Understanding and Managing People Case/Essay.
The notion of Payment by Results is often seen in present society as sensible business acumen. The practice of paying ‘providers’ or employees, whether they are sports personnel, or otherwise in relation to the results that they achieved is on the increase. Indeed, Payment by Results can be understood to be a practice whereby individuals, and or providers deliver quality services in line with pre –agreed targets. In short, if and when these targets are achieved, payment is received. Currently in the UK, funding for certain public welfare services, including areas of the National Health Service, the Ministry of Justice and prison services have moved some distance towards operating a Payment by Results system. This involves providers being paid for the quality of their individual performance, rather than for ‘activity’ alone. However, there is the need to be mindful of the range of ‘risk factors’ for those involved, many of which are outside their control and jurisdiction. However, it should be understood that in order for any workforce to achieve success in relation to Payment by Result initiatives, then there will need to be both clear and defined ‘tariff’ systems and ‘results frameworks’ that appropriately reward the results achieved. Business analysists, psychologists and management consultants are all likely to agree that motivation is a key factor of success (or lack of it) within a workforce. Indeed, the psychology behind motivational factors is difficult and complex, but leaders and managers need to be mindful of addressing what people actually want from their jobs; whether it is an increased salary, job security, good relationships with colleagues, promotion prospects, or something entirely different. Considering these factors needs to be central to the success of a ‘business’ of any nature, as this is the basis for all motivation – the methodology of engaging with individuals and teams to ensure their best performance. In 1959, Herzberg, F. researched and wrote, along with two colleagues, ‘The Motivation to Work’, where he first expounded his workplace based motivation theories. This work, although initially based on a survey of two hundred Pittsburgh accountants and engineers, remains to this day, a key reference in relation to motivational theory. Herzberg's study used a unique approach, based on open questioning and made few assumptions, in order to collect and analyse details of 'critical incidents' as recounted by the interviewees. Certainly, Herzberg was the first academic researcher to show that satisfaction and dissatisfaction at work nearly always arose for different reasons, and were not simply opposing responses to the same factors, as had previously been surmised. He concluded that, "We can expand ... by stating that the job satisfiers deal with the factors involved in doing the job, whereas the job dissatisfiers deal with the factors which define the job context." The results from this in-depth study formed the basis of Herzberg’s Motivation-Hygiene Theory, also referred to as the Two Factor Theory. In his renowned article ’One More Time: How Do You Motivate Employees?’ (1968) the conclusions that were drawn are still hugely influential in terms of motivational practice, over half a decade later. In this article, Herzberg initially discussed the unique notion of KITA – a kick up the backside, for want of a better word, in terms of negative, negative psychological and positive KITA, whilst realising that KITA must not be confused with motivation. Herzberg’s theory was similar to that of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, where Maslow suggested five levels of hierarchical needs of employees, whereby each low-level need must be satisfied before a higher level need can be pursued. These needs included the fulfilment of physiological, safety, social, esteem and self-actualizing needs, in order to achieve. In this theory, Herzberg explained the job satisfiers as...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document