ITERATURE REVIEW ON EMPLOYEE RELATIONS PRACTICE OF AERO CONTRACTORS, PORT HARCOURT

                           LITERATURE REVIEW

2.0 Introduction

          This chapter attempts to link the study with the existing works in the field. The researcher made use of some related materials or literatures as they are relevant to the topic under discussion. The chapter is divided in the following: theoretical framework, conceptual review and empirical review.

2.1              Theoretical framework

Theories of Motivation

          This area of the study lay emphasis on the theoretical framework discussed in the argumentative comments of different researchers on the theories of motivation and the effect of motivation on the performance of employees. The results from this theoretical framework will help managers in designing solutions and methodologies to motivate the employees.

          Motivation theories are classified into two groups; content theories and process theories (Iguisi, 2009). Content theories explore what motivate people. The most famous content theories are Maslow’s need hierarchy, Herzberg’s two-factor theory and McClelland’s three-factor theory. Process theories researched the specifics of the motivation process. Vroom’s expectancy theory, Four-drive theory, Skinner’s reinforcement theory and Adam’s equity theory are well known process theories. Among motivation theories that are mentioned above, Abraham Maslow’s need hierarchy will be reviewed.

2.1.1  Maslow’s Need Hierarchy

       Maslow’s needs hierarchy theory was developed by psychologist Abraham Maslow in the 1940s. The model has been applied in almost every human pursuit, from marketing products to rehabilitating prison inmates. This incredible popularity is rather odd considering that the theory has little research support. Maslow’s need hierarchy organizes dozen of different needs into five basic categories arranged in the hierarchy. Physiological needs (for food, air, water, shelter, and the like) are at the bottom of the hierarchy. Next is safety needs – the need for a secure and stable environment and the absence of pain, threat, or illness. Belongingness includes the need for love, affection, and interaction with other people. Esteem includes self-esteem through personal achievement as well as social esteem through recognition and respect from others. At the top of the hierarchy is self-actualization, which represents the need for self-fulfillment – a sense that one’s potential has been realized. In addition to these five, Maslow describes the need to know and need for aesthetic beauty as two needs that do not fit within the hierarchy. Needs hierarchy theory says that people are motivated by several needs at the same time, but the strongest source is the lowest unsatisfied need. As the person satisfies a lower-level need, the next higher need in the hierarchy becomes the primary motivator and remains so even if never satisfied. Physiological needs are initially the most important, and people are motivated to satisfy them first. As they become gratified, safety needs emerge as the strongest motivator. As safety needs are satisfied, belongingness needs become most important, and so forth. The exception to this fulfillment process is self-actualization; as people experience self-actualization, they desire more rather than less of this gratification. Thus while the bottom four groups are deficiency needs because they become activated when unfulfilled, self actualization is known as a growth need because it continues to develop even when fulfilled. However, the most serious limitation of Maslow’s needs hierarchy is its assumption that everyone has the same needs hierarchy. Research has revealed that this is a false assumption. People actually have different needs hierarchies tied to their personal values. Needs are conscious deficiencies produced from innate drives but strengthened or weakened through learning and social forces such as culture and childhood upbringing. Furthermore, studies have reported that the general needs hierarchy in some cultures is different from the needs hierarchy in other cultures (Oishi et al, 1999).

          According to the study conducted by Eisenberger, Rhoades, and Cameron (1999), factors such as good performance, high perceived self-determination, and performance-reward expectancy positively impact employee’s intrinsic motivation. In other words, if employees expect to be rewarded for performing a task well, their motivation will increase to perform it well. However, Mayo (as cited in Riley, 2012) states that Fredrick, in his theory ignored the point of meeting employee’s social needs in order to get them motivated. However, Tella et al. explains that Taylor also introduced incentive systems to produce better performance, dedication, and contentment in workers. In support of Mayo and contradiction to the Fredrick Theory, Al-Harthy (2008) proves that motivation caused by appreciation has exceeded salary and benefit packages with a significant 10 % point difference. Similarly Chen, Wu and Chen (2010) state that factors like encouraging work environment which makes the work interesting, the feeling of accomplishment through demanding task, are usually neglected by the manager. However, the researcher of this study observed that financial motivational sources also bring most constructive individual’s creative behavior.

          In addition to the above discussion of motivation, Tella et al. with respect to the Abraham Maslow’s theory declares that, motivation is what pushes the employees in accomplishing and satisfying the needs as Hansmann (2010) states that Maslow assumes humans to be continuously motivated by needs. If a particular need is satisfied, the individual steps to another need to get motivated. Furthermore Hansmann (2010) clarifies about Maslow’s theory that along with the hierarchically arranged needs, Maslow emphasized on the need for the consideration and knowledge of the needs which has an impact on interest and motivation.

          According to Adewunmi, Omotuyole and John (2011), Job satisfaction and motivation are major determining factors that assist in channeling the employee efforts towards the attainment of organizational goal. Similarly, Tella et al. (2007) consider motivation as a factor which affects the individual’s performance. However, there are other important factors also which should be considered, for example, individual’s ability and competency, funds and working situations. In addition to this, Chen et al. (2010) indicate that creative behavior at special levels is been affected by the motivation while doing the job. However, Meija et al. (2004) highlight that manager should have a clear understanding of work motivation because employees with higher motivation produce a superior quality product or service than employees who lack in motivation. Motivation in employees is brought through a combination of both, the extrinsic and the intrinsic rewards.               

          Organizational performance and its goals achievement depend upon the will and motivation of employees to achieve the personal goals aligned with the achievement of the organizational goals. Without motivation, employees will be doing jobs just for the sake of necessity but not for the success of organization which will finally result in dissatisfaction and decreased loyalty at the end of every job done. The manager and the employee should have a good relationship in their work environment.

2.2 Conceptual Review

Motivational Technique

          The concept of motivation has been defined in different ways by different scholars. Motivation is derived from a Latin word known as ‘Movere’.

          ‘Movere’ means to move. Motivation is based on the principle of hedonism. Hedonism is that human tendency to seek pleasure and avoid pain.

          Berelson and Staines (2003) defined the concept of motivation as an inner state that encourages, activities, direct and channels behavior towards goals.

          It is also referred to as a general term applying to the entire class of drives, needs, wishes and similar forces that propel an employee to action. For example, an employee of an organization may decide to work with all enthusiasm indicating he/she wants to make a major contribution to the realization of the organization’s objective. The employer may decide to reward the employee with mere words of mouths of monetary rewards. The employer’s reward can further motivate employee to productivity.

          Beach (2005) defined motivation as the willingness to expend energy in order to achieve a goal. Appleby (2002, pp.24) says that motivation is keenness for a particular pattern or behavior. He explained how drive, urges and needs of individuals direct and control their behavior. Davies (2005) defines the concept as what goes on inside a person, which brings about his/her behavior. Davies emphasizes that lack of motivation could make an individual not to achieve satisfaction from the work. Agbeto (2002) define the term as that thing which moves somebody towards a goal. Motivation is a term applying to the class drives, desire, needs, wishes and similar forces. (Koontz O’Donnell, 2008).

          Implicit in all the definitions of motivation above, is the fact that motivation deals with the factors that induce people to performance in the organization.

2.2   Factors that Motivate Employees to Perform in an                Organization

2.2.1 Leadership Style

          Leadership style plays an important role in the motivation of workers to performance. The style of leading adopted by a manager can affect the performance of the subordinates. The success of a leadership in influencing subordinates to performance can be affected by certain situational variables like confidence of the subordinates, experience, the need and the perception of the subordinates. It is important that before any leader adopts any style of leading, he should first of all understand the nature and characteristics of the subordinates since this can affect his performance. Leadership style can be a source of motivation.

 2.2.2 Management by Objective (MBO)

          This is one of the most motivational techniques used by management. Its use in the organization has increased since its inception in 1950s. The program is designed to encompass specific goals, participative set for an explicit time period with feedback on goals progress. This was advocated in different forms and one of the advocates is Peter Drucker, who first introduced the concept.

          Drucker (2009) states that the objective of the MBO should be concise statement of expected accomplishment, that is the superior and the subordinates should jointly choose the goals and decide on how they will be measured. Drucker believes that the greatest advantage of the MBO is that it allows the worker to control his productivity. This self-control will result in stronger motivation to do the best rather than just get by it.

          Another philosopher of the MBO were Koontz et al. they defined it as a process whereby the superior and the subordinates jointly identifies the common goal, define individual major areas of responsibility in terms of the result expected of him and use these measures as guards for operating the units and accessing the contribution of each of his members.

          An important factor in Koontz et al view point is for the subordinates and superiors to have an understanding regarding the subordinates’ major areas of responsibility. A common feature in Drucker and Koontz et al conceptions of MBO is that MBO can lead to improved motivation of the participants. This is because the superior and subordinates meets to discuss the goals of their department, which must be in line with overall goals of the organization.

          The superior and subordinate meet again after the initial goals are established and evaluate the subordinate performance inters of goals. With the participation of the subordinates in discussion, establishment and emulation of the organizational goals as specified by MBO, the subordinate will be motivated to contribute his best to the attainment of the goal. MBO gives the subordinates a sense of belonging and this can motivate them to act well in their performance.

2.2.3 Job Enrichment

          Researchers and analysis of motivation points to the importance of making job challenging and meaningful to the person doing the job. Herzberg et al popularized Job enrichment as motivational technique in their two-factor theory of motivation.

          Job enrichment is referred to as the vertical expansion of the job which entails giving the individual full control and autonomy over the job he is doing.

          Basically, increasing the responsibility of a job, in order to increase the satisfaction associated with the job. A job may be enriched in the following ways:

          Giving room for selection of jobs where better motivation is more likely to improve performance. The job must be designed to provide opportunities for achievement, recognition, responsibility, advancement and growth. The technique entails enriching the job so that these factors are included.

i.    Encouraging participation of subordinates and interaction    between workers.

ii.   By giving workers a feeling of personal responsibility of their task.

iii.By taking steps to make sure that people can see how their task contributes to a finished products and the welfare of the enterprise.

iv. Giving people a feedback on their job performance.

v.    Involving workers in analysis and change of physical aspect of the work environment such as layout of the office or plant, temperature lighting, and cleanliness.

vi.  With job enrichment, worker’s interest in their job may be generated and their level of motivation will be increased.

2.2.4 Job Enlargement

          Job enlargement is another technique of motivation. It is referred to as the horizontal expansion of the job.

Job enlargement simply makes a job varied by removing dullness associated with performing the job. It means enlarging the scope of the job by adding task without enhancing responsibility. The essence of job enlargement is to prevent monotony which kills interest and job interesting to the workers. Job enlargement can help to motivate people to productivity.

2.2.5 Positive Re-Enforcement

          This is another motivational technique used as a means of motivating workers to productivity. Re-enforcement is used to motivate workers to performance by encouraging a desired behavior and discouraging an undesired behavior. Re-enforcement approach to the motivation of workers was first developed by a Harvard psychologist known as B.F. Skinner. This theory was first developed in learning, which entails encouraging desired behavior and discouraging undesired behavior. It can be used to encourage the workers to performance by rewarding a desired behavior. For example, an engineer is given the task of designing a new piece of equipment (stimulus) the engineer exerts a high level of efforts and complete the project in time (response), the supervisor reviews the work and recommend an increase pay for an excellent work (positive re-enforcement).

Rewarding a desired behavior entails monetary reward, promotion, recognition and praise. With positive re-enforcement, a behavior desired by the management can be repeated in subsequent times.

2.2.6 Money

          Money cannot be overlooked as a means of motivating workers to performance whether in the form of wages, piecework, bonuses or any other incentive pay that may be given to employees for performance. The influence of money as a motivational technique is a function of the need level of the worker. A worker who is striving to satisfy his psychological needs will value money more than a worker striving to satisfy a self-actualization need. Management should understand the desire of workers before using money as a means of motivating them to performance.

2.2.7 Participation

          Participation is another motivational technique which requires that management of any organization should also consult employees on decision affecting them and that they should be given the opportunity to air their own views with regards to such decisions. Researchers have shown that when workers are allowed to have a say in things that affect them in the work place, they tend to be satisfied.

This increases productivity and discourages absenteeism. Participation is also a means of recognition. It appeals to the need for affiliation and acceptance. Above all, it gives people sense of accomplishment.

2.2.8 Welfare Schemes

          These are facilities provided by the organization, which are in addition to workers wages or salaries.

2.3 Empirical Review

          People have all manner of opinion about the events they witness in their day-to-day lives. Such opinions are invariably shaped by their family and school circumstances, the jobs they hold and the organizations they work for, the churches and clubs they patronize, the circle of friends and communities they belong to, and so on. 

          Stone (1995), Blyton & Turnbull (1992), Guest (1989) argue that this form of employee practice differs from the previous two in that it starts from the belief that organizational tensions can be completely resolved by nurturing  psychological contract based on cooperation. The employee relations choices in this instance are predicated on the belief that the forces uniting managers and employees are far stronger than the forces dividing them. Because work is such a central part in people’s lives, its nature and governance is one social phenomenon that often invokes intensely passionate debate. Hence the empirical review first coined by Alan Fox (1966, 1974) as means of categorizing the different opinions held by people towards such issues. For Maslow (1954), Mayo (1933), Child (1967), in this case, the reduction of organizational tension is held to rest the ability of individuals to achieve self-fulfillment in the workplace. Workers are regarded as qualitatively different to other resources used in production. Fox claimed that three such frames of reference captured the main currents of opinion, which he defined in terms of their Unitarist, Pluralist and Marxist credentials.

REFERENCES

Adewunmi O., I., Omotuyole I., A., & John O.Y., A. (2011). Job satisfaction and turnover among workers of small scale angro alied firms in Southwest Nigeria.

Asian Journal of Business and Management Sciences, 1(4), 54-62. Afful-Broni, A. (2012). Relationship between Motivation and Job Performance at the University of Mines and Technology, Tarkwa, Ghana: Leadership Lessons.

Asian Journal of Business and Management Sciences,2(1), 20-28. Mejia, L. R., Balkin, D. B., & Cardy, R. L. (2004).

Behavior in Marine Tourism Industry. J. Service Science & Management, 198-205. doi:10.4236/jssm.2010.32024 Danish, R. Q., & Ali, U. (2010). Impact of Reward and Recognition on Job Satisfaction and Motivation: An Empirical Study from Pakistan.

Creative Education, 3(3) , 315-321. doi: 10.4236/ce.2012.33050. Al-Harthy, M. H. (2007). Motivation: a challenge for oil and gas companies.

European Journal of Business and Management, 3(3), 2222-1905. Manzoor, A., Awan, H., & Mariam, S. (2012). Investigating the impact of work stress on job performance:A Study on Textile Sector of Faisalabad.

Iguisi O. (2009). Motivation-related values across cultures, African Journal of Business Management, Vol. 3(4) pp 141-150.

International journal of Business and management, 5(2). DeCenzo, D. A., & Robbins, P. S. (2005). Fundamentals of human resource management.

Journal of personality and social psychology, 77(5), 1026-1040. Hansmann, R. (2010). Sustainability Learning: An Introduction to the Concept and Its Motivational Aspects.

Managing human resources. New Delhi: Prentice-Hall of India  private limited. L. Javed & N. Javed 124 Robbin, S. P., Judge, T. A., & Sanghi, S. (2007).

Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation, Psychological Review, 50, 370-396. doi:10.1037/h0054346, http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0054346 

McClelland D. (1961). The Achieving Society, Princeton NJ, van Nostrand.

New Delhi: Wiley India  private limited. Eisenberger, R., Rhoades, L., & Cameron, J. (1999). Does pay for performance increase or decrease perceived self determination and intrinsic motivation.

Oil and Gas Business, pp. 1-14. Chen, S. C., Wu, M. C., & Chen, C. H.(2010). Employee’s Personality Traits, Work Motivation and Innovative.

Oishi, S. (1999). Cross-cultural variations in predictors of life satisfaction: perspectives from Needs and Values, Personality and Social Psychological Bulletin 25, no 8 pp 980-990. doi:10.1177/01461672992511006, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/01461672992511006.

Organizational behavior. Sofat, S. (2012). Effect of Motivation on employee performance and Organizational. Journal of Applied Management & Computer Science ,1, 1-11. Tella, A., Ayeni, C., & Popoola, S.O. (2007).

Organizational Behavior.Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2008). Essentials of organizational behavior.Florida: Pearson education. Robbins, S. P., Judge, T. A., & Sanghi, S. (2007).

Scientific Research ,3(3), 309-314.doi:10.4236/ce.2012.33049 Afful-Broni, A. & Nanyele, S. (2012). Factors Influencing Worker Motivation in a Private African University: Lessons for Leadership.

Sustainability, 2, 2874-2897.doi:10.3390/su2092873 Manzoor, Q.A. (2012). Impact of Employees Motivation on Organizational.

Work motivation, Job satisfaction, and Organizational commitment of library personnel in academic and research libraries in Oyo state, Nigeria. Library Philosophy and Practice.doi: 10.4236/jssm.2010.32025 Tyson, S. (2006).Essentials of human resource management. Burlington: Butterworth-Heinemann.