Expectancy Theory

Expectancy Theory

Expectancy theory posits that motivation results from valence, instrumentality, and expectancy. When these elements are high, the motivation is expected to rise and vice versa.

Article Summary

Employers can now access information regarding the right conditions regarding rewards and designs to motivate interns, leading to improved performance and work appreciation. This is the conclusion of a study that involved e-interns. It sought to understand the performance ad appreciation of the subjects as well as assess the imbalance between effort and rewards. Recruitment of subjects was done using the snowball technique. The researchers also set up two intern portals to facilitate the study, which featured virtual interns. All participants were grouped into two; effort and reward condition groups. The effort condition group was based on the subjects’ clarity of goal and satisfaction with support. The availability or absence of training and remuneration determined the reward conditions group. The authors, Deborah Jeske and Carolyn M. Axtell confirmed that interns who exhibited low performance had an imbalance of effort and reward, where effort was high and the reward low (Jeske & Axtell, 2017). The individuals felt a diminished value regarding their efforts and presence. In addition, the vice versa was also found to be true.

Discussion

People are an organization’s first customers. This implies that the treatment they receive and the environment they work in are reflected in their work performance and relations with clients. It follows that happy employees create happy and satisfied clients. Motivation is an important aspect of this process. Motivated employees, whether paid or unpaid, tend to perform well. Vroom’s expectancy theory of motivation posits that valence, instrumentality, and expectancy must be high for similar motivation. In agreement with Jeske and Axtell’s findings, high effort and high reward tend to lead to high performance and appreciation. The study, which involved virtual interns, established that a balance between efforts and rewards is necessary for interns who are part of the workforce. However, the study does not address valence, an element of motivation in Vroom’s theory. Valence is variable in terms of value to individuals. In this study, the valence is measured as interns’ income. Thus, this outcome may be negative for an individual seeking recognition or a promotion.

Similarly, a different study that involved federal employees highlighted the suitability of Vroom’s expectancy theory. The study found that the expectancy and valences of federal workers in high units influenced their satisfaction. Employees who receive the expected rewards are satisfied with the job. However, these rewards must be desirable to the employees. This study agrees with the previous study’s findings and promotes the notion that financial awards play a critical role in task completion. As a result, employees tend to possess a shared goal. For motivation to occur, employees’ intrinsic and extrinsic needs must be met adequately for job satisfaction to occur (Park & Kim, 2017). Individuals within managerial positions tend to exhibit more job satisfaction in comparison to their subordinates due to the fulfillment of self-actualization.

Both studies highlight the importance of motivation in every organization. For job satisfaction to occur, it is necessary that the needs of employees be met. Rewards make up part of these needs and must be desirable to the employee. Financial rewards are important to this process of motivation. A satisfied and motivated workforce tends to be highly productive. In agreement with these studies, I highly recommend the application of Vroom’s expectancy theory alongside other theories that enable employers to identify the elements related to valence, instrumentality, and expectancy. Most importantly, it is critical to identify the outcomes that are valuable to each employee for the successful application of the theory.

Biblical Integration

In Colossians chapter 4, verse 1, masters are urged to treat their servants justly and fairly. They should do so in the knowledge that they also have a heavenly master. Fair treatment of employees pertains to ensuring that the promised rewards are granted without shortchanging. The rewards should correspond to the efforts and work of employees. Employers should not seek to reward others highly at the expense of the rest. Instead, they should treat all employees as they would like to be treated. This fair treatment is expected to raise appreciation among employees, an important element of motivation. This biblical instruction is intended to eliminate the oppression of employees by their employers.

References

Jeske, D., & Axtell, C. M. (2017). Effort and Reward Effects: Appreciation and Self-Rated Performance in e-Internships. Social Sciences, 6(154), 1-14.

Park , S., & Kim, S. (2017). The Linkage Between Work Unit Performance Perceptions of US Federal Employees and Their Job Satisfaction: An Expectancy Theory. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences(52E), 77-93. Retrieved 3 December 2020, from https://doaj.org/article/a8669e5d5dee4ae9887a2ef26345be4d

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

Expectancy Theory

This is a discussion post following the guidelines below.

Expectancy Theory

Textbook

• Bateman, T.S., Snell, S.A., Konopaske, R. (2018). Management (5th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.

Discussion Board Instructions

Discussion Board Forum Threads and replies are due in Modules/Weeks 2, 4 and 6. The learning theories upon which this class is based are actualized in the threads.  Both the thread and replies are due in the same module and are considered one assignment; both must be submitted in order to be eligible for the full points.

Discussion Board Forum Threads:

The requirements listed below are the minimum requirements.

1. Review the concepts studied the previous week and select one. No duplication of concepts is allowed. Each student must cover a different concept. You may reserve a topic beginning at 12 a.m. (ET) on Tuesday of the even-numbered modules/weeks (2, 4 and 6). Topics reserved prior to then will be deleted.

2. Conduct a search of Liberty University’s Online Library resources to find 2 peer-reviewed articles that are no more than 4 years old and closely relate to the concept. These articles must be found through the Liberty University Library; no general internet search is allowed. Note: Blogs, education sites, commercial sites, Wikipedia, About.com, editorials, dissertations, books and book reviews are just a few of the types of materials that not acceptable for this exercise. You must look for articles from reputable peer-reviewed journals.
3. After reading the articles, select the 1 article that you wish to summarize. Your thread should be in APA format, use the following headings, and include the information listed below in the following format and be posted directly in the discussion board:

• Definition: a brief definition of the key term; this does not count in the word requirement. The definition must be cited to the source.
• Summary: Choose 1 of the articles and clearly summarize it in your own words. This must be 150 word minimum. While the majority of the summary should be focused on the article, be sure to note the article’s author as well as his/her credentials. This information should be clearly cited.
• Discussion: Using a minimum of 400 words, write a brief discussion in your own words of how the article relates to the selected concept. The discussion should include input from BOTH ARTICLES chosen for the key concept. Some discussion could include whether the articles agree or disagree; recommendations in the articles for integration in the workplace, etc.
• Biblical Integration: You must integrate your key term with a biblical truth. Integration of biblical truth is not simply listing a Bible verse but connecting the Scripture to the concept being covered. This section must be a minimum of 100 words.
• References: All references must be listed at the bottom of the thread in current APA format.

Be sure to use the headers (Definition, Summary, Discussion, Biblical Integration, References) in your thread to ensure that all aspects of the assignment are completed as required.  Use 3^rd person.

Any form of plagiarism (including cutting and pasting) will result in 0 points for the entire discussion board and may result in further penalties.

To post your thread, reply to the thread in which you reserved your topic and then type your key term in the subject line. Complete your submission in the text area.

Submit your thread by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Friday of the assigned module/week.

At the same time that you submit to the DB, submit your thread to the appropriate SafeAssign assignment link.

Discussion Board Forum Replies:

In Modules/Weeks 2, 4, and 6, you will be required to post a substantive reply of at least 300 words each to a minimum of TWO classmates’ threads.

• You must use at least 1 peer-reviewed reference published within the past 4 yeras (and not used in the original posting) in your response. The reference must be from the library (see guidelines above).
• Do not simply revisit what was discussed in the thread, but add information from the unique article you researched on the concept and compare the findings. Did the findings of the article you found and the articles used in the original thread agree, disagree, address different aspects of the concept?
• Only the substantive part of the response will be counted toward the word count.
• Use APA format and write in 3^rd

Submit your replies by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Monday of the assigned module/week.

At the same time that you submit both of your replies, submit your replies as one document to the appropriate SafeAssign assignment link.