Equity Theory of Motivation Essay

As the cliche goes, no man is an island. Everything man does is make up ones mindd by other custody and his environment. Be it in school or at fiddle, the reason why people persevere lies on the desire to achieve a certain goal. Hence, motivation is essential to keep the drive of doing things passionately and effectively. However, the ecstasy to sustain the dream and keep the motivation alive can be tampered by brios uncertainties. Given the unique characteristics that each student possess, the center of effort exerted by an average student does not al expressive styles equal the amount of effort exerted by an outlier in class, yet the results atomic number 18 the said(prenominal) or sometimes exceeded by the outlier. Perhaps there are instances when studying overnight and not studying at all yielded the same result. These situations affect the level of motivation a student harness when studying. The impression of darkness affects how he/she will prepare for the next exam. In the employment panorama, motivation is standardisedwise an important portion to increase productivity. For example, an employee who worked overtime to get the job easily done vis-a-vis an employee who slacked off and produced a bonny output both received the same net income and the same praises from their boss. The voicelessworking employee might feel wronged upon perceive how his extra effort was overlooked. To give justice to the un forthrightness he feels, he opts to mimic the other employee, thus also producing a mediocre output. The equity opening of motivation, developed by workplace and behavioral psychologist can Stacey Adams in 1963, is grounded on the concept that employees tend to seek equity or balance in the amount of input they give to their job or relationship with their bosses, and the output they receive. The inputs referred in this theory include college degree, hard work, effort, committment, ability, adaptability, determination, flexibility, skill , loyalty, tolerance, enthusiasm, trust in superiors, support from colleages, personal sacrifice and the like. On the other hand, outputs come in the institute of financial benefits like salary, bonuses, and perks, and also intangible benefits such as recognition from superiors, praises, responsibility, job security, good reputation, sand of achievement, personal growth and the like. When an employees inputs outweigh his or her outputs, he or she becomes demotivated and unhappy. To achieve equity, the behavioral retort is to balance out the input-output equation by postulation for an increase in the output side, orsolely diminishing his or her input. The state of equity lie on the perception of an employee in relation to another(prenominal) employees input and output balance, which shows that employee motivation is subjective nature. However, an employer or managers role of charge employees motivated should not be deterred by this notion. Instead, understanding the sources of employee dissatisfaction and demotivation can help managers address the issues surrounding the workplace to allow for a to a greater extent productive and work-conducive environment.The equity theory is more comm lonesome(prenominal) known as the social comparison theory or the iniquity theory since an employee compares his input-output ratio with another employees input-output ratio to determine equity, and an employee who feels inequity or un bazaarness reduces this through his behavior and attitude towards work. The exchange relationship surrounded by work and compensation in comparison with a colleage draws forth discernment of what is fair and unfair. To grasp the suspiciousness behind the theory, four objects must be present which include the person, whose aim is to reduce whatever inequity feeling he or she has the comparison to other, which pertains to the benchmark person from whom equity and inequity is determined the inputs and the outputs. tally to the theory, a per son first compares inputs and outputs with a comparison other, then determines if there is inequity or unbalanced input/output ratio between himself/herself and comparison other. Basically, the theory assumes that an individual addresses his/her inequity feeling after comparison to others, and remains at the level where equity is achieved. Several ways a person does in reaching equity include altering his/her inputs, altering his/her outputs, distorting his inputs and outputs cognitively, finding a new job, or ever-changing the person of comparison. (Gogia, 2010) In line with this, Huseman, Hattfield and Miles (1987) dissected the equity theory into four basic ideas. First, the notion of fairness is conceived through comparing an individuals input and takes ratio with others. The other does not necessarily subscribe a colleage, because it can also be his/her old self. Comparing the amount of effort exerted and the amount of salary received to a colleages or an old job facilitates the judgment of what is fair to an individual. Second, if the compared ratios are not equal, then there is inequity.The both kinds ofinequity are underpayment inequity and overpayment inequity. Underpayment inequity happens when an individual deems that his/her ratio is little than others, or in other words, his great effort mismatches with the benefit received as compared to another employee. On the contrary, overpayment inequity occurs when a big compensation is received from the little effort exerted, as compared to other coworkers. Third, the greater the difference in inequity, the greater tension and distress the individual feels. The different attitudes people have toward lifes unfairness in general brought about the three kinds of equity-sensitive people namely the benevolents, the equity sensitives and the entitleds, with the benevolents world the most tolerant of underrewards, and the entitleds having the most preference of over-rewards. The equity sensitives just want their ratio to be the same with others, moreover the entitleds believe that the world owes them, so it is just rightful for them to receive more. Forth, the more intense feeling of tension brought about by inequity, the harder an individual will work to restore equity. This is just like how a more oppressed victim is more thirsty he is to seek justice, if not revenge. The ways in achieving equity varies from person to person. Upon experiencing the feeling of unfairness, the assumption of this theory is that employees will find ways to reduce inequity. The two most typical ways are through behavioral options and cognitive options, where the latter is used more often used since it is both less riskier and easier to do than the former. For behavioral options, the employees change their input to match outcomes like slacking off or leaving work early, changing outcomes to match input by asking for an increase, or perpetrating a crime like theft or fraud, persuading others to change inpu ts by complaining to superiors, and drug withdrawal through tardiness, absenteeism or quitting the job. As for the cognitive options, the employee distorts his own inputs or outcomes by underestimating his own carrying out so that the inputs will match the output distort the inputs or outcomes of others by thinking that others earn more because they in all probability deserve it change the comparison others by choosing a different benchmark for them to feel better. (Motivation theories, 2009) Applying this theory in the regimen office place gives a clearer understanding as to why in general, government employeees are unmotivated and unhappy with their jobs. Perhaps they have once tried to work dilligently, but nevertheless end up with having the same crossways-the-board inducement as fellow workers who do not work as hard as them. Hence, the Aquino administration came up with the public presentation-based incentive system to allow a fair compensation to those who deserve to be rewarded. By altering the outcome through a performance-based bonus, government employees submit to match their performance to the amount of bonus they wish to receive. Motivation Theories. (2009, April 26).Why Do Employees Take more(prenominal) Initiatives to Improve Their murder After Co-developing Performance Measures? A Field account (Groen, Wouters & Wilderom, 2012)Usually, people work more conscientiously when their performances are being monitored, be it in school, at work, or even in acting games. Knowing how grades, scores or output are obtained help an individuals goal setting and invoke the determination and inscription to achieve the said goal. What more if the employees themselves determine how they are to be rated? Having an mind and first hand experience in developing performance measure criteria make employees not only feel valued, but also feel a sense of fairness because they know that the criteria they set are attainable and reasonable.Groen, Wouters and W ilderom (2012) conducted a field study to investigate why employees perform better when they are have-to doe with in developing peformance measures. The study used the theory of imagened behavior, which states that beliefs predict how individuals behave or plan to behave. Gathering data from meetings, interviews, company breeding data, quantitative questionnaire and first-hand experience in the field in a beverage manufacturing company, bottling line employees were found to be more motivated, have more initiative, and more positively alter by social pressure when they were involved in developing performance measures. Thevariables examined in the study include attitude towards the job, social pressure from coworkers, capability from personal skills. All these variables were found to positively and significantly influence an employees intiative towards his job, thus increasing his productivity. The study showed that productivity and initative of the employees who were aware and ha d a say on performance bill criteria improved the departments overall performance. 7. Models of Performance- beat Use in Local Governments Understanding Budgeting, Communication, and Lasting Effects (Melkers & Willoghby, 2005) Since performance meter has been emphasized in various literatures, the magnificence of having them espouse and implemented is no longer debatable. Performance measurement schemes help in understanding the strengths and weaknesses of the organization, and it also serves as an objective basis of planning the reckon to be used to fund government projects. The study of Melkers and Willoghby (2005) paid close attention to the usefulness of performance-based information on the operations of the local government in the US, communication, and budgetary decisions. The pervasiveness of performance measurement implementation in the US was also studied through the results obtained from a national survey of city and county administrators and budgeters of nearly ccc g overnments. Multiple regression analysis was implemented to find out whether dependent variables budget set up, communication effects and lasting effects index were individually affected by independent variables community characteristics, respondent characteristics, organisational culturea and performance measurement characteristics. The results showed that although the use of performance indicators was pervasive, the respondents were apathetic with regards to the effectiveness of these performance measurements for budgetary concerns and operational processes at heart the government unit.Promoting the Utilization of Performance Measures in Public Organizations An Empirical Study of Factors Affecting Adoption and slaying (Julnes & Holzner, 2001) It is true that performance measurements are vital for making informed decisions. Both public and private firms have to be guided on a set of parameters that help them determine where they have done well and what areas need improvement. If the government departments are seriousin improving their service to the public, then coming up with a set of criteria and implementing these evaluation criteria would be essential in determining where to start the change. Despite recognizing the importance of having performance measures, there are several issues that impede the development and utilization of a performance measurement scheme. The empirical study by Julnes and Holzner (2001) examined the factors that hamper the utilization of performance measurement in public organizations in the US. A sample of state and local government employees were drawn from the Government Financial Officers Association, International metropolis/County Management Association of College and University Business Officers obtained from GASB. A total of 934 questionnaires were sent to state and local government employees across the nation in 1997. The variables used in the survey included word sense and implementation for the dependent variable, an d outdoor(a) requirements, internal requirements, internal interest groups, external interest groups, attitudes, risk taking, information, resources, goal orientation, percent unionized, government casing and position. Using ordinary least square mulitple-regression analyses, the results of the study revealed that output measures were developed for various programs, but capability measures and outcome measures were less developed. Looking at the performance measure usage, the researchers found out that efficiency and outcome measures were less used for strategic planning, resource allocation, program management, monitoring and evaluation, reporting to internal management, electec officials, citizens or media. deviation from these, the researchers findings showed that internal requirements, external requirements, goal orientation and access to information positively and significantly affect the adoption of performance measures, composition external interest groups and internal r equirements positively affect implementation of performance measures, but unionization negatively affect implementation. Overall, the policy of using performance measures would more likely be adopted if it were an internal requirement wherein top management commits to the effort of evaluating government programs. On the contrary, external requirement would not automatically merit the implementation of performance measures since factors such as organizations ability, politicians support, sufficient resources and commitment to the purpose were lacking if not missing. The study suggests that public administrators be aware thatperformance measure is a two-step process namely adoption and implementation, wherein factors affecting adoption include mostly rational and technocratic theory, while actual implementation are determined by political and cultural factors. (Julnes & Holzner, 2001)The Use of Performance Measurement Systems in the Public Sector Effects on Performance (Spekle & Verbe eten, 2013) Performance measurement information are collected and used in various ways such as strategic planning, budgeting, and employee bonus planning. The vast benefits of measuring performance outweighs the costs of collecting such data, which is why most government agencies have already instilled in their system a peformance measurement mechanism for reference. In the study of Spekle and Verbeeten (2013), the researchers explored whether the pefromance measurement system very improves or deters organizational performance. They also introduced the concept of contractibility, which means clear goals, undistorted pefromance metrics, managers knowledge and control of the interlingual rendition process. Public sector organizations that have high contractibility were expected to be better than those organizations with low contractibilty in foothold of performance. The test was done through a survey of 101 public sector organizations in the US. The results showed that contractibil ity influences the way incentive-oriented use of the performance measurement system and performance. More interestingly, the researchers concluded that usign the performance measurement system for incentive purposes negatively influences organizational performance, unless contractibility is high. Disregarding contractibility, performance measurement system tends to enhance performance. Hence, the effect of the performance measurement system in public sector organizations are greatly affected by the level of contractibility and managers usage of the system.Determinants of Incentive Intensity in Group-Based Rewards (Zenger & Marshall, 2000) Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) in the Public Sector A Study in Malaysia. Economic Incentives and the Choice of State Government Accounting Practices (Ingram, 1984)