2.4 Motivation and demotivation

Taylor's scientific-management approach emphasizes standardized tasks, close measurement and financial incentives; Maslow proposes a hierarchy from physiological and safety needs through belonging, esteem and self-actualization; Herzberg separates hygiene factors that prevent dissatisfaction from motivators that create satisfaction.

Taylor may raise output where tasks and individual results are measurable, but can understate social and intrinsic needs. Maslow helps managers consider unmet needs, but people do not always move through a fixed sequence. In Herzberg's model, pay, policy and conditions are mainly hygiene factors, while achievement, recognition, responsibility and growth are motivators; improving hygiene can remove dissatisfaction without necessarily creating lasting motivation.

For repetitive packing work, a piece-rate bonus may increase effort as Taylor predicts, safe conditions may address a lower-level Maslow need, and enriched responsibility plus recognition may add Herzberg motivators. The best intervention depends on whether the problem is low pay, insecurity, weak belonging or an unchallenging job.

Do not treat the theories as universal laws or assume pay is irrelevant in Herzberg's model. Diagnose the employee, task and source of dissatisfaction, then evaluate evidence and implementation costs.

McClelland explains acquired needs for achievement, affiliation and power; Deci and Ryan's self-determination theory emphasizes autonomy, competence and relatedness; equity theory focuses on perceived fairness of input–outcome ratios; expectancy theory links effort to expected performance, reward and the value of that reward.

Match the intervention to the mechanism. Challenging feedback may suit a high need for achievement, team belonging a high affiliation need, and influence a responsibly channelled power need. Autonomy, mastery feedback and connection can support intrinsic motivation. Equity problems require credible comparison and fair process. Expectancy falls if employees doubt that effort can meet the target, that performance will be rewarded, or that the reward matters.

A salesperson may reject a bonus if the territory makes the target unattainable (weak effort–performance expectancy), if managers do not reliably pay it (weak performance–reward link), or if extra leave is valued more than cash (low reward value). A transparent target, adequate training and a valued reward address different links.

The theories overlap but are not interchangeable. More autonomy cannot repair perceived pay inequity, and an attractive reward cannot motivate when the employee believes performance is impossible. Identify the broken mechanism before recommending action.

Labour turnover measures people leaving and being replaced. A high rate can raise recruitment and training cost, but its meaning depends on who leaves, why, and whether vacancies are filled.

Separate avoidable from unavoidable departures and examine pay, management, workload, progression, location and labour-market alternatives before choosing a response.

If experienced technicians leave after a shift change, exit evidence may point to scheduling rather than a general motivation problem.

A lower turnover rate is not automatically better: retaining poor-fit staff can also reduce performance.

Calculate $\text{labour turnover rate}=\frac{\text{number of employees leaving during the period}}{\text{average number employed during the period}}\times100$. If 18 employees leave and average employment is 240, turnover is $18/240\times100=7.5\%$. Compare the same period and workforce group over time or with a relevant benchmark, then investigate who left and why: the percentage alone cannot show whether departures were avoidable or harmful.

An appraisal compares performance or development evidence with agreed expectations and decides what support or action follows. Formative reviews improve work during a period; summative reviews judge an outcome.

Choose feedback, targets and evidence that fit the role. A 360-degree view can reveal patterns across colleagues, but it also needs confidentiality and careful interpretation.

A new supervisor receives monthly coaching on observable behaviours, then a formal review after the trial period.

An appraisal is not just a score and feedback is not automatically objective; define the criteria and reduce halo or recency effects.

Use all four methods deliberately. Formative appraisal gives ongoing feedback for improvement; summative appraisal judges performance at the end of a period; 360-degree feedback combines views from people around the employee; self-appraisal asks the employee to assess evidence and development needs. Self-appraisal can increase reflection and ownership but may involve leniency or limited self-awareness; 360-degree evidence broadens perspective but needs anonymity, consistent criteria and protection from popularity bias.

Recruitment starts by defining the role and ends with a fair choice from suitable applicants. Internal recruitment can preserve knowledge and motivate staff; external recruitment widens the pool but adds uncertainty and cost.

Match the source and selection method to the skills, urgency, budget and diversity objective. A job description sets expectations; selection evidence should test the capabilities the role actually needs.

A firm filling a routine promotion role may use an internal competition, but a new specialist technology role may need an external search and a technical work sample.

More applicants do not guarantee a better hire. Distinguish attraction, selection and the quality of the evidence used.

Financial rewards include pay, bonuses, commission, profit-related pay and benefits. They can attract staff or focus effort, but the metric rewarded may distort behaviour.

Ask whether the reward is individual or team-based, short- or long-term, and whether performance is measurable without encouraging unsafe or low-quality shortcuts.

A sales commission can increase volume, yet a customer-retention bonus may better support a subscription business.

Higher pay does not guarantee motivation, and an incentive that changes one metric can damage another.

Distinguish the syllabus reward types. Salary is fixed annual pay; wages are based on time or output (piece rate); commission links pay to sales; performance-related pay links it to assessed targets; profit-related pay shares organizational profit; employee share ownership gives employees an ownership stake; fringe payments are benefits such as insurance or a company car. Match the measure to controllable performance: piece rates or commission can sharpen effort but may sacrifice quality, cooperation or customer fit, while profit or shares align longer-term interests but weakly connect one employee's effort to the final reward.

Non-financial rewards include recognition, responsibility, development, flexible work and a supportive environment. They can improve intrinsic motivation and retention when they meet a real employee need.

Select the reward that changes the relevant experience: autonomy for ownership, development for progression, recognition for contribution, or flexibility for work–life constraints.

Offering a skilled analyst ownership of a client dashboard may motivate more than a generic “employee of the month” award.

Non-financial does not mean cost-free, and the same reward will not fit every employee or role.

Job rotation moves employees among tasks to build variety and breadth; job enlargement adds tasks at a similar responsibility level; job enrichment adds autonomy, challenge and responsibility. Empowerment grants authority to make decisions. Purpose or the opportunity to make a difference connects work to valued impact, while teamwork can add belonging, mutual support and shared problem-solving. Choose the mechanism that addresses the actual need: adding more routine tasks is enlargement, not enrichment, and may increase workload without increasing motivation.

Training develops knowledge or skill; induction helps a new employee enter safely, on-the-job learning uses the workplace, and off-the-job learning creates protected practice.

Start with the capability gap, choose a method that fits risk and complexity, then check transfer through observed performance. Training without time, tools or follow-up may not change behaviour.

A new machine operator can learn procedures in a supervised simulation before a competency check on the production line.

Attendance is not learning. Evaluate whether the new capability appears in the job and whether the benefit exceeds the training cost.