Employee Relation and Motivation - Free Download | Page 3
4.5, 3476 votes
Please vote for this template if it helps you.
Employee Relation and Motivation Page 3
Employee Relation and Motivation
The person-job fit concept implies that the person and the job operate as joint determinants of individual
and organizational outcomes (Lewin, 1951). The literature uses a plethora of different ‘fit’ terms such as
‘matching’, ‘congruence’, and ‘contingency’. Most research has focused on the ‘fit between employee
desires and job supplies’ (Edwards, 1991: 309). Early studies documented more need deficiency than
satisfaction, with respect to job level, job type, and other factors. Other studies have looked at
preferences (for example, ‘would like’). The better the ‘fit’ between job and person, the higher the job
satisfaction, commitment, trust and well-being, and the lower the absenteeism and turnover.
Edwards (199: 328) is nonetheless cautious about making too much of this apparent consensus in
findings, because of what he calls ‘serious methodological problems’ associated with sampling (that is,
one-shot samples), design (that is, cross-sectional), measurement issues and analysis (that is, reliance
on single ‘fit’ index). He makes recommendations for future research using longitudinal designs and
multi-dimensional fit indices.
Organizational justice
Greenberg (1987) links cognitive and motivational processes specifically to organizational procedures. He
proposed that perceptions of organizational injustice prompt cognitive or behavioural change if
procedures are seen as terminal or an ‘end in themselves’. If procedures are construed as ‘means to an
end’, perceptions of procedural fairness per se are less influential than perceptions of distributive
fairness. In other words, the motivational power of injustice perceptions may be tied to personal goals.
It has also been suggested that interpersonal aspects of procedures influence perceptions of procedural
fairness. For example, Tyler and Bies (1999) proposed five norms that contribute to perceptions of
procedural fairness: adequate consideration of an employee’s viewpoint; suppression of personal bias;
consistent application of criteria across employees; provision of timely feedback after a decision; and
providing employees with an adequate explanation for the decision.
Can creativity be extrinsically motivated
Across five studies, Eisenberger and Rhoades (2001) found that repeated reward for creative behaviour
consistently yielded an increase in creative behaviour across three different samples (pre-adolescent,
college students and employees). They also found that intrinsic job interests mediated employees’
expectations of reward for creative performance at work. Eisenberger and Rhoades (2001) say that
these results are consistent with other views and findings that reward for high performance increase
intrinsic task interest (rather than undermining it). They found that intrinsic task motivation was increased
by reward via a process of increased self-determination, leading to enhanced creative behaviour. On the
other hand, findings suggest that intrinsic interest can be undermined if expectations of reward are not
seen as contingent on performance, which ties in with the instrumentality element of Valence-
Instrumentality-Expectancy (VIE) theory (Eisenberger, Pearce, & Cameron, 1999). Other findings have
confirmed the importance of self-determination (autonomy, control) in the workplace as a source of
satisfaction and motivation (Parker et al., 2001).
Engagement at work
The following ‘engagement’ items are examples taken from May, Gilson, & Harter (2004):
Performing my job is so absorbing that I forget about everything else.
I often think about other things when performing my role.
Employee Relation and Motivation Previous Page Employee Relation and Motivation Next Page
source: uk.sagepub.com
Employee Relation and Motivation