Self-Determination Theory And Work Motivation In Organizational Behavior Essay.

Relevance of Self-Determination Theory in Work Motivation

The report describes about the self-determination theory as work motivation and indicates the relevance with the organizational theory of behavior. Evaluation theory of cognitive theory describes the responses about extrinsic motivators and intrinsic motivation. The association between intrinsic and extrinsic motivates different types of work settings (Gagne and Desi 2005).

This report discusses the both positive and negative aspects of work satisfaction and motivation. The data is an overview of organizational employee management. The research data is collected by questionnaire survey method among the employees.

In the following, the report provides the research objectives, rationale, research question process, methodology, contexts of the research, characterization of the research project and conclusion.  

The purpose of the study is to investigate the association between incentives, reward recognition on employee motivation and satisfaction. Our hypothesis is to test the significant and insignificant effects of the factors behind motivation and satisfaction of the employees. The analysis shows that the result is very much precious for management and controlling procedures of an organization. Our objective is to draw necessary inferences about association and relevance between different factors that are related to the motivation and satisfaction of the employees.  

Our aim is to link the relationship between self-confidence and work motivation. Behavior of leaders towards the employees is associated with the tendencies to set the goals of self-concordant (bono and Judge 2003). Transformational leaders viewed their work on positive performance and job attitudes. The pattern of relationships differed in the field study and experimental study (Hackman and Oldham 1976).

The research proposal describes about rationale of research proposals. First, the factors of data are non-numeric. Secondly, the evaluation process includes the rating systems in many questions. Here we observe that lesser the star, lesser is the quality of performance on that aspect. Third, we gather the maximum number of question-answer data in “Yes-No” format. Lastly, the data is randomly taken from all employees and calculated by MS excel and R software package.

The survey process of job satisfaction is dependent upon stored responses on a set of questionnaire. The queries for the questionnaire is –

1. Enter the gender: Responses are male or female (nominal data).
2. Enter the position of the job: Responses are Employee, Line Manager, CEO and Others (nominal data) (Baglin 2014).
3. Enter the assessment of your performance as measured theoretically: The Reponses are 1 star (miserable performance) to 8 star (outstanding performance) (Ordinal scale) (Christensen 2015).
4. Enter the measurement of the organization: The responses are respectively Quantitative, Qualitative, Both and No targets specified (nominal data).
5. Enter whether you are satisfied with position and tasks or not: The Responses are Yes or No (nominal data).
6. Enter the rating about tasks and objectives clearly communicated by our supervisor or not: The Responses are 1 star to 5 star (Ordinal data).
7. Enter whether your manager influences directly your professional performance or not: The Responses are Yes or No (nominal data).
8. Enter whether you are satisfied with your leadership or not: The Responses are 1 star to 5 star (Ordinal data).
9. Enter the rate of motivation in the job: The Responses are 1 star (weak) to 5 star (strong) (Ordinal data).
10. Enter the responses of motivation by the supervision: The Responses are Yes and No (nominal data).
11. Enter whether opinions and suggestions are taken into account when making decision: The Responses are Always, Sometimes, Rare and Never (ordinal data).
12. Enter whether your organization offer further training to help you achieve better professional performance or not: The three responses are nominal in nature.
13. Enter whether your organization strives for your personal development in the job or not: The three responses are nominal in nature.
14. Enter whether your work performance is sufficiently appreciated and praised by the manager or the company or not: The Responses are Yes or Not (nominal data).

1. The response of survey in gender question is appeared to be male (57) and female (78) among 135 responses. The response is 42.2% and 57.8% respectively.
2. In second question, we found that number of Employee, Line Manager, CEO and others as 67, 34, 20 and 14 respectively. The percentage calculation is 49.6%, 25.2%, 14.8% and 10.4% respectively. We see that percentage of Employee is maximum and percentage of others position is minimum.
3. The average marking of performance in profession as measured in terms of potential is 6.3 stars out of 8 stars. The response of 8 star (count 13 and percentage 9.6%), 7 star (count 7 and percentage 34.8%), 6 star (count 51 and percentage 37.8%), 5 star (count 17 and percentage 12.6%), 4 star (count 5 and percentage 3.7%). Less than 4 star marking is negligible. 6 star is maximum in number.
4. Answer of the question 4 in the questionnaire set is given as Quantitative (count 5 and percentage 3.7%), Qualitative (count 27 and percentage 19.9%), both (count 87 and percentage 64%) and no targets specified (count 17 and percentage 12.5%). The “Both” type has maximum frequency and “Quantitative” has minimum frequency.
5. Answer of question 5 about the satisfaction and position of the tasks is “Yes” (count 116 and percentage 85.9%) and “No” (count 19 and percentage 14.1%). The positive response is generally undertaken from the employees.
6. Answer of question 6 shows the average objectives clearly communicated by line manager has rating 3.7out of 5. The 5 star (count 5 and percentage 23.9%), 4 star (count 49 and percentage 36.6%), 3 star (count 33 and percentage 24.6%), 2 star (count 15 and percentage 11.2%) and 1 star (count 5 and percentage 3.7%). The frequency of 4 star marking is maximum in number and 1 star marking is minimum in number.
7. The responses about influence of manager indicate that “Yes” (count 67 and percentage 49.3%) and “No” (count 69 and percentage 50.7%). That interprets a contrasting assessment within the employees.
8. The satisfaction about the leadership style indicates that average marking of satisfaction is 3.6 stars out of 5 stars.  The levels are 5 star (count 31 and frequency 23.1%), 4 star (count 48 and frequency 35.8%), 3 star (count 32 and frequency 23.9%), 2 star (count 18 and frequency 13.4%) and one star (count 5 and frequency 3.7%). The maximum frequency is 48 in case of 4 star rating.
9. Answer of question 9 shows that average rating of marking is 4.1. The levels are measured as 5 star (count 47 and percentage 35.1%), 4 star (count 60 and percentage 44.8%), 3 star (count 22 and percentage 16.4%), 2 star (count 4 and percentage 3%). The minimum frequency is 1 star (count 1 and percentage 0.7%) and maximum frequency is 4 star.
10. The answer of sufficiently motivation describes about the responses about “Yes” (count 83 and percentage 61.5%) and “No” (count 52 and percentage 38.5%). The positive response is greater than negative response.
11. The responses of question 11 shows that the opinion and decision making is Always (count 38 and frequency 27.9%), sometimes (count 82 and frequency 60.3%), rare (count 15 and percentage 11%) and never (count 1 and percentage 0.7%). The “Never” response is negligible and “Sometime” response is maximum in frequency.
12. The responses about training achievement are “Yes” (count 58 and percentage 42.6%), “No” (count 40 and percentage 29.4%) and “Conditional No” (count 38 and percentage 27.9%). The positive reaction of motivation of training achievement is maximum in frequency.
13. The responses about organizational strive are “Yes” (count 79 and percentage 58.5%), “No” (count 40 and percentage 29.6%) and “Do not know” (count 16 and percentage 11.9%). The positive responses dominates other factors.
14. The responses about managerial appraisal about work performance indicate the “Yes” (count 85 and percentage 62.5%) and “No” (count 51 and percentage 37.5%). The positive response dominates the other.

The methodology and methods of analyzing research questions is normally done with the help of statistical packages and software. We calculate the Pearson’s correlative correlation coefficient, linear regression and multiple regressions. We plotted some bar plots, scatter plots and box plots for further evaluation and decision-making.

Our strategy is to provide the correct significance of the factors and draw references for the welfare of the company or organization.

Evaluation of Cognitive Theory and Extrinsic Motivators' Responses and Intrinsic Motivation

A review of the relationship between job satisfaction and job performance is given in this essay. According to the researches and meta-analysis, we consider the relevance between job satisfaction and job performance. The future research relies on the relationship between satisfaction-performance relationships. Job satisfaction is also a mediating factor in that case (Judge et al., 2001).

A motivation towards physiological states of the employees must be present for internal development (Gupta and Dawn 2014). The characteristics of the jobs can generate psychological states. The attributes of satisfaction determine that how an employee would respond to a complicated and challenging job. An analysis of 658 employees who work on 62 different jobs in seven organizations validates the result. A number of special features and factors of the analysis are diagnosed on the evaluation and satisfaction of job (Danish and Usman 2010).

We all know that human resource is the most crucial among all the resources in an organization. To maintain efficient and experienced workforce in an organization is very important in overall assessment of an organization (Judge and Bono 2014). The major factors that motivate employees in the relationship with authority and higher organization are reward, recognition, appraisal and sectoral composition. In the survey, 605 of the selected employees of different sectors completed the useable questionnaires for response rate of 88%. The participation of the survey was voluntary and confidentially ensured. The analysis statistically shows that different dimensions of work motivation and satisfaction are highly correlated. Reward and recognition have deep effect on motivation of employees. Implications of the analysis for managers and policy makers practices in the context of human resource.

The characteristics of the analysis and report are -

Promotional opportunities: Assertion of promotions creates the opportunity for personal growth, increment of social standing and responsibility. To have the promotion of organizational growth and job satisfaction, extension of scopes for the employees is necessary. It is a part of performance evaluation process where an opportunity for growth and development is present according to his or her work, abilities and skills.

Operating Procedures: Operating procedure includes all the rules, regulations, requirements and procedures. The nature of job and values of an organization is performed by operating procedures. The data of operating procedure depends on satisfaction of procedure.

Recognition: The recognition process provides the employees a certain status within an organization. This is a very important factor towards an employee motivation. The perfection of work evaluates the recognition process appreciated from the organization (Huang and Rundle-Thiele 2015). The way of receiving rewards and promotion, is also the measure of satisfaction.

Positive and Negative Aspects of Work Satisfaction and Motivation

Relationship with Co-workers: The environment of an organization and the relationship among co-workers develops the idea of person-to-person relevance.

Satisfaction with compensation: It is measured by the amount of pay and fringe benefits given to the employees fairly paid by the companies.

Satisfaction with security: It is measured with the help of two items that are amount of job security and secured matters that are stored for the employees in the company.

Satisfaction with supervision: This attribute is consists of amount of support and guidance and Likert scale of diagnostics survey on job diagnostics survey.

Satisfaction with growth: The satisfaction of growth is dependent on the Likert scale of amount of personal growth and development.

Achievement Sense: We measure the sense of achievement from the Likert scale of the data.      

With respect to the promotional opportunities, operating procedures, coworkers’ relationship, security of satisfaction, satisfaction of supervision and satisfaction with compensation, the motivation and satisfaction of the employees puts deep impact.

The collected data is summarized with the instruction of descriptive statistics. Our complete filtered data submitted by 136 employees. However, we took the total visit of 630 students among which 494 data was just shown. The overall closing rate is 21.6%.

We calculated the frequency bar diagram according to the percentage of frequency. The cumulative frequency is also provided in the table as a measure of summarization. Various types of different levels (in Likart scale) of each data presentation are given by percentage bar diagram.

The summary summarization would be critical if we take into account all the incomplete data. The data survey analyze would be more erroneous. The comparative regression model and correlation coefficient might get bias. The response survey is not at all successful in all manners (21.6%). Many of the data are incomplete. The filtration of data was therefore essential for good result.

The analytical strategy is to analyze the qualitative data with graphs. Presentation of survey data includes most of the qualitative data. Therefore, we had to use the percentage calculation, cumulative percentage calculation and percentage bar diagram.

The statistical analytical tools that were used here to analyze the data file is MS excel spreadsheet and R (“plotly” and “lattice” package). . The graphs using “plotly” and “lattice” package are highly interactive.

We could convert the nominal qualitative data to the numerical value using “factor” function such as “Yes” = 1 and “No” = 2. We could then only convert these data as quantitative data. We could convert different levels of ordinal qualitative data to qualitative data such as “always”=1, “sometimes”=2, “rarely”=3, “Never”=4. Then we can summarize the data and find its descriptive statistics. Next, we can find the correlation coefficient, linear regression model, binary logistic regression model and different types of bar plots, scatter plots, box plots between different types of two columns. The testing of hypothesis, p-value calculation, F-statistic calculation, goodness of fit could be calculated with the help of the converted analytical data.

Association between Incentives, Reward Recognition, and Employee Motivation and Satisfaction

The alternative tools of analyzing the data are PSPP or Minitab software. The data could also be analyzed properly with the help of this analyzing software. If we would have the data analysis in PSPP, then graphs and the calculation table representation would be different.

  Chosen data columns are random in nature. Any authority persons do not anyhow manipulate the data. For the of data columns, we can analyze qualitatively or quantitatively both the data. We can calculate the mean and estimated mean of the data. Their difference would indicate the presence of significant or insignificant bias. We can calculate standard deviation of each the data and calculate the estimated values. The bias is measured with respect to mean and standard deviation. We could not found any significant bias in these cases.

Conclusion

Apart from Operating procedures and work itself process, the factors and attributes have deep impact on motivation and job satisfaction of the employees. The effects that have huge association with the employees’ job satisfaction and motivation are promotional opportunities, bonus availabilities and relationship between co-workers. Some factors are highly correlated with each other. Such as appreciation of boss and amount of work-done, recognition and production management are highly associated (Cox 2017). These kinds of associations motivate the employees for better performance and probability of sticking to the same company. An analytical result could be beneficial for the authority and policy makers (Men 2014). The motivation and influence about training should be enhanced for the welfare of company. It is also shown that the employees are happy with their position and performance. Managers could apprehend the demand and need for satisfaction of the employees. Similarly, they could take the possible measures. The data also indicates that if data association between Boss’s interference to employees’ work and satisfaction to own work increases, then it would be more helpful (Lazaroiu 2013). Next, if association between satisfaction with security and rate of motivate increases, then organization would be more successful towards employee-satisfaction policy. Employees’ performance and production would definitely increase if and only if they would get their incentives and promotion in time.

References

Baglin, J., 2014. Improving your exploratory factor analysis for ordinal data: a demonstration using FACTOR. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 19(5), p.2.

Bono, J.E. and Judge, T.A., 2003. Self-concordance at work: Toward understanding the motivational effects of transformational leaders. Academy of Management Journal, 46(5), pp.554-571.

Christensen, R.H.B., 2015. ordinal: Regression Models for Ordinal Data. R package version 2015.6-28. See https://www. cran. r-project. org/package= ordinal.

Cox, V., 2017. Exploratory data analysis. In Translating Statistics to Make Decisions (pp. 47-74). Apress.

Danish, R.Q. and Usman, A., 2010. Impact of reward and recognition on job satisfaction and motivation: An empirical study from Pakistan. International journal of business and management, 5(2), p.159.

Gagné, M. and Deci, E.L., 2005. Self?determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational behavior, 26(4), pp.331-362.

Gupta, N. and Shaw, J.D., 2014. Employee compensation: The neglected area of HRM research. Human Resource Management Review, 24(1), pp.1-4.

Hackman, J.R. and Oldham, G.R., 1976. Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational behavior and human performance, 16(2), pp.250-279.

Huang, Y.T. and Rundle-Thiele, S., 2014. The moderating effect of cultural congruence on the internal marketing practice and employee satisfaction relationship: An empirical examination of Australian and Taiwanese born tourism employees. Tourism Management, 42, pp.196-206.

Judge, T.A. and Bono, J.E., 2001. Relationship of core self-evaluations traits—self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability—with job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of applied Psychology, 86(1), p.80.

Judge, T.A., Thoresen, C.J., Bono, J.E. and Patton, G.K., 2001. The job satisfaction–job performance relationship: A qualitative and quantitative review.

Lazaroiu, G., 2015. Employee Motivation and Job Performance. Linguistic and Philosophical Investigations, 14, p.97.

Men, L.R., 2014. Strategic internal communication: Transformational leadership, communication channels, and employee satisfaction. Management Communication Quarterly, 28(2), pp.264-284.