Associates and Motivation¹

Allen F. Wysocki, Karl W. Kepner, and Michelle W. Glasser²

Introduction

In this article we will discuss associates and motivation. What is motivation? Motivation comes from the word "motive" which comes from the Latin word "to move."

Motivation is

Figure 1. 

Regardless of the reason—fear, money, recognition, peer pressure, self-esteem, etc—if people are trying, they are motivated. It should be recognized, however, that wanting is not synonymous with trying and is therefore not motivation.

Think of motivation this way

Figure 2. 

This implies that associates not only need to have a reason to act a certain way, they must be "moved" into some form of action.

Supervision and Motivation

It is generally recognized that management cannot motivate; motivation must come from within. What then is management's role regarding motivation? It is the manager's responsibility to develop and maintain a positive motivational climate. A positive motivational climate involves a work environment where everyone will be motivated to consistently perform at his highest level of productivity. As a manager or supervisor, evaluate the extent to which you believe you have created a positive motivational climate with your associates and work unit. How would your associates evaluate the organization's motivational climate? Studies have shown that approximately 75 percent of associates say they can be significantly more productive in their work. Therefore, they are obviously not motivated to perform at their highest level of productivity.

Associates and Motivation

Some associates are more motivated than others; yet, everyone is motivated. This motivation, however, is not always positive. Three types of associate motivational levels can be identified: negative, maintenance, and positive. Each type of motivation has a corresponding performance level.

Figure 3. 

Table 1 lists 24 potential motivational factors. Read the 24 factors and indicate whether you believe each to be a strong motivator or de-motivator for associates to do their best work. To qualify as a strong motivator, one must be able to answer yes to this question: If I can provide my associates with more of this factor, will they be motivated to work at higher levels of productivity?

From the works and writings of Frederick Herzberg, de-motivators are identified as policies, money, status, security, and supervision; and motivators are identified as achievement, recognition, increased responsibility, growth, and learning.

Herzberg's motivational model illustrates that the primary role of de-motivators is to adjust the level of dissatisfaction. That is, even under the best circumstances, de-motivators can only decrease the level of dissatisfaction; they cannot increase an associate's level of satisfaction. In fact, if the factors in Table 1 are perceived as inadequate, associates will look for ways to make up for these inadequacies (get even with management).

Motivators, on the other hand, can be used to adjust the level of associate satisfaction. That is, effective use of motivators will increase an associate's satisfaction from a level characterized by indifference to a high level of satisfaction.

Given the distinction between de-motivators and motivators, an evaluation of the 24 potential motivational factors in Table 1 would indicate that items 4, 8, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, and 24 are motivational factors, and items 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 18, 19, and 23 are de-motivational factors. The motivational factors should provide managers with a greater opportunity to create a strong motivational work environment. It would seem appropriate that each manager should identify two or three items from this list that could be used more effectively in the future.

Please note as you study the general categories of de-motivators and motivators that providing a motivating work environment requires little in terms of capital outlay (motivators are essentially non-monetary in nature). The bottom line is that creating a motivating environment requires the manager to appeal to the associate's sense of self-improvement and self-worth as a human being. It should also be noted that strong motivators tend to be controlled by the immediate supervisor rather than by top management.

In a related work (a survey of over 1500 employees), Dr. Gerald H. Graham of Wichita State University identified the most important motivating techniques used by managers. The top five techniques were

1. The manager personally congratulates associates who do a good job.

2. The manager writes personal notes about good performance.

3. The organization uses performance as the basis for promotion.

4. The manager publicly recognizes employees for good performance.

5. The manager holds morale-building meetings to celebrate success.

Dr. Graham also interviewed associates to find out how often managers utilized the top five motivating techniques as part of their management activities. He discovered that less than 50 percent of the managers in the study utilized item one (personal congratulations for associates who did a good job) and that less than 25 percent of these same managers utilized items two through five of the top motivational techniques in their management styles. Take a moment to evaluate the effectiveness with which your management team utilizes these top five motivational techniques. Would your associates agree that your management team effectively utilizes these non-monetary feedback rewards?

Conclusion

By using the information provided in this article, you can determine how your organization stacks up in the motivation department. The managerial challenge is to create a work climate that will stimulate each associate to achieve his/her highest level of productivity and to provide opportunities for maintaining the highest level of productivity.

We hope you found this topic useful and invite readers to provide feedback (via email) on which motivational and de-motivational practices were the most prevalent in their organizations. Drs. Wysocki and Kepner would be happy to lead a workshop on motivation of your associates.

Your comments and suggestions are always welcome and you may email us directly at wysocki@ufl.edu or respond via extension web page http://webct.nerdc.ufl.edu:8910/public/WysockiExtension/index.html.

References

Graham, Gerald H. Understanding Human Relations: The Individual, Organization, and Management. SRA Publishing Company. May 1982.

Herzberg, Frederick. Herzberg on Motivation. Penton Education Division. December 1991.

Kepner, Karl. FRE class discussions for AEB 4424 and AEB 5757 (Human Resource Management in Agribusiness).

Tables

Table 1. Strong motivator is defined as 'more of the factor provided, the greater the productivity observed."

Potential Motivational Factors		Strong Motivator	De-Motivator
1.	Pension Plan	_______	_______
2.	Rest Breaks	_______	_______
3.	Clear Company Policies	_______	_______
4.	Involvement in Problem Solving	_______	_______
5.	Wages -- Good Pay	_______	_______
6.	Steady Employment	_______	_______
7.	Paid Holidays	_______	_______
8.	Recognition for Good Work	_______	_______
9.	Clear Work Instructions	_______	_______
10.	Good Physical Working Conditions	_______	_______
11.	Insurance Program	_______	_______
12.	Having an Effective Supervisor	_______	_______
13.	Feeling My Job Is Important	_______	_______
14.	Opportunity to Do a Good Job	_______	_______
15.	Chances for Promotion	_______	_______
16.	Respect for Me as a Person	_______	_______
17.	Being Evaluated so I Know Where I Stand	_______	_______
18.	Working Under Close Supervision	_______	_______
19.	Knowing I Will Be Disciplined if I Do a Bad Job	_______	_______
20.	Agreement on Work Objectives	_______	_______
21.	Opportunity for Self Development	_______	_______
22.	Work that Is Interesting	_______	_______
23.	Getting Along Well with Others	_______	_______
24.	Feeling of Being In on Things	_______	_______

---

Footnotes

1. This is EDIS document HR 004, a publication of the Department of Food and Resource Economics, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611. Published May 2001. Reviewed: September 2008. Please visit the EDIS website at http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu.

2. Allen F. Wysocki, assistant professor; Karl W. Kepner, distinguished professor; and Michelle W. Glasser, graduate research assistant; Department of Food and Resource Economics, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.

---

The Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS) is an Equal Opportunity Institution authorized to provide research, educational information and other services only to individuals and institutions that function with non-discrimination with respect to race, creed, color, religion, age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, political opinions or affiliations. For more information on obtaining other extension publications, contact your county Cooperative Extension service.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service, University of Florida, IFAS, Florida A. & M. University Cooperative Extension Program, and Boards of County Commissioners Cooperating. Larry Arrington, Dean.