In seven pages this paper discusses procedural justice, equity, and expectancy theories as they relate to performance in the workplace and its motivational factors. Eight sources are cited in the bibliography.
Name of Research Paper File: D0_MTmotfac.rtf
Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
while on the job and the weekly salary. However, as corporate culture changed during the latter part of the 20th century, so did factors that motivated the workers. Doing a
good job was no longer a motivation - many times, despite the type of job an employee might perform, he or she would be laid off. And when it came
to salary, many employees found that the pressures of earning a higher salary (including being away from family for extended periods of time) just werent worth the effort.
As a result, managers more and more are determining that different factors motivate different employees. The employees basic need is there - to do
work that is challenging and to earn a living doing it. Beyond that, however, what motivates the employees to do their work in the first place can be varied.
This paper will illustrate three motivational theories, describe the theories, and then determine how they differ from one another. Defining Motivation
Before examining theories, it might be helpful to define motivation. Pinder considers that motivation is a set of internal and external forces that create
work-related behavior, as well as its form, intensity and duration (Ambrose et al, 1999). This definition takes into account environmental forces as well as internal forces of the employee (Ambrose
et al, 1999). The problem with motivation is that its hypothetical - it cant be seen or necessarily measured (Ambrose et al,
1999). The effects of motivation, however, can be seen and felt in the bottom line. A dissatisfied workforce is generally cause for a loss in profits in a roundabout way.