final part01

8/11/2019 Final Part01

1/42

1

Chapter 1

Introduction

1.0 INTRODUCTION

In an industry workers performance is very important because it provides products and

service, which represent the basis for a company's success. Employees are a valuable

resource that may contribute in several different ways to a company's activities, provided

that the company gives them an appropriate chance (Morgan, 1997). For achieving the

success important keys are, how productive people are at work, their skills, motivation

and commitment. In order to be successful, a company needs employees who act toward

the goals of the organization and have a strong desire to remain in the company

(Molander, 1996). Such loyalty and commitment may be generated by motivation. Theaims of motivation are to increase productivity and job satisfaction. Highly motivated

persons tend to work harder and perform more effectively in their jobs than less

motivated individuals.

Managers who need to be aware of factors that motivate workers to make them perform

well, ending up with HR professionals who have to understand motivation to effectively

design and implement reward structure and systems. However, because of a complex

nature of human behavior, motivation is not easy to understand and to use. Although,

some of research suggested that money is not as potent as it seemed to be, many

companies tried to implement monetary incentives as their main tool to motivateemployees. The literature on a subject of motivation shows that there are several other

ways to motivate employees. The most well know and often cited theories can be divided

into two categories: content theories and process theories. The first group is focused on

what motivate people. It is represented by authors such as Maslow, McClelland and

Herzberg. The second categoryprocess theories, try to find out how motivation occurs.

Vroom, Adams, Locke and Latham created the most influential process theories. The

points of view presented by authors of those theories in some aspects are complementary

but in others are totally opposite. That possibly was the reason for other researchers

inspiration to conduct own studies on motivation. It resulted in a number of possible

suggestions about motivators that could play a crucial role in increasing employees

performance. Some authors (Oldham & Hackman, 2010; Lawler, 1969) indicate that job

design plays important role in shaping employees behavior while others (Roche &

MacKinnon, 1970; Allender & Allender, 1998; Lu, 1999; Tharenou, 1993; Mayfield,

Mayfield, & Kopf, 1998) suggest that leadership style and freedom given to employees

are crucial in motivating employees. Another group of researchers (Luthans & Stajkovic,

2000; Armstrong & Murlis, 2004) try to prove that recognition can be used to motivate


2/42

2

people to perform well. In fact, there are many more examples of possible motivators in

the literature on a subject of motivation.

In this multitude of possible options it is not easy to answer the question what in fact

motivates employees. The easiest way to find out is simply to ask them. There is a long

history of researches which ask employees to rank the importance of motivating factors.

In their studies they compared answers from employees coming from different cultures,

age groups, levels of organization and even from different points of time in a history.

Their results showed that there are several motivating factors that are very often ranked

high positions.

1.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT

In order to be successful, a company has to be aware of what motivates and satisfies the

workers at work in order to stimulate them to perform their job as best as possible and to

remain in the company. A person who is satisfied with his/her work may show a higher

commitment to put efforts toward the achievement of the company's goals and will not

easily change job. However, people differ, they distinguish themselves from each other

regarding their needs, backgrounds, expectations, and individual characteristics. In other

words, what may satisfy one employee may be different from what will satisfy another, at

least in terms of the satisfaction degree. Moreover, some needs may change over time,

getting stronger or weaker. How can the company know how to motivate whom in the

right way?

The knowledge about similarities and differences in the motivation of employees may

make it easier for the company to motivate them and to generate organizational

commitment. Thereby, the consideration of individual characteristics such as age, gender,

work area, and years a person has been working in the company may provide useful

information A group of workers sharing the same individual features may have the same

needs and expectations toward work and may be satisfied in the same way. Information

about the extent to which certain factors of motivation and job satisfaction are present at

work and information about the importance, which is attributed to those factors by theemployees, may offer valuable clues to the field of motivation. A comparison of this data

may reveal factors whose enhancement may cause higher motivation and job satisfaction

of the work force.


3/42

3

1.2 STRUCTURE OF THE PAPER

The structure of this thesis paper can be broken down into four general parts. The first

part is an introduction. It contains basic information about theoretical foundations of the

thesis and the importance of the topic of motivation. The limitations of the study areconcerned at the end of the introductory part.

The second part is a theoretical background of the thesis. It is based on findings from the

literature and previous research on motivation. This part contains authors theoretical

analysis in which he synthesize and ex-pound ideas upon the subject area in question. In

this part firstly, the concept of motivation is presented and clarified. Secondly, the most

important content and process theories of motivation are introduced.

The third part of this thesis paper is based on authors own research. It starts with

description of used methodology. The research method and the ways of gatheringinformation, collecting data and preparing the questionnaire are presented. In the next

step author justify the choice of five factors used in the questionnaire.

The fourth part of the paper presents results of the research for the workers. They are

followed by discussion, guidelines and summary of findings.

The paper is ended by a conclusion which summarizes the thesis. The last part lists the

references used during the process of writing this thesis and are followed by appendix

that contain questionnaires.


4/42

4

1.3 OBJECTIVES\PURPOSE OF THE THESIS

The purpose of this thesis is to investigate and analyses the factors which motivate

employees, under consideration of individual characteristics. In trying to find answers to

the research question and on the basis of the above background discussion and research

question, the main purposes developed for this thesis is to assess the factors that motivate

employees to perform best at work.


5/42

5

1.4 LIMITATION

Due to the scope of this research there are several limitations that need to be addressed.

Firstly, the present study limited its sample to a group of workers from comfit composite

knit limited, Standard Group and Ecomex Limited. This may hinder the generalizabilityof the results. In other words, results should be generalized only to the population of

workers from particular industry. However, it is possible that workers from other

industries would give similar answers.

Secondly, the list of five factors used in the questionnaire was made on the basis of

previous researches on that topic. The motivation factors chosen to be ranked seem to

cover the most important aspects of motivation. However, a disadvantage of choosing

this particular form of questioning is a risk to miss some factors that are important but are

not listed. To avoid this bias an open- ended question was added. The response rate for

this question was low. It might mean that the list contained all the most importantmotivators. On the other hand, it is possible that there are still some other important

factors but respondents just did not want to answer the open-ended question.

Finally, the questionnaire used in the research was designed in Bangla for the workers

because all of the workers are feel comfort with this language. To minimize the

difference the questionnaire was translated to English for the research paper.


6/42

6

1.5 THE SELECTED COMPANY

The company where we carried out the empirical research is located in Tangail (Comfit

composite knit limited), Gazipur (Ecomax Limited) and Dhaka (Standard Group) which

are a large sized production company.

During our company visits we have the possibility to be guided through departments of

the company in order to get an impression of the work and the work environment. During

this guided tour, we received information about the work tasks of the respective

employees, which helped me to better understand the results of the mail questionnaire

later on.


7/42

7

Chapter 2

Literature Review

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

In todays world, the biggest task of the human-resource manager is to motivate and

retain employees. Motivation is a companys life-blood (Sharma, 2006: i). Businesses

today have entered a new era in the relationship between the companies themselves and

their employees. The companies can no longer see their employees as either their loyal

family members or as easily replaceable company resources. In this new era, employees

need to be respected and like to be treated as valuable human capital, as even more

important than the companys financial capital. Employees are now becoming the main

source of a companys competitive advantage. Therefore, how a company treats its

employees increasingly determines whether a company is going to thrive or even to

survive (Lawler, 2003:3). As Lawler (2000:3) says, in the twenty-first century, treating

people right is not an option; it is a necessity.

Employee try to find satisfaction in what they do and as a result the manager should

be able to understand the problems faced by his workers and find a way of satisfying their

needs and aspiration. The general assumption is that an adequately motivated worker will

in turn give in his or her best towards the attainment of a general consensus. when a

worker is motivated the question of poor performance and inefficiency will be

forgotten issue in an organization.

A well-managed company can retain and motivate its employees, and hence has the

following advantages: reduced turnover; increased productivity; reduced absenteeism;

increased revenue; and improved performance. Companies need to attract and retain

talented employees (Pittorino et al 2005:11), therefore understanding what motivates

employees has become an essential requirement for todays managers.

2.1 MOTIVATION DEFINED

Since the 1930s, work motivation has been of interest to the industrial/organizationalpsychologists, stimulated mainly by the famous Hawthorne studies, and followed by

studies by Vroom, Herzberg, Bandura, Skinner and many more. However, the study and

understanding of work motivation is far from complete (Locke & Latham, 2004:388).

The aim of this study is to help organizations to adapt to changes in the world of work

with the aid of the existing motivation theories.


8/42

8

Everyone has motives that are inspired by certain factors that encourage the desire to

enhance performance (Kressler, 2003:1). The word motivation is derived from the

movere,which means to move (Kretiner, 1998 in Ramlall, 2004:53). Motivation has

been defined as an internal drive to satisfy an unsatisfied need (Higgins, 1994 in Lindner,

1998:2). To define motivation both in a comprehensive and explicit way, Pinder (1995),

Locke, Shaw, Saari, and Latham (1981), Steers and Porter (1979), and Vroom (1964),

formulate following definition (1998, p.11) : Work motivation is a set of energetic

forces that originate both within as beyond an individuals being, to initiate work-related

behavior, and to determine its form, direction, intensity, and duration.

Kreitner (1995), Buford, Bedeian &Linder (1995), Higgins (1994) all cited in Linder

(1998,p3) defined motivation as the psychological process that gives behavior purpose

and direction, a predisposition to behave in a purposive manner to achieve specific unmet

needs, an unsatisfied need, and the will to achieve, respectively. For this thesis, the

definition of motivation by Greenberg & Baron (2003) is adopted, as it is more realisticand simple. Greenberg &Baron defines motivation as:

The set of processes that arouse, direct, and maintain human behavior towards attaining

some goal. (Greenberg &Baron, 2003, p190).

2.2 SOURCES OF MOTIVATION

Sources of motivation can be intrinsic or extrinsic (Jones & George, 2004:405).

Intrinsically motivated behavior is behavior that is performed for ones own sake and

extrinsically motivated behavior is performed to acquire rewards or to avoid punishment.


9/42

9

2.3 THE CONCEPT OF WORK MOTIVATION

The term motive usually is explained as desires, needs, emotions or impulses that make

someone do something. Following this definition, motivation is the state of being incited

to action. When we take into consideration work environment it becomes clear that work

motivation refers to motivation within a work setting. Typically, it refers to employees

motivation to perform, stay and commit in a company, cooperate, lead or support a

leader, help customers and so forth. Obviously, this definition from International

Encyclopedia of Organizational Studies (ed. Bailey & Clegg, 2008) is just an example

from a mass of work motivation definitions which can be found in almost every paper

about this topic. Some authors define what motivation is by explaining where it comes

from. In this approach work motivation has been defined as a psychological process

resulting from the reciprocal interaction between the individual and the environment that

affects a persons choices, effort, and persistence (Latham & Ernst, 2006). In other

definitions work motivation is associated with the goal attainment. People are motivated

to do something if they believe it is likely that it will bring desired result. People who arewell motivated take action that they expect will achieve their clearly defined goals

(Armstrong, 2007). Kanfer (1990, as cited in Bjorklund, 2001) stressed that motivation is

a phenomenon which cannot be directly observed. The only way to infer motivational

processes is to analyze streams of behavior caused by environmental or inherited factors

which can be observed through their effects on abilities, beliefs, knowledge and

personality.

There are probably as many definitions of motivation as researchers working on this

topic. However, there are some features of motivation that are common for most

definitions. It can be observed from the examples presented above that when authorsdescribe motivation they mention an action or behavior that is directed and sustained as a

result of motivation. In other words motivation is usually described as an invisible force

that pushes people to behave in a certain way. For the purpose of this thesis definition by

Pinder (1998) will be used as it seems to define motivation both in a comprehensive and

explicit way. Pinder used work of Jones (1995), Locke, Shaw, Saari, and Latham (1981),

Steers and Porter (1979), and Vroom (1964) to formulate following definition (1998,

p.11) : Work motivation is a set of energetic forces that originate both within as beyond

an individuals being, to initiate work-related behavior, and to determine its form,

direction, intensity, and duration. Pinder (1998) believes that presented definition has

some features that make it better than others. Firstly, it is not general as many other

definitions, it presents motivation in a close relation to work and careers. His definition is

intended to apply behavior such as joining or leaving company, being punctual,

respecting or not supervisors orders, inventing better ways to performing a job and

accepting relocation to another place. According to Pinder one of the key elements that

are important in defining motivation is a concept of force. It not only makes the definition


10/42

10

consistent with other authors work but also allows motivation level to be weak or strong

depending on circumstances. The idea of force suggests that motivation is related to an

effort. Pinder believes that effort is a consequence and indicator of motivation rather than

the same phenomena. He points out that his definition does not present hedonism as a

primary force in work motivation. However, it does not exclude it either. There are three

more important elements of Pinders work motivation definition: intensity, direction and

duration. Author describes the intensity dimension using two terms created by Brehm and

Self (1989) potential motivation and potential arousal. The first of those two terms is

created by expectations that performance of behavior will affect final outcome. The

second term is dependent on magnitude of potential motivation and occurs only to the

extent that particular behavior is difficult. In Pinders opinion intensity is not affected by

the potential available and is defined as the transient size of motivational arousal in a

particular point of time. The direction can be understood by considering towards which

goals the energy of motivation is directed. Finally, the duration suggests that goal

achieving might be a possible outcome of on job behavior. As the last but also veryimportant feature of the definition Pinder mentions the fact that motivation is presented

as a hypothetical construct which cannot be measured or seen directly but is treated as an

existing psychological process.

2.4 RESEARCH DESIGN

Once a literature study has been done, a questionnaire will be designed. The

questionnaire will then be distributed among the employees in various garments. In the

questionnaire, questions will be used to determine the level of motivation among the

employees. The questionnaire will then be validated by using appropriate statistical

methods which include item analysis & Chi square analysis.

2.5 ORGANIZATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS

Organizational effectiveness is the concept of how effective an organization is in

achieving the outcomes the organization intends to produce. Organizational

effectiveness is an abstract concept and is basically impossible to measure. Instead of

measuring organizational effectiveness, the organization determines proxy measures

which will be used to represent effectiveness. We may include such things as efficiency

of management, performance of employees, core competencies, number of people served,

types and sizes of population segments served and so on. So we focused on the

performance of the employees that to what extend this proxy measure contributes in

Organizational effective


11/42

11

Chapter 3

Theoretical Background

3.0 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKEmployee motivation is influenced by the employee himself or herself, the management

and the environment. Motivating the employee is the managers job (Birkin, 2006:40). It

is therefore the managers job to understand what motivates the employees. Based on

Locke and Lathams integrated model of work motivation, various theories of

work/employee motivation will be discussed, including Maslows need hierarchy,

McClellands personality-based approach to employee motivation, Vrooms VIE theory,

Locke and Lathams goal theory, Banduras self-efficacy theory, Weiners attribution

theory, Herzbergs job characteristics model, the organizational commitment theory and

Adams equity theory. These theories attempt to explain employees behavior. They

provide understanding to both managers and employees of how to motivate others and/or

become more involved in ones own motivation (Drafke & Kossen, 2002:273). The

important motivational factors identified by Nelson and Lindner will be discussed in

detail and will also be used as the foundation for setting up the questionnaire for the

research.

Locke and Latham (2004:388) mention that all of the above theories have limitations and

criticisms. Their six recommendations for possible directions for future research on

motivation will also be discussed.

3.1 KEY CONCEPTS AND THEORIESThe key concept motivation will be defined in the study. The following key concepts

relating to work motivation and relevant work motivation theories, based on Locke and

Lathams integrated model of work motivation, will be discussed in this study:

Needs

Values and personality

Personality theory

VIE theory

Incentives

Self-efficacy

Goal choice

Goal and efficacy mechanisms

Goal theory and social-cognitive theory

Goal moderators

Performance and outcomes

Attribution theory

Job characteristics theory


12/42

12

Satisfaction and dissatisfaction

Organization policies and procedures

Distributive and procedural justice theory

Organizationalcommitment

3.2 MOTIVATION THEORIES

The subject of motivation has been present in the literature from the early beginning of

20th Century. Although, many theories have been developed and aplenty of research has

been conducted, factors that motivate people to perform well at work are still a

controversial topic. Many researchers as a starting point for their work in the field of

motivation used the most known theories and models of motivation. Armstrong (2007) in

his book about employee reward management summarized those theories in a clear and

useful way. According to him, Taylors theory of motivation to work is related to rewards

and penalties which are directly connected to performance. Maslows concept of

hierarchy of needs is less instrumental approach. It defines motivation as a result ofpeoples unsatisfied needs. Herzberg focused on a distinction between extrinsic and

intrinsic motivators. Those old theories are definitely important , however they are not

perfect. Analysis showed that they are characterized by some significant weaknesses.

Armstrong presents modern, process theories which approach motivation from different

perspective. As an example, Vrooms expectancy theory explains that motivation exists

only when relationship between performance and outcome is clear and usable. Goal

theory emphasizes the role of a feedback and setting goals in relation to motivation and

performance. Finally, Equity theory says that people are more motivated if they are

treated equally. In the previous part of this paper a number of motivation definitions have

been presented. Each of existing definitions has some strengths and weaknesses. Exactly

the same can be said about motivational theories. As one can observe from the short

overview presented above there are many different theoretical approaches to the topic of

motivation. Motivation for a group of authors is strictly related to human needs, while

point of view of other authors is much more focused on cognitive processes that influence

peoples behavior. In the literature of the subject those differences between theories

resulted in a division in two categories: content and process theories. In the next part of

this paper the most important theories from each category will be presented and analyzed.

3.2.1 CONTENT THEORIES

The content theories are characterized by emphasis on what motivates people. They

concern with individual goals and needs which are said to be the same for every person.

Although, needs, they differ in defining what those needs are. The most well-known and

very often cited author of motivational theory is Maslow human needs (Fincham &

Rhodes, 2005) behavior is driven by the existence of unsatisfied needs. His hierarchy


13/42

13

from psychological needs and lead through security needs, social needs, self-esteem

needs and self-actualization need on the top position

Figure 3.1: Maslows hierarchy of needs

According to Maslow, higher needs are not felt until lower needs are not fulfilled.

Additionally, when the need is satisfied it does not influence human behavior anymore

and as a result the focus is moved into a need which is higher in the hierarchy.

Maslow divided needs into two categories: deficiency needs and high-order needs.

Deficiency needs include basic needs such as hunger or thirst and a need for shelter and

protection. When these needs are satisfied people become motivated by high order needs

such as the need for supportive and satisfactory relationships with others, needs for

freedom, independence, recognition and achievement and finally the need to develop

ones potential. The self-actualization which is the highest step in Maslows pyramid can

be described as the ending point of gradual psychological maturation process. This final

level is achieved by few people and unlike other needs is never fully satisfied (Fincham

& Rhodes, 2005).

Maslows work on the theory of needs has been followed by other authors who took an

attempt to improve it. One of modifications was presented in 1973 by Alderfer, who

developed and tested model with fewer needs levels (Pinder,1998). His study, unlike

Maslows, was based on empirical research in organizational settings. The theorysuggests three general categories of human needs which are partly based on Maslows

model but are not the same. Alderfers model is named ERG and consists of existence

needs, relatedness needs and growth needs. The first group is closely related to Maslows

physiological needs and part ly to security needs (only physical security).Existence needs

are concrete in nature and are usually limited. A good example of them in organization

setting is a salary. If money has to be divided between two groups - the more money


14/42

14

receives one group, the less gets the other group. Relatedness needs basically consist of

the interpersonal security needs, the need for prestige and esteem from others. Satisfying

relatedness needs requires development of relations and interactions with other people.

The last group of needs in Alderfers theory contains growth needs. Although, growth

needs are corresponding to Maslows self-esteem and self-actualization needs there are

some major differences in a point of view of those two authors. Maslow suggested that

self-actualization consist of a fulfillment of unique, innate potential, whereas Alderfers

growth needs contain desire to interact with environment by investigating, exploring and

mastering it. In Alderfers model growth needs change if ones environment changes

(Pinder, 1998).

The next important contributor to the field of content theories is McClelland whose

model became a starting point for many other authors research. McClellands theory

focuses on three motives that are relevant in an organizational context (Miner, 2006).

Maslow differentiated between any certain transitions among the needs, whereas

McClelland indicates that some people have higher needs than others. Moreover, needs inMcClellands point of view change over a life as they are shaped by peoples experience.

That is why income sources his theory is called acquired needs theory. McClelland

(1990) suggested that most of acquired needs can be classified to one of three groups:

achievement needs, power needs or affiliation needs. In his opinion some people have a

strong need for achievement others for power and finally there is a group that desire

affiliation. High achievers tend to perform better for the intrinsic satisfaction for doing

something better or just to show that they are more capable of doing something. They

prefer to work with tasks which are moderately challenging and they actually perform

better with those kinds of tasks. In one of their papers McClellands and Burnham

(1976) deliberate on what makes people good managers. They suggest that highachievement is an important factor that leads to the personal success but it does not

necessarily make someone a good manager. High achievers work on their own success by

doing everything personally and by receiving feedback that is crucial for them. Managers

are not able to do everything by themselves so they have to put some responsibility on

others. As well as that, the feedback that they receive comes with a delay, so they are not

able to find out immediately how well they performed. Regarding those facts

McClellands and Burnham stated opinion that the factor that has a great influence on

being a successful manager is something else than a need for achievement. They

suggested that it is the need for power that is characterized by a desire to influence

people.

McClelland (1990) found that people who desire to have some serious influence on other

have some special traits. The high need for power usually comes with features such as

competitiveness, assertiveness and aggressiveness which result in a negative self-image.

The socially acceptable way to fulfill the need for power is the search for prestige by

collecting symbols of power. People characterized by a high need for power tend to act in


15/42

15

a way that makes them recognized in group. Finally, they are more willing to take a

risk. The last group of needs described by McClellands model is the group of needs for

affiliation. The term affiliation was described by Atkinson, Hens, & Verify (1954), as

the concern over establishing, maintaining, or restoring a positive, affective relationship

with another person or persons (as cited in McClelland, 1990, p.347). People with a

strong need for affiliation perform better in tasks which are related to affinitive

incentives. In other words, they prefer if their work require maintaining contacts with

other people. High affiliated individuals avoid conflict and prefer to solve problems by

cooperative and confirmative behavior. The reason for that is the fear for rejection.

McClellands findingssuggested that the need for affiliation is not a factor that supports

management. Managers high in affiliation try to spend more time with employees and

make good relations with them, but it is not a crucial part of being a manager, who

sometimes has to make hard decisions (McClelland, 1990) .The last content theory that

will be presented in this chapter, is Herzbergs twofactor theory. The theory brought a lot

of interest from academics and from managers who were looking for ways of motivatingtheir employees. The reason for so much interest in Herzbergs results comes from a dual

character of his work. His theory not only describes employees needs but also goes

further and presents how to enrich jobs and make workforce more motivated (Fincham

&Rhodes, 2005).

Herzberg indicates that job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction are not opposite

phenomena (Herzberg, 1968). According to him the opposite of satisfaction is rather no

satisfaction and the opposite of dissatisfaction is no dissatisfaction. Herzberg suggests

that satisfaction and dissatisfaction are produced by different factors. People are satisfied

at their work by factors related to content of that work. Those factors are called intrinsic

motivators and contain achievement, recognition, interesting work, responsibility,advancement and growth. Factors that make people unhappy with their work are called

dissatisfies or hygiene factors. Herzberg found following dissatisfies: company policy,

supervision, working conditions, interpersonal relationships, salary, status, security. What

makes them different from motivators is the fact that they are not related to the content of

the work but to the context of the job (Herzberg,1974). Figure 2 presents a frequency of

each factor in Herzbergs research and their division into hygiene factors and intrinsic

motivators.

In Herzbergs research the most frequently chosen factors which led to satisfaction were

achievement and recognition, while the most frequently chosen factors which led to

dissatisfaction were company policy and administration and good relations with

supervisor

Each of presented here content theories has some strengths and weaknesses. It might have

happened that authors of those theories focused strongly on a onside of the problem but

they missed other important side. Motivation of employees is really important topic, so

every research in this subject is observed and evaluated by other researchers. As a result


16/42

16

some researchers agree with and support original theories and others disagree and

criticize them. In other words, the most well-known theories in motivation bring some

serious controversies.

Figure 3.2.1: Herzbergs theory factors affecting job attitudes

3.2.2 PROCESS THEORIESProcess theories are characterized by a dynamic character, not static as content theories.

The main concern is not what motivates people but how motivation occurs. Process

theories try to explain how and why peoples behavior is directed to certain choices. The

focus of all process theories is put-on the role of individuals cognitive processes in

determining his or her level of motivation (Fincham & Rhodes, 2005, p.202). The

process theory which seems to be the core one is the Expectancy Theory. This model was


17/42

17

originally presented by Vroom (1968), however many other later researchers tried to

adapt and develops it. Vroms Expectancy theory compromises three factors: valence,

instrumentality and expectancy. Vroom describes valence in a relation to peoples

affecting preferences toward particular outcomes. The valence of outcome is positive if a

person prefers attaining it instead of not attaining. Oppositely, the negative valence of

outcomes characterize situation when a person prefers not attaining it instead of attaining.

The third possibility is zero valence of outcome, which means that a person is indifferent

between attaining outcome or not. The instrumentality is a belief that one action lead to

another. Finally, the expectancy is defined as a belief about likelihood that a particular

behavior will be followed by a part icular outcome (Vroom, 1964). Values of those three

factors can be used to calculate the motivational force of the job,. Summarizing, Vrooms

theory suggests that a job is motivating for employees when they can see a relation

between performance and outcome, if they have abilities to do the job and if they see

outcome as satisfying their needs. Vrooms theory can be a suggestion for managers to

focus on main aspects of their subordinates perceptions. As well as that, it is helpful inexplaining occupational choices and in predicting tasks that people will work most and

least hard at(Fincham & Rhodes, 2005).

Another group of process theories - equity theories, are related to the distribution of

resources. There are three main aspects that are common for all equity theories. Firstly,

they suggest that employee perceive a fair return for his contribution at work. Secondly,

they imply that employees compare the return they received to the return received by

other for the same job. Finally, they assume that employees who are in inequitable

position comparing to others will try to do something to reduce the difference (Carrell &

Dittrich, 1978). The most influential and often cited in the literature of motivation is the

Equity Theory, which was put forward in 1963 by Adams. The theory distinguishesbetween employees inputs and outputs. Inputs are understood as the number and value of

contributions that person make to his or her work. Outputs are described as the nature and

quantity of received rewards for doing the job (Pinder, 1998).Examples of inputs and

outputs are presented in Figure 3.


18/42

18

Figure 3.2.2: The Equity Theory diagram

According to Adams theory different employees stress different inputs and outcomes as

the most important for them. However, all people evaluate their outcomes in a relation totheir inputs and judge a fairness of this relation. What is suggested by the theory is the

fact that people not only evaluate the equity by comparing the amount of their inputs and

outputs but additionally they make social comparisons with other people. They feel that

they are not treated fairly if other people receive better outputs for the same job. As was

stated before, employees who encounter inequity try to do something to reduce it. The

equity theory presents the most common consequences of perceived inequity. The first

and the most common behavior is changing employees own effort to increase or reduce

performance. If it is not possible to solve the problem of unfairness by changing effort

then employee try to cognitively reevaluate outcomes and inputs. That means for

example reconsideration of own credentials or effort in a comparison to credentials or

effort of a person who was chosen as a referent. The inequity may lead to some

dysfunctional reactions such as stealing from employer. Finally, employee may simply

decide to withdraw from a company (Pin


19/42

19

Chapter 4

Research Methodology

4.0 METHODOLOGY OF RESEARCHEach research problem is in some way unique, and therefore requires a tailored research

procedure. In the following, the research process of this study is shown;

Formulation

of the problem and the

research questions

questionnaireInterviews

Secondary data

Analysis

Result

Conclusion

Figure 4.0.1: Stages in the research process.

The first step in doing this research was the formulation of the problem and the creation

of the research questions. Thereafter, identify the methodology which would best fit the

problem under research. After that, gathered secondary data in the form of books and

articles in order to improve understanding of the research problem. Next create The

questionnaire about motivation and work based on the knowledge of the theoretical

research. Thereby, several decisions such as the form of the questions, the language used

in the questionnaire, as well as the procedure in performing the mail questionnaire had to

be made. The questionnaire was tested and several days later sent by mail or by hand to

each employee of the company. One week later the questionnaires were collected and a

period of editing and analyzing the data. These results were used for carrying out


20/42

20

interviews with several employees in order to get a deeper understanding of the

questionnaire results. After carrying out the interviews, a period of writing down the

results of the mail questionnaire and interviews in connection with the theoretical

framework followed. During the entire time between determining the methodology and

the end of writing down the analysis the frames of reference was created. Finally, the

research report was completed by adding the conclusion and the closing comments.

4.1 IRESEARCH INSTRUMENT

The standardized instrument utilized was the Weiman Occupational Stress Scale, which

was designed in 1978. The Weiman Occupational Stress Scale was used to establish a

baseline score for the participants in the study. The Weiman Scale is a fifteen question

instrument that it scored on a 3 point Likert-type instrument that measures important

motivational factor. Answers on the scale range from 1-3 points, with 1 = yes , 2 =

sometimes , 3 = no

The author chose these instruments for several reasons. Both the Weiman OccupationalStress Scale and the listed questionnaire were simple instruments for subjects to complete

and it takes very limited time and instructions. On average, the questionnaires took

approximately 10-15 minutes to complete.

Chi-square used to test the hypothesis of independence of two variables of classification.

The two variables are null hypothesis Hand Alternative hypothesis H1 .In our thesis

work we have used this important tools for two purposes Firstly we have used it for the

purpose of testing independence between factors that needs to be concerned and the

garments we visited. Either the factors are dependent on the garments or applicable for all

garments. Secondly the major factors dependent on various departments of the garments

or independents.

4.2 Data Analysis

The Weiman Occupational Stress Scale is scored by adding together the total number of

point for the three questions for each factor. The range that can be scored by a subject is a

maximum of 9 points and a minimum of 3 points.

To determine the highest rank of motivational factor, five condition are selected those are

mostly responsible for motivating the workers such as salary & payment, working

condition, working environment, reward & bonus, safety.The mean score for each

condition are determined using Weiman Occupational stress scale. Using the mean scores

these conditions are ranked from highest motivation factor to lowest motivation factor.

4.3 PROCEDURE

For collecting data a questionnaire is made which contains total 15 questions for five

factors. The questionnaires are provided among workers under Comfit Composite Knit

Limited, Standard Group, New tex where each selected workers from different

department of organizations are asked about the questions to complete the questionnaires.


21/42

21

This data is then used to measure the most important motivational factor using Weiman

Occupational stress scale.

Using Weiman Occupational stress scale rating, the score for all factor choosing are

determined for every selected worker. The score of 50 workers is then summed for every

factor. The average score is then determined dividing by number of workers. The

individual score is obtained dividing by number of questions for every factor. The factor

which are responsible for motivate the workers are then ranked based on individual score.

4.4 CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION

The following information about chi square distribution is given from Wikipedia, the free

encyclopedia. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi-square_distribution)

Inprobability theory andstatistics, the chi-square distribution (also chi-squared or-

distribution) with kdegrees of freedom is the distribution of a sum of the squares

of kindependentstandard normal random variables. It is one of the most widelyusedprobability distributions ininferential statistics, e.g., inhypothesis testing or in

construction ofconfidence intervals.[40][41][42][43]

When there is a need to contrast it with

thenon-central chi-square distribution, this distribution is sometimes called the central

chi-square distribution.

The chi-square distribution is used in the commonchi-square tests for goodness of an

observed distribution to a theoretical one, the independence of two criteria of

classification ofqualitative data,and in confidence estimation for a populationstandard

deviation of a normal distribution from a sample standard deviation. Many other

statistical tests also use this distribution, likeFriedman's analysis of variance by ranks.

The chi-square distribution is a special case of thegamma distribution.

4.4.1 DEFINITION

IfZ1...Zkareindependent,standard normal random variables, then the sum of their

squares,

is distributed according to the chi-square distributionwith kdegrees of freedom. This is

usually denoted as

The chi-square distribution has one parameter: k(also denoted as ); a positive integer

that specifies the number ofdegrees of freedom.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi-square_distributionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probability_theoryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statisticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi_(letter)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi_(letter)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi_(letter)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degrees_of_freedom_(statistics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_(probability_theory)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_normalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probability_distributionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inferential_statisticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothesis_testinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidence_intervalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi-square_distribution#cite_note-abramowitz-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi-square_distribution#cite_note-abramowitz-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi-square_distribution#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noncentral_chi-square_distributionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi-square_testhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_analysishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedman_testhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma_distributionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_(probability_theory)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_normalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degrees_of_freedom_(statistics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degrees_of_freedom_(statistics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_normalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_(probability_theory)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma_distributionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedman_testhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_analysishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi-square_testhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noncentral_chi-square_distributionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi-square_distribution#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi-square_distribution#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi-square_distribution#cite_note-abramowitz-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi-square_distribution#cite_note-abramowitz-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidence_intervalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothesis_testinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inferential_statisticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probability_distributionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_normalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_(probability_theory)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degrees_of_freedom_(statistics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi_(letter)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statisticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probability_theoryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi-square_distribution


22/42

22

4.4.2 STATISTIC OF CHI SQUARE DISTRIBUTION

The statistic also can be written as-

(oi ei)2/ei (i=1 to k)

Where-

Xi=Oi = observed frequency

i= ei= expected frequency

4.4.3 Characteristics

Figure 4.4.1:probability density function (pdf) of chi square distribution

Probabilitydensityfunction

x
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Chi-square_distributionPDF.svghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Chi-square_distributionPDF.svg


23/42

23

Figure 4.4.2:cumulative distribution (cdf) function of chi square distribution

notation:or

parameters: kN1degrees of freedom

support: x[0, +)

pdf:

cdf:

mean: k

median:

mode: max{k 2, 0}

variance: 2k

skewness:

ex.kurtosis: 12/k

entropy:

mgf: (1 2t)

for t <

cf: (1 2it)

Table 4.4.1: characteristics of chi square distribution

CumulativeProbability

x
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Support_(mathematics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probability_density_functionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumulative_distribution_functionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expected_valuehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medianhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mode_(statistics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variancehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skewnesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excess_kurtosishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_entropyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moment-generating_functionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Characteristic_function_(probability_theory)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi-square_distribution#cite_note-abramowitz-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Characteristic_function_(probability_theory)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moment-generating_functionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_entropyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excess_kurtosishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skewnesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variancehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mode_(statistics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medianhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expected_valuehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumulative_distribution_functionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probability_density_functionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Support_(mathematics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Chi-square_distributionCDF.svg


24/42

24

Chapter 5

Calculation

5.0 CALCULATION

This chapter will be a presentation of demographic information, result of the Weiman

Occupational Stress Scale and result of the chi-square test.

5.1 CHI SQUARE TESTS

In this segment, we have performed hypothesis test showing whether or not the major

five factors are garment dependent (test for independence 1) and whether the factors are

Department dependent or not (test for independence 2).

5.1.1 TEST FOR INDEPENDENCE 1

Table1 5.1.1: 35contingency table for observed frequency of the factors in the garments

Factor

Industry

Salary

&

Payment

Working

Condition

Environmental

Condition

Safety Reward

&

Bonus

Total

Comfit 40 9 14 10 25 98

Standard 35 12 11 7 20 85

Ecomax

Limited

40 7 15 8 17 87

Total 115 28 40 25 62 270


25/42

25

Table 5.1.2: observed and expected frequency of the factors

Factors

Industry

Salary

&

Payment

Working

Condition

Environmental

Condition

Safety Reward

&

Bonus

Total

Comfit 40(41.74) 9(10.16) 14(14.51) 10(9.07) 25(22.50) 98

Standard 35(36.20) 12(8.81) 11(12.6) 7(7.87) 20(19.51) 85

Ecomax

Limited

40(37) 7(9.02) 15(12.88) 8(8.05) 17(19.97) 87

Total 115 28 40 25 62 270

5.1.2 SAMPLE CALCULATION

2actual = (oi ei) 2/ei

ei = expected frequency= (column total) (row total)/grand total

Expected Frequency:

-for Comfit

e1 = (115*98)/270 =41.74

e2 = (28*98)/270 =10.16

-for Standard Group

e1 = (115*85)/270 = 36.20

e2 = (28*85)/270 = 8.81

2 valueFor First Column:

(4041.74)2/41.74 =0.0725

(3536.20)2/36.20 =0.0397

(4037)2/37=0.243

2actual

=0.0725+0.132+0.018+0.095+0.277+0.0397+1.15+0.2+0.096+0.0123+0.24+0.45+0.35+

0.0003+0.44=3.43


26/42

26

5.1.3 SOLUTION:

1. H= data is garment independent

2. H1= data is garment dependent

3. = 0.05,0.005

4. Degree of freedom: = (r-1) (c-1) = (3-1) (5-1) = 8

5. 2actual =3.43

6. 2

0.05,08 = 15.507 > 2actual

7. 20.005,08= 21.955 > 2actual

8. Decision: do not reject H

5.1.4 Test for independence 2

Table 5.1.3: for observed frequency of factors respective to different departments

Department : Printing Dyeing Cutting Sewing Total

Salary &Payments

10 5 9 9 33

Working

Condition

2 1 3 5 11

Environmental

Condition

5 8 4 4 21

Safety 2 5 1 1 9

Reward & Bonus 2 9 7 7 25

Total 21 28 24 26 99

Table 5.1.4: for observed and expected frequency of factors respective to different

departments

Department : Printing Dyeing Cutting Sewing Total

Salary &

Payments

10(7.90) 1(7.64) 9(5.6) 9(6.85) 29

Working

Condition

7(5.45) 9(5.27) 3(4.54) 1(4.72) 20

Environmental

Condition

5(5.72) 8(5.53) 4(4.77) 4(4.96) 21

Safety 6(4.09) 2(3.95) 2(3.40) 5(3.54) 15


27/42

27

5.1.5 SOLUTION

1. H= problems are Department independent

2. H1= problems are Department dependent

3. = 0.05, 0.95

4. Degree of freedom: = (r-1) (c-1) = (5-1) (4-1) = 12

5. 2actual =24.84

2

actual=

{(0.558+5.77+2.06+.67)+(0.44+2.64+0.52+2.9)+(0.09+1.10+0.124+0.1858)+(0.89+0.96

+0.54+0.6)+(3.4+0.87+0.3+0.2)=24.84

6. 2

0.05,12 = 21.026< 2

actual

7. 2

0.95,12 = 5.2526


28/42

28

5.2.3 MARITAL STATUS

Department Married Unmarried

Cutting 8 5

Swing 15 7

Printing 3 7

Dying 4 1

Total 30 20

5.2.4 GENDER

Department Male Female

Cutting 10 3

Swing 12 10

Printing 6 4

Dying 5 0

Total 33 17

5.2.5 NUMBER OF YEARS AT PRESENT JOB

Department Range of years Average of years

Cutting 1-10 4.38

Swing 1-15 6.31

Printing 1-8 3.8

Dying 1-13 6

Total 1-15 5.30


29/42

29

5.3 WEIMAN OCCUPATIONAL STRESS SCALE

The Weiman Occupational Stress Scale (WOSS) was first introduced in 1978. The

Weiman Scale is a fifteen question instrument that it scored on a 3 point Likert-type

instrument that measures important motivational factor. To determine the highest rank of

motivational factor, five condition are selected those are mostly responsible for motivating

the workers such as salary & payment, working condition, working environment, reward

& bonus, safety. Using Weiman Occupational stress scale rating, the score for all factor

choosing are determined for every selected worker. The score of 50 workers is then

summed for every factor. The average score then determined dividing by number of

workers. The individual score is obtained dividing by number of questions for every

factor. The factor which are responsible for motivate the workers are then ranked based

on individual score.

5.3.1 TOTAL SCORE FOR FIVE FACTORS

Number of

workers

Salary &

Payments

Working

Condition

Environmental

Condition

Reward &

Bonus

Safety

01 7 4 5 6 4

02 7 4 6 6 4

03 6 4 6 5 304 7 3 5 6 3

05 7 3 5 6 3

06 5 4 4 7 3

07 6 3 5 5 4

08 7 4 6 6 4

09 7 4 5 6 4

10 6 3 5 5 3

11 6 5 5 6 3

12 6 4 6 6 3

13 7 5 5 6 4

14 5 4 5 5 3

15 7 4 5 5 3

16 5 5 4 5 3

17 5 3 4 7 4

18 7 3 5 6 3


30/42

30

Number of

workers

Salary &

Payments

Working

Condition

Environmental

Condition

Reward &

Bonus

Safety

19 6 5 4 6 3

20 7 4 5 6 4

21 7 4 6 6 4

22 7 4 5 6 4

23 7 3 4 5 3

24 7 5 4 7 4

25 7 4 4 5 3

26 6 5 5 6 4

27 6 3 5 7 3

28 6 4 5 7 4

29 5 4 5 5 4

30 5 4 6 5 4

31 7 4 6 5 3

32 6 4 4 6 3

33 5 3 6 6 3

34 6 3 5 6 4

35 5 3 6 6 4

36 5 4 4 5 4

37 7 5 5 5 4

38 7 4 5 7 3

39 7 4 5 6 3

40 7 5 5 6 441 7 4 5 6 3

42 6 3 4 6 4

43 6 3 4 7 4

44 7 3 5 5 4

45 6 4 4 5 3

46 6 4 4 6 3

47 5 4 4 6 4

48 5 5 5 5 3

49 7 4 4 6 3

50 7 4 4 6 4

Total 313 195 243 291 175


31/42

31

5.3.2 RANKING OF FACTORS

Factors Total Score Average Score Individual

Score

Rank

Salary &

Wages

313 6.26 2.09 1

Working

Condition

195 3.90 1.30 4

Environmental

Condition

243 4.86 1.62 3

Reward &

Bonus

291 5.82 1.94 2

Safety 175 3.50 1.17 5


32/42

32

CHAPTER 6

Result Analysis and Recommendation

6.1 RESULT ANALYSIS

6.1.1 RESULT ANALYSIS FOR SEGMENT 5.1.2

In this segment, we have determined whether or not the major five problems are garments

dependent.

Result said that we accept the null hypothesis H(since 2

actual< 2

critical), that means the

major five problems are garment independent, in other words these problems are

prevalent on all garments and that is what we wanted prove.

We have determined 2

criticalfor two different Confidence Interval (CI=1- ), 99.5% and

5%. For all CI, the value of 2

actualis less than the value of 2

critical.So even for very low CIthat is 5%, our null hypothesis is accepted.


In this segment, we have determined whether the problems are department dependent or

not.

We have determined 2

criticalfor two different Confidence Interval (CI=1- ), 95% and

5% For both CI, the value of 2actualis greater than the value of 2

critical.

So we conclude that we reject the null hypothesis H (problems are m/c independent).

That means problems are department dependent, in other words particular department is

responsible for particular problem.


In this segment we determine the highest rank of motivational factor, five condition are

selected those are mostly responsible for motivating the workers such as salary &

payment, working condition, working environment, reward & bonus, safety. Using

Weiman Occupational stress scale rating, the score for all factor choosing are determined

for every selected worker. The score of 50 workers is then summed for every factor. The

average score is then determined dividing by number of workers. The individual score is

obtained dividing by number of questions for every factor. The factor which areresponsible for motivate the workers are then ranked based on individual score.

From the table 5.3.2 we see that Salary & wages is the main factor that need to concerned

for the management


33/42

33

Figure 6.1.1 Major five factors (from table 5.3.2)

Figure 6.1.2: Motivating factor (from table 5.3.2)


34/42

34

6.1.4 ANALYSIS OF EMPIRICAL FINDINGS

In an attempt to possibly contribute to, without doubt, one of the most important issues

facing organizations and their employees before today and possibly in the foreseeable

future this thesis undertook the factors that motivate me survey among 50 workers of

the Garments. Considered being a team of the future labor force. The results indicate that

the paramount and most popular motivating factor by a low margin (26%) among all the

survey participants was that of Salary & wages. It is necessary to make the reader aware

at this point that in discussing the responses or results of this survey, major emphasis will

be placed on the top five motivational factors ranked. The collective rank order of

motivational factors by the entire group of 50 respondents for this thesis indicate that: (1)

Salary & Wages, (2) Reward & Bonus, (3) Environmental Condition, (4)Working Condition,(5)

Safetywere considered to be the top five most important factors. (Ranked first to fifth

respectively).

6.1.5 COMPARISON OF THE RANKING OF PRIMARY FACTORS

Hersey &Blanchard (1969), study of industrial employees, ranked: (1) full appreciation

of work done, (2) feeling of being (3) sympathetic help with personal problems, (4) job

security(5) Good wages/salaries as the five top motivational factors. Kovach (1987)

carried out a similar study of industrial employees in 1981 and again in 1986 and

concluded that by 1981 what workers wanted had changed interesting work was in first

position and sympathetic help with personal problems had dropped to the ninth position.

Kovach further reported that by 1986 the ranking had changed further and the top five

ranked motivational factors were (1) interesting work (2) full appreciation of work done

(3) feeling of being (recognition) (4) job security (5) good wages/salary. In a survey byWiley (1997) in which approximately 550 questionnaires were administered to persons

employed in different industries .The survey concluded the following collective rank by

respondents (1) Good wages (2) full appreciation of work (3) job security(4)

promotions/expectations and (5) Interesting work. The ranked order of motivational

factors according to a survey of extension workers by Lindner (1998) found the following

ranking of five out of the ten motivational factors.(1)Interesting work (2) good

wages/salary (3) recognition (4) job security (5) good working conditions.

It is only appropriate at this point to discuss the findings of this study compared with the

other previous studies mentioned above. It can be observed that Hampaz (1990) ranked

Job satisfaction as the most important motivational factor at that time among industrial

workers. Seventeen years later, the results of this study also indicate that the most

paramount motivational factor by a wide margin among future employees today is that of

Job satisfaction. This finding is further supported by the 1986 study carried out by

Kovach (1987), And Lindner (1998).Furthermore, the importance of interesting work is

also supported by Herzbergs (1968) motivation-hygiene theory. This theory posits that


35/42

35

employees are motivated by their own inherent need to succeed at a challenging task. The

managers job is then to provide opportunities for people to be motivated to achieve

(Herberg 1987, Pp29-31). Interesting work was also ranked 5th by one of the earliest

employee surveys (Hersey &Blanchard 969) as well as the 1946, 1997 results in Wiley

(1997). Although in this study job satisfaction was not ranked first but it was considered

among the top five motivational factors. Based on the results of this thesis we believe that

(at least in the developing world situation) this factor will only grow in importance for

employees. I do not doubt the fact that no employee will prefer aborting and monotonous

job that lives him unsatisfied. Therefore, organizations are faced with the task of making

work interesting for their employees else run the possible risk of high labor turnover. For

example, I have always seen money as the main and primary reason why People work.

This has however been proven otherwise. Herberg (1968,pp87) suggested that yes,

having spiraling wages motivates people, but only to seek the next wage increase,

therefore as an affecter of job altitudes, salary has more potency as a job dissatisfies than

a job satisfies. Hence, Herzberg as a hygiene factor originally considered wages/salaries.However over the years research have shown that it is dissatisfaction on the job. Even

(1964), Shipley & Kiley (1988) concluded that some job characteristics did not group

according to the hygiene-motivator dichotomy since variables led to both satisfaction and

dissatisfaction and that certain factors were identified to be both motivators and

dissatisfies respectively. Wiley (1997), the results of the 1992 study reported in Wiley

(1997) and Analoni (2000) all ranked good wages as the most important motivational

factor, while it was ranked second by Lindner (1998) and Hampaz (1990). In this study

good wages was ranked 4th as the most important factor among respondents. In a study by

Wiley (1997) good wages was ranked the5 th most important factor. This consistent

average importance given to wages by employees may suggest that this factor have neverand perhaps will never be regarded as the most important motivational factor. However,

majority of these studies have been undertaken in the developed world the importance

that might not be the same in the developing world. Hersey and Blanchard (1969) ranked

promotions/expectations/rewards in 7th place. While Kovach1987), Wiley (1997),

Lindner (1998), all ranked this same factor in the 6 th, 4thand 5thplaces respectively. On

average, this factor was ranked 6thbetween 1946 and 1992 as reported in Wiley (1997).

In this study this factor was ranked 2nd. The almost average ranks of this factor both in

this study and previous studies are closely linked to the rank position given to this.

Factor since1946 the irony with this factor is that, originally Herzberg considered it as a

motivator thus one would expect it to be highly rated among employees as top

motivational factor. The result of this study and those of similar studies mentioned above,

do not seem to support the original Herzberg theory of this factor being a motivator.

Recognition or full appreciation of work done in the study by Herzberg (1987) and

Wiley(1990) was not ranked 2nd, by Hersey & Blanchard (1969) as one of the most

important motivational factor with a rank of 1st and 3rdby Lindner (1998). Furthermore,


36/42

36

the results reported in Wiley (1997) indicated that this factor was ranked 1 st in 1946 and

consistently ranked 2ndbetween 1980 and 1922. In this study this factor occupied the 3rd

position. Perhaps the high levels of importance given to this factor in these earlier studies

was because Herzbergs two factor theory was new as a motivational tool for

organizations. Those may cause employees at that time who feel their work is not being

appreciated and recognized may work less or undermine the work of other employees.

6.1.6 RECOMMENDATION

By using Maslow need theory of motivation as a foundation or basis, the original need

factors, which have over the years been modified by other researchers, were also adapted

for use in this thesis. A survey questionnaire was prepared and administered among 50

Workers in Garments. Financial motivation we may all agree remains one of the

problems and major concerns facing organizations before, today and even in the

foreseeable future. Furthermore, organizations and those who work in them have over the

years changed in what motivates them as employees. Available and numerous studiescarried out shows that since the 1950s employees motivation have been the focal point

of much management organizations. Given the difficult nature of identifying how and

what really motivates these employees it is paramount that these organizations find all

means and ways possible to understand the motivational factors and to sustain them

overtime for their general survival. Such an understanding is the cause of low level of

labor turnover, high productivity, and high profitability. In order for them to gain an

understanding of what really motivates their employees an employee survey such as this

one maybe used to gain insight to employees job motivation preferences. The

respondents in this survey ranked as top five factors that motivate them as future

employees as follows: Salary & Wages, Working Condition, Environmental Condition,Reward & Bonus, and Safety. This thesis concludes that, these factors reflect the current

state of affairs in terms of employees needs and implies that especially job redesign

strategies may be used to reinforce and to motivate employees today.

The most obvious and major findings emerging from this study is the clear indication of

Salary & Wages as a top motivator among todays future employees. Strikingly, however

is the ranking of a number of lower orders need factors rather than the growth (higher

order need factors) among the primary and top five most important motivational factors.

Regardless of age and gender, respondents in this survey seem to have a common interest

or goal. This I believe may have some practical implications for organizations, but

perhaps its provision and implications may not be as difficult because employees seem to

have similar preferences and wants. That is, they want their work to be as satisfying as it

could be. In general respondents in this thesis place high emphasis on Salary & Wages

and other factors, which that are largely of basic in nature. Therefore organizations that

may provide such enabling environments facilitate and tirelessly promote these basic


37/42

37

need factors could attract and retain high caliber employees. Harpaz (1990, p.81) argues

that when work is interesting and challenging, people are inspired to perform more than

is obligated to warrant their instrumental attainments, in other words, employees may

put additional effort with the hope of reaching their potential and accomplishing

worthwhile ends. Therefore the availability of unavailability of such job factors may

affect the worker and may influence the way the worker reacts towards the job. This may

also in the long run ultimately affect the workers motivational level and consequently the

workers performance or output on the job. Hence making jobs more interesting and

challenging and ensuring the availability of the primary motivational factors identified by

this thesis, is not only crucial for satisfying workers needs, but also it is requisite for

maintaining productivity and ensuring the long term survival of the organization. The

results of this study evidently show that it was mainly the growth factors (lower order

needs), which were highly valued and given higher motivational importance than the

traditional higher order need factors by the respondents. Maslow originally considered

need factors such as recognition, promotion and responsibilities to be very importantmotivators. Wiley (1997, p.279) suggest that these factors are longstanding motivators

to employees performance and that the most successful method of motivating is to build

challenge and opportunity for achievement into the job itself.

When it comes to the issue of money, which for we though was the foremost reason why

people work or are motivated to work. Harpaz (1990, p.80) argues that the role money

plays in people lives cannot be overlooked, since the main reason why people work is to

secure income, which gives them buying powers and surpluses for savings. According to

(GreenbergJ. & Baron R Behavior in Organizations 8th edition Prentice Hall p.191)

When it comes to motivation money isnt everything he argues that perks, althoughimportant ultimately motivate people less than doing interesting and important work. In

this study, all the respondents irrespective of age and gender considered wages to be of

motivational importance. Available literature as well as the findings of this study, show

that good wages has been consistently ranked among the top five factors that motivate

every employee to do his job best. Although an important motivational factor has been

identified as wages by previous studies. Put differently money can perform a dual role in

motivating employees. This thesis also concludes that the ranking of work-related factors

that motivate employees may change over time and may differ significantly from one

person to another and also across different groups of employees. Furthermore, this thesis

concludes that the important motivational valve placed on each factor may vary

according to age and gender. It is my believe that since the things or factors that motivate

people to do perform best are distinct and different, learning about what workers want

from their jobs, or what is more important for them, may generate essential information

for effective human-resource management. Thereby guarantying the long-term

profitability and survival of the organization. Furthermore, such learning may help


38/42

38

organizations to find answers to questions such as why do some people invest greater

effort in their jobs and why some people are more efficacious in their jobs than others?

The result of such exercises could prove useful for the organization, because knowing

what their employees wants and efforts in meeting these needs facilitate a mutual

working environment for both the employees and its management. Finally we believe the

results of this study and those presented and discussed in this thesis could be useful in

helping organizations determine what motivates employees or job-related motivational

preferences of their employees today and in the foreseeable future.


39/42

39

REFERENCES

Allender, H., & Allender, J. (1998). Identifying the right management job for you.

Industrial Management , Mar/Apr98, Vol. 40 Issue 2, 29-31

Armstrong, M., & Murlis, H. (2004). Reward management : a handbook of

remuneration strategy and practice. London: Kogan Page.

Dckel, A. 2003. The effect of retention factors on organizational commitment: an

investigation of high technology employees. Unpublished MCom thesis. Pretoria:

University of Pretoria.

Kreitner, R. 2004. Management 9 ed. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Lu, L. (1999). Work Motivation, Job Stress and Employees' Well-being. Journal of

Applied Management Studies , Jun99, Vol. 8 Issue 1, 61-63

Luthans, F., & Stajkovic, A. (2000, April 1). The Impact of Recognition on

Employee performance

http://www.sba.muohio.edu/management/MWAcademy/2000

Lawler, E. (1969). Job Design and Employees Motivation. Personnel Psychology ,

Winter69, Vol. 22 Issue 4, 426-435

Locke, E.A. & Latham, G.P. 1990. Work Motivation: The High Performance Cycle. In:

Kleinbeck, U., Quast, H.H., Thierry, H & Hacker, H. (ed.) Work Motivation . New

Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers

Molander, C. (1996):Human Resources at Work, Chartwell-Bratt, Lund

Morgan, G. (1997):Images of Organization, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks

Mayfield, J. R., Mayfield, M. P., & Kopf, J. (1998). The Effects of Leader

Motivating Language on Subordinate Performance and Satisfaction. Human

Resource Management, , Fall/Winter98, Vol. 37 Issue 3/4, 235-244, visited 19 may, 2010
http://www.sba.muohio.edu/management/MWAcademy/2000http://www.sba.muohio.edu/management/MWAcademy/2000http://www.sba.muohio.edu/management/MWAcademy/2000


40/42

40

Nelson, B. 2003. The top ten ways to motivate your employees. ABA Bank Marketing,

35(10) [Online]

Availablefrom:http://proquest.umi.com/pqdlink?did=309890291&sid=1&Fmt=4&clientl

d=39523&RQT=309&VName=PQD

Oldham, G., & Hackman, R. (2010). Not what it was and not what it will be: The future

of job design research. Journal of Organizational Behavior , Feb2010, Vol. 31 Issue

2/3, 463-479.

Roche, W., & MacKinnon, N. (1970). Motivating people with meaningful work

Harvard Business Review , May/Jun70, Vol. 48 Issue 3, 97-110

Robbins, S.P. 2000. Managing today! 2 ed. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice

Hall Davenport, T.H., Prusak, L. & Wilson, H.J. 2003. Whats the big idea? Creating

and capitalizing on the best management thinking. Massachusetts: Harvard Business

School Press.

Robbins, S.P. 2003. The truth about managing peopleand nothing but the truth.

Amsterdam: Financial Times, Prentice Hall.

Sharma, S. 2006. A right way to motivate an employee, is to win his heart!!! [Online]Available from: http://www.bpoindia.org/research/win-heart.shtml [Downloaded: 2006-

07-25]

Simons, T. & Enz, C.A. 2006. Motivating hotel employees: beyond the carrot and the

stick. [Online] Available from: http://www.allbusiness.com/periodicals/article/ 489873-

1.html [Accessed: 2006-06-03]

Tharenou, P . (1993). A test of reciprocal causality for absenteeism . Journal of

Organizational Behavior , May93, Vol. 14 Issue 3, 269-287.

Trompenaars, F. & Woollomas, P. 2005. A new paradigm for HR: dilemmas in

employing and managing the resourceful human. In: Losey, M., Meisinger, S. & Ulrich


41/42

41

Vercueil, A. 2001. Organizational transformation and information technology: a systems

perspective of employee perceptions. Unpublished Master of Arts thesis. Pretoria:

University of Pretoria.

Appendix

Motivational Questionnaires

Salary & Payments:

1. Are you satisfied with your basic salary?

a) Yes b) Somewhat c) No

2. Is the basic salary given at the right time?a) Yes b) Sometimes c) No

3. Are you satisfied with the company incentive system?


Working Condition:

1. Are you happy with the behave of your supervisor\in-charge?


2. Have there any work overload?

a) Yes b) Sometimes c) No

3. are you happy with youre your machine and supplying accessories?a) Yes b) Somewhat c) No

Environmental condition:

1. What is the level of noise & dust?

a) Low b) Medium c) High

2. Have any type reducing process for dust or noise?


42/42


3. Have any recreation system?


Reward & Bonus:

1. Are you have festival bonus?


2. Are you have any attendance bonus?


3. Are you happy company reward system?


Safety:

1. Have any safety instruments in the industries?

a) Yes b) Somewhat c) No2. Are you given any compensation for accident?


3. Are you have medical treatment from the company?


final part01

Documents