REVIEW OF MOTIVATIONAL THEORIES

Abstract

Human resources are the most important among all the resources owned by any organization. As organizations continue to face mounting competitive pressures, they seek to do it with less, and do it with better quality. To retain efficient and experienced workforce in an organization is extremely crucial in overall performance of an organization. Motivated employees can help make an organization competitively more value added and profitable. This paper provides human resource professionals with a broad understanding of the importance of pay in motivating employees and in improving their productivity. A new motivational model has been proposed for the organizations belonging to the IT sector in this paper. Limitations and guidelines for future research are also provided.

Keywords Motivation, human, resource, IT sector

1. Introduction In organizations, motivating people is a highly researched subject as it contributes to both the quality of working life and the productivity of the organization. Consequently, it is extremely important for managers to perform a vital role of identifying what motivates an individual, create an environment to positively support and meet the needs of employees. The present study is an attempt to find out the applications of certain motivational theories and also the major factors that motivate employees. The various theories of motivation that have been considered for this study are given below:

1.1 McClellands Theory of Needs McClelland, a Psychologist, developed this theory in the late 1940‘s whose research shows motives are acquired by an association with an internal state of positive or negative affect and that once an external or internal cue, becomes associated with, and results in a motive.(Trash & Elliott, 1985). McClelland (1985) describes motivation as the end product of all forms of action and is anything that influences the tendency to respond. David McClelland, in his acquired-needs theory, proposed that an individual's specific needs are acquired over time

and are shaped by one's life experiences. Most of these needs can be classified as either of the three, namely, achievement, affiliation, or power. A person's motivation and effectiveness in certain job functions are influenced by these three needs. Need for Achievement: Characteristics of a person high in achievement are competition, imagery and high investment. People with a high need for achievement seek to excel and thus tend to avoid both low-risk and high-risk situations. Achievers avoid low-risk situations because according to them, the easily attained success is not a genuine achievement. They need regular feedback in order to monitor the progress of their achievements. They prefer either to work alone or with other high achievers. Need for Affiliation: A need for relating to others for opportunities to communicate and spend time with (Wood et al, 2010). Those with a high need for affiliation need harmonious relationships with other people and need to feel accepted by other people. They tend to conform to the norms of their work group. Individuals with traits of high affiliation prefer work that provides significant personal interaction. They perform well in customer service and client interaction situations. Need for Power: A person's need for power can be one of two types, namely, personal and institutional. Those who need personal power want to direct others, and this need often is perceived as undesirable. Persons who need institutional power (also known as social power) want to organize the efforts of others to further the goals of the organization. Managers with a high need for institutional power tend to be more effective than those with a high need for personal power.

1.2 Equity Theory According to equity theory, it is the perception of equitability and in-equitability that motivates people to work. Equity theory focuses on two sides: the input and the outcome. An employee compares his or her job‘s inputs with an outcomes ratio. Many times inequities can lead to an increase in absenteeism and sometimes resignation of an organization (Greenberg, 1999). Equity theory deals with human motives and has wide applications in understanding organizational behaviour. The Human Resources Development Team of an organisation takes equity theory under serious consideration when dealing with people, whether in cases of administering simple tasks like pay, promotions, and recognition or in cases of training,

improvements, and development. Equity theory will help HRD explain employee‘s behaviour and provide them with the possible factors that might decrease efficiency and performance. In this paper, equity theory has been examined in regard to pay, assuming that it is one of the most important factors responsible for satisfaction and motivation of the employee. This paper will provide human resource professionals with a broad understanding of the importance of pay in motivating employees and in improving their productivity.

1.3 Expectancy Theory Developed by Victor Vroom, expectancy theory predicts how much effort a person will exert to achieve a task (Wood et al, 2010), is from an individual decision making basis model (Geiger & Cooper, 1996) which is determined by a person‘s beliefs about effort-performance relationship and work outcomes (Wood et al, 2010).This theory is called a process theory, which is based on understanding the cognitive processes a person uses that influences their behaviour. This includes a person‘s beliefs and reasoning for needing rewards to fill desired needs (Wood et al, 2010). Vroom's expectancy theory assumes that the behaviour of the person results from conscious choices among alternatives whose purpose it is to maximize pleasure and to minimize pain. Vroom realized that an employee's performance is based on individual factors such as skills, knowledge, personality, experience and abilities. He stated that effort, performance and motivation are linked in a person's motivation, and thus, used the variables Expectancy, Instrumentality and Valence to account for this. Expectancy is the belief that increased effort will lead to increased performance. It refers to employees‘ different expectations and levels of confidence about what they are capable of doing – the belief that effort will lead to first order outcomes. Instrumentality refers to the perception of employees whether they will actually receive what they desire, even if it has been promised by a manager. It is the perceived link between first order and second order outcomes.

1.4 Job Characteristic Model The Job Characteristics Model (JCM) was designed to evaluate and improve the ―jobs‖ of those employed by others. The primary purpose was to diagnose the existing jobs, and

evaluate the effects of job changes on employees for outcomes such as productivity, motivation and satisfaction (Hackman & Oldham, 1975). This approach focused on the work of the job itself as opposed to other job design focused perspectives (Hackman & Oldham, 1980).

1.5 Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Maslow's hierarchy of needs is a theory in psychology proposed by Abraham Maslow in his 1943 paper "A Theory of Human Motivation" in Review. According to him if people grew in an environment in which their needs are not met, they will be unlikely to function as healthy individuals or well-adjusted individuals. Maslow theorised that people have five types of needs and that these are activated in a hierarchical manner. This means that these needs are aroused in a specific order from lowest to highest, such that the lowest-order need must be fulfilled, before the next order need is triggered and the process continues. According to Maslow we need to know where a person is on the hierarchical pyramid in order to motivate him/her. Then we need to focus on meeting that person‘s needs at that level (Robbins, 2001). Below is a summary of these needs that in this thesis are divided into Hygiene needs (Physiological, safety, social needs) and Growth needs (esteem, self-actualisation needs). Physiological needs are the needs at the bottom of the triangle. This includes the need to satisfy the fundamental biological drives such as food, air, water and shelter. According to Maslow says, organisations must provide employees with a salary that enable them to afford adequate living conditions. The rationale here is that any hungry employee will hardly be able to make much of any contribution to his organisation. Safety needs occupies the second level of needs. Safety needs are activated after physiological needs are met. They refer to the need for a secure working environment, free from any threats or harms. The rationale is that employees working in an environment free of harm do their jobs without fear of harm. Social needs represent the third level of needs. They are activated after safety needs are met. Esteem needs represent the fourth level of needs. It includes the need for self-respect and approval of others. Organisations introduce awards banquets to recognise distinguished achievements. Self-actualisation needs occupy the last level at the top of the triangle. This refers, need to become all that one is capable of being to develop ones fullest potential. The rationale here

holds to the point that self-actualised employees represent valuable assets to the organisation human resource.

1.6 Goal Setting Theory According to the theory, there are two cognitive determinants of behaviour: values and intentions (goals). A goal is defined simply as what the individual is consciously trying to do. Locke and Latham postulate that the form in which one experiences one‘s value judgments is emotional. That is, one‘s values create a desire to-do things consistent with them. Goals also affect behaviour (job performance) through other mechanisms. Goals motivate people to develop strategies that will enable them to perform at the required goal levels. Finally, accomplishing the goal can lead to satisfaction and further motivation, or frustration and lower motivation if the goal is not accomplished. Goals Need to Be Specific: Organization members perform at higher levels when asked to meet a specific high-performance goal. Specific goals (often quantified) let organization members know what to reach for and allow them to measure their own progress. Goals Must Be Difficult but Attainable: A goal that is too easily attained will not bring about the desired increments in performance. The key point is that a goal must be difficult as well as specific for it to raise performance. However, there is a limit to this effect. Although organization members will work hard to reach challenging goals, they will only do so when the goals are within their capability. As goals become too difficult, performance suffers because organization members reject the goals as unreasonable and unattainable. A major factor in attainability of a goal is self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997). This is an internal belief regarding one‘s job-related capabilities and competencies. If employees have high self efficacies, they will tend to set higher personal goals under the belief that they are attainable. The first key to successful goal setting is to build and reinforce employees ‗self-efficacy. Goals Must Be Accepted: Goals need to be accepted. Simply assigning goals to organization members may not result in their commitment to those goals, especially if the goal will be difficult to accomplish. A powerful method of obtaining acceptance is to allow organization members to participate in the goal-setting process. Some individuals may reject imposed goals, but if they have self-efficacy, they may still maintain high personal goals to accomplish the imposed goals (Bandura, 1997). Feedback Must Be Provided on Goal Attainment: Feedback helps organization members attain their performance goals. Feedback helps in two important ways. First, it helps people determine how well they are doing. For example, sports teams need to know the score of the

game; a sharpshooter needs to see the target; a golfer needs to know his score. The same can be said for a work team, department, or organization. Performance feedback tends to encourage better performance. Second, feedback also helps people determine the nature of the adjustments to their performance that are required to improve. Deadlines Improve the Effectiveness of Goals: For most employees, goals are more effective when they include a deadline for completion. Deadlines serve as a time-control mechanism and increase the motivational impact of goals. Being aware that a deadline is approaching, the typical employee will invest more effort into completing the task. In contrast, if plenty of time remains for attaining the goal, the employee is likely to slow down his or her pace to fill the available time. However, when deadlines are too tight, particularly with complex tasks, the quality of work may suffer.

2. Literature Review The purpose of this literature review is to present an overview of the theories that explain motivation in the workplace and address the factors that contribute to job satisfaction (motivation) or cause job dissatisfaction. The various theories of motivation presented in this paper focus on how each theory supports the other and how they are applicable in the workplace. The three most important areas for motivation, namely, training and development, appraisal, and compensation and benefits have been included.

2.1 McClelland’s Theory Motivation plays an important role in today‘s work environment as motivated employees are more productive employees. However, the ways in which the organization motivates its employees have to be improved from time to time. ‗A motivational strategy is any effort to induce employees to initiate and sustain activities that can directly or indirectly improve service productivity‘ (Greiner 1986, p. 82). Motivation can have an effect on the output of your

business

and

concerns

both

quantity

and

quality.

McClelland proposed that an individual‘s particular needs are obtained over time as a result of life experiences. Most of these needs fall into three general categories of needs which can

be class as need for achievement, affiliation or power. The strengths of the McClelland‘s acquired needs theory is that it provides a clear picture for the organization and the managers to know which type of job are suitable for the employees and which types of people that can make the organizations more successful. McClelland and Burnham have identified two types of power managers: those who seek personal power and those who seek institutional power‘ (Lyden 1976, p. 201). However, managers who seek for institutional power are more successful as they can create favourable condition at work. Wagner and Swanson (1979, p. 66) have attributed the success of higher power needs people to their ability to create a greater sense of responsibility and team spirit in their organizations. This gives the organization, a clear picture of the employees that are suitable to be promoted and become a manager. Therefore, management should provide people with high need for power the opportunity to manage other. In addition, this will also give the manager a guideline on how to become a good manager because as stated manager who

seek

institutional

power

are

more

successful.

Furthermore, a major problem with affiliative managers is that due to the concern of the wellbeing of the subordinates, he/she might be willing to make exceptions to the company‘s rule in responding to his employees‘ needs, thus violating one of the bureaucracy‘s basic principles of fairness (Lyden 1976, p. 201). However, this could be stated as a weakness for the theory, as managers should not always look at fairness when judging, because different situation require different types of decision. For example, two employees with different situation at the same time wanting to apply for leave, one saying that he want to go for a vacation and one saying that he needs to go back to his home town to attend his parent‘s funeral. If the manager were to be fair both of the employees are not to be given any leave, however

the

manager

should

act

accordingly.

Besides that, the weaknesses of the McClelland‘s acquired needs theory is that it serves little purpose in the public sector. As stated in the article, public sector employees are being motivated by job security and stability, teamwork and worthwhile service to society, while eschewing monetary rewards, prestige and the desire for challenge and autonomy (Jurkiewicz, Massey & Brown 1998, p. 231). From here, we can see that public sector employees are only high in affiliation and low in achievement and power. When this happen, superiors will find it hard to delegate task and to create a competitive environment between

the employees in public sector, because they do not like challenging task and that most of them are very high in affiliation which are suitable in providing customer service. People with different needs should be motivated differently and this makes it extremely important for the organisation to identify the type of employee, so that he can be motivated using the appropriate methods. High achievers should be given challenging projects with reachable goals, and provided frequent feedback. While money is not an important motivator, it is an effective form of feedback. Employees with high affiliation need perform best in a cooperative environment. On the other hand, management should provide power seekers the opportunity to manage others. A way of using McClelland‘s theories in organisational development could be through analysing the employees needs and through that their personalities in order to create an effective team, where each team member could do the best according to his or her needs. People with a high need for affiliation identify themselves as good socialisers with strong social skills. This can be shown by a test measure called the ‗affiliative choice measure‘ where people are asked to rate how highly they liked doing fifteen different types of activities with friends and how high they rated themselves in social situations (McClelland, 1985).

2.2 Equity theory Studies bearing on equity theory divide conveniently into two groups: those studying the effects of underpayment and those dealing with the effects of overpayment. Equity theory suggests that employee perceptions of what they contribute to the organization, what they get in return, and how their return-contribution ratio compares to others inside and outside the organization,' determine how fair they perceive their employment relationship to be (Adams, 1963). Perceptions of inequity are expected to cause employees to take actions to restore equity; such actions (e.g., quitting or lack of cooperation) may not be helpful to the organization. Two recent empirical studies provide good examples of the types of counterproductive behaviours that can occur as a result of perceived inequity. In the first study, Greenberg(1990) analysed how an organization communicated pay cuts to its employees, and its effects on theft rates and perceived equity. In this study, two organization units received 15% across-the-board pay cuts. A third unit received no pay cut and served as a control

group. Also, the reasons for the pay cuts were communicated to the two pay-cut groups in different ways. In the "adequate explanation" pay-cut group, the management expressed remorse, and also provided a significant degree of information to explain its reasons for the pay cut. In contrast, the group with "inadequate explanation" received much less information and there was no indication of remorse for the same. The control group received no pay cut, and thus no explanation was provided. The control group and the two pay-cut groups began with the same theft rates and equity perceptions. After the pay cut, the theft rate in the adequate explanation group was 54% higher than in the control group. However, in the "inadequate explanation" condition, the theft rate was 141% than in the control group. In this case, communication had a large and independent effect on employees' attitudes and behaviours. Cowherd and Levine (1992) used a sample 102 business units in 41 corporations to examine whether the size of the pay differential between lower-level employees and top management had any impact on product quality. According to Cowherd and Levine, individuals often compare their pay to that of people higher in the organization structure. If lower-level employees feel inequitably treated, they may seek to reduce their effort to achieve equity. Quality was defined in their study as customer perceptions of the quality of goods and services. They hypothesized that citizenship-behaviours, such as freely offering to help others and correcting errors that would ordinarily escape notice, would be less likely if pay differentials between hourly and top managerial employees were large. Their results supported this hypothesis, thus suggesting that organizations need to take care of the potential adverse motivational consequences of executive pay for the motivation of other employees. Organizations are attempting to develop a work force that is self-managing and autonomous, a sense of justice becomes even more essential as the glue that holds the organization together and maintains teamwork (Cropanzano & Kacmar, 1995). The essential idea behind equity theory is that when individuals work for an organization they present certain inputs (e.g., abilities or job performance). Based on their input, people expect to get something in return. For example, when people input high performance they expect to get a high pay level (Cropanzano, 1993). Adams (1965) expressed this as a ratio of outcomes per inputs. The difficult thing for workers is to determine when a given ratio is fair. Adams argued that individuals determine fairness by comparing their ratio to the ratio of some comparison other; this allows someone to see if a reasonable amount were obtained. Equity theory predicts that low rewards produce dissatisfaction; this would in turn motivate people to take action and reduce the discrepancy between their ratio and the ratio of the

comparison other. For example, one might reduce inputs (lower performance), or if possible, increase outcomes. According to Adams (1965) when a person is over-rewarded he/she might experience guilt, shame, or remorse instead of anger or resentment. These emotions are negative and therefore should motivate individuals to move toward reducing the imbalance. Because individuals do not usually forego positive outcomes, people are generally likely to respond by increasing inputs. That is, they are expected to work harder. For the purpose of this research paper an attempt would be to determine the effect pay would have on employees. Pay in the workplace is considered a potentially motivating force or learning device, and a highly rewarding outcome. It is considered important because it refers to decisions made by the employee as to how high or good his/her contribution to the organization will be. Pay is important to the extent it provides performance feedback (Thierry, 1992). In the United States, a capitalistic society, money plays an important role in the society. Equity theory deals with this issue as a source of motivation (Rice, 1993). Employees realize that pay will lead to some security in living, recognition by peers, and status in his or her professional group. In other words, pay is important to the extent that it is seen as a way to realize more motives; even those employees who are dissatisfied with other factors in their job (e.g., working conditions), will accept more pay to compensate for that lack of satisfaction. According to Thierry (1992), pay will represent the following: 1. Salient motives: Pay is often seen as the vehicle that leads to the satisfaction, and is expected to provide more security, more status, less anxiety, and more recognition. 2. Relative position: Pay may refer to the degree of progress in the employee‘s task performance relative to task goals set, and thus informs us about the effectiveness of performance behaviour. It also provides more opportunity to correct one‘s course of action. Pay reflects how well someone‘s performance has been relative to others. 3. Control: Pay may convey to an employee how effective he or she has been in affecting the behaviours of others.

Most of the research reviewed emphasized that underpayment inequity is associated with negative attitude and dissatisfaction. Management needs to be concerned mainly with pay equity since it is one of the most important outcomes for employees (Huseman, R. C. & Hatfield, J. D, 1990) identified the top ten system outcomes and rated pay third after sense of accomplishment and doing meaningful work. Due to underpayment inequity, individuals may follow different approaches to restore equity, one of which redefines their reference group (Watson, Storey, Wynarczyk, Keasey, & Short,

1996). Data was collected from 721 employees (553 employees and 168 managers) to investigate the role of reference groups outside and inside the organization within the framework of equity theory. Attitude towards pay was used as the base for comparison. Therefore, the findings indicated that comparison to others outside and inside the organization, contributes to pay satisfaction for employees (Ronen, 1986). Goodman (1974) studied 214 managers in a single firm. The purpose of the study was to show the relationship between comparison with referents and pay satisfaction. He used three classes of referents (other, self, and system). ―Other‖ represents someone in the same organization, but in a different designation. ―Self‖ refers to the input/outcome ratio from the past job. ―System‖ refers to the contract between the employer and the employee. The employees when comparing themselves to referent other, were the major determinant in their pay satisfaction (Goodman, 1974). Summers and DeNisi (1990) retested the Goodman study but tested the study on nationwide level. The study involved 1043 managers from all levels of restaurant chain. Sixty-five percent (65%) reported have feelings underpaid and the majority (34.5%) used self as a comparison group. This study supports the hypothesis that comparison with referent (other, self, system) is a major determinant of pay satisfaction. This supports Adams equity theory that people tend to use a number of various referents simultaneously. Equity theory has received more attention lately from human resource professionals, especially regarding the fairness of outcome. Inequity is a major concern of industry, labour, and government. It is not enough for the fairness of exchange between employees and employer to be perceived by the employees as simply as an economic matter, an element of relative justice is involved as well.

2.3 Expectancy theory While Maslow and Herzberg look at the relationship between internal needs and the resulting effort expended to fulfil them, Vroom's expectancy theory separates effort (which arises from motivation), performance, and outcomes. According to Igalens and Roussel (1999, p. 1006), the expectancy theory clearly indicates that during the motivational process, the attitudinal factors drive the individual to produce effort to perform better. Examples of attitudinal factors are the extrinsic or intrinsic rewards felt by the employee, and the expectancy of whether the employee will succeed or fail in his or her task. Therefore, in the process of motivating the employees, the manager might work

on the attitudinal factors which can drive the individual to perform better. Thus, in order for the employee to produce effort to perform better, the manager can either discuss with the employee on the reward he or she wants, and have two-way communication when the task is being carried out. This will help the manager find out if the employee is facing any problem and try to eliminate the problem to increase productivity of the employee.

The weakness of expectancy theories is that the relationship between effort and performance is not be perfect, since it is moderated by both intrinsic and extrinsic factors, ie, one‘s skills and knowledge and by the difficulty of the task (Ferris, Beehr & Gilmore 1978, p. 342). The difficulty of the job can only be determine by the employees himself or herself, because each of the employees have different level of skills and knowledge and that the manager cannot assume that the job which is easy for a particular employee, is also easy for the other employees. Another weakness of the expectancy theories is that the specification of an outcome from some choice of job behaviour is more complex and open ended (Connolly 1976, p.39). A manager might assume that giving several positive outcomes is enough to motivate their employees. However, this may be wrong because one outcome may lead to another in an extended sequence. For example, choosing to work hard may be associated to increase in wages, however, this does not stop there because demand for the employees will increase from time to time. Managers might find it hard to cope with employees demand as their demands might change or remain the same; and the only way to know is through two way communication

or

having

feedback

from

time

to

time.

2.4 Job Characteristic Model

More than two decades of empirical research has inspired over 200 studies conducted on attitudinal and behavioural outcomes, based on job characteristic model (Ambrose and Kulik 1999). Based on these researches, two main conclusions have been proposed by Parker et al. (2001). First, the collective effects of the core job characteristics on affective responses (satisfaction and motivation) have been largely supported, but those for behavior (i.e. work performance, turnover and absence) less consistently. Second, the more particular features of

the model remain unproven. For example, the specified links between the job characteristics and the critical psychological states have not been confirmed.

Hackman and Oldham had developed the job characteristics model as an alternative to job design for conceptualizing traditional jobs, and took into account the utility of certain aspects of work in achieving positive outcomes, such as motivation and satisfaction. Previous findings on job characteristics, show that certain job characteristics can lead to desirable outcomes, such as performance, high levels of motivation and satisfaction (Fried & Ferris, 1987). Another study confirmed the same, that if the mentioned job features are present in a job, the job incumbent will be more likely to have high internal work motivation, high quality and performance, high satisfaction with the work and thus, low absenteeism and turnover rate (Gomez-Mejia, Balkin, & Cardy, 2005; Matteson, 2002). Research within the field of entrepreneurship has been carried out as well, concluding that the promise of more desirable job characteristics can motivate those currently employed by others to start their own ventures (Cromie, 1987).

Table 1: Brief List of JCM Milestones Relevant to the Current Study Author Year Contribution Hackman & Oldham 1974

Job Diagnostic Survey (Assessment tool for JCM)

Hackman & Oldham 1975

Model for diagnosing job

Hackman & Oldham 1976

Motivating Potential Score – Score for motivating

potential of a job James & Tetrick

1986

Established

relationship for job characteristics

and

satisfaction Fried & Ferris

1987

Stronger relationship between job characteristics and

psychological outcomes than behavioral outcomes (meta-analysis)

Behson, Eddy, & Lorenzet

2000 Two stage model of JCM without critical psychological

states results in better fit than three stage model (SEM)

Humphrey, Nahrgang, & Morgeson 2007

Proposed expanded JCM

In this study, work characteristics are subdivided into three clear categories. The division is

developed from classification from the study by Janssen, Jonge & Bakker (1999) and Houkes et al. (2001). The first category in this study is called internal job factors, which are directly related to the job activity. This category focuses on the work content and draws heavily from Hackman and Oldham‘s work characteristics model. Autonomy: In individualist cultures, autonomy is among the most strongly held values (Hulin and Judge 2003). However, we have to consider that autonomy is only important in those jobs where the work is not routine or predictable (Latham and Pinder 2005). Three aspects of work autonomy and responsibility are clarified in Morgeson and Campion (2003): timing control, method control and production responsibility. Timing control reflects the opportunity to determine the scheduling of work. Method control refers to the choice of how to carry out tasks. Production responsibility concerns the extent to which an individual can make errors that can result in loss of output. This research focuses on all the three aspects of autonomy.

The second category characterizes factors outside the job activity, thus focusing on the conditions of employment. The relevant and selected variables of this factor are salary and job security, that are assumed to influence the outcome variables (Houkes, Janssen, Jonge and Nijhuis (2001), Morgeson and Campion (2003)). The third category, called as social job factors, focuses on the social environment at work. Social environment is considered as an important factor in work design. Research conducted in the stress literature has emphasized the importance of social support. Social support can come from co-workers or supervisors and might serve to buffer workers from a number of negative outcomes. The social environment dimension has received less research attention, but recent research on job and task interdependence has begun to address this gap. More work is clearly needed into other features of the social environment, such as feedback from others related to important work design outcomes (Morgeson and Campion 2001). Within the category of social job factors, the selected variables are feedback from others and co-worker relations. Feedback from others: The work of Hackman and Lawler (1971) suggested that feedback from others, i.e., co-workers, leaders etc., represents an important aspect of work. Also Parker et al. (2001) highlighted feedback as an important job characteristic. Co-worker relations: Co-worker relations is included as a factor within the social job factor category due to results from the qualitative pilot study and due to demand from literature to give social environment more attention in a work design setting (Morgeson and Campion 2003).

Today, JCM is identified as one of the key employee motivation theories for organizations (Ramlall, 2004). The tenets of this approach are that the characteristics of a job lead to critical psychological states, which lead to personal and work outcomes with each step being moderated by one‘s need for growth. There are five core job characteristics, namely, skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, and feedback. Skill variety is ostensible variety and intricacy of skills and talents required by a job to perform it (Buys, Olckers, & Schaap, 2007). Task identity requires from a worker to perform all the tasks necessary to complete the job from beginning to the end of the production process; whereas the worker‘s feeling for his job regarding its meaningful for his colleagues and organization is termed as task significance (Hackman & Oldham, 1976). Autonomy refers to the situation where the job provides its owner the freedom and power to exercise his own authority while taking the decision (Buys et al., 2007). When the employee gets direct and clear information about his performance on his job, it is known as the feedback characteristic of job (Hunter, 2006). All these job characteristics are specified as determinants of three ‗critical psychological states‘: skill variety, task identity and task significance together contributing to ‗experienced meaningfulness‘; autonomy to ‗experienced responsibility‘; and feedback to ‗knowledge of results. In turn, the critical psychological states are cast collectively as promoting work satisfaction, internal work motivation, performance and reduced absenteeism and employeeturnover. The job characteristic model assumes that autonomy and feedback are more important than the other work characteristics. The personal and work outcomes are high internal work motivation, high quality work performance, high satisfaction with work, and low absenteeism and turnover (Hackman & Oldham, 1975, 1976). While these characteristics had been originally designed for the jobs of those employed by others, they also apply to the self-employed. In particular, autonomy is identified as a primary motivator by entrepreneurs for creating their own venture (Kuratko, Hornsby, & Naffziger, 1997).

2.5 Maslow’s hierarchy of needs

Maslow proposed that if people grew up in an environment in which their needs are not meet, they would be unlikely to function healthy, well-adjusted individuals. Research testing Maslow‘s theory has supported the distinction between the hygiene and growth needs but

showed that not all people are able to satisfy their higher-order needs on the job. Maslow‘s theory has not received a great deal of support with respect to specific notion it proposes (Greenberg &Baron 2003, p195). To them this model is theorised to be especially effective in describing the behaviour of individuals, who are high in growth need. Employees who are different to the idea of increasing their growth will not realise any physiological reaction to their jobs.

Centers & Bgental (1966) in their survey carried out among a cross-section of the working population in Los Angeles, posited ―background factors, altitudes and aspirations affects workers needs, expectations and situation assessment‖. According to Graham & Messner (1998, p.196) there are generally three major criticisms directed to the need theory and other content theories of motivation. (A) There is scant empirical data to support their conclusions, (b) they assume employees are basically alike, and (c) they are not theories of motivation at all, but rather theories of job satisfaction. This was supported by the views of Nadler & Lawler (1979) in Graham & Messner (2000, p 188).

Nadler & Lawler (1979) cited in Graham & Messner (2000,p.198) were also critical of the need theory of motivation. They argue that the theory makes the following unrealistic assumptions about employees in general that: (a) all employees are alike (b) all situations are alike and that (c) there is only one best way to meet needs. Another critic to this view was Basset-Jones & Lloyd (2004, p 961).Basset-Jones & Lloyd (2004, p 961) presents that in general, critics of the need theory argue that it is as a result of the natural feeling of employees to take credit for needs met and dissatisfaction on needs not met.

2.6 Goal setting theory

Goal setting is a general theory that can be applied in a multitude of work situations. Support for the theory comes from individual and group settings, laboratory and field studies, across different cultures and involves many different tasks. Research indicates that specific goals help bring about other desirable organizational goals, such as reducing absenteeism, tardiness, and turnover (Locke & Latham, 2002) Edwin Locke and Gary Latham (1990), leaders in goal-setting theory and research, have incorporated nearly 400 studies about goals into a theory of goal setting and task

performance. The strongest support relates to the relationship between specific, difficult goals and task performance. A meta-analysis performed by Tubbs (1986) supported the concept that specific, difficult goals are positively correlated to improved performance. Other research obtained similar conclusions and further stated that, ―If there is ever to be a viable candidate from the organizational sciences for elevation to the lofty status of a scientific law of nature, then the relationships between goal difficulty, specificity/difficulty, and task performance are most worthy of serious consideration‖ (Mento, Steel, & Karren, 1987, p. 74). DeWalt, et al. (2009) found a direct correlation between those who achieve set goals and the motivation to create additional goals or add more challenging aspects to the current goal based on feedback. Parker, Jimmieson, & Amiot (2009) found that autonomy in the workplace improves self-efficacy, which improves performance towards reaching goals. Within this idea is the vision and structure that goal setting provides, which helps to motivate individuals and teams to perform better and do more (Sorrentino, 2006).

Goal setting is not without its critics. Ordóñez, Schweitzer, Galinsky, and Bazerman (2009) stated that the theory is over-prescribed and can potentially cause harm to an organization. Care should be taken in applying goal setting due to the possible unintended side effects. The arguments levied against the theory are not new and have been discussed by previous researchers. For example, Ordóñez, et al. (2009) argued that unethical behaviour can result from motivating employees to meet specific and challenging goals. In an effort to reach a sales quota, salespeople may either fudge numbers or lie to customers in order to reach their monetary goal. According to the authors, this focus on goal attainment can actually promote unethical behaviour by creating a ―focus on ends rather than the means‖ (Ordóñez, et al., 2009, p. 12). Not only was negative behaviour addressed by Latham & Locke, but the means to mitigate this issue were offered as well, such as offering progressive awards toward goal attainment, organizational control systems, and an ethical workplace culture (O'Neil & Drillings, 1994). The preponderance of empirical research supporting goal-setting theory illustrates its utility as a method to motivate individuals and improve organizational outcomes. While some caution may be in order, Locke and Latham (2002) argue that failures resulting from the theory are usually due to errors in its application and can often be prevented. The subject of human motivation is vast and complex. No single theory fully explains every aspect of what motivates individuals to perform better.

2007 Study by Vigoda-Gadot and Angert35 A study conducted in 2007 by researchers EranVigoda-Gadot and Larisa Angert at the University of Haifa found connections between the aspects of goal-setting theory, specifically in the realm of feedback, and organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB). This study used the Management by Objectives (MBO) process to study aspects of goal-setting theory beyond the goals themselves, by examining desirable types of behaviours in organizations such as the enhancement of team spirit and job attachment, social support, and bolstering performance overall beyond the goals set by management (Vigoda-Gadot&Angert, 2007, p. 20).Participants in this study were students working in a social service capacity with needy children in Israel. The study set the independent variables of goal setting, job satisfaction, job commitment, organizational justice, and job feedback against the dependent variables of formal performance and OCB (Vigoda-Gadot&Angert, 2007, p. 123). Since the researchers were already in agreement about Locke and Latham's argument that the setting of specific goals was better than vague ones, their focus was on how behaviours not related to goals would be increased by the processes of goal setting. The findings concluded that though the process is important, the key remained in feedback regarding both the formal goals set during the process as well as feedback regarding other informal behaviours. Specifically, that "managers should consider the positive effect of feedback on formal performance, but even more importantly, on informal work behaviours such as altruistic OCB or compliance OCB" (Vigoda-Gadot & Angert, 2007, p. 127). This is important since it is not only results that drive an organization, but the people who fit within it and how they conduct themselves with others both in their own group and throughout the company, both in representation and group harmony.

3. Methodology The data were collected from employees of diverse organizational background to gain wide representation of organizational culture. In all, 110 self-administered questionnaires were distributed among the employees working in the IT sector. In addition to this, 20 personal interviews were conducted to obtain detailed insights from the employees. The participation in survey was voluntary and confidentiality of responses was ensured.

3.1 Data Collection

A survey research design was used in the current study to examine the effect of training & development, appraisal and compensation on work motivation. The survey research design was a suitable choice for two reasons: (a) A cross-sectional study the data was collected at one point in time, and (b) The study aimed at measuring the importance of the various factors that are important for motivating employees. The respondents were asked about their preferences and reactions to various situations that employees face on a daily basis, and their response was used to deduce the most important factors for motivation.

The current research followed the procedure, which integrated the construction of precise measuring instrument in shape of a questionnaire, which comprised of 30 questions in the beginning. In an exploratory phase the questionnaire was pre- tested and the items that challenged the reliability and validity of the scale were eliminated. The final questionnaire administered contained 23 questions. The questionnaire was administered to people working in the IT sector with work experience between 1 to 5 years. The questionnaire was mailed to most of them, and interviews were conducted for 20 employees.

3.2 Data Processing Tools used : SPSS,MS-EXCEL, Google-Docs The questionnaire was floated using google-docs software, which facilitated avoiding incompleteness and inconsistencies. This helped detect errors and omissions, by correcting them when possible, and certifying that minimum data quality standards are achieved. It also helps eliminate initial screening, which is generally carried out to determine if the responses are legible, consistent and complete. Before the data are tabulated and analysis carried, the researcher is required to edit the same suitably to make it more meaningful.

The data was entered using SPSS and simple frequencies were run on the summated scores for both the variables, which showed the minimum, and the maximum summated score for both the variables and also the frequencies for all the summated scores of the whole data. Cronbach‘s Alpha Cronbach (1951) was used to check the reliability of the scale and internal consistency. The value .74 of the Cronbach alpha is a good indicator of the instrument‘s internal-consistency reliability. In addition to this, a personal interview of 20 employees were conducted which helped in providing deeper insights about employee motivation.

3.3 Handling of Blank Responses The respondents leave some questions unanswered or blank. De Vaus (2002) has suggested that the blank responses should be assigned the middle value. According to Converse and Stanley Presser (1986), it is the editor‘s responsibility to decide which of the responses is both consistent with intent the of the question and other information in the survey and most accurate for this individual respondent. In this study in order to avoid any bias or misunderstanding, the all the questions were made mandatory to answer, ie, the questionnaire would not be submitted unless the respondent answers all the questions.

4. Data Analysis 4.1 McClelland’s Theory Based on the response, we found that a vast majority of the people prefer maintaining friendly rather than professional relations at the workplace. This depicts the need to maintain good relations with people around one-self, and points out to a strong need for affiliation at the workplace. However, as far as completion of the work is concerned, most of the people do not have absolute work preferences. When asked about their work reference, most of them responded stating that they did not mind working on individual tasks or group assignments as well.

Another observation made is that a majority of the people prefer to discuss a matter upfront in case of disagreement. This depicts the need for power among the respondents. However, it has been observed that the need is stronger when things take place against their will. For example, a majority of the same sample of respondents do not mind someone else leading the group most of the times.

Most of the respondents inquire about the progression of the work on a regular basis, and take necessary inputs from their superiors to do the work in a better manner. Also, the respondents tend to challenge themselves, to take up work beyond their work description. This depicts a strong need for achievement among the respondents.

4.2 Expectancy Theory The motivational force of the sample was found out by assigning values to all the three components, ie, expectancy, instrumentality and valence. The product of the scores of all the three components was found out to determine the strength of expectancy theory of motivation in each case. Because the motivational force is the product of the three perceptions, if any one of their values is zero, the whole equation becomes zero. Based on the results, we derived that expectancy and instrumentality are more important motivators, as compared to valence. The score of valence was significantly less, as compared to expectancy and instrumentality.

4.3 Equity Theory The need for equity is tested through the questionnaire. The views of the respondents regarding internal and external equity have not been captured separately. However, the key issue is capturing the importance of equity in the views of the concerned person. Most of the responses did acknowledge the importance of equity.

4.4 Goal Setting Theory A majority of employees clarify their doubts as opposed to using their own judgement if the given task is ambiguous. This shows that employees believe that their goals should be specific. When it comes to deadlines, a major proportion of the employees, especially the ones who perform managerial tasks, feel that goals should have deadlines. The responses also showed that there are very few employees who want the organisation to set goals for them. Most employees believe that goal setting process should be participative of both, the employee and his manager. 4.5 Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs The responses show that a vast number of employees believe that compensation, working conditions and good interpersonal relations are basic requirements. This demonstrates that the lower order needs forms the hygiene factor which is minimum employee requirement. At the same time, most employees rated self-respect and growth factors as highest. This shows that the need for self-esteem and self-actualization is higher in our target group.

4.6 Job Characteristic Model As opposed to gaining expertise in same role, majority of employees preferred working on different roles to learn new things. This shows that skill variety is important to the employees. There were very few employees who restricted themselves to working on the same component for a long period of time. Employees also feel that task identity is an important factor. Almost all the employees feel that their jobs should be significant and add value to the company and to the society as well. Another important factor that employees think affects their motivation is the freedom to work. Responses show that employees tend to perform better when they have autonomy of their tasks. However, employees also feel that a certain degree of autonomy should be maintained to avoid absolute ownership. Similarly, employees feel that feedback mechanism is a crucial factor for enhanced performance. A majority of employees were open not only to positive feedback but also negative feedback.

5. Proposed model for motivation Based on our study of both traditional and modern motivational theories, and our research through questionnaire data, we would like to propose a new model for motivation. Below are the four factors that are most important to employees having a work experience between one to five years in Information Technology industry. 5.1 Good Work Environment Nothing stunts productivity like a sour working environment. Indeed, employee happiness is directly linked to motivation, according to a study published by the Health. Creating a positive work environment can potentially have a big impact on employee motivation. One of the most important factors mentioned by the majority of respondents was having an open, safe, and welcoming environment. A friendly, supportive, and caring environment drives employee motivation. Organizations should try to establish a trusting relationship with employees and provide them, with the means they need to perform. A supportive and encouraging environment can be created by providing people the opportunity to expand their minds and abilities, to assume responsibility for their own actions, and to find innovative ways to do their work and meet their goals. Organization should create an environment that is interactive and engaging, paying attention to building relationships and inclusion. Providing regular feedback and

taking time to know the needs and expectations of the employees, increases trust and openness in relationships. Employees spend a large chunk of their lives working in their office, Hence it is important for the employer to make the work environment as appealing as possible. A pleasant and comfortable working environment attracts the employees to work which directly affects their productivity. 5.2 Autonomy or Empowering employees Autonomy is particularly critical when it comes to creating and maintaining intrinsic motivation. It gives them a freedom of choice, which in turn provides a sense of selfdetermination. This means giving them more room to make decisions, to think for themselves, to "own" their jobs. Command and control environments create an atmosphere that fosters Learned Helplessness. Employees in this environment feel that thinking for themselves and acting on their own is pointless, so they passively await orders. In contrast, when employees get the chance to think and act like small business owners-i.e. have autonomy, they continuously build confidence and greater self-efficacy. Because of this, these employees possess far greater resilience which makes them better resources. Autonomous motivation has proven to promote greater conceptual understanding, generate higher productivity, less burnout, and greater levels of psychological well-being. Workplaces can support autonomy by giving people real control over various aspects of their work — whether it‘s deciding what to work on or when to do it. 5.3 Rewards and Recognition Rewards are crucial for maintaining employee motivation, however, it is important not to let the rewards become the main goal. Rewards are feedback that goals are being accomplished. When organization recognizes exceptional effort or rare achievement, its value for the employee increases. Simple things such as a company-wide email acknowledgment or pat on the back will go a long way. Additionally, personal call or shake hands to express appreciation to the employee, will instil motivation of a surprising level.

When management genuinely recognizes an employee‘s contribution to the organization, they feel, they are vital members of a team working towards a goal. They feel like the company is more than just a place to work. Recognition is priceless, and status is much more than money. It increases employee loyalty, enhances performance and generates greater success. Recognition can be an incredibly powerful tool to foster a close-knit team environment, encourage employees to achieve high levels of productivity, increase employee retention rates, and reduce incidental expenses relating to inattentiveness to job duties that result in dissatisfied customers, safety issues, or on-the-job downtime. 5.4 Purpose A dramatic shift is occurring in how employees view their work. In many cases employees are willing to work harder and work for an employer longer if the intrinsic feeling of purpose motivates them. People don‘t just want to make money, they also want to be meaningful contributors to their community and take action to respect and preserve the planet. People who find purpose in their work unlock the highest level of the motivation game. It connects to a cause larger than self that drives the deepest motivation. Such deep motivation drives employees to pursue the most difficult problems. They can go the extra mile if they care about the outcome and stay engaged. Employees can also be inspired to meet stretch goals and tackle impossible challenges. Organizations should make sure employees know and understand the organisation‘s purpose goals not just its profit goals. Employees, who understand the purpose and vision of their organisation and how their individual roles contribute to this purpose, are more likely to be satisfied in their work. 6. Conclusion The aim of the study was to explore the applicability and impact of motivational theories on employees, their performance and job satisfaction. Motivational theories attempt to explain what motivates people to behave the way they do. Motivational theories can be applied to workplace settings to shed light into why some employees work harder or are more committed than others. However, in any organization, one size does not fit all. Hence, no

individual theory is sufficient to motivate employees by itself. Organizations need to find out every employees needs and then use a relevant motivator. Many a times, a need may arise to use various techniques together in order to motivate employees. 7. Limitations and directions for future research The current study is limited to employees having a work experience between 1-5 years in the Information Technology sector. The scope of the study will increase if the target group consists of middle and senior management. The research can further be extended to various sectors like Manufacturing, FMCG, etc.

REFERENCES

Greenberg, J. (1999). Managing behavior in organizations.2nd edition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Greenberg, J. (1990). Employee theft as a reaction to underpayment of inequity: The hidden cost of pay cuts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 561-568.

McClelland D.C., (1985). How motives, skills & values determine what people do [Electronic version]. American Psychologist,40(7), 812-825.

Thrash, T.M., & Elliot, A.J., (2001).Delimiting & Integrating achievement motive and goal constructs,

Netherlands:

Kluwer

Academic

Publishers. Available

from

http://www.site.ebrary.com/lib/acap/doc?id=10053382

Wood, J, Zeffane, R., Fromholtz M., Wiesner R., Creed A., SchermerhornJ.,Hunt J., & Osborn R., (2010). Organisational Behaviour, Core concepts &applications. 2nd Ed. John Wiley & Sons, Australia, Ltd. Milton Qld.

Geiger, M.A., & Cooper, E.A. (1996). Cross-cultural comparisons using Expectancy Theory to assess student motivation [Electronic version]. Issues in Accounting Education, 11(1), 113126.

Cropanzano, R. (Ed.)(1993). Justice in the workplace: Approaching fairness in human resource management. Hillsdale: Academic Press, Inc.

Cropanzano, S. R., &Kacmar, M. K. (Ed.)(1995). Organizational politics, justice, and support: Managing the social climate of the work place. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc.

Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), advances in experimental psychology pp. 267-299. New York: Academic Press.

Thierry, H. (1992). Payment: Which meanings are rewarding? American Behavioral Scientists, 35(6), 694-707.

Rice, R. D. (1993). Equity theory: The pay satisfaction Construct. Thesis. Tuscaloosa, Alabama.

Huseman, R. C. & Hatfield, J. D. (1990).Equity theory and the managerial matrix. Training and Development Journal, 44(4), 98-103.

Watson, R., Storey, D., Wynarczy, P., Keasey, K., & Short, H. (1996). The relationship between job satisfaction and managerial remuneration in small and medium sized enterprises: An empirical test of comparison income and equity theory hypothesis. Applied Economics, 28(5),567-577.

Ronen, S. (1986). Equity perception in multiple comparisons: A field study. Human Relations, 39(4), 333-346.

Goodman, P. S. (1974). An examination of referents used in the evaluation of pay. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 12, 170-195.

Summers, T. P. &DeNisi, A. S. (1990). In search of Adams other: Reexamination of referents used in the evaluation of pay. Human Relations, 43(6), 497-511.

Greiner, JM 1986, ‗Motivational programs and productivity improvement in times of limited resources‘, Public Productivity Review, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 81-101, from Jstor database. Lyden, RJ 1976, ‗Power driven managers make the best bosses‘, Public Administration Review, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 201-202, from Jstor database. Wagner, KV & Swanson, C 1979, ‗From Machiavelli to Ms: differences in male-female power styles‘, Public Administration Review, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 66-72, from Jstor database. Jurkiewicz, CL, Massey, TM & Brown, RG 1998, ‗Motivation in public and private organizations: A comparative study‘, Public Productivity & Management Review, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 230-250, from Jstor database. Igalens, J &Roussel, P 1999, ‗A study of the relationship between compensation package, work motivation and job satisfaction‘, Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol. 20, no. 7, pp. 1003-1025, from Jstor database. Ferris, GR, Beehr, TA & Gilmore, DC 1978, ‗Social facilitation: A review and alternative conceptual model‘, Academy of Management Review, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 338-347, from ABI/INFORM Global database. Connolly, T 1976, ‗Some conceptual and methodological issues in expectancy models of work performance motivation‘, Academy of Management Review, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 37-47, from ABI/INFORM Global database.

DeVaus, D.A. (2002). Survey in Social Research 5th edition, London, Routledge.

Converse, J.M., & Presser, S. (1986) Survey Questions: Handcrafting the Standardized Questionnaire. New Delhi, India: Sage Publications.

Adams, J.S. (1963). Toward an understanding of inequity. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 67, 422-436.

Cowherd, D.M., & Levine, D.I. (1992). Product quality and pay equity between lower-level employees and top

management: An investigation of distributive justice theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 302-320.

Kuratko, D. F., Hornsby, J. S., &Naffziger, D. W. (1997). An examination of owner's goals in sustaining entrepreneurship. Journal of Small Business Management, 35, 24-33.

Ramlall, S. (2004). A review of employee motivation theories and their implications for employee retention within organizations. The Journal of American Academy of Business, 5, 52-63.

Fried, Y., & Ferris, G. R. (1987). The validity of the Job Characteristics Model: A review and meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 40, 287-322.

Cromie, S. (1987).Motivations of aspiring male and female entrepreneurs.Journal of Occupational Behavior, 8, 251-261. Ambrose, M. L and Kulik, C. T. (1999).‘Old Friends, New Faces: Motivation Research in the 1990s.‘Journal of Management.Vol 25 (3), pp 231 – 292.

Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J. &Sparrowe, R. T. (2000). An examination of the mediating role of psychological empowerment on the job interpersonal relationships, and work outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 407 – 416. Parker, S. K, Wall, T. D. &Corderly, J. L. (2001). ‗Future work design research and practice: Towards an elaborated model of work design.‘Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 74, 413 – 440.

Gomez-Mejia, R.L., Balkin, B.D., &Cardy L.R. (2005).Management (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin.

Buys, M.A., Olckers, C., &Schaap, P. (2007).Theconstruct validity of the revised job diagnosticsurvey.South African Journal of BusinessManagement, 38, 33-40.

Latham, G.P. &Pinder, C. C. (2005). Work motivation theory and research at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 485 – 516.

Hulin, C. L. & Judge, T. A. (2003). In W. C. Borman, D. R. Ilgen& R. J. Klimoski (Eds.), Handbook of psychology, Vol. 12: 255-276. Janssen, P. P. M., Jonge, J. & Bakker, A.B. (1999). ‘Specific determinants of intrinsic work motivation, burnout and turnover intentions: a study among nurses. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 29 (6), 1360-1369.

Houkes, I., Janssen, P. P. M., Jonge, J. &Nijhuis, F. J. N. (2001). Specific relationships between work characteristics and intrinsic work motivation, burnout and turnover intention: A multi-sample analysis. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 10, 123.

Morgeson, F. R. & Campion, M. A. (2003). In W. C. Borman, D. R. Ilgen& R. J. Klimoski (Eds.), Handbook of psychology, Vol. 12: 425 – 452. [1] Antomioni, D. (1999), ―What motivates middle managers‖? IndustrialManagement, Nov,Dec, Vol. 41, No 6, pp. 27-30. [2] Basset-Jones, N. & Lloyd, G.C. (2005), ―Does Herzbergs Motivational Theoryhave staying power‖? Journal of Management Development, Vol.24, No.10,pp. 57-56 [3] Friedlander, F. (1964), ―Job characteristics as satisfies and dissatisfies‖,Journal of applied Psychology, Vol.48, No.6, pp. 388-399. [4] Friedlander, F. (1966) ―Motivation to work and Organisational Performance‖,Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 50, No. 2, pp. 143-152. [5]

Friedlander,

F.

(1966b)

―importances

of

work

versus

Non

work

among

socialoccupationally stratified groups.‖ Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 50, No.6, pp. 437-443.

[6] Gordon, G. (1965), ―The relationship of Satisfies and Dissatisfies toProductivity, Turnover and Morale‖, American Psychologist, Vol. 20, pp.499

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Upper Saddle River, NJ:Prentice Hall.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W. H.Freeman.

Latham, G. P. (2003). Goal setting: A five-step approach to behavior change.Organizational Dynamics, 32(3), 309-318.

Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990).A theory of goal setting and task performance. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation. American Psychologist, 57(9), 705-717.

Luthans, F. (2011). Organizational behavior (12th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Ordonez, L., Schweitzer, M. E., Galinsky, A., &Bazerman,M. (2009). Goals gone wild: How goals systematically harm individuals and organizations. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(1), X–X.

Pinder, C. (1998). Work motivation in organizational behavior.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Vigoda-Gadot, E. &Angert, L. (2007). Goal setting theory, job feedback, and OCB: Lessons from a longitudinal study. Basic and Applied Social Psychology,29(2), 119-128. Retrieved February 20, 2014

O'Neil Jr., H.F., & Drillings, M. (Eds.). (1994). Motivation: Theory and research. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Mento, A. J., Steel, R. P., & Karren, R. J. (1987). A meta-analytic study of the effects of goal setting on task performance: 1966-1984. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision processes

DeWalt, D.A., Davis, T.C., Wallace, A.S., Seligman, H.K., Bryant-Shilliday, B., Arnold, C.L., Freburger, J., &Schillinger, D. (2009). Goal setting in diabetes self-management: Taking the baby steps to success. Patient Education and Counseling, 77, 218-223

Morgeson, F. R. & Campion, M. A. (2003). In W. C. Borman, D. R. Ilgen & R. J. Klimoski (Eds.), Handbook of psychology, Vol. 12: 425 – 452.

Hackman, J. R. and Lawler, E. E. (1971). Employee reactions to job characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology Monograph, 55, 259 – 286.