Barlow's Lack Of Motivation example essay topic

helpful individual, and others viewed his work as being in consistence and spotty at times. Rios is required to submit a formal performance evaluation on all of her workers, and Barlow's performance appraisal was the most challenging yet she had to face. Lack of Motivation Barlow's behavior at the TA can be simply defined as lack of motivation, and this can be further explained in depth by the use of expectancy theory. The expectancy model states, "People are motivated to work when they expect to achieve things they want from their jobs. A basic premise of the expectancy model is that employees are rational people. They think about what they have to do to be rewarded and how much the rewards mean to them before they perform their jobs".

(Hellriegel, Slocum, Woodman, 2001, p. 146) In addition, Hellriegel, Slocum, and Woodman also explained, individuals decide their jobs that are based on their needs, motivations and past experiences. Decisions about how much to produce, how much to work and the quality of workmanship (job-performance decisions) are solely depend on the individual's level of motivation. In another words, as it stated in the text, "the expectancy model holds that work motivation is determined by individual beliefs regarding effort-performance relationships and the desirability of various work outcomes associated with different performance levels... Unless an individual believes that effort lead to some desired performance level, he or she will not make much of an effort". (Hellriegel, Slocum, Woodman, 2001, p. 147) In relation to Barlow, he could not find a reason to be motivated at the TA.

First, through his past performance evaluation, he had been rated a score of three consecutively for the past four years. The scores were a punishment itself because he had no way to determine his performance. Regardless Barlow performed well or not, the same score will be given; this caused Barlow to become careless about his job because he saw no reward in his effort; no reason be to motivated. His attitude toward his job was manifest through his work, which was the cause of the incidents. Secondly, Barlow saw no reward from his position. He had secured his position with his expertise and his background knowledge of the TA.

When the whistle-blower incident occurred, he was accused of being responsible for the incident; however, neither the TA nor anyone could prove it. Because of this, the TA felt intimated by Barlow's action, hence, granted Barlow with coercive power. Coercive power is an individual's ability to influence others' behavior by punishing their undesirable behavior as defined in Hellriegel, Slocum, Woodman (2001). In addition, Barlow had proven his expertise through his knowledge, and connection through his network. This also grant him them expert power, which is defined as one's ability to influence other's behavior because of competencies, talent, and specialized knowledge in Hellriegel, Slocum, Woodman (2001).

Because the powers that he already obtained, Barlow seek no interest in power as a reward; therefore, Barlow was low on motivation. TA vs. Barlow Barlow's lack of motivation had caused the TA to conflict with its goal as well. One of the main goals the TA was to improve its relation with the field offices. This goal was being under met because its accounting department was operating inefficiently. The inefficiency was due to Barlow's attitude toward his work, which was reflected upon his work. A problem exists when the Toll Authority's objective was not accomplished.

TA had a goal to operate a smooth efficient operation. To achieve this goal, TA had to improve its relations with the field offices, and the reason behind was to eliminate the skimming in the small accounts by the field offices. Unfortunately, the TA's objective was under met because of Barlow's lack of motivation, which ironically, TA was liable for because of his past performance appraisal. A predicament can also be found in the case of Estella Rios. It exists when TA's objective and Barlow's objective were conflicting one other.

TA's goal was to improve its relations with the field offices, in order for it to accomplish such goal; its departments must be operating effortlessly. On the other hand, Barlow's goal was being achieve. His goal was to obtain a position and receive a salary without any effort; his goal was not to improve productivity nor increase power. Barlow's goal was being satisfy. Because of these indifference's, a predicament, therefore, exists. Plan of Action Rios is certainly in a very frustrated position; however, working through the main causes could be beneficial in this situation.

First, Rios should establish herself in a management perspective. She should increase her power; this could achieve by increase her knowledge about accounting and the TA audit procedures. In addition, to become well networked can certainly boost her power. Despite of the power, Rios should also motivate Barlow and increase his performance awareness. First, Rios would have to explain the indifference in performance rating in comparison to the pervious management. Secondly, Rios would have to evaluate according to performances, and fallow up with individuals quarterly.

By demonstrating a new performance appraisal approach, one third of the employee would either quit, another would agree with changes, and another would linger until further outcome according to the Third of Law (Achieving Competitive Advantages, 2000). Conclusion Motivate plays a vital role in any organization. As in the case of Estella Rios, motivation was the cause of organization inefficiency. The role of management is to delegate its goals and motivate its employees. Unfortunately, human beings have different needs. One's motivation might not be the case for another.

As management, reward accordingly is an essential tool in an organizational success. Reference Hellriegel, Slocum & Woodman (2001). Organization Behavior (9th ed. ). Ohio: South-Western College Publishing. Achieving Competitive Advantage: Managing for Organizational Effectiveness (2000): The Wharton Management Development Series.