Personalizing Productivity Is a Fairly

¶ … Personalizing Productivity is a fairly straightforward morality play about the role that treating employees well has on motivation. This article oversimplifies the issue of motivation, but does tap into one important aspect of motivation. There is a psychological need on the part of all people to have meaning in their work. When management is able to tap into that meaning, the result will be higher levels of motivation, which in turn lead to higher levels of productivity.

The basic psychology of motivation has addressed in a few different ways. Maslow's hierarchy is one of the most basic ways for managers to understand human motivation. The company is presumed to meet the safety needs of the workers. The managers in the article that were successful tapped into the social and esteem needs of the workers; the managers who were not successful did not. There were differences between the leadership styles of the different managers, illustrating that the question of motivation is not one of style but of meeting deep-rooted needs.

The social needs include the need for belonging and this is illustrated in the article. When workers do not feel as though they are a part of the team -- for example the quote "she treats us like fifth-graders" -- they lose motivation. When workers do feel that they are an important part of the team -- for example the quote "one hand washes the other" -- they have higher levels of motivation. The same applies to esteem needs. The esteem needs of the workers are met through recognition of their contributions to the organization. When these conditions are met, employee motivation increases.

The other major content theory is Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory. Dissatisfaction arises when certain factors are not present in the work. With the poor managers at Flagler, the recognition for efforts was not present, and neither was a human connection between the manager and the worker. As the result of this, the employees lost motivation. The company may have been providing many things to the employees, but it is the absence of specific things that the employees need that resulting in decreased motivation (Silva, no date).

In addition to the content theories of motivation, there are also process theories. Vroom's Expectancy Theory posits that employees will put into work a level of effort that is related to the expected outcomes. In other words, if the employees expect that greater effort will result in nothing, they will not put forth greater effort. Employees therefore can be understood to be rational actors and all terms and conditions of their employment, including their productivity, can be viewed as part of a bargain. When managers fail to reward employees for increased effort -- such as Bill Shaney -- the employees are unwilling to exert further effort. If there is an extrinsic reward, even a non-financial one, then employees are more willing to extend their effort level, as is the case with Harry Cross' employees.

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.