Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Notwithstanding above what is observed in common is that HR professionals with all their
good intent still create programs which intermix the concepts of Organizational Behavior. In
this particular thought paper I have tried to clarify how three widely used yet commonly
misunderstood concepts of ‘Motivation’, ‘Commitment’ and ‘Engagement’ are primarily
different from each other.
Motivation
What is: Motivation is energy behind attainment of a particular desire. As per Arnold J.
Robertson (Work Psychology, 1991) Motivation is a behavior that consists of:
1. Direction of desire
2. Effort for that attaining that desire
3. Persistence for attaining that desire
It is to be noted that it is variability of above 3 elements Direction, Efforts, Persistence that will
determine the direction & extent of Motivation in a person.
Theory: Motivation has been a part of numerous researches, experiments and studies. From
as old as Indian Scriptures like Vedas describing Motivation as basic desires which drives ego
to achieve intended results or Aristotle that it was "the real or the apparent good" of some
Famous theories which have left their impregnating effect on HR scenario are:
Observation: When surveys are conducted then high score in Motivators indicates that
employee takes that self-initiated steps or work an extra mile out of Commitment. High score
in Hygiene factor is just indicator that employee is not dissatisfied yet since high score
doesn’t add to Commitment by employee. While going through complete research of
Herzberg, readers will observe that this theory can be claimed as one of the first base on
which HR Departments initiated Job Enrichment and Intrinsic Motivation workshops.
Observation: It is to be noted that researches show that this hierarchy is not always strictly
followed and model itself appears to be inconsistent with same experiment repeated in society
based in Asian countries like India. It is also observed that needs at lower levels does not
disappear once a person is on higher level, making a person always vulnerable to variables of
environment.
Observation: Above 2 relationship spheres operates in different manner. It was found that
Communal Norm is more productive but highly susceptible to mutate into Exchange Norm
even if an iota of Exchange Norm is involved. These experiments indicate following
implications for HR:
i. Dependence on Monetary benefits only as a motivator leads to trade thinking only
without any increase in commitment, engagement or motivation as desired.
ii. Employees’ relatedness with their Organizations, Peers, Superiors and
Subordinates are Social Exchange. Social exchanges work best when kept away
from any type of monetary exchanges. Social Rewards, Appreciation and
Commitment work best when kept separated from any type of monetary benefit.
iii. Social Rewards are much better motivators than monetary rewards.
© Gaurav Kapil 2010, Pg: 4 of 8
Commitment
What is: Commitment refers to attachment and loyalty to a cause or to a role model. As per
Mowday, Porter (Employee-Organization Linkages, 1982) Commitment refers to 3
characteristics:
1) Desire to ‘remain’ a member of Organization.
2) Belief in & acceptance of values & goals of Organization.
3) Readiness to exert considerable effort on behalf of the Organization.
Observation: From above theory it is observed that ‘readiness to exert considerable effort’ is
what makes difference with respect to presence of commitment. However this readiness also
creates confusion often misquoted as employee engagement.
The problems with concept of Commitment especially when espoused by HR are as follows:
1) The measure of Commitment cannot be same for everyone, since organization is coalition
of different interest groups (Management, Union, IR Department, Finance, Operative units
etc.). The varying motivation of different interest groups brings up the question:
‘Commitment to What?’ (Power in and around Organizations by Mintzberg, 1983).
2) Author will place an argument that another problem with HR rational of Commitment is that
at any point of time people have multiple commitments, which are consistently changing
due to internal factors like new found interest, focus on society etc. and external factors
like change in policy, devaluation of currency etc. Individual behavior of an employee
therefore will keep changing due to intensities of these different multiple commitments.
3) When two separate areas that is “Commitment to What” and “Multiple Commitments” are
read together then one can observe that presence of ‘Direction of Commitment’ and
‘Intensity of Commitment’ makes linkage to performance a concern. As per D E Guest
(Personnel Management: The end of orthodoxy; British Journal of Industrial Relations, pp:
149-176, 1991) high organizational Commitment is associated with lower labour turnover
and absence, but there is no clear link to performance. That is to say high commitment
© Gaurav Kapil 2010, Pg: 5 of 8
does not lead to high performance on job. On a lighter note this is analogous to: High
Overtime does not necessarily mean High Productivity.
Application:
Commitment to Organization in itself may not lead to higher job performance, since individual
employee efforts are rarely visible in Big Picture of organizational performance. However
commitment to a cause of organization (or even a team) led by competent Leader should
show desired results i.e. direction given by Team Leader becomes sole guidance for directing
the efforts of committed employees in that team. This in turns also places important
observation that when HR is basing its program and planning on commitment then following is
to be kept in mind:
i. Employee to be committed to Team and Organization both.
a. Organizational commitment can also be built by better implementation of company
policies and practices.
b. Team commitment can be built by allowing people to affiliate more.
ii. Team commitment and thereby team results are dependent on Team leader.
Engagement
What is: Engagement is said to be present when an employee displays positive discretionary
behaviors and efforts towards completion of the job. This can be understood as below:
1. Discretion in behavior and efforts: A Person when chooses to perform an
action/behavior or chooses to not to perform an action/behavior is said to have exercised
discretion at his disposal.
3. Intensity of Positive Discretion in behavior and efforts: It is the extra mile which an
employee is willing to walk for completion of his job defines the presence of engagement.
L
y
n
.a
ls
m
t
k
u
A high intensity of positive discretion actions assures that seemingly long stuck issues get
resolved.
Following matrix should difference between Engagement and Commitment clearer.
ow
H L
ig
Engagement,
High Engagement,
Low Commitment
ow
h Eng
En gag
ag
Low Commitment
Excited
Nontifies
Ide
Ide
Excited
fo rrest
ntifies
Job.
g:nynew
himse
himse
for
emen
oldAtimgrers
bothered
bothered
men
f
l
adestu
f
l
t,
Hig h Co mmitment
No inte
Low Engagement
Courtesy: pp: 337, Armstrong’s Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice, 11 th Ed., 2009
O fficer
ck in rtheir
ightly
Observation: Above matrix brings out two points to be observed as below:
1. High Commitment may not always lead to job engagement, yet it is than low commitment.
or lei s.
ro nted
for
2. A highly productive employee may not necessarily be attuned to Corporation. In worst
case scenarios such an employee shall resign or display hyper competitiveness damaging
Employer.
work environment.
© Gaurav Kapil 2010, Pg: 7 of 8
Application: As per research by IDS, London (HR Studies Update, 2007a) there are 2
elements which are present in any genuine engagement:
1. Rational Aspect: This aspect talks about employee’s rational understanding of their roles,
work itself, fitment of work with Business, economy oriented issues etc.
2. Emotional Aspect: This aspect talks about employee’s feelings of their roles, work-value
alignment, relationships etc.
It is to be noted that both of above aspects shall overlap at many times e.g. work itself is
source of rational thought as a economic cycle, also it is related to confidence of employee.
Finally, analysis by V Vroom (Work & Motivation, 1964) indicated that it is High Performance
that leads to Job Satisfaction i.e. a productive worker need not be satisfied worker and a
satisfied worker need not be a productive worker. That is also to say Organizations can
now base decision that:
i. Job Engagement is about Work or Job itself
a. Giving an individual a job, which she likes, is creating Employee Engagement.
b. Training her to do her Job better is better Engagement.
c. Creating Environment which enables her to do her Job better is better Engagement.
d. Letting her do the Job where she can succeed is Job Engagement.
e. Ideally, a job should irresistible that employee finds solace in his job (musicians,
artists etc).
ii. Job Engagement is NOT about
a. If Employee doesn’t like his ‘Job’ then engagement cannot be found, even if his
performance is superior.
b. Breaking rhythms of work (micromanaging), interruptions in work (meetings!),
dictating that is ‘factors which lead to a feeling in an individual that one will not be
able to do her job to her own satisfaction is losing engagement’.
c. Learning opportunities on the job may or may not increase engagement.
Gaurav Kapil
MBA (HR): MDI, Gurgaon
© Gaurav Kapil 2010, Pg: 8 of 8
Electronics & Communication Engineer: OIST-RGTU
Graphologist: KIT