizational citizenshipbehavior, Journal of Behavioral and AppliedManagement, 9(2): 169–184. DUBIN, R. 1956. Industrial workers’ worlds: a studyof the central life interests of industrial workers, SocialProblems, 3: 131–142. EMERY, C.R. & BARKER, K.J. 2007. Effect ofcommitment, job involvement and teams on customersatisfaction and profit, Team Performance Management,13(3/4): 90–101. GERBER, P.D., NEL, P.S. & VAN DYK, P.S. 1998.Human resource management (4th ed.) Halfway House:International Thomson Publishing. HERZBERG, F. 1968. One more time: How do youmotivate employees?, Harvard Business Review, 81(1):87–96. HUSELID, M.A. & DAY, N.A. 1991. Organizationalcommitment, job involvement and turnover: Asubstantive and methodological analysis, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 76: 380–391. KIRBY, S.L. & RICHARD, O.C. 2000. Impact ofmarketing: work-place diversity on employee jobinvolvement and organizational commitment, TheJournal of Social Psychology, 140(3) LAWLER, E.E LODAHL, T.M. & KEJNER, M. 1965. The definitionand measurement of job involvement, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 49(1): 24–33. LUSSIER, R.N. 2000. Management fundamentals:concepts applications skills development South-WesternCollege Publishing: USA. MADSEN, S.R., MILLER, D. & JOHN, C.R. 2005.Readiness for organizational change: do organizationalcommitment and social relationships in the workplacemake a difference? Human Resource DevelopmentQuarterly, 16(2): 213–233. MICHIE, J., OUGHTON, C. & BENNION, Y. 2002.Employee ownership, motivation and productivity, Aresearch report for employees direct from Birkbeck andThe Work Foundation. London: Birkbeck University ofLondon. MUCHINSKY, P.M. 1990. Psychology applied towork: an introduction to industrial and organizationalpsychology (3rd ed.) Brooks/Cole Publishing Company:USA. MULLINS, L.J. 1996. Management and organizationalbehaviour (4th ed.) Pitman Publishing: Great Britain. RABINOWITZ, S. & HALL, D.T. 1977.Organizational research on job involvement,Psychological Bulletin, 84(2): 265–288. ROTENBERRY, P.F. & MOBERG, P.J. 2007.Assessing the impact of job involvement onperformance, Management Research News, 30(3):203–215. SINGH, A. & KUMARI, P. 1988 A study of individualneed strength, motivation and job involvementin relation to job satisfaction, productivity andabsenteeism, Managerial Psychology, 1: 24–42. WEGGE, J., SCHMIDT, K-H., PARKES, C. & VANDICK, R. 2007. Taking a sickie: job satisfaction and jobinvolvement as interactive predictors of absenteeismin a public organization, Journal of Occupational andOrganizational Psychology, 80(1): 77.