Posted: November 4th, 2022

Motivation and Employee Performance

Introduction In the realm of industrial and organizational psychology, level of job performance is considered the most significant dependent variable. According to Borman (2004), companies have always been at the forefront of promoting worker productivity which is an indicator of job performance. Organization acts as the core of any business as it is the source of strength. If the business sector is highly organized and efficient, it functions and produces better.
In an organization, an individual has a specific role to play in fulfilling the mission and vision of the company and the individual’s ability to contribute in its realization constitutes job performance (Greguras, 1996). Keller (2006) pointed out that when employers expect the best from their employees, the workforce will deliver to the best of their abilities. However, when little is expected from employees, their performance will be poor. This is referred by Manzoni and Barsoux (2004) as the set-up-to fail syndrome.
One of the common grievances voiced by employees is the failure of employers to recognize and appreciate their effort resulting in low employee motivation. Another is lack of periodic evaluation and assessment. When there are communication barriers between the employers and employees, feedbacks cannot be performed regularly causing them to feel overlooked which inhibits them to achieve their full potential in contributing to the company’s goals. Thus, increasing employee motivation is one of the ways eyed by managers as an antidote to improve effectiveness of workers in performing their respective responsibilities to the company.

Since motivation is basically a psychological process, it influences behavior basing on the knowledge on what make people tick (Luthans, 1998). In 1998, Luthans asserted that motivation is the force that directs, sustains, arouses, and energizes behavior as well as performance. In other words, it is the process by which individuals are stimulated to action and achieve assigned tasks. A possible way to stimulate people is to employ effective motivational skills increasing job satisfaction and commitment. It is true that money is not the only motivating factor as there are other motivators.
Some of these motivators are identified as either a desired or needed entity. Numerous organizations the world over for the past decades focused their attention on what motivates their workers to perform their best. Many of these theories have found their validation in empirical studies. Nowadays, majority of workers especially in the banking sector have at least earned college degrees from reputable universities and for that they not only deserve a reasonable financial compensation but also favorable working conditions.
Having been perceived as a personal phenomenon, motivation is unique at the level of the individual since each person would have a distinct set of potentials, values, attitudes, expectations, goals and needs. What majority of workers are most concerned are their wants and desires. “It is important to identify employees’ wants and desires which includes: job security, praise and recognition; communication; to feel involved in the company’s decision making; and chance of advancing and gaining new experiences.
Luthans (1998) admitted that work motivation is not in itself the only key factor necessary to effectively result in maximum work performance. Thus, it is integral in management to understand the significance of individuals in an organization. As earlier mentioned, some leaders do not realize the necessity of motivating their employees and the impact this will have in their ability to achieve the goals and objectives of the organization. In countries where there is abundant supply of labor than its demand, employers do not believe that effective motivation of employees could translate in better performance.
They view that despite lack of proper motivation, workers would not leave their jobs since there are no more available jobs in the labor market. Some employers do not possess effective leadership behaviors that they treat their subordinates like machines and do not have proper time management with their workers so that accomplishments are well on their targets. This study was designed to investigate the influence of work motivation and performance among employees of Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation or HSBC. By the first quarter of 2008, the Banker magazine declared HSBC as the world’s most valuable banking institution (Imeson, 2008).
It is not only well-known for its significant fluctuations in security exchanges but also its conservative and risk-averse business operations which is a tradition since the nineteenth century (Olson, 2008). Review of Forbes magazine in April 2008 revealed assets worth of up to $2,348. 98 billion, sales of $146. 50 billion, and market value worth $180. 81 billion. Its net income of $19. 13 billion has earned its place as the most profitable bank in the world in 2007 which is higher than Citigroup’s $3. 62 billion and the $14. 98 of Bank of America. The study is significant particularly among managers and management researchers.
These groups of individuals have strongly held that the goals of an organization cannot be attained unless members are fully committed to the cause of the organization. Stoke (1999) as cited in Tella, Ayeni, and Popoola (2007) described motivation as a basic psychological trait that influences an individual’s degree of commitment. It covers the factors that prompt, direct, and uphold behavior shifted towards a specific direction. Adeyemo (1999) related four basic assumptions that govern in the motivation practices of managers. The first assumption is that motivation is generally a positive thing.
When one is not motivated, the individual does not feel good about himself or herself. The second assumes that motivation is one of numerous factors that determine performance of a worker in the case of this study, the bank employee. Other important aspects that are important in promoting better performance among employees is availability of resources, the working conditions, and inherent talents and abilities of employees. Third, researchers and managers have preconceived notion that because motivation is in short supply, it must be periodically replenished.
Fourth, motivation can be used by managers in organizations or companies. When a manager knows what motivates his or her employees, the management can do some modifications on the assignments and tasks given as well as rewards. Motivation can also be regarded as whatever the management is willing to provide in order to maximize their performance. According to Olajide (2000), “it is goal-directed, and therefore cannot be outside the goals of any organization whether public, private, or nonprofit”. The study is about the relationship between motivation and employee performance in HSBC.
In this study, the independent variable was limited to employee motivation while performance served as the dependent variable. In assessing work motivation, the parameters drive, control, challenges, relationships, and rewards were considered. On the other hand, job performance was based on task performance, sportsmanship, ourtesy, civic virtue, conscientiousness, altruism, and innovative behavior. For this study, it was assumed that the respondent pool is normally distributed such that there is adequate representation of different classes of bank employees namely that in the management, senior, and junior staff.
The study was both cross-sectional and correlational, therefore no causation or direction of causal effect can be drawn based on the results. Because the sampling design employed was stratified sampling, conclusion could be generalized to reflect the overall situation on the HSBC in the locale. Since the setting of the study is only one HSBC branch, the results of the study could not extrapolate on other branches of HSBC. Another assumption is that the respondents truthfully answered the items in the questionnaire-checklist; thus a high external validity is ensured.
One limitation is that the data was based on the self-report of the respondents based on their subjective assessment of community participation, capacity building, and empowerment. Only the views of management staff, senior staff, and junior staff were determined. Though self-reports obtained from self-administered questionnaires are advantageous because of its relative ease in scoring and assessment, it has high validity and reliability since these are standardized measures used by previous investigators. It is also likely that some respondents might not completely answer the questionnaires.
To minimize this problem, the investigator checked accomplished instruments individually. In order to allay any anxiety during test administration, the investigator emphasized there are no right or wrong answers. Research Problem It is the desire of every organization or company to improve its productivity and performance. And HSBC is no exception. Any human resource management team invest their time and energy in identifying the prime movers of employees as well as the norms, values, and many others that constitute what is termed organizational culture.
An organization that is properly managed recognizes the fact that each and every worker is a potential contributor in ensuring the company’s productivity. These organizations do not turn to capital investment but to their workforce as the primary source of their improvement. The effectiveness of an organization is measured in terms of its degree of achieving its goals. An organization could also be considered effective when there is commitment, satisfaction and cooperation. So that job satisfaction and commitment are fostered within the organization, there is a necessity for an effective and strong motivation at all levels in the workforce.
Performance as defined by Cascio (2006) is the degree in which the employee has successfully carried out his or her assignments or tasks. Jones (2003) added that job performance represents the net effect of the employee’s involvement and effort which are modified by perceptions regarding the roles and tasks at hand. The aim of this study is to investigate the correlation between work motivation and employee performance in HSBC. Specifically, the study answered the following objectives: 1. What is the level of motivation among selected employees in HSBC in terms of: 1. 1. drive 1. 2. control 1. 3. challenges 1.
4. relationships 1. 5. rewards 2. What is the extent of performance among the employees in HSBC in terms of: 2. 1. task performance 2. 2. sportsmanship 2. 3. courtesy 2. 4. civic virtue 2. 5. conscientiousness 2. 6. altruism 2. 7. innovative behavior 3. Is there a significant correlation between level of employee motivation and performance among employees in HSBC? Based on these problems, the study tested the hypothesis that: The level of work motivation is not significantly correlated with performance among selected employees in HSBC using a 5% level of significance (? =0. 05). Review of Related Literature
This section of the paper presents the concepts and definitions of motivation and job performance. Motivation Burney et al. (2007) claimed that extent of employee performance is not only dependent on skills possessed but also motivation. According to Dessler (1978), motivation is the internal driving force or external stimulus to behave in a particular way typically resulting in rewards acquisition. The achievement and talent of employees constitute the driving force of all firms, thus it is important for these organizations to motivate these employees and work best in retaining them (Harrington, 2003).
What significantly contributes to optimal performance of firms is the quality of human resource management. Among employees, deep concern is expressed in commitment flexibility, quality, and strategic integration to motivate and retain the creme de la creme in the industry. In today’s organizations, it is widely recognized that motivation of employees is largely financial and referring to Maslow’s needs theory, the non-financial element of the work comes into view when financial-based motivation has failed. Greenberg and Baron (2003) defined motivation into three major parts.
The first part pertains to arousal, the drive or energy fueling an individual’s action. It appears that persons are guided by their interest particularly in impressing other people, doing projects that sparks others’ interests and becoming successful in their endeavors. The second part refers to the choice individuals make and where these choices will lead them to. The last and final part is on the maintenance of behavior which clearly defines the amount of time individuals have to devote in order to meet their goals. Other psychologists would describe motivation as either intrinsic or extrinsic.
By extrinsic motivation, it concerns the set of behaviors whose influence is acquiring external rewards (Hitt, Esser, ; Marriott, 1992). Some forms of these external rewards include money, positive feedback, and no punishment (Deci, 1980). On the other hand, intrinsic motivation pertains to the pleasure brought by performing a particular activity (Hagedoorn ; Van Yperen, 2003). Extrinsic factors may be any of these examples: recognition, interesting work, achievement, or growth, among others. Linz (2003) reviewed numerous studies and has come to conclude that the higher the intrinsic motivation, the higher is the level of job performance.
Moreover, he emphasized that intrinsic motivation and job satisfaction are positively correlated. This result could well be used by business leaders as the business and finance climate all over the world is competitive. In a highly competitive environment, employees who are intrinsically motivated perform better, become more productive, and satisfied with their jobs. When employees rate their job to be satisfying, they are likely to stick with the organization and feel no need to transfer to another firm.
In an experiment carried out by Deci and Ryan in 2000, monetary rewards negatively affect performance of college students in a puzzle. There were two groups of respondents: those who got payment in exchange of participation and the others did not receive any money from the researchers. Students who took part in the experiment without any monetary reward solved the puzzle much longer than those given money. When the study was implemented in the workplace, the employees felt their behaviors are being constrained or contained in a dehumanizing and alienating manner by the monetary rewards provided.
It was then observed that rewards significantly diminish an employee’s motivation to ever accomplish the activity being rewarded anytime in their careers. Another finding was that employees will not perform tasks or responsibilities unless rewarded, therefore completion or compliance require rewards if there has already been a precedent. Over time, the employees would expect an increase in the amount and if rewards are decreased or altogether eliminated, these rewards reinforce behavior on a negative fashion. The following year, Deci and Ryan teamed with Cameron and Koester.
Their study was about the effects of performance-contingent rewards on intrinsic motivation of the employees. The rewards involved were very controlling since there is a direct association between the rewards and the tasks to be performed. In that context, performance-contingent rewards compromise intrinsic motivation; however, if reward will be given on condition of excellence, the role of the rewards is to fortify and promote a sense of competence among employees and in the process, decrease the rewards’ negative effect on the intrinsic motivation of the employees.
Moreover, interpersonal atmosphere is significant in setting where performance-contingent rewards are present. Cameron et al. (2001) did a comparison on the impact of administration of rewards to intrinsic motivation in both controlling and non-controlling climates. The researchers discovered that when performance-contingent rewards are given in a more controlling interpersonal climate, intrinsic motivation is undermined. In order to prevent the decrease in intrinsic motivation among the employees, the climate with which performance-contingent rewards are distributed should be more supportive.
The proposal of Vroom (1964) stated that individuals are motivated by the amount of wants and the means by which these wants are met. This suggests that motivation results in efforts; efforts combined with the employees’ ability and environment factors. This interplay among variables lead to performance. This performance then lead to a variety of outcomes, each with an associated value called valence. Adams (1965) suggested that what people seek is social equity in the rewards they reap in the pursuit of an outstanding performance.
According to his work, the outcomes from performing their job include recognition, promotion, social relationships, intrinsic reward and pay. In order to obtain these rewards, various inputs from the employees are needed like time, experience, efforts, education and loyalty. He suggested that people tend to view their outcomes and inputs as a ratio and then compare these ratios with others and turn to become motivated if this ratio is high. Herzberg (1959) presented motivation in a two-dimensional theory consisting of factors affecting individuals’ work attitudes.
He stated that factors such as policies, internal relations, supervision, salary, and working conditions are referred as hygiene factors instead of motivators. As stated, absence of hygiene result in job dissatisfaction, but presence neither motivates nor creates satisfaction. Conversely, he mentioned that motivators are those elements that enhance a person’s job or career and these are strong determinants of job satisfaction which consist of achievement, recognition, the nature of the work itself, responsibility, and advancement.
It was demonstrated that motivators positively affected job performance on a long-term basis while hygiene factors only produced temporary variations then rapidly fell to its baseline level. To sum up, satisfiers define the relationship of a person with his or her job and many of these are related to tasks being assigned to accomplish. On the contrary, dissatisfiers are those that pertain to the employee’s relationship with the environment where the job is performed. In simple terms, satisfiers denote what a person does while dissatisfiers are situations in which the person performs the job being given.
Maslow (1954) introduced a theory that determines how individuals are able to satisfy personal needs in the context of their respective jobs. Basing on his observations being a humanistic psychologist, he claimed that a general pattern of recognizing and satisfying needs exists and this same sequence is generally being followed. His theory also suggested that a person’s needs are arranged hierarchically and in order for a person to address the next level of needs, those below it must be substantially or completely satisfied.
This concept is known as prepotency. In other references, it is presented as a pyramid with the survival need occupying the bottom while at its peak is self-actualization. A collection of studies and literature focusing on motivation noted problems in articulating their expectations of their current jobs. Thus, employers have neglected the opinions and points of view of their employees. Instead, they tell their workers what their expectations are based on the managers’ beliefs of what most people usually want given the circumstances.
Very frequently, employers base their decisions on the hierarchy of needs according to Maslow (1954) which incorporates the factor of prepotency. Taking this theory into the work context, an individual’s advancement in the organization will lead to the provision of opportunities by the employer to satisfy higher-level needs in Maslow’s pyramid. Job performance Wall et al. (2004) suggested that job performance is a significant predictor of organizational performance basing on the results in a number of studies.
Though performance is often described as the battle of numbers like number of sales etc, it can also be determined by combining behavior- and task-related aspects expected of employees (Motowidlo, 2003). As a matter of fact, performance reported as an “absolute value” or self-reports may represent performance of the organization (Gomez-Mejia, Balkin, & Cardy, 2007; Wall et al. 2004). In addition, job analysis can also lead to the development of performance standards that employees use as reference in employee assessment and evaluation (Heneman & Judge, 2005).
Specified in job analysis are work-related knowledge, behaviors, aptitudes, capabilities, and other characteristics. As asserted by Wiedower (2001) and Pincus (1986), determination of performance utilizing appraisal items offers a higher reliability in the evaluation of employee evaluation. Schmitt and Chan as cited in Motowidlo (2003) grouped job performance into two: the ‘will-do’ and the ‘can-do’. The ‘will-do’ refers to the employees’ set of attitudes, skills, and knowledge and other characteristics that serve as prerequisites in the completion of the task assigned.
On the contrary, ‘can-do’ represents the level of motivation individuals have in performing their respective assignments. In the same light, Motowidlo and Van Scotter (1994) asserted two main constructs of performance namely: task and contextual performance. These constructs are influenced by numerous factors, for example, experience related to the job predicts task performance while personality type is a determinant of contextual performance (Motowidlo & Van Scotter, 1994). Likewise, Cardy and Dobbins as cited in Williams (2002) defined performance as a work outcome that is closely related to task performance.
This includes the amount and quality of completed work as well as behaviors that are relevant to the job. In other words, job-relevant behaviors provide support in performing task-related matters. Wall et al. (2004) mentioned that in measuring job performance subjectively, most experts in human resources management base their assessment on elements that are related to the employees’ tasks and behaviors. This subjective measurement is advantageous as it allows researchers to come up with generalizations on a broader scale of the performance construct (Wall et al. 2004).
This agreed with Motowidlo (2003) who said that task performance is best interpreted as a behavioral construct as it entails psychological process related to motivation, training, selection, and facilitation of situational processes. The daunting challenge faced by employers in the management of human resources is how to encourage employees to work the extra mile on a voluntary basis, without any additional pay or renumeration. The fact remains that maximization of efforts on the part of employers is indispensable in sustaining competitive edge, adapting to the changes of the times, and pooling innovative energies (Organ, 1997).
This scenario requires what is termed as organizational citizenship behavior or OCB which should be possessed by the employees in an organization or company. Organ (1997) and Podsakoff et al. (2000) held that it is the organization citizenship behavior that represents the contextual aspect of job performance which contributes considerably in increasing the effectiveness of the company or organization. Organ (1988) defined organizational citizenship behavior as: “An individual behavior that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system and that in aggregate promotes the
effective functioning of the organization. By discretionary, we mean that the behavior is not an enforceable requirement of the role or job description that is the clearly specifiable terms of the person’s employment contract with the organization; the behavior is rather a matter of personal choice, such that the omission is not generally understood as punishable” (p. 4). In simpler terms, OCB is concerned with positive behaviors not stipulated in their job description or enforced by the contract. OCB is also referred to as “extra-role behaviors or discretionary behaviors” (Organ et al. , 2006).
When the term was first introduced by Bateman and Organ, OCB was divided into two: first, general compliance behaviors employees are expected to demonstrate and second, altruism or the inclination of employees to help colleagues in their work (Organ et al. , 2006). Then five dimensions were added by Organ in 1985 which covers sportsmanship, courtesy, civic virtue, altruism, and conscientiousness. The years that followed has seen transformation in how OCB was conceptualized. For example, Williams and Anderson (1991) subdivided OCB into OCB-I.
The focus of OCB-I are those sets of behaviors at the level of the individual and OCB-O which deals with behaviors of employees within the organization. In 1997, three categories of OCB emerged which include conscientiousness, courtesy, and helping. Koster and Sanders (2006) simply defined OCB as behaviors that are oriented towards customer satisfaction or those considered to be pro-social. In 2006, Chiaburu and Baker said there is a distinction between pro-social or customer-directed behaviors previously described by Koster and Sanders and OCB by considering behaviors performed by employees.
The reason being, OCB includes reciprocity wherein employees exhibit OCB granting that their direct supervisors or coworkers do the same while pro-social behavior according to Chiaburu and Baker (2006) are employee behaviors that should be demonstrated in attending to the needs of their customers. Despite the history of conceptual revisions to OCB, the one by Organ (1985) on the five dimensions of OCB has been subjected to rigorous scrutiny. These dimensions are altruism, civic virtue, conscientiousness, courtesy, and sportsmanship.
Recently, innovative behavior was incorporated to the concept. The authors were Moon, Van Dyne and Wrobel in 2005 as cited in Turnispeed (2005). They noted that innovative behavior is markedly different from the conventional definition of creativity and innovation because in OCB, innovative behavior refers to the extent the employees were engaged in providing and adopting constructive recommendations aimed to improve the functional aspect of the organization or company.
As suggested by Moon, Van Dyne and Wrobel (2005) as cited in Turnispeed (2005), the role that innovative behavior play in organizational effectiveness is crucial that it is important for managers or industry movers and leaders to involve the workforce in the delivery of ideas to improve the company in terms of its performance and effectiveness. Methodology The study used a descriptive design because the purpose is to collect factual and detailed information describing an existing phenomenon. The phenomenon this research investigated is the state of work motivation and performance among employees in HSBC.
The respondent pool consisted of 100 bank employees selected from a population in HSBC in order to determine how their level of work motivation affects job performance. The sample consisted of the management staff, senior staff, and junior staff. A stratified random sampling was carried out to draw participants from a population of bank employees. From each group, samples were drawn randomly. Each participant was assigned a number and using the table of random numbers, samples were drawn without replacement.
The range on age was between 32 and 60 years. Fifty-five percent of the samples were females while the remaining 45 percent were males. Only those currently employed at HSBC Bank, signed the written informed consent, and willing to participate in both the survey and interview were included. Before conduct of study is commenced, permission was first obtained from Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the University. Permission was secured from the College Dean. Afterwards, another letter was prepared addressed to the respondents of the study.
It briefly explained the objectives of the study and the instruments to be accomplished in response to the problems of the study. Most importantly it sought the participation and coordination of the participants. Two sets of questionnaires were self-administered. The first measures work motivation while the second on job performance. The Motivation Questionnaire (MQ) by Smith (2004) aims to provide helpful data on the conditions that increase or decrease enthusiasm of employees in the work place. It has 25 statements divided equally five subscales namely: drive, control, challenge, relationships, and rewards.
Respondents are asked to rate each of the statements using a 10-point numerical scale. If the statement is 1 to 3, then the level of motivation felt by the respondent is low; 4-7, average; and 8-10, high. For the second part, the Job Performance questionnaire by Johari, Yahya and Omar (n. d) was utilized. It has seven subscales as follows: task performance, sportsmanship, altruism, courtesy, civic virtue, conscientiousness, and innovative behavior. Statements were rated using a seven-point Likert scale depending on the degree the respondent agreed or disagreed with the statements.
If 1, strongly disagree; 2, disagree; 3, slightly disagree; 4, moderate; 5, slightly agree; 6, agree; and 7, strongly agree. Since some of the statements are negative, reverse scoring was done on these items. Several ethical considerations were taken. The answers to the structured questionnaires were kept confidential and only examined by the researcher. Furthermore, permission to use information was requested and secured prior to data analysis. Lastly, no monetary incentives were offered to the participants of the study. After questionnaire administration, tabulation and data analysis followed.
Means and standard deviations in work motivation and job performance were obtained to answer the first two problems. Statistical inferences were based on the results of the Pearson Product Moment Correlation Analysis at 5% level of significance. It is expected that the study tested the null hypothesis that no significant among employees in HSBC at 95% level of confidence. Therefore there is a high degree of certainty that both variables affect each other. Likewise, the study had a high external validity since the participants were drawn randomly therefore error and bias are controlled.
Findings & Conclusion This part of the paper presents the findings and conclusion of the study. More importantly, it presents the results of the correlation analysis between work motivation and job performance among selected employees of HSBC. The first objective of the study is to determine the level of work motivation among employees of HSBC in terms of drive, control, challenges, relationships, and rewards. Table 1. Level of motivation of bank employees in HSBC in terms of drive Indicators Mean Standard Deviation Adjectival Rating Activity 7. 12 1. 57 High Achievement 7. 59 1.
38 High Competition 8. 64 0. 82 High Fear of failure 8. 4 1. 03 High Interpretation of means: 1-3 – Low 4-6 – Average 7-10 – High The number one subscale in the MQ is drive which covers four dimensions namely activity, achievement, competition, and fear of failure. Table 1 shows that activity got a mean of 7. 12; achievement, 7. 59; competition, 8. 64; and fear of failure, 8. 4. Since the average in all the subscales fell with the 7-10 range, its adjectival rating is high. The results imply that having plenty of things to do and keeping a busy work schedule is very important.
Moreover, achievement or the nature of the job being able to test demanding responsibilities and provide new doors for challenges greatly motivated the bank employees. Having been able to compete professionally with colleagues did not hinder the employees’ motivation. Likewise, fear of failure or the likelihood of failing in front of colleagues does not de-motivate the employees. Table 2. Level of motivation of bank employees in HSBC in terms of control Indicators Mean Standard Deviation Adjectival Rating Power 8. 75 0. 89 High Recognition 8. 95 0. 72 High Status 8. 36 0. 70 High Ethi

Order | Check Discount

Tags: Masters Essays, Psychology Assignment, Psychology Dissertations, Psychology essays, Psychology Research Papers