EXAMINING HOW VARIOUS MOTIVATIONAL STRATEGIES

Examining how various motivational strategies affect productivity in the BP Refinary organization workplace.

How various motivational strategies affect productivity in the BP Refinary organization workplace

The vast majority of organisations view engagement very practically, for example 'we need to engage everyone around X topic or issue' (by which they mean 'get people's hearts and minds around it'). Often this is because there is a change in organisational focus, a new initiative needs to be implemented or behaviours need to be aligned to new ways of working.

The motivational practices that support BP employees stems from effective learning, communication and coaching principles are used to help people internalise business issues, creating a line of sight between strategy and an individual's role. (Franks 2008)

Approaches vary - from the very directional to the more involving and explorative. A growing number of organisations see engagement as the outcome of a healthy psychological contract and how engaged an individual is with their job - for example are their role and responsibilities clear, are they properly equipped to do their job, do they feel valued and appropriately rewarded etc? This requires a more sophisticated approach which takes into account the wide variety of factors that influence how positive people are about their job and the organisation they work for. A small number of organisations see it as strategic - the end result of everything the organisation does to nurture, maintain and grow a positive and productive two-way relationship with employees. This requires joined-up thinking and action across a whole host of areas - from how people are rewarded, to the way leaders communicate and how people are developed for the future.

It also emphasises the critical role good people managers' play and the importance of allowing employees to play to their strengths. In many ways engagement is nothing new. It's just become more important in the struggle to find a real source of competitive advantage. The challenge is how good your organisation is at making it happen. There are many theories regarding motivation with the most prevalent being the theories of Abraham Maslow and Frederick Herzberg. It is important to understand these theories and their implications to accurately comment on reinforcement theories of motivation. According to Maslow's hierarchy of needs, there are five classes: (1) physiological, (2) safety, (3) social, (4) esteem, and (5) self-actualisation. ((Franks 2008) each lower level need must be satisfied before an individual experiences higher level needs. (Berlyne 1969) found that Maslow hypothesized that as physiological, safety, social, and esteem needs were satisfied, they ceased to motivate, while the self-actualisation needs actually motivate an individual more as they are satisfied (Hall et al. 1999). Herzberg used this theory as a base to build his motivation-hygiene theory, which ties Maslow's needs to on the job achievement.

The hygiene elements relate to low needs (physiological, safety, and social)( Brody N. 1983). For an individual, hygiene conditions include company policy and administration, supervision, relationships with peers and supervisors, work conditions, salary, status, and ...