Humans – an important factor to growth organisations

Human is an important factor to growth organisations. No any company can be operated its business without people. Success and achieving goal are the main task for all employees. Therefore, managers have to consider how those people can be encouraged to work efficiency and effectiveness for their companies. In this sense, motivation factor has been considered to encourage people to achieve their works. It is also related to psychological extent to motivate people from inside, which link to individual behaviour and human's mind.

In term of Human Resource Management thinking, individual motivation is more important, and has been mentioned by many theorists such as Maslow, Alderfer and Herzberg that is concerned with "need", which reflect to people's performance and behaviours. Moreover, Thompson and McHugh (1995) mentioned that motivation can be indicated into two main factors: internal and external. These focus on the process of motivation theory which content of theory will be used, for instance, external use payment level and internal use a creation of work satisfaction.

Discussion in details deeply will be revealed later. Although money seems to be seen as the main factor of encouraging people to work, but it cannot motivate them working in long-period. In fact, people always expect more and more payment, and they will not willing to work in fully power if they have inadequate expected money (Thompson and McHugh, 1995). Consequently, in this report will examine that besides the money, there are other factors, which can drive people to make a complete effort in their competency for achieving an organisation goal.

Order custom essay Humans – an important factor to growth organisations with free plagiarism report

450+ experts on 30 subjects Starting from 3 hours delivery

Get Essay Help

Money is not the only motivator "If you are financially incented at your job that will most likely prevent you from hating your job. It is not going to motivate you to achieve" (Livingston)1 An organisation offers both intrinsic and extrinsic rewards to its employees, therefore, it must be realised that the financial rewards is considered as an extrinsic reward. On the other hand, employee derives intrinsic rewards from the job itself.

They depend on how deeply the employee integrates himself with the work, as well as, how the job fits the employee's ambition and could be practiced by giving the employees such a degree of authority and responsibility at their the workplace, that could generate a sense of personal achievement by completing the tasks, which in most cases, leds to high performance in the direction of the organisation strategy, and sense of satisfaction flanked by the employees. Now the question arises which one of these rewards is more operatively motivating employee?

Is it the extrinsic reward as a money motivator factor, or is it intrinsic, which expresses the rest of intangible factors? Supportive theories Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs Theory consists of five hierarchal levels; each level represents a need that must be satisfied. By this he meant that at any given moment an individual will be aiming to satisfy one particular category of need, but once this has been done that person will be interested in satisfying the next higher level. (Waiting for Appendix ref.) Furthermore, in Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory, the author indicated that some motivators are recognition, promotion, responsibility and the work itself. However, no matter how significant these factors are, people will never be motivated without having enjoyable work to do. He also describes the "hygiene factors" as being things that can contribute to job dissatisfaction and demotivate workers. These include low salary, unsatisfactory supervisors and poor working conditions. Although a low salary can demotivate workers, a high salary will not motivate them to do more. After considering these motivation theories, it will be easier to understand why pay is an ineffective motivator. As evidenced by the motivation theories, motivation is an internal force. Motivation causes an individual to act because he/she wants to. Pay is an external factor; it is a motivator only in the short term. It can last for little depending on the amount before it becomes just another factor. According to Herzberg, pay can keep a person from being demotivated, but it will not make a person motivated to do more and work harder.

As the result of a survey conducted in the year 1999 by the American Management Association employers ranked external conferences and seminars, tuition reimbursement, managerial training and company support for an academic degree higher than pay for performance as ways to retain their best and brightest workers. Also money, when used as a motivator, tends to distract employees. Employees focus on this external ineffective motivator rather than concentrating on internal motivators, which are superior to anything external.

As regards the findings of a research conducted by research scientist George Dudley of Behavioural Sciences Research Press, 32% of the U. S. sales people studied say they work for making money. The figure drops to 19% for sales people from Singapore and 18% for those from Sweden. Only 12% of Australian sales people and 9% from New Zealand say money is their primary motivator3. Thus, motivators like recognition, a strong culture and stable work environment, a sense of commitment and desire to do the job, a pleasant workplace with good people to work with, and a shared goal or vision can keep people motivated for a long time than money.

Money as the only motivator People necessitate money, and as a result they demand money. Money is seen as a possible motivator but there are other interesting options to study. People give different value to money so if the organizations want to use it as a reinforcement factor, it should be something that the employees want to have. If the organizations use money as an incentive to respond, it will depend on the value that people give to this incentive. To find the role that money plays apart from covering the basic needs (survival and security) that referred to the Maslow's Hierarchy.

When the earnings are regular, it helps to satisfy the need for self-esteem. As money is usually connected with the achievement of the needs, therefore, it can be defined as motivates. The importance of money relies on the fact that it can be exchanged for many different things. Money is likely not to have and essential meaning in itself, but obtains indicative motivating power due to the fact that through money, there are able to symbolise so many intangible objectives. In line with this argument, Pfeffer (1999) pointed out six dangerous myths about pay, the more distinguished of which are the following two.

1. Individual incentive pay improve performance: If managers give incentive to individuals, they might not promoting the teamwork and people are working to move on the hierarchy. 2. People work for money: This is relatively not truth since they have other reasons to work. For instance, the meaning to lives. As maintained by Pfeffer (1999) that pay cannot substitute for a working environment "high on trust, fun, and meaningful work". New forms of money motivator As money helps to compare the wage with the anterior jobs this could be the reason explain why people associate the money compensation as their success.

As Ed Lawier (Bayett and Bayett, 1999) stated that, "the best incentive pay system for most companies probably would involve some combination of corporate wide profit sharing and stock ownership, couple with gain sharing plans in major operating units that award groups for cost saving". Profit sharing and stock ownership are considered as new forms of money motivator. However, compared with simply money rewarding, these two seems more powerful and more indictable to employees through providing a sense of belonging.

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Run a free check or have your essay done for you

Check my essay Hire Writer