Beyond Motivation:
Improving Performance through
Job and Work Design
Dr. Stan Malos, J.D., Ph.D.
Professor of Management/HRM
San Jose State University
Copyright 2005; 2016 © Stan Malos
Performance Overview
Conceptually, performance can be
thought of as a multiplicative function of
motivation and ability:
Performance = Motivation * Ability
(So, if either motivation or ability are zero, performance is zero!)
Motivation
Force that energizes, directs, and sustains
human behavior; typically reflected by desire
to do the best possible job or exert the most
effort to perform desired or assigned tasks.
Ability
Overall capacity to perform assigned
tasks, typically reflected by, e.g.,
*Mental/physical/emotional resources
*Training/experience levels
*Tools/plant & equipment available
Traditional Approaches to
Job/Work Design





Work simplification (A)
Job enlargement (M)
Job rotation (M)
Job enrichment (M)
Team-based job
designs (A & M)
[A => Ability emphasis; M => Motivational emphasis]
Review of Motivation
“Theories”:
-Maslow’s Hierarchy
-Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory
-Work Adjustment Theory
-Equity Theory
-Expectancy Theory
-Goal Setting Theory*
-Job Characteristics Theory*
Maslow’s Hierarchy of
Needs
Self - Actualization
Self esteem
Safety
Physiological needs
Herzberg’s 2-Factor Theory
ID “Motivators” vs. “Hygiene Factors”
 Ensure hygiene factors are adequate
to enable motivation
 Increase motivators to motivate
 Duh!

Work Adjustment Theory
Motivation and job satisfaction
depend on the fit between
employee needs and abilities and
aspects of the job and organization
 Duh!

Equity Theory


Aspects of Job Satisfaction [e.g., pay
satisfaction] are driven by employee
comparisons of outcomes (theirs and
others’) to inputs; e.g.,
Rewardsself / Effortsself
=
Rewardsother / Effortsother
Individuals will adjust the relative “equities”
to maintain the relative equality
Expectancy Theory
Motivation = Expectancy * Instrumentality * Valence
where
-Expectancy => "If I try, can I perform
at the level necessary to get the promised reward?"
-Instrumentality => "If I perform at the necessary level,
will I in fact get the promised reward?" and
-Valence =>"How much do I value the promised reward?"
Goal Setting Theory

Hard, Specific Goals that are
Accepted, and
 Understood

lead to better performance than
-no goals, or
-”do your best”
The Job Characteristics
Theory of Work Motivation
Core Job
Characteristics
Skill Varieties
Task Identity
Task Significance
Critical
Psychological States
Experienced Meaningfullness of the Work
Autonomy
Experienced Responsibility for Work
Outcomes
Personal and
Work Outcomes
High Internal
Work Motivation
Job Characteristics Theory
Feedback
Knowledge of Results
from Work Activities
Strength of Relationships
is Determined by Intensity
of Employee Growth Need
High-Quality
Work Performance
High Satisfaction
With the Work
Low Turnover
and Absenteeism
Work Design Revisited
Work simplification
 Job enlargement
 Job rotation
 Job enrichment
 Team-based job designs

Working in
Teams…[Compare JCT]

Include members from
different levels of organization

Monitor teams to ensure free exchange
of ideas and creativity

Select members for expertise, diverse
perspectives and ability to collaborate

Coordinate with managers to make time
for team meetings
Systems-based Approaches
High-involvement work systems
 Can be integrated with either teambased approaches, individual-based
approaches, or [preferably] both
 More when our research
presentations address! 

Multi-disciplinary Approaches
(Campion & Thayer, 1985)




Mechanistic Approach [views the employee
as a machine, focusing on efficiency]
Motivational Approach [views the employee
as a human being, focusing on satisfaction]
Biological Approach [views the employee as
a biological organism, focusing on comfort]
Perceptual-Motor Approach [views the
employee as an information processor,
focusing on reliability/accuracy/error rate]
Tradeoffs among Approaches


How much is “too much” of a good thing?
Are tradeoffs unavoidable or can they be
eliminated (or at least managed/minimized)?




Prioritize
Consider
Consider
Consider
desired outcomes
individual differences
organizational factors
environmental factors
Applications/Examples
See Lengnick-Hall article and
invocation of “biological lens” [pp.
79-80]
 Onward to Research Demo!
