Motivation and Performance

What is it?

There are a number of theories of motivation. General needs theories such as Maslow and Alderfer indicate that people have a hierarchy of needs which they seek to satisfy. Once one level of need is satisfied, they will strive towards the next level and so on up the hierarchy from safety needs through to self-actualisation. The Maslow and Alderfer models have been combined and adapted to show an example hierarchy of needs below:

Herzberg’s two-factor theory of motivation can be related to the needs models and also has a bearing on performance. Herzberg differentiated between hygiene factors and motivators. Hygiene factors consist of company policies, supervision, work relationships, working conditions, salary, and security of employment. Motivators are: achievement, recognition, the work itself, responsibility, advancement, and growth.

The lack or absence of hygiene factors (which relate to lower-level needs) will lead to dissatisfaction, but their existence does not necessarily lead to higher performance. There is a difference between job satisfaction and job performance. The true indicators of job performance are the motivators (which relate to higher-level needs). Hygiene factors usually involve extrinsic rewards (external to the person and their job) while motivators are based on intrinsic rewards, which are more powerful.

Since the work itself is a higher-level need, a number of job design techniques have been developed in order to improve performance. Job rotation is the transfer of staff between jobs to provide more task variety. Job enlargement widens the job by increasing the number of operations or tasks within it. These techniques expand the job horizontally (more of the same) and only address the lower-level needs, thus limiting the impact on job performance. Job enrichment, however, is a planned and deliberate action to build greater responsibility, autonomy, discretion and challenge into a job. It expands the job vertically and addresses the higher-level needs, thus leading to greater levels of motivation and performance. This is why empowerment is such a popular concept for both procurement managers and those they manage.

We have so far only discussed content theories of motivation: what motivates people. We should also consider process theories: how people are motivated. Content theories are generalisations and assume that everyone is the same and will be motivated in the same way. Process theories recognise that people are different and will therefore be motivated differently. Vroom’s expectancy model is a typical process theory. It can be expressed as a calculation: Force = Valence x Expectancy.

The force or strength of an individual’s motivation depends on valence (their level of preference for a given outcome or reward) and expectancy (whether they believe that their action will result in the outcome or reward). Both valence and expectancy need to be present for a person to be motivated. A mental calculation takes place which assesses how important the outcome is to the individual, how much effort needs to be expended, and whether this will lead to the desired outcome. The procurement manager therefore needs to understand staff individually and set appropriate targets and objectives in order to motivate them and increase their performance.

What does it look like?

How does it work in practice?

A meta-analysis over ten years of healthcare workers in the East African Community identified a number of motivators and de-motivators at three determinant levels.[1] See table below:

It can be seen that a large number of de-motivating factors are identified, which are mainly related to structural/external factors and lower-level needs. On the other hand, a smaller number of motivating factors were identified, which mainly relate to self-actualisation and esteem needs.

A study of hospital workers in Tanzania found that almost half of both doctors and nurses were not satisfied with their jobs, as was the case for 67% of auxiliary clinical staff and 39% of supporting staff.[2] Amongst the contributing factors reported were: low salary levels, the frequent unavailability of necessary equipment and consumables to ensure proper patient care, inadequate performance evaluation and feedback, poor communication channels in different organisational units and between workers and management, lack of participation in decision-making processes, and a general lack of concern for workers welfare by the hospital management.

These are typical hygiene factors and demonstrate that staff members are not having their lower-level needs satisfied. This has to be rectified before any thought of introducing interventions to improve motivation and job performance. The recommendations made in the report were: setting defined job criteria and description of tasks for all staff, improving availability and quality of working gear for the hospital, the introduction of a reward system commensurate with performance, improved communication at all levels, and introduction of measures to demonstrate concern for the workers' welfare.

A study of community health workers in Zambia produced an interesting finding in terms of motivation and job performance.[3] A trial was undertaken whereby half of the districts recruited staff by emphasising that they would be 'helping the community' (the existing approach) while the other half were promised ‘rapid career advancement’. After a year, the results demonstrated a noticeable difference in performance between the two groups. Applicants recruited on the basis of career opportunity had more advanced skills, stronger scientific backgrounds and higher performance ratings. Both groups, however, attained similar scores in terms of commitment to the local community and retention rates were similar in the two groups. This demonstrates the power of personal growth and intrinsic rewards in relation to job performance. The Zambian government was concerned that appealing to people’s self-interest would attract the ‘wrong people’, but this was not the case at all, and the recruitment policy was subsequently changed.

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7349547/

[2] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18669121/

[3] https://www.lse.ac.uk/Research/research-impact-case-studies/improving-motivation-performance-health-workers-Africa