5.1 Vroom Expectancy Theory
The following Video 1 elucidates the application of Vroom theory in the workplace.
Figure 1: Vroom Expectancy Theory
Source: (Joy, 2018).
The Expectancy
theory of Victor Vroom describes the internal process of choice of outcomes
between different behaviors (Champoux, 2011). According to Parijat and Bagga (2014) Vroom’s expectancy theory of
motivation, proposed in the 1960s as an alternative to the content models or
theories. Motivation is a product of three factors:
(1) Expectancy,
(2) instrumentality, and (3) valence. Valence revolves
around how much a person wants a reward, expectancy refers to one’s estimation
of the probability that effort will result in successful performance, and
instrumentality is the estimation of whether one’s performance will result in
receiving the reward. The motivational relationship can be expressed in below
formula:
Motivation (M) = Valence x Expectancy x
Instrumentality (V x E x I)
(Parijat and Bagga, 2014).
The
multiplier effect in the equation is significant. It means that higher levels
of motivation will result when expectancy, instrumentality, and valence are all
high, when they are all low. If any one of the three factors is zero, the
overall level of motivation is zero. Therefore, even if an employee believes
that his effort will result in performance, which will result in reward,
motivation will be zero if the valence of the reward he expects to receive is
zero, for instance if he believes that the reward he will receive for his
effort has no value for him (Lunenburg, 2011).
Valence is strength, personal value and person’s
preference for an outcome that the rewards can be received based on
performance, as high valence is a guarantee of high motivation. As a process
theory of motivation, Vroom’s expectancy theory looks at the cognitive process
to study the effects of the motivation of employees working in different organizations
(Parijat & Bagga, 2014).
Expectancy theory has showed a well linked and
inspiring system from the beginning, but has been denigrated for its assumption
that people are as calculating and reasoned in their decision-making. According
to Hadebe (2001) theory has limited use, and is more valid for prediction of behavior
where effort–performance–rewards connection may be clearly apparent by the
individual. It has also been criticized for failing to take adequate account of
people’s cognitive boundaries (Baron et al., 2002). Accordingly, there
has been mixed levels of support for the theory usefulness in the workplace.
The following Video 1 elucidates the application of Vroom theory in the workplace.
Video1: Vroom Expectancy theory
Source: (Jiko, 2018).
5.2 Application in the workplace
From an organizational point of view the Vroom theory has some significant involvement for motivating people in medical care context and recognizes some significant belongings that make people motivate (Lunenburg, 2011). Study and researched on reasons that influence level of motivation of health and nursing workforce of three national healthcare organizations in Italy under expectancy theory, by evaluating 492 feedbacks from health and nursing workforce. Study found that the motivation appears from the level of employee conditions and works on the conditions of an individual inputs and the choice derives from the correlations input/performance and performance/outcome (Simone, 2015).
From an organizational point of view the Vroom theory has some significant involvement for motivating people in medical care context and recognizes some significant belongings that make people motivate (Lunenburg, 2011). Study and researched on reasons that influence level of motivation of health and nursing workforce of three national healthcare organizations in Italy under expectancy theory, by evaluating 492 feedbacks from health and nursing workforce. Study found that the motivation appears from the level of employee conditions and works on the conditions of an individual inputs and the choice derives from the correlations input/performance and performance/outcome (Simone, 2015).
5.3 List of Reference
Baron, H., Henley, S., McGibbon, A. and McCarthy, T.,
2002. Motivation Questionnaire Manual And User’s Guide. Brighton:
Saville and Holdsworth Limited.
Champoux,
J., 2011. Organizational Behavior: Integrating
Individuals, Groups, and Organizations. 4th ed. New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
Hadebe, T., 2001. Relationship Between Motivation And
Job Satisfaction Of Employees At Vista Information Services. M.A.
dissertation. Rand Afrikaans University, Johannesburg.
Lunenburg,
F., 2011. Theory of Motivation: Motivating by Altering Expectations. International
Journal of Management, Business and Administration, 15(1), pp.1-6.
Jiko, A., 2018. Vroom Expectancy Theory 2018.
[video] Available at:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpnzW06shsM&t=1s> [Accessed 26 May
2020].
Parijat, P and Bagga, S. (2014) Victor Vroom’s Expectancy
Theory of Motivation – An Evaluation. International Research Journal of
Business and Management, 7(9), pp.1-8.
Simone, S., 2015. Expectancy Value Theory: Motivating Healthcare
Workers. American International Journal of Contemporary Research,
[online] 5(2). Available at:
<https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Expectancy-Value-Theory%3A-Motivating-Healthcare-Simone/eb1406a388050bb07b683a8dcdd49b1d4f43cf29>
[Accessed 26 May 2020].
In addition to your views, each individual has a perception on the reward is called the valence and it depends on the basic needs of the individual, therefore, it is essential that the organization focusing on the value, an individual may have on a reward, when determining the rewards (Lambright, 2010).
ReplyDeleteThank you for your insight. Reward systems play a key role as they determine the employer-employee relationships. The reward system defines what the employer is willing to give, which has a direct impact on what employees are willing to contribute in exchange. Therefore financial returns (in cash or shares) that employees receive directly from their employers as part of their contractual relationship. Compensation returns can be fixed (base pay) and variable for instance short-term and long-term incentives (Santos and Mejia, 2015).
DeleteAgreed Manuja. According to Parijat & Bagga (2014) Vroom’s Expectancy theory equation shows the advantage of eliminating the imaginary implications in motivation and providing numerical comments where comparison and soft experiments are possible.
ReplyDeleteYes Loshitha, Expectancy is what one awaits related to the individual effort. Expectancy expresses the success chances that depend on one’s abilities in order to reach performance. An individual will be more willing to engage in work if he believes that his effort will help him reach performance(Suciu, Mortan and Laqar, 2013)
Delete