Archive

Archive for December, 2007

Motivation in Organizations

December 7th, 2007

These are notes of subjects covered in a class of Organizational Behavior at UCF, Fall 2007, with Professor Piccolo

In these Notes:

  • Job Design
    • Job Characteristics
    • Goals
    • Rewards / Consequences
  • Individual Needs
  • Self Efficacy

High motivation != High Performance, rather:
Performance = f ( Ability x Motivation )

Motivation reflects and employee’s choice regarding:
1. Whether to expend effort directed towards tasks that affect performance.
2. The level of effort to expend.
3. Whether to persist with the level of effort that is chosen.

Motivation Theories

  • Need Theories: emphasize if satisfaction of basic needs

(Maslow’s Hierarchy, McClelland’s need for Power, Affiliation and Achievement)

  • Job Design Theories: emphasize in work conditions

(Hertzberg, Job Characteristics Model)

1. Job Characteristics Model

5 Chars that shape motivation:
> Task identity
> Task significance
> Skill variety
> Autonomy
> Feedback

Promote Job Satisfaction through Mental Challenge

How managers can increase mental challenge in jobs:
> Job Rotation: allow employees to perform different tasks.
> Job Enlargement: expand number of tasks.
> Job Enrichment: increase responsabilities.

Exceptions to the Principle:
> Growth Need Strength:

  • People with low GNS aren’t motivated by the mental challenges.
  • These people don’t seek career advancement, they just want to do their job and go home.

> Job Characteristics –> Job Satisfaction
> Employees value other job attributes

2. Reinforcement Theory

  1. Positive reinforcement: praising an employee.
  2. Negative reinforcement: stop at a red light to avoid a fine.
  3. Punishment: negative consequences, like making employee work weekends.
  4. Extinction: get rid of what is maintaining specific behavior.

3. Rewarding A, while Hoping for B
Example: War

  • A: Primary goal of military organization: win the war;
  • B: Primary goal of individuals in the front line: go home alive;
  • Thus, goals of B might conflict with A.

4. Goal-Setting Theory

  • Difficult goals, when accepted, result in higher performance than easy goals.
  • A person with higher goals will do better (than a person with lower goals).
  • Specific goals increase performance rather than just “Do your best“.
  • People do better when they receive feedback.

5. SELF-EFFICACY

Recognition that motivation is both internal (need) and external (job characteristics, rewards, goals)

Self Efficacy - An individual’s belief about his or her own capability to produce designated levels of performance

Sources of Self Efficacy
> Mastery Experiences (learning about the job)
> Vicarious Experience (becoming more effective cause you see someone else doing it)
> Social persuasion (some motivational speech convinces you that you can do it)
> Physiological and Affective states (emotional arousal leads to an energized state, hence improves performance)

Why does all this matter?
> One of the manager’s main responsibilities is to motivate employees.
> If employees are not motivated, re-consider reward system.
> Managers need a large set of motivational tools because not all techniques work the same for everyone.

MANAGERS SHOULD (very important):
> ensure small wins
> encourage mastery
> utilize role models
> stay close to those with low self efficacy
> consider consequences of failure for those with LOW and HIGH self efficacy

Verbal Persuasion: (This is not too important)
> Pygmalian Effect (form of speech where believing in something can make it true)
> Galatea Effect (communicating high performance expectations to employee)

Management

Cat Hungry

December 6th, 2007

How to Get Into Harvard

December 3rd, 2007

A WSJ study finds that certain high schools have a remarkable record of sending their students to elite colleges.
By ELLEN GAMERMAN
November 30, 2007; Page W1

As college-application season enters its most stressful final stretch, parents want to know if their children’s schools are delivering the goods — consistently getting students into top universities.

It’s a tricky question to answer, but for a snapshot, The Wall Street Journal examined this year’s freshman classes at eight highly selective colleges to find out where they went to high school. New York City private schools and New England prep schools continue to hold sway — Phillips Academy in Andover, Mass., is a virtual factory, sending 19 kids to Harvard this fall — but these institutions are seeing some new competition from schools overseas and public schools that focus on math and science.

The 10 schools that performed best in our survey are all private schools. Two top performers overall are located in South Korea. Daewon Foreign Language High School in Seoul sent 14% of its graduating class to the eight colleges we examined — that’s more than four times the acceptance rate of the prestigious Horace Greeley High School in Chappaqua, N.Y.

Read Full Article at WSJ

WSJ