Assessing Employee Motivation: Observation vs. Surveys

Introduction

There are a variety of ways that an industrial-organizational (I-O) consultant could go about determining the underlying motivational problem in a workplace. One method would be to simply observe employees and look for telltale signs of dissatisfaction or apathy. Another approach would be to conduct interviews with employees, either individually or in groups, or to administer surveys that ask employees directly about their level of satisfaction with their work and what motivates them. By using one or the other of these methods, an I-O consultant can usually get to the bottom of any motivational problems in a workplace. This paper discusses the strengths and weaknesses of both methods of understanding employee motivation.

Method 1: Direct Observation

The direct observation method of obtaining data can be very useful at times, but it can also be very limiting. This research method involves observing employees in their natural work environment and then analyzing the collected data to identify reasons why employees may not be motivated. It can be a way for an I-O consultant to observe directly in the field what employees are doing and to develop an objective impression of potential problems.

The advantage of using this method is that it allows researchers to gather data from an unbiased perspective, as they are not interacting with or asking questions of employees. Additionally, this method can provide insights into employee behavior that might not be apparent through other research methods, such as interviews. In interviews, an employee might not be totally honest because of what is known as the Hawthorne Effect — when a person changes their behavior because they are aware of being watched or studied (Wickström & Bendix, 2000). But when observing without the employees' knowledge, a consultant can see employees in their most honest moments and notice things that might otherwise go unnoticed.

However, the direct observation method also has some disadvantages, such as the potential for observer bias and the time-consuming nature of data collection and analysis. For instance, the I-O consultant may have preconceived notions about motivation that do not apply to the situation at hand. The consultant may also have personal feelings about the company or may have biases based on stereotypes that have been unconsciously incorporated into their own views without realizing it. Overall, the direct observation method can be a useful tool for understanding employee motivation, but it is important to consider both its advantages and disadvantages when deciding whether to use it in a particular research study.

Method 2: Interview and Survey

This method involves interviewers asking questions of employees and/or surveying a sample of employees in order to identify areas of dissatisfaction. Once identified, these areas can be addressed through changes in policies or practices. The interview approach allows the researcher to probe somewhat more deeply, but it usually limits sample size. The survey approach, on the other hand, allows one to present a range of questions or statements to a wider sample and obtain feedback that is typically quantified using a Likert scale (Joshi et al., 2015). Both methods are acceptable and can be helpful in gaining insight into the underlying reasons for employee behavior. However, both rely on self-reported data, which means that information given may not be fully honest or accurate, and some important information may be withheld (Brutus et al., 2013).

One of the biggest strengths of interview methodology is that it allows the researcher to obtain in-depth information from participants about a particular topic. Additionally, interviews provide an opportunity for the researcher to build rapport with participants and establish trust, which can encourage participants to be more open and candid in their responses. Moreover, interviews can be adapted to different contexts and research goals; for example, they can be conducted in person or over the phone, and they can be structured or unstructured. Finally, interviews generate rich data that can be analyzed using a variety of methods. Overall, interview methodology is a versatile and powerful tool that can yield valuable insights into complex behavior and phenomena.

Surveys, too, are a popular research method because they provide a quick and easy way to collect data from a large number of people. Surveys can be used to collect information about people's opinions, knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes, as well as demographic information such as age, gender, education level, and income. One of the main strengths of survey methodology is that it is relatively cheap and efficient. Surveys can be administered online, by phone, or in person, and they can reach a large number of people in a short amount of time. Another strength is that surveys allow researchers to ask specific questions and receive detailed responses. This type of research is especially well suited for exploring people's opinions and attitudes on controversial or sensitive topics (Groves et al., 2011).

While survey methodology is a widely used research technique, it also has a number of potential weaknesses. One issue is that respondents may not be honest in their answers, either because they want to appear socially desirable or because they do not want to admit to certain behaviors. Another issue is that surveys can only provide information about what people say they do, not what they actually do. For these reasons, the potential weaknesses of survey methodology should be taken into account when interpreting results.

One of the primary weaknesses of interview methodology is that it is often difficult to determine the validity and reliability of the data collected. This is because interviews are generally conducted in an unstructured format, which can make it hard to compare responses across different subjects or to replicate results. Additionally, interviews can be influenced by numerous factors, including the interviewer's bias, the subject's mood or motivation, and outside distractions.

Conclusion

An I-O consultant should be careful about which method is used to collect data. The best approach is to use multiple methods, including direct observation and interview/survey approaches. Each method has its own strengths and weaknesses, and each can be useful depending upon what kind of data the consultant is trying to obtain. The best way to determine the appropriate method is to first decide what kind of data is needed and how much detail is required.

References

Brutus, S., Aguinis, H., & Wassmer, U. (2013). Self-reported limitations and future directions in scholarly reports: Analysis and recommendations. Journal of Management, 39(1), 48–75.

Groves, R. M., Fowler, F. J., Jr., Couper, M. P., Lepkowski, J. M., Singer, E., & Tourangeau, R. (2011). Survey methodology. John Wiley & Sons.

Joshi, A., Kale, S., Chandel, S., & Pal, D. K. (2015). Likert scale: Explored and explained. British Journal of Applied Science & Technology, 7(4), 396.

Wickström, G., & Bendix, T. (2000). The "Hawthorne effect" — what did the original Hawthorne studies actually show? Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 363–367.