How expectancy theory and equity theory might be used to motivate graduate trainees working in a large organisation Essay Example

How expectancy theory and equity theory might be used to motivate graduate trainees working in a large organisation Paper There are two main theories behind motivation; Expectancy theory and Equity theory. Expectancy theory, developed by Edward Tolman, is known as a cognitive theory and was brought about to dispute previous behaviourist theories. Equity theory looked at by J. Stacy Adams, is a process theory which is actually based on the idea of inequity. Motivation among graduate trainees can vary depending on the circumstances surrounding an individuals employment. If they are in a career that they are extremely passionate about, they will likely put in more effort than someone who has no real determination. Graduates are likely to be in a job for one of two reasons. They will either be there to get a foothold in the profession that they want to ultimately work in, or to make a lot of money to pay off their student debts. However in both cases, an individual will want to feel rewarded and that they are being treated fairly and in an equitable manner to their peers. We will write a custom essay sample on How expectancy theory and equity theory might be used to motivate graduate trainees working in a large organisation specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on How expectancy theory and equity theory might be used to motivate graduate trainees working in a large organisation specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on How expectancy theory and equity theory might be used to motivate graduate trainees working in a large organisation specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer Although Edward Tolman and Kurt Lewin were the first people to pioneer Expectancy theory, it was Victor Vrooms (1964) studies that applied the model to workplace motivation. The theory looks at peoples choice in options left open to them and suggests that an individuals motivation is dependent on how much they want something and their likelihood of achieving it. To ensure that graduates in an organisation are motivated, the company must first recognise the components that make up motivation. These are effort, direction and persistence. Effort looks at what actually motivates an individual while direction determines what behaviours an individual chooses. Persistence examines the role in which sustaining or halting a particular behaviour is important. Once a company understands that its graduates are likely to be motivated if all these criteria are positive, they can begin to formulate plans for ensuring that their employees are happy and conducting a successful job. The expectancy theory suggests that there are three key areas that an individual must want to succeed in. These are expectancy, instrumentality and valence. Vroom suggested a formula and it implied that if an individual put no value on any of the areas they would not be motivated. It is therefore important for a company to ensure that their graduates place value on all three areas, as shown in the diagram below. 1.1 The components of Expectancy Theory While some people believe that each of the components are distinct, it has been shown that there is a link between them and that one leads to another. As the newest employees of a company, graduates will be required to show motivation and a desire to succeed in the company. However if the company provides no set targets or options for them to fulfil the above key areas, there is a likelihood that the motivation would not be shown. Therefore, in order for the company to motivate graduates according to expectancy theory, they must ensure that the more work an individual puts in, it will be recognisable in terms of output. For instrumentality, they should also make clear that the more work an individual does for a company, the quicker they are likely to achieve a promotion or a salary increase. As a graduate, it is likely that an individual will want this promotion but in a case where it might not matter and to ensure that valence is present, it would be important for the company to ensure that the benefits of the promotion outweigh the costs to the individual. In a large organisation it is likely that there will be many graduates but competition to get a place initially may be fierce. It is important for the company to enforce the fact that whilst the individual was lucky to get a place, they very much deserved it and that the company values them as a person and for their talents. This in itself will increase motivation. However, as there will be many others in the same shoes it is important for a company to distinguish between each individual to ensure that their work doesnt go unnoticed. With so many graduates, it is important that whilst distinguishing between all of them, that none are overlooked and all feel equal to one another. J. Stacy Adams (1963, 1965) statement on equity theory was perhaps the most influential of its time. He argued that we are motivated to act in situations which we perceive to be inequitable or unfair (Buchanan Huczynski, 2004). As a graduate, inequity is likely to occur when an individual believes they are receiving more or less than they think they deserve. In an instance where they may be being better rewarded than their counterparts it may not be of concern to them, but when their counterparts are receiving higher benefits than the individual there will be a great feeling of inequity and maybe inadequacy. Adams model is based on inputs and outputs and they need to be balanced and calibrated against others in the workplace in order to ensure equity as the below diagram shows. 1.2 The components of J. Stacey Adams Equity Theory Graduates are likely to not have any previous experience of being in a workplace and therefore will probably make a lot more comparisons than those higher up the corporate ladder. As seen from the above diagram, the graduates perception of rewards and outputs includes money, recognition, responsibility, praise and enjoyment. If the graduate feels that their peers are receiving a higher token in any of these output areas, they are likely to experience inequity. Their inputs will be things such as effort, commitment, time, reliability and loyalty. As an individuals outputs reduce and an inequity manifests, the individual will feel compelled to act upon this reduction. They will try to correct the inequity as quickly as possible and this may involve lowering productivity, increased absenteeism or a reduced quality of the work produced. However, the limitation with this model is that it leaves inputs and outputs open to interpretation according to individual differences. For example, whilst one graduate might place large value on pay rises, another may think that these are negligible and that promotion and climbing the corporate ladder is more important. Adams believes that there are strategies for reducing inequity though and in the case of a graduate where one was being paid more than another for doing similar jobs, then the following steps that an individual would take: 1) Change their outputs (i.e. ask for a pay rise) 2) Change their inputs (i.e. not put in as much effort) 3) Change the other partys outputs (i.e. persuade superiors to cut others pay) 4) Change the other partys inputs (i.e. leave the hard work to others) 5) Change the comparable party (i.e. compare with a different individual) 6) Change attitude to inequity (i.e. reason as to why the other is receiving more outputs) 7) Leave the job Therefore, for an organisation to use equity theory to its advantage and to ensure its graduates continue to be motivated after the first few weeks at the company, it is important to ensure that they feel that their inputs are rewarded by outputs and that their peers are not receiving more outputs than them. Obviously, there will be certain individuals who perform better than others and will deserve higher outputs. When this is the case, the company must ensure that the individuals work is definitely above the standard of their counterparts and that it is made clear to others in the organisation why the said individual received the reward. This will actually have a positive effect on the company in that the other graduates in the company will want to achieve a similar output benefit and therefore be motivated to work harder and in turn their inputs will increase. This will have a spiralling effect which will increase productivity and therefore in turn have a positive effect on the company. Both theories can be used to ensure that the graduates are happy and feel aptly rewarded in their jobs. Expectancy Theory and Equity Theory both take into account the costs to the individual and the rewards that are ultimately expected. It is important for an organisation not to pass these theories by because it may ultimately have a detrimental effect to the reputation of the company. By ensuring that those at the bottom of the firm are enjoying their work and feel aptly rewarded, it will create a positive atmosphere that will ensure that the graduates remain loyal to the organisation and are more likely to stay with them rather than defect to a rival firm.

Science Coursework Essays

Science Coursework Essays Science Coursework Essay Science Coursework Essay For my science coursework I have been asked to carry out an experiment to investigate the strengths of different sodium hydroxide solutions. By the end of my experiment I would like to find out which solution would be the best antacid to overcome indigestion. Indigestion is when acid from your stomach flows back up the oesophagus. I will be testing three sodium hydroxide (Na) solutions which have varying strengths, they are labelled A, B and C. To investigate the strength of each alkali I will use 4 different methods to measure the solutions.Phenolphthalein indicator is added to the antacid to turn it pink. Acid is added to the alkali solution to neutralise it. The amount of Acid which is added to each solution will determine the strength ness of it. Neutralisation is an irreversible chemical reaction; this is when an acid is neutralised by an alkali. This kind of chemical reaction produces reactants which are water and salt. The formula for this is: Acid + Alkali Salt + Water.The e quation for this experiment will be:Hydrochloric Acid + Sodium HydroxideHCl (aq) +NaOH (aq) NaCl (aq) +H2O (l)Apparatus:1 x 250cm3 Beaker,1 x 200cm3 Beaker,Pipette Filler,Pipette,Conical Flask,Clamp,Clamp stand,Test tube,Test tube stand,Burette,Measuring cylinder.Sodium Hydroxide solutions A, B and C,Hydrochloric Acid,Phenolphthalein (Indicator),Water.Strategy:In order to make this experiment fair I will be using 4 different methods to measure the acid used to neutralise the antacid solution. I will be using test tubes, beakers, measuring cylinders and the burette/pipette. I will test the equipment to see which method produces the most accurate results. By the end of the experiment I will be able to identify which method is the best and therefore conclude which equipment formed the most precise outcomes.Method 1 (Test Tubes)1. Pour one test tube full of the Sodium Hydroxide into a beaker.2. Add few drops of indicator to turn it pink.3. Add little amounts of HCl from the test tubes, into the solution and wait until it turned colourless.4. Record how many test tubes of HCl it took for the solution to be neutralised.Conclusion of this method:By using this method I found it difficult to record the results accurately. I was unable to control my hand when the acid was being added to the alkali. This made my result unreliable because the correct readings werent taken as the solution turned colourless. Therefore I will not be assessing this strategy as there are many defects and creates unreliable results.Method 2 (Beakers)1. Pour 100cm3 of Sodium Hydroxide in to the smaller beaker.2. Add few drops of indicator to turn pink.3. Use the larger beaker to add the acid to the alkali. Wait till the solution turns colourless.4. Record how much HCl was added to the Sodium Hydroxide.Conclusion of this method:I think this strategy was reasonably reliable as there was more acid in the beaker than the test tube, so I was able to stop as soon as the solution went colourless. Howe ver due to human error I dont think I got completely accurate results. Also as the graduations on the beaker were more spread out, me and my group couldnt tell exactly how much HCl was added to the Sodium Hydroxide. We estimated most of the results for this method. Overall I think this method is undependable as the results wont reflect the true outcomes of the experiment, therefore I will not be assessing this strategy.Method 3 (Measuring cylinders)1. Pour 100cm3 of Sodium Hydroxide into the measuring cylinder.2. Add few drops of indicator to turn pink3. Pour 100cm3 HCl into a measuring cylinder.4. Add HCl to Sodium Hydroxide until it turns colourless. Then record how much HCl was used and take it away from 100cm3Conclusion of this method:I think this method was very accurate because of the amount of graduations of the measuring cylinders. I was able to tell exactly how much acid was needed to neutralise the solutions. This slightly closed the gap for human error as the graduations were more reliable. However, it was difficult to pour acid from one cylinder to the other, sometimes a few drops of solution fell outside the measuring cylinder. This minor problem could affect the outcome of my results, therefore I will not be using this method.Method 4 (Burette Pipette)1. Pour acid into smaller beaker. Pour Sodium Hydroxide into larger beaker.2. Pour acid into the burette up to 0.003. Using the pipette and pipette filler pour 25cm3 of Sodium Hydroxide into a conical flask.4. Add few drops of indicator to turn pink5. Turn the tap of the burette to pour the Acid into the conical flask. Wait till the solution goes colourless.Conclusion of this method:Because of the amount of gradients on the burette, I believe that this is the best method. My results were extremely reliable and I was able to obtain accurate results. There was very little room for human error as the tap enabled me to stop the acid as soon as the solution went colourless. So, I have decided to use thi s method because of the amount of accuracy.Experiment:Method 4 is the overall method I will use as I consider it to be the best experiment to find out which Antacid is the strongest.Here is how to carry out the experiment, step by step:1. Collect all the equipment which is neededs of antacid brands include Rennie and Mucogel, and many of the popular antacid brands contain a mixture of more than one active ingredient. However some antacids can create some Side-effects such as diarrhoea and constipation. Also some antacids contain an ingredient called which forms a barrier that floats on the top the stomach contents to prevent reflux.Evaluation Conclusion:From my results and calculations I think my experiment went well. I did as much as I could to try and make the experiment fair and accurate however it was inevitable that a gap would be open for human errors. During my experiment my group always changed the person who was recording the amount of acid needed and the role of turning t he tap when the solution turned colourless. This may have affected our results as different people observe things in different ways. Someone may have turned the tap too early or too late which would affect the outcome of our results. Also to make my results more firm, I could have repeated the experiment a few more times in order to get a range of results.Human error makes way for things such as, not rinsing out glassware properly, misreading the burette and not detecting the end point accurately. There are other methods that I could have tried out as well such as a pH meter. A pH meter is an electronic instrument used to measure the pH (acidity or alkalinity) of a liquid. A typical pH meter consists of a special measuring probe (a glass electrode) connected to an electronic meter that measures and displays the pH reading. This would have given me more accurate readings.However I think titrations was the best strategy out of all the methods I had tried. It was extremely accurate and only little mistakes could be made. Although I did find a few outliers during my experiment. The biggest outlier I found was the first titration of the whole expermint which was a rough one, the result outcome was 24.30cm whereas the other results were between 25.00-26.00. This may be because the equipment werent cleaned put properly or the results werent read accurately. To make my results even more accurate I could have redone them, however with such a small difference I did not feel that it was not necessary. If I wanted to have strong results I could repeat these experiments where there would not be any outliers whatsoever.In conclusion, I think I chose the finest method to find out which antacid is the best solution to cure indigestion according to the equipment which was available. I tested other strategies and came to a conclusion that they werent accurate enough. Using a burette and pipette, secured my results and made them extremely reliable. My experiment was carried out carefully and precisely in order to get a fair result. Overall I believe my experiment was triumphant, and by the end of it I found out which antacid successfully combats indigestion.