Employee Portfolio Management 311 University Of Phoenix

Employee Portfoliomgt311 Version 11university Of Phoenix Materialempl

Employee Portfolio MGT/311 Version University of Phoenix Material Employee Portfolio Complete one matrix for each employee. Employee name: _________Peterson Kay________________ Self Assessment Results Summary Strengths Weaknesses How Satisfied Am I with My Job? 74 score This is average -employee is self-motivated -they can get along with almost everyone they work with The employee feels the pay is not tallying with their efforts and hence they feel unappreciated Am I Engaged? The employee scored 30 which is average -know how to coexist with others -understand other people feeling The employee sometimes can get rude How Are You Feeling Right Now? 60 which is good -am ever jovial The employee has mood swings What’s My Affect Intensity? 50 which is neutral -smile occasionally -excited by new things or people -I frown easily -I fear humiliation What’s My Emotional Intelligence Score? 102 Excellent score -I make others feel good -I identify when I experience foreign moods -can build consensus with others -gets angry quickly -I rarely relax when under pressure -I rarely consider the implications of my behavior to others Am I A Deliberate Decision Maker? The worker scored 36 Which is good -I can take own initiative on my own -I am proactive/planning ahead -Creative The employee show he can act without considering what the implications of their actions are Management recommendations: The employee can positively affect the organizational performance just like that of their fellow workers. However, they still have the potential to spoil for the organization especially if they use more of their negative aspects. The management can motivate this employee by increasing, base salary pay as well as other benefits at work such as work off during the week. The employee also needs moderation-training programs to explain them the importance of considering their actions before they act. Employee name: _______Julian Anderson______________ Self Assessment Results Summary Strengths Weaknesses How Satisfied Am I with My Job? 76 which is about what is recommended The employee likes choosing what they can do The employee loves work Categorically does not like the kind of people they work with Poor team worker Am I Engaged? The score is 35 an average score The employee enjoys having themselves busy They feel occupied by their current tasks Does not like consultation with others Sometimes they can’t just concentrate and want time out How Are You Feeling Right Now? The score is 40 which is below average The employee is always in good mood if something is not disturbing her The employee is self reserved at times What’s My Affect Intensity? 70 which is positive The employee is always in jovial mood The face naturally looks frowned What’s My Emotional Intelligence Score? The employee has 38 A good score The employee can help others when stressed Can effectively build consensus with others Finds it had to deal with a negative habit at work Am I A Deliberate Decision Maker? The employee scored 34 which is about average The employee is an independent thinker The employee can influence people to a desired direction The employee can get overambitious sometimes in making decisions Management recommendations: This employee has the potential to boost the organizational performance through positive influence to others if they decide to capitalize on their strengths. The management should therefore focus on programs such as increase in remuneration and other benefits to motivate them. Job enrichment is also important to avoid them feeling out of place sometimes. They should also be encouraged to participate in teamwork activities Employee name: _________Karl Bismarck_______________ Self Assessment Results Summary Strengths Weaknesses How Satisfied Am I with My Job? 76, was the score which is within the recommended. The employee loves his job and is motivated to work overtime Sometimes they find the working conditions too de-motivating Am I Engaged? 28 which is within average Feels less occupied, needs more tasks Is restless especially when they have no enough work How Are You Feeling Right Now? 45 slightly below expectation The employee is happy and finds satisfaction with his fellow workers The employee does not sometimes treasure others input in their live What’s My Affect Intensity? 72 average The employee has face always beaming with happiness Easily angered and finds difficult tolerating others What’s My Emotional Intelligence Score? The employee scored 68 which is a good one The employee understands others in their times of difficulties The employee can control their anger The employee is unable to realize when they are about to get mood swings Am I A Deliberate Decision Maker? The employee scored 31 which is average The employee likes showing leadership in times of crisis The employee rarely listens to advice nor consults in decision making Management recommendations: This kind of employee is somehow mixed and therefore the organization may find hard bringing the best out of them. They can have positive and negative impact on the organizational performance and that of their fellow workers in equal measure. Organization therefore should focus on increasing job tasks for them as well as encouraging teamwork so that they can learn team decision making. They should also be kept busy at work to avoid them wandering both physically and mentally References Employee benefit plan review, (2003). New York: Aspen Publishers Odiorne, G. S. (1984). Strategic management of human resources, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Employee Portfolio: Motivation Action Plan MGT/311 Version University of Phoenix Material Employee Portfolio: Motivation Action Plan Determine the motivational strategy or strategies that would likely be most appropriate for each of your three employees on basis of their individual characteristics. Indicate how you would leverage their employee evaluations to motivate each of the three employees. Describe one or more of the motivational theories and explain how the theories connect to each of your selected motivational strategies. Team Member Name Summary of Individual Characteristics Motivational Strategy and Action Plan Relevant Theory

Paper For Above instruction

In organizational management, understanding employee characteristics and tailoring motivational strategies accordingly are crucial for enhancing performance and job satisfaction. This paper examines three employees—Peterson Kay, Julian Anderson, and Karl Bismarck—and proposes individualized motivational strategies rooted in their unique self-assessment results, which include data on job satisfaction, engagement, emotional states, affect, and decision-making styles. The core goal is to leverage these insights to foster motivation, productivity, and organizational loyalty, aligning with established motivational theories.

Peterson Kay: Motivation Strategy and Theoretical Connection

Peterson Kay exhibits average self-motivation with scores indicating a tendency to get along well with colleagues, yet feeling underappreciated due to perceived pay inadequacies. Her emotional intelligence is highly developed, and she demonstrates proactive decision-making skills. Despite her strengths, her dissatisfaction regarding compensation can dampen motivation.

Given her profile, a motivational strategy that emphasizes recognition and financial incentives would be effective. Specifically, implementing a performance-based reward system coupled with non-monetary recognition such as appreciation programs can boost her intrinsic motivation. According to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs (Maslow, 1943), recognizing her efforts fulfills esteem needs, promoting higher engagement. Additionally, Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory (Herzberg, 1959) suggests that addressing her motivators—achievement, recognition, and responsibility—can enhance her job satisfaction.

Management should consider adjusting her base salary and offering opportunities for skill development or increased responsibilities, thus aligning her with her innate need for recognition and self-actualization. Such strategies can mitigate her feelings of underappreciation and foster a more committed, motivated workforce member.

Julian Anderson: Motivation Strategy and Theoretical Connection

Julian Anderson’s self-assessment reveals a generally positive outlook with strong self-motivation and a love for her work but identifies challenges in teamwork and concentration. Her emotional intelligence is commendable, yet she sometimes exhibits reserved behavior. Her scores suggest that she enjoys activity but struggles with interpersonal collaboration.

To motivate Julian, strategies should focus on job enrichment and social reinforcement. Enrichment activities that involve teamwork, such as collaborative projects or peer recognition, can help her develop interpersonal skills and boost her engagement. According to McClelland’s Theory of Needs (McClelland, 1961), providing her with opportunities to achieve and belong through team-based tasks can activate her need for affiliation and achievement. Furthermore, applying the Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985), fostering a sense of autonomy and competence through meaningful work and autonomy in decision-making can enhance her intrinsic motivation.

Offering her opportunities to participate in team decision-making processes and providing feedback to build confidence can enhance her motivation significantly, thereby improving performance and morale.

Karl Bismarck: Motivation Strategy and Theoretical Connection

Karl Bismarck displays a positive attitude towards his job but exhibits signs of restlessness and dissatisfaction with working conditions. His emotional intelligence is rated highly, yet he demonstrates difficulty tolerating others and controlling mood swings. His scores suggest a need for structured engagement and emotional stability.

For Karl, a motivational plan involving task variety and workload management would be effective. Ensuring that he remains challenged and engaged by providing additional responsibilities or cross-training opportunities can reduce restlessness. Concurrently, implementing stress management and emotional regulation workshops can help him develop better coping mechanisms. According to Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000), satisfying his need for competence and relatedness by involving him in meaningful tasks and fostering team cohesion is vital.

Furthermore, applying Equity Theory (Adams, 1965), ensuring his efforts are recognized and rewarded fairly can boost his motivation and reduce feelings of dissatisfaction. Management should also emphasize leadership development opportunities, enabling him to channel his energy positively and reduce mood swings.

Conclusion

Aligning motivational strategies with individual employee characteristics, as identified through self-assessment, is essential for maximizing organizational performance. By utilizing motivation theories such as Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory, McClelland’s Theory of Needs, and Self-Determination Theory, managers can craft targeted interventions that foster engagement, satisfaction, and productivity. Personalizing motivation not only enhances employee well-being but also contributes to a resilient and adaptable organizational culture.

References

• Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Springer Science & Business Media.
• Herzberg, F. (1959). The Motivation to Work. John Wiley & Sons.
• Maslow, A.H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370-396.
• McClelland, D.C. (1961). The Achieving Society. Princeton University Press.
• Odiorne, G. S. (1984). Strategic management of human resources. Jossey-Bass.
• Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211.
• Adams, J.S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 62, 267–299.
• Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (2000). The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268.
• Odiorne, G. S. (1984). Strategic management of human resources. Jossey-Bass.
• Employee benefit plan review. (2003). Aspen Publishers.