Individual Level - Highly Motivated Employees
By: Jon • Term Paper • 398 Words • January 20, 2010 • 1,182 Views
Join now to read essay Individual Level - Highly Motivated Employees
Individual Level - Highly Motivated Employees
Competitive Compensation Package
Expectancy Theory (Valence-Instrumentality- Expectancy Theory)
The strength and tendency to act in a certain way depends on the strength of an expectation that the act will be followed by a given outcome and on the attractiveness of that outcome. (Vroom 1964).
Google has been able to motivate and retain its high quality staff through its outstanding compensation package, which includes employee stock options, high pay and other numerous benefits. They attract, motivate and retain employees with both extrinsic and intrinsic outcomes. Google's packages along with recognition for hard word, are a highly valent outcome for both potential and existing employees.
Also when employees ideas are accepted by the company, Google rewards them by making them managers of the project. Such recognition gives employees a lot of motivation and increases productivity.
Hertzbergs Two Factor Theory (Herzberg, Mausner & Snyderman 1959)
Fredrick Hertzberg claims that "The motivators" were the source of motivation and job satisfaction while "hygienes" affect dissatisfaction.
Recent studies have shown that this is not always the case, as there is considerate emphasis upon hygiene as a source of employee motivation today (Gray and Stark 1984). Milton Mososkowitz, co author of the bestseller, The 100 Best Companies to work for in America, claims that treating employees well (providing fringe benefits) is very important for generating positive attitudes, loyalty and commitment to the organization. (Milton Mosokowitz 1985). Google has placed a lot of emphasis on providing all these benefits to its employees and people are proud and happy to work with companies that treat them well. This is major contributor to Google's popularity and productivity.
References
David K. Banner , T. Elaine Gagne Designing effective organizations page 265 1995)
Milton