Resource Only Use This One

Resource Only Use This Onehttpsopenlibumneduorganizationalbeh

Answer the below questions. Question AND response to be submitted ONLY.

1. What are the three factors that influence employee performance?

2. Define the three factors that influence employee performance (definition)?

3. What is the connection between a company's reward system and the level of ethical behaviors?

4. What do inputs, outcomes, and referents have to do with the equity theory?

5. What are the three types of justice the equity theory looks at to perceive fairness as a motivator? Define each type of justice.

6. What are the three factors that individuals use to evaluate their situation, according to the expectancy theory? Define each factor.

7. Review Maslow's hierarchy of needs. How can an organization satisfy employee needs that are included in the hierarchy? Give specific examples.

Paper For Above instruction

Understanding employee motivation and performance remains a central focus in organizational behavior, underpinning efforts to enhance productivity, satisfaction, and ethical conduct within the workplace. This paper addresses key questions about the factors influencing employee performance, the theory behind motivation, and how organizations can utilize this understanding to foster a motivated and ethical workforce.

Factors Influencing Employee Performance

Employee performance is influenced by several interrelated factors, primarily including motivation, ability, and work environment. Motivation refers to the internal or external drive that compels an employee to perform tasks efficiently and effectively. Ability encompasses an employee’s skills, knowledge, and competencies necessary to execute job responsibilities successfully. The work environment involves organizational culture, resources, management style, and the physical workspace, all of which can either facilitate or hinder optimal performance (Robbins & Judge, 2019).

These three factors interact dynamically; for instance, even highly motivated employees with the requisite skills may underperform if the work environment is hostile or resource-scarce. Conversely, a supportive environment can enhance motivation and enable employees to utilize their abilities fully, leading to higher performance outcomes.

Definitions of the Three Factors

Motivation is defined as the psychological forces that determine the direction, intensity, and persistence of behavior toward achieving a goal (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Ability pertains to the sum of an employee’s skills, talents, and capacities required to perform job duties effectively (Latham & Pinder, 2005). Work environment refers to the physical, social, and organizational context in which employees operate, including leadership style, organizational policies, and the physical workspace, all affecting their capacity to perform (Spector, 2017).

The Connection Between Reward Systems and Ethical Behavior

A company's reward system critically influences ethical behaviors. When rewards are aligned with ethical standards—such as recognizing honesty, integrity, and fairness—employees are more likely to engage in ethical conduct. Conversely, reward systems that emphasize results alone, regardless of how outcomes are achieved, can incentivize unethical behaviors like cutting corners or manipulation. For example, if sales metrics are emphasized without regard to customer satisfaction, salespeople might resort to deceptive practices to meet targets (Valentine & Ferrell, 2019).

Ethically aligned reward systems foster a culture of integrity, reinforce organizational values, and promote sustainable employee behavior that benefits both the organization and society, highlighting the importance of integrating ethical considerations into performance management processes.

Inputs, Outcomes, and Referents in Equity Theory

Equity theory posits that employees assess fairness by comparing their inputs and outcomes with those of others, referred to as referents. Inputs include effort, skills, experience, and time contributed to the job. Outcomes encompass salary, benefits, recognition, and promotions received. Referents are other employees or groups used as benchmarks for comparison (Adams, 1963).

This comparison influences perceived fairness; if employees believe they are under-rewarded relative to their referents, they may experience guilt or resentment and reduce effort. Conversely, over-rewarded employees may feel guilt or strive to justify their favorable position. The theory underscores that perceived fairness in the distribution of rewards and recognition is vital for motivation and job satisfaction.

Three Types of Justice in Equity Theory

The three types of justice that influence perceptions of fairness are distributive justice, procedural justice, and interactional justice. Distributive justice concerns the fairness of outcomes or resource allocation, ensuring that rewards are distributed equitably based on contribution or need. Procedural justice relates to the fairness of processes used to determine outcomes, emphasizing transparency, consistency, and impartiality. Interactional justice pertains to the quality of interpersonal treatment during the implementation of procedures, emphasizing respect, dignity, and politeness (Greenberg, 1990).

These justice types collectively influence employee perceptions of fairness, which, in turn, affect their motivation, commitment, and ethical behavior at work.

Factors Used to Evaluate Situations in Expectancy Theory

According to expectancy theory, individuals evaluate their situations based on three factors: expectancy, instrumentality, and valence. Expectancy is the belief that effort will lead to desired performance; if employees believe their effort results in successful performance, they are more motivated. Instrumentality refers to the belief that performance will lead to certain outcomes; employees must trust that good performance will be rewarded. Valence signifies the value or attractiveness of these outcomes to the individual; rewards must be meaningful to motivate behavior (Vroom, 1964).

For example, if an employee believes that working harder will improve their chances of promotion (expectancy), trusts that this performance will result in a raise or recognition (instrumentality), and values these outcomes highly (valence), they are more likely to exert increased effort.

Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs and Organizational Applications

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs categorizes human motivations into five levels: physiological, safety, social, esteem, and self-actualization. Organizations can satisfy these needs through targeted policies and practices. Physiological needs can be addressed with competitive wages and comfortable working conditions. Safety needs can be met through job security, safe work environments, and health benefits. Social needs require fostering a sense of community, teamwork, and belonging through collaborative projects and social activities.

Esteem needs can be fulfilled via recognition programs, opportunities for advancement, and respect from peers and supervisors. Finally, self-actualization, or the realization of one's full potential, can be supported through professional development, challenging projects, and autonomy in decision-making. For instance, offering training programs and opportunities for leadership development helps employees progress toward their highest-level needs.

By addressing these needs, organizations create a motivated workforce where employees feel valued, secure, and engaged, leading to increased productivity and organizational success.

Conclusion

Employee motivation and performance are complex phenomena influenced by various factors and theories. Understanding the interrelated roles of motivation, ability, and environment can help organizations craft strategies to improve performance. Furthermore, aligning reward systems with ethical standards, ensuring fairness through justice perceptions, and fulfilling employees’ hierarchical needs are essential steps toward fostering a motivated, ethical, and high-performing workforce. Applying these insights enables organizations to create a sustainable competitive advantage rooted in motivated and committed employees.

References

• Adams, J. S. (1963). Theories of motivation: The law of justice. Needs and Values in Social Psychology. New York: Free Press.
• 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.
• Greenberg, J. (1990). Organizational justice: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Journal of Management, 16(2), 399–432.
• Latham, G. P., & Pinder, C. C. (2005). Work motivation theory and research at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 56, 485–516.
• Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2019). Organizational Behavior (18th ed.). Pearson.
• Spector, P. E. (2017). Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Research and Practice. John Wiley & Sons.
• Valentine, S., & Ferrell, L. (2019). Corporate ethics and social responsibility. Business & Society, 58(4), 587–617.
• Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and Motivation. John Wiley & Sons.