Employee motivation, culture, and power struggles in organizations

Leadership Power Struggles manifest themselves in employee behavior. This impacts overall organizational performance and productivity.

Employee motivation and its impact of job satisfaction and tenure

Employees that are highly motivated both intrinsically and extrinsically stay with their employee for longer durations. These longer stints with a single employer allow for the employee to become more tasks efficient. Through these efficiency gains, overall organizational performance and productivity is improved. Leadership power struggles arise as employee behavior, dictated by internal motivation, cause parties to act in disparate ways. Likewise, employees react to varying motivational factors differently based on culture. In Asian countries were a collectivistic culture is prevalent, organizations productivity is based on the performance of the group. In western culture, individualism is prevalent. As a result, individuals looking to surpass their peers often engage in conflict that is dysfunctional. These individuals are primarily motivated by intrinsic mechanisms such as money, power and fame. All of which characterize an individualistic organization as oppose to a collectivistic one. As a result power struggles emerge that undermine the overall organizational performance and productivity. Examples include Wall Street investment bankers and entrepreneurs. In their individual search for power, these organizations undermined their own productivity. As a result the worst financial crisis since the great depression emerged.

b. Leaders, historically are highly motivated by a calling outside the sphere of influence of the their job. These leaders are motivated to construct activities or concepts that ultimately benefit the company while creating a greater good for humanity. As these leaders fulfill their calling, conflicts often arise about organizational direction. This can potentially lead to disputes in leadership that impact organizational performance and productivity

c. Resources:

i. Steinmetz, L.L. (1983) Nice Guys Finish Last: Management Myths and Reality. Boulder, Colorado: Horizon Publications Inc. (pp. 43 -- 44)

ii. McClelland, David (1953). The Achievement Motive. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts iii. Cofer, Charles N; Appley, Mortimer H (1967), Motivation: Theory and Research, New York, London, Sydney: John Wiley & Sons

2) Social Systems Theory and its impact on organizational performance

a. Social Systems Theory postulates that leaders must give consideration to the entire organization, individuals within the organization and the interactions between individuals and groups in the organization. The leaders primary concern should be with the growth of employees. This will ultimately improve organizational performance. This can be daunting within large organizations. As a result leaders revert to the Path Goal Theory, which results in power struggles. Path Goal Theory is designed to help leaders clarify the routes followers must travel to obtain a work related goal. Power struggles arise as leaders define these routes and the metrics used to evaluate results. This is juxtaposed against the social systems theory that suggests leaders should empower individuals to help arrive at a collective agreement.