Equity Theory argues that workers will engage in comparison with one another for rewards to help determine their level of effort (Barnet, 2010). In this instance, workers for the poor managers can see that not only do they not receive reward for their efforts at all, but they are treated more poorly than other workers. The supervisor may even take all of the credit for the success of the organization. Under such situations, employees will not have a high level of motivation and therefore will have lower productivity levels than their peers. At Flagler, employees did not explicitly state comparisons, but it is reasonable that some workers such as those in the two warehouses or in the back office departments will make such comparisons.

Reinforcement Theory as espoused by B.F. Skinner underscores the situation at Flagler as well. It can be intimated that the good managers, by virtue of having a strong human connection with the people under their supervision, reinforce positive behaviors more than managers such as Shaney or Hoff, neither of whom it appears will reinforce positive activities. Such managers instead appear to operate from the belief that workers will work because they are told to work, and feel that the company should not be indebted to the workers for so much as a thank you.

All of the theories studied, both content and process, support the findings of Ellen and Steve. Workers are motivated by recognition and reward, and if these things are not present then this will have a negative...

Workers also need to feel as though they are treated equitably, and positive behaviors must be reinforced. Workers expect that they will receive some sort of recognition for their efforts. Ellen and Steve did not study the "ok" group in the middle of the productivity standings, but if they had a reasonable hypothesis for their findings would be that management in those units provides some degree of reinforcement and human bonding, but not to the degree of the other managers. Those groups are not motivated, but nor are they demotivated. The groups Steve and Ellen studied provide a contrast by which the issues surrounding employee motivation can be understood, and the case highlights that no matter what theory is applied to the situation the underlying maxim in the case applies, and productivity improvements at Flagler will require the promotion of that maxim to the moderately performing and underperforming managers.
Works Cited:

Dreyfack. R. (2004). Personalizing productivity. Supervision. Vol. 65 (5) 20-22.

Silva, S. (no date). Motivation theories -- the foundations to employee motivation. Articles Base. Retrieved June 24, 2010 from http://www.articlesbase.com/human-resources-articles/motivation-theories-the-foundation-to-employee-motivation-768923.html

Barnet, T. (2010). Motivation and motivation theory. Reference for Business. Retrieved June 24, 2010 from http://www.referenceforbusiness.com/management/Mar-No/Motivation-and-Motivation-Theory.html