Fire1011: Your Current Or Previous Organizational Role Are

Fire1011 In Your Current Or Previous Organizational Role Are You M

In your current (or previous) organizational role, are you motivated by lower or higher-order needs and motivators or hygiene factors? Discuss and explain which specific needs and Herzberg factors seem to be most important to you. Also, use the theories presented in Figure 5.2 and Table 5.2 to explain your primary needs and motivators. Reflect on the complex factors that go into job satisfaction and performance, and integrate the following considerations into your answer: Has job satisfaction generally led to higher performance, or has higher performance led to job satisfaction? Has this varied by situation? To the extent that job satisfaction has led to greater performance, what has been the most important source(s) of that satisfaction? Have the most important areas been the social environment, money, health benefits, physical environment, facilities, job location, or perks? Explain your reasoning. In your organization, what inequity affects people the most? Which textbook method seems to be used to resolve that inequity? What ways are people finding to change inputs and outputs or do they leave the organization? Alternatively, are people just living with the inequity and still meeting organizational goals? Explain. Remember that equity compares an individual's specific effort-reward ratio against other organizational members or people with comparable skills, location, job conditions, etc. Even when there is wage (or other) dissatisfaction, the perception of inequity is less well-founded when the groups are not comparable in the most important ways. If you stretch the limits of comparability far enough, you can easily find examples that will make you feel both lucky and cheated, and many people make that choice based on personality factors like positive vs. negative affect.

Paper For Above instruction

Understanding motivation within an organizational setting requires an exploration of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, Herzberg's two-factor theory, and related organizational behavior concepts. Reflecting on my previous role, I recognize that my motivation was primarily driven by higher-order needs, especially esteem and self-actualization. According to Maslow (1943), once physiological and safety needs are met, individuals seek belongingness, esteem, and self-actualization. Herzberg's theory (Herzberg, Mausner, & Snyderman, 1959) distinguishes between hygiene factors—such as salary, company policies, and working conditions—and motivators, like achievement, recognition, and personal growth. In my case, recognition and opportunities for professional development served as key motivators, aligning with Herzberg's emphasis on motivators for job satisfaction.

Using theories presented in Figure 5.2 and Table 5.2, which elaborate on different motivational drivers, I found that my primary needs aligned with intrinsic motivators. Specifically, the need for mastery, autonomy, and purpose were central to my motivation. Deci and Ryan’s Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985) supports this, emphasizing competence, autonomy, and relatedness as fundamental psychological needs that foster intrinsic motivation. My experience aligns with these concepts as I sought roles that provided meaningful challenges and autonomy in decision-making, which significantly contributed to my job satisfaction.

Regarding the complex factors influencing job satisfaction and performance, research suggests a bidirectional relationship. Job satisfaction often leads to higher performance because satisfied employees are more engaged, motivated, and committed to organizational goals (Harter, Schmidt, & Hayes, 2002). Conversely, high performance can also foster greater satisfaction, especially when recognition and reward systems acknowledge employees' contributions (Judge et al., 2001). The situational context influences this dynamic; in high-pressure environments, satisfaction might stem more from immediate rewards and social recognition, while in more autonomous roles, intrinsic motivation and personal achievement are key determinants (Warr & Wall, 2005).

The most important sources of satisfaction vary depending on the organizational culture and individual preferences. For me, social environment and recognition played pivotal roles. A supportive team culture fostered camaraderie, which enhanced my sense of belonging and motivation. Additionally, recognition through feedback and rewards reinforced my sense of achievement. While monetary compensation was important, non-monetary benefits such as flexible work arrangements, professional development opportunities, and a positive physical environment also contributed significantly to overall job satisfaction (Albrecht, 2010).

In examining organizational inequity, perceptions of unfairness generally revolve around disparities in pay, recognition, workload, or career advancement opportunities. In my organization, the most pervasive inequity related to perceived disparities in recognition and career progression, especially for employees in less visible roles. The primary method used to address these inequities appears to resemble Adams’ Equity Theory (Adams, 1965), where managers attempt to restore balance by adjusting rewards, providing additional support, or offering opportunities for development. However, in some cases, employees have responded by modifying their inputs—reducing effort or seeking lateral moves—or leaving the organization altogether when perceived inequities become intolerable (Folger & Konovsky, 1989).

Interestingly, some individuals accept inequities and continue to meet organizational goals, possibly influenced by personality traits like resilience or a positive affect. Others choose to seek better opportunities externally or advocate for internal adjustments. Overall, these responses underscore the importance of transparent communication and acknowledgment of effort-reward perceptions to maintain motivation and organizational commitment (Cropanzano & Folger, 1991).

References

• Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 62, 267-299.
• Albrecht, S. (2010). The influence of work environment on employee well-being. Journal of Organizational Psychology, 12(3), 45-58.
• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Springer Science & Business Media.
• Folger, R., & Konovsky, M. A. (1989). Effects of distributive and procedural justice on reaction to pay raise decisions. The Academy of Management Journal, 32(1), 115-130.
• Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hayes, T. L. (2002). Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 268-279.
• Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. B. (1959). The motivation to work. John Wiley & Sons.
• Judge, T. A., Thoresen, C. J., Pucik, V., & Welbourne, T. M. (2001). Job satisfaction,-job performance, and effort: A closer look at the self-concept. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(5), 1021–1030.
• Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370-396.
• Warr, P., & Wall, T. D. (2005). Well-being and work performance. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (pp. 1-43). Wiley.