Motivational Factors At Work And Performance Commerce Essay Example

and Job Performance, this study is the first attempt to establish a relationship between motivation and job performance by considering job satisfaction as well as analyzing the factors that influence this connection.

We hope that our survey is successful in filling this research spread. Keywords: Motivation Type, Job Satisfaction, Job Performance, Intrinsic Motivation, External Regulation, Integrated Regulation, Identified Regulation, Introjected Regulation, Motivation. Paper Type: Student research survey paper.

Introduction

There has been a significant focus on the high salaries received by executives recently.

In the Economic Times newspaper articles dated January 23, 2010, Agarwal (2010) presents evidence that supports the notion of justifying high wages as a means to motivate employees. The argument suggests that higher salaries can act as a motivating factor, leading to enhanced performance. Nevertheless, if this assumption is proven false, organizations would be expending substantial funds on an ineffective approach.

Several studies suggest that job satisfaction is crucial for preventing employees from leaving their current positions and for enhancing their performance (Allent A., Veena, and Talia, 2010). Building upon this finding, our research aims to provide empirical evidence supporting the link between a person's motivational type and their level of job satisfaction, ultimately resulting in improved performance. Another challenge faced by behavioral scientists and HR managers revolves around the conflict between Agency Theory and the Intrinsic Motivation perspective. Agency Theory argues that employees tend to prioritize their own interests over those of the organization, requiring the implementation of monitoring and incentive strategies to promote performance.

McGregor's Theory X suggests that people are motivated by external factors, while the intrinsic motive position believes in an individual's natural desire to be

accepted and appreciated in society, leading to their motivation to work well. The survey aims to find a suitable solution to this dilemma. (Ren, 2010)

Research Background and Hypothesis

• Understanding Motivation - The Predictor Construct

The concept of work motive is defined as a set of energetic forces that originate within and beyond a person's being, which initiate work-related behaviors and determine its form, direction, intensity, and duration (Latham and Pinder, 2005). The study of motivation at work began with the Hawthorne studies and has since been explored through various theories such as Maslow's hierarchy of needs and Herzberg's two-factor theory. Recent belief suggests that there are different types of motivation processes (Deci, 1992), which can be broadly categorized into three classes: Extrinsic Motivation - Motivation caused by external factors such as perceived fairness of the monetary and promotional components of the compensation system (Herpen, Praag, and Cools, 2005). Intrinsic Motivation - When individuals engage in an activity for the sake of the interest generated by the activity itself (Gagne and Deci, 2005). Motivation - Non-intentional behavior or impersonal induction of motivation (Deci, 1992). Currently, there are several theories regarding what drives this motivation. Some researchers argue that rewards do not undermine intrinsic motivation (Eisenberger and Cameron, 1999).

Some argue that their studies have shown that workers in non-profit organizations have higher intrinsic motivation compared to those in for-profit organizations (Lanfranchi, Narcy and Larguem, 2010). Others believe that using external incentives can actually decrease a person's intrinsic motivation by reducing the inherent value of the task to them (Benabou and Tirole, 2003). This debate

has led to increased efforts to measure a person's motivation, which we will discuss in more detail later. There are also other theories of motivation besides the three discussed above. The Hierarchical Model of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation suggests that motivation occurs at three hierarchical levels: Global (Personality), Contextual (Life Domain), and Situational (State) (Vallerand, 2001).

From here, we establish the moderator for this survey, which is the respondent's role in the organization. We have determined this based on the Situational degree mentioned earlier. According to Vallerand's article, the situation refers to the current state of motivation.

Numerous research studies have demonstrated that an individual's position within the organizational hierarchy determines its current state. These studies indicate that employees at different levels possess distinct types of motivation. For instance, one survey discovered that workers in non-supervisory roles with lower incomes were primarily motivated by monetary concerns, while individuals in higher-income and higher-level positions were more driven by the nature and quality of the work (Rai, 2004). Middle-level managers often face intense work pressure and may lose their sense of identity as they aspire for upward mobility within the organization (Gebler and David, 2009). Senior-level employees also encounter unique work environments. It is these conditions that shape individuals' current motivation type.

From the standpoint of work motivation, we are solely interested in the current state of motivation because it is what ultimately has the biggest impact on determining their performance. Thus, our first research hypothesis is: The effect of motivation type on job performance depends on the respondent's position in the organizational hierarchy.

• Understanding Job Performance - The Outcome Construct

Performance is

considered from three perspectives: the tasks completed, behaviors exhibited, and roles performed by an employee; the qualities and skills of an employee; and the decisions made by the employee (Borman ; Brush, 1993). The domain of job performance is continuously examined by researchers.

New methods of measurement and explaining it are constantly being developed. One highly intriguing perspective that has emerged is the consideration of contextual aspects of job performance. This notion suggests that in addition to carrying out specific tasks outlined in the job description, job performance also encompasses various organizational activities (Arvey and Murphy, 1998). This concept aligns with the growing empirical evidence that supports the idea that performance is multidimensional.

Hunt's (1996) study identified eight dimensions of job performance: diligence, thoroughness, schedule flexibility, attention, off-task behavior, unruliness, theft, and drug abuse. Other researchers have expanded on this concept by attempting to develop additional dimensions and assign them to performance.

• One example is the understanding of job satisfaction as a mediator construct.

The confirmation/disconfirmation paradigm is widely accepted in understanding how individuals develop feelings of satisfaction or dissatisfaction (Chowdhury, Roy, and Ghose, 2008). This process can be understood in three ways:

• Confirmation occurs when actual outcomes match the benchmark level.
• Satisfaction is experienced when actual outcomes exceed the benchmark level.
• Dissatisfaction arises when actual outcomes fall below the benchmark level.

According to the same article, an employee's satisfaction level is influenced by their years of experience in the industry.

According to the information provided, there are three categories of employees in the

industry. These include newlyweds, dissatisfied midterm workers, and experienced veterans. Newlyweds are individuals who are new to the industry and have a high level of satisfaction due to the excitement of experiencing something new. However, dissatisfied midterm workers, who have been in the industry for some time now, are currently unhappy with the processes and methods being utilized. Out of these three categories, dissatisfied midterm workers have the lowest levels of satisfaction.

This paragraph discusses the third group of people in the industry who have gained experience and knowledge of the process. They have also developed techniques to achieve desired outcomes and are content with their progress. Additionally, there are various surveys created to evaluate job satisfaction among individuals, which will be explored soon.

• Relationship between Motivation Type and Job Satisfaction

Researchers have discovered that the type of motivation an individual possesses is linked to their level of job satisfaction. Specifically, intrinsic motivation, which stems from personal growth and utilizing existing skills, is hypothesized to result in higher levels of job satisfaction (Saleh, Hyde 1969). Conversely, it is also believed that being motivated by extrinsic factors within a job leads to job satisfaction regardless of location (Huang and Vliert, 2003). Our group concurs with the notion that intrinsic motivation yields enhanced job satisfaction.

This agreement not only relies on literature reviews, but also incorporates intuition. The hypothesis in this analysis is supported by a study conducted in France, which found that while monetary benefits can enhance satisfaction, they hamper employee motivation. The research paper refers to this phenomenon as the Rejection Effect, indicating that employees' excitement about benefits is inversely proportional to their motivation at work (Igalens and Roussel,

1999). Therefore, our second hypothesis for the research is:

• There exists a positive correlation between an employee's intrinsic motivation and their level of job satisfaction.

Relationship between Job Satisfaction and Performance

Studies suggest potential growth in exploring the relationship between Job Satisfaction and Performance. These studies investigate factors such as contingent wages' impact on intrinsic motivation, work-life balance, attitudes and satisfaction within complex organizations, performance abilities, etc.

Job satisfaction is crucial for employee performance. According to Baird's paper on Feedback, every employee desires recognition for their good work and expects some form of tangible or intangible reward. The lack of this acknowledgment can hinder their performance. Thus, creating a satisfied work environment for employees is essential. Baird's research suggests that job satisfaction and performance are not directly linked; even high satisfaction levels do not guarantee performance improvement without feedback. Conversely, jobs with low satisfaction levels but adequate feedback can positively impact performance. Some researchers argue that satisfaction arises from intrinsic rewards and feelings of achievement, with minimal influence from external agencies.

According to Lawler and Hackman (1969), performance leads to a sense of achievement when the task has high variety, individuality, autonomy, and feedback, resulting in satisfaction. Green and Haywood (2007) support the idea that performance pay can generate satisfaction and ultimately improve performance. However, subjective systems or risk-averse employees may also produce negative outcomes.

Therefore, our third hypothesis can be stated:

• There is a positive relationship between the level of job satisfaction received and the performance delivered by an employee.

Relationship between Motivation Type and Performance
Performance is influenced by motivation and ability. Vroom's Expectancy Theory emphasizes the role of motivation and management

in an employee's performance.

Working at various levels, within different sectors, individuals were essentially the industry contacts of the research workers who were contacted via electronic mails. Respondents received questionnaires which were then analyzed to yield results.

Measures

The questionnaire assessed the value of three concepts using the following information. Motivational Behavior: This was measured using the Work Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation Scale (WEIMS).

The text describes the Weims, which is composed of 18 points corresponding to six types of motive based on Self-Determination Theory (SDT). These motive types include intrinsic motive, integrated, identified,

introjected, and external regulations and motivation, each assigned different weights by Blanchard, Tremblay, Taylor, and Pelletier. SDT was developed by Deci and Ryan to understand the nature of an individual's motive or the reason behind their behavior. To measure this, WEIMS uses a 5-point Likert Scale where participants indicate the extent to which each point represents their current work involvement. Additionally, the text mentions that the Situation Motivation Scale (Guay, Vallerand, and Blanchard) was also considered for this purpose.

However, Weims covers motive behavior in greater detail compared to SIMS. Weims discusses Integrated Regulation and Introjected Regulation as additional forms of Motivation Behaviors that are not covered by SIMS. Additionally, Weims is applicable in various organizational scenarios.

Job Satisfaction: The measure used to assess job satisfaction was Brayfield ; Rothe's (1951) index of overall job satisfaction.

This instrument consists of 5 points using a 5-point Likert Scale.

Job Performance:

Performance was measured using a self-assessment version of Mahoney et Al's (1963, 1965) nine-dimensional managerial performance evaluation scale. The nine dimensions include 8 sub-dimensions of performance and one overall evaluation (Adler and Reid).

General Information:

This section required information about the participant. It also covered factors that act as moderators during the analysis of the survey results. The Cronbach Coefficient for the scales has been calculated using the responses to the questions and the SPSS Software.

The values for all variables were found to be greater than 0.7 in the survey. Baron and Kenny's Four measure mediation method was used to analyze the data. Multiple Regression Analyses were conducted to explore the relationship between different concepts, both with and without considering moderation. The first analysis examined the impact of motivation type on

job performance, with job satisfaction acting as the mediator. Then, the mediator effect was recalculated by introducing the moderator of position in the organization, specifically focusing on senior positions.

Last, the results of the Mediator effect as a Junior are once again calculated.

Consequences

Step 1:

The Dependent Variable Job Performance is analyzed in relation to the Independent Variable, Motivation type. The analysis shows that there is a significant relationship with a R2 value of 23.9%, P < .001 and F=31.177. It is possible that this relationship involves mediation and has a significant impact. Therefore, Hypothesis H4 stating that Job Performance is directly affected by the Motivation Type is confirmed.

Step 2:

In the research proposition, the Dependent Variable Job Satisfaction, which acts as a mediator, is analyzed in relation to the predictor, Motivation.

The significance of the results in terms of P & lt ; .001, R2=38.3% and F=62.945 shows that we can proceed with the Analysis. The Hypothesis, H2 that states Motivation type affects Job Satisfaction, remains true.

Step3:

The significance of the relationship is further confirmed as the Dependent Variable, Job Performance, is regressed against the Mediator, with a regression of 20.1%, P & lt ; .001, and F=24.9.

H3 suggests that Job Satisfaction has a significant impact on Performance, even when it has been verified. Step4: Ultimately, both independent variables, Motivation and Satisfaction (as a mediator), are regressed together against the Dependent Variable Job Performance. The Trial remains important, but less so compared to Step1. The Unstandardized Beta has decreased by 0.062, indicating a six percent lesser impact on Performance through the Moderator, thus establishing a Mediation effect. The Beta value has also significantly decreased

by 0.146. Therefore, it can be concluded that there is Partial Moderation by Job Satisfaction for the interaction between Motivation Type and Job Performance.

The partial consequence suggests that the Hypothesis, H5, which states that Motivation Type affects Job Performance mediated by Job Satisfaction, can be assumed to be true. The Moderator, which is the Hierarchical Position of an Employee, affects the Mediation. This is due to the job responsibility and answerability that come with the employee's level, which in turn affect the Motivation Type, Job Satisfaction, and Performance. This effect of the Moderator is studied by considering only employees in senior degrees for response and scores. The aforementioned steps are then repeated to find Mediation under Moderation. It is worth noting that the impact of Motivation on Performance is observed to be greater for employees in senior positions as indicated by the higher Standardized Beta value. The Tests remain important with B=177, 001, F=6.432.

The text discusses a hypothesis that suggests that the type of motivation someone has can affect their job performance, depending on their position within the organization. The research conducted not only supported this relationship but also demonstrated the mediating effect of job satisfaction. The study found that self-determination, a form of motivation, leads to job satisfaction, which ultimately impacts an employee's performance. However, it is important to note that this mediation is partial, as there may be other factors besides satisfaction that contribute to performance in motivated employees. There are various types of moderators that can also influence this relationship.

The situational moderator of place, which is the global, contextual and conditional factor taken into account here, has the most significant impact on

various concepts. It directly influences the motivation of an employee to work efficiently and effectively. Research has shown that senior level employees are more affected by motivation in terms of job performance, both directly and indirectly, compared to junior level employees. As senior employees have more responsibilities and independence, their job satisfaction increases, resulting in a boost in their overall performance.

Decision

The research has tried to indicate a way to address performance issues at the workplace by considering the motivation and job fit of employees. By aligning motivation with job requirements, it is possible to achieve job satisfaction and improve performance.