Motivation

  

The focus of this week’s reading is motivation.  We are all familiar with the idea of motivation, but I am sure you are beginning to realize that it is not a “one size fits all” process.  Finding a way to motivate a group of individuals can be a challenge!  What motivates you to perform well?  Does your manager motivate you, or are there company policies that motivate you?  Maybe you motivate yourself.  If you find that you cannot answer these questions, what could your company do to increase your motivation?  While you are not required to formally cite your sources within the forum, you should make sure that you are incorporating information from the readings into your responses.  Your responses should clearly show that you have read the material.

Minimum of 300 words in APA format. The material, citings, and references only come from the attached readings

Age-Related Work Motivation Declines: Myth or Reality?

Thomas J. Calo
Salisbury University

Meredith M. Patterson

Salisbury University

Wayne H. Decker
Salisbury University

Actual and widely assumed age-related work motivation changes are differentiated. Self-rated extrinsic
motivation (compensation and recognition) of university alumni decreased as respondent age increased,
while intrinsic motivation (challenge and task enjoyment) did not vary with age. As respondent age
increased, ratings of older workers’ intrinsic motivation increased, but older workers’ perceived
extrinsic motivation did not vary. Younger respondents (under 50) consistently rated themselves higher
than older workers, while older respondents did so only on challenge and recognition motivation.
Interventions to reduce age stereotypes should be directed at workers of all ages.

INTRODUCTION

Various trends have contributed to an increased presence of older workers in the work force. Among
the most significant of the contributing factors are the aging of the large cohort of baby boomers,
increasing life expectancy, and difficult economic times (Feldman & Turnley, 1995; Loi & Shultz, 2007;
Pienta & Hayward, 2002; Purcell, 2009). As workers grow older, changes occur biologically and
psychosocially that pose unforeseen and unique challenges for organizations. Traditional assumptions of
work and workers often fail to incorporate an understanding of age-related changes on older workers and
on the organizational policies and practices that affect them. While some research studies have focused
on the reasons older workers continue to hold a job (e.g., Dendinger, Adams, & Jacobson, 2005; Higgs,
Ferrie, Hyde, & Nazroo, 2003; Lord, 2002), this study investigated workers’ motives as a function of
age, as well as perceptions held of older workers (cf., Kanfer & Ackerman, 2004; Lang & Carstensen,
2002; Paynter, 2004).

Older Worker Stereotypes

With the growing number and percentage of older workers in the work force a fundamental issue for
both organizations and older workers is the prevalence of negative stereotypes concerning older worker
job performance and work-related motives (Posthuma & Campion, 2009). Cuddy and Fiske (2002, p. 4)
defined stereotypes as “cognitive structures that store our beliefs and expectations about the
characteristics of members of social groups”, and stereotyping as “the process of applying stereotypic

96 Journal of Organizational Psychology vol. 14(1) 2014

information”. Stereotypes of older workers are reflective of the widespread societal stereotypes of older
persons. According to Lawrence (1988), members of a social system develop age norms, which are
widely shared judgments as to the expected ages of individuals holding each role or status. Whether
accurate or not, they influence how information guides our behavior in situations such as judging an
employee’s suitability for a promotion. Ageism is not limited to bias against older persons. For example,
bias against Millennials (born between 1979 and 1994) has been found in the workplace (Myers &
Sadaghiani, 2010). Nonetheless, negative stereotypes of older persons appear to be especially prevalent.

Although there are some positive stereotypes of older persons, including as being perceived as
having better interpersonal skills (Rosen & Jerdee, 1977), as being more reliable (Metcalf & Thompson,
1990; McGregor & Gray, 2002), and as being more experienced (Finkelstein, Higgins, & Clancy, 2000)
than younger workers, negative perceptions seem to be more pervasive. Common negative beliefs about
older workers relate to their ability and desire to learn and develop at work, as well as their overall
motivation. Rosen and Jerdee’s (1976b) respondents believed a 60-year-old had less development
potential than 30-year-old. Similarly, older adults were perceived as inferior in processing information
and accepting new technology (Rosen & Jerdee, 1976a), as well as in creativity and flexibility (Metcalf
& Thompson, 1990; Vrugt & Schabracq, 1996; Wood, Wilkinson, & Harcourt, 2008). Also, older
workers were viewed as less alert and less productive than other workers (Wood et al., 2008).
Furthermore, older workers were seen as more accident prone, less intelligent, and less decisive than
younger ones (Brosi & Kleiner, 1999).

Despite the continuing existence of negative stereotypes of older workers’ motivation and
performance, such stereotypes are largely unfounded. From an extensive meta-analysis of 96
independent studies on age-performance correlations, McEvoy and Cascio (1989) concluded that age and
job performance were generally unrelated, regardless of the type of job or type of performance
measured. Similarly, Wood et al. (2008) determined that older workers usually perform at least as well
as younger workers. Furthermore, in reviewing more than 185 research studies on age-related differences
in various categories of work attributes and behavior, Rhodes (1983) found strong evidence that age is
typically positively associated with work satisfaction and motivation. In addition, older workers typically
have been found to have more favorable attitudes toward their jobs, including higher levels of
organizational commitment than younger workers (Brosi & Kleiner, 1999; Kalleberg & Loscocco, 1983;
Ng & Feldman, 2010; Rhodes, 1983). Kanfer and Ackerman (2004) suggested that, while aging is often
perceived as associated with decline, particularly in cognitive and intellectual capabilities, research has
demonstrated such assumptions to be simplistic and misleading. Yet, Cuddy, Norton, and Fiske (2005)
concluded prejudice against older persons continues to go unchallenged by mainstream society.

The current study sought to determine the prevalence of negative age stereotypes concerning older
workers’ motivation and to assess the degree to which those perceptions vary with respondent age.
Although negative age stereotyping is common among adults of all ages (Posthuma & Campion, 2009),
older adults generally have more positive views of older persons than do younger ones (Calo, Patterson,
& Decker, 2013; Kite, Deaux, & Miele, 1991; Kite, Stockdale, Whitley, & Johnson, 2005; Kluge &
Krings, 2008; Lyon & Pollard, 1997; Wentura & Brändstadter, 2003). These findings are consistent with
the Social Identity Theory proposition that people tend to maintain a positive self-image as a result of
evaluating their in-groups positively (Kite et al., 2005). On the other hand, a somewhat reverse process
may be occurring. The phenomenon may be reflective of externalization, i.e., respondents’ favorable
views of themselves impacting their stereotypes of similar-aged persons positively (Rothermund &
Brandtstädter, 2003).

Older Worker Motivation

Age stereotypes found in the workplace reflect not only negative attitudes toward older workers’
abilities, but also their motivations (Maurer, Barbeite, Weiss, & Lippstreu, 2008; Posthuma & Campion,
2009). After an extensive literature review, Kanfer and Ackerman (2004) concluded that as workers age
extrinsic rewards such as compensation become less attractive and intrinsic factors such as feelings of
accomplishment become more important in determining job satisfaction. The findings support the Life

Journal of Organizational Psychology vol. 14(1) 2014 97

Span Theory of Control which includes the notion that older persons shift their focus to situations they
have high control over (i.e., intrinsic rewards) and away from those over which they have less control
(i.e., extrinsic rewards) (Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995). However, results have not been consistent across
intrinsic motives. Kooij, de Lange, Jansen, and Dikkers (2008) concluded from their review that while
some intrinsic motives, such as desire to maintain a positive self-concept and to mentor others, increase
with age, achievement motivation and the desire to learn new things decrease with age. An extensive
meta-analysis has supported these assumptions (Kooij, de Lange, Jansen, Kanfer, & Dikkers, 2011).
Also, Linz (2004) found older workers in Russia to place a higher value on extrinsic rewards (e.g., pay
and friendliness of co-workers) than did younger workers. Furthermore, Paynter (2004) found older
teachers to exceed younger teachers in both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.

Apparently, neither all extrinsic nor all intrinsic motives change at the same points in one’s life. For
example, among intrinsic motives, the desire to learn new tasks may have declined for older workers
who, at the same time, may be experiencing an increased desire to mentor others, i.e., generativity (Kooij
et al., 2008; McAdams & de St. Aubin, 1992). Such motivational changes are consistent with
Socioemotional Selectivity Theory which posits that persons sensing that their time is running out focus
increasingly on near-term goals (Carstensen, Isaacowitz, & Charles, 1999; Lang & Carstensen, 2002).

Two extrinsic and two intrinsic motives have been measured with the Work Preference Inventory
(WPI) (Amabile, Hill, Hennessey, & Tighe, 1994). This instrument consists of a series of rating scales in
which extrinsic motivation is subdivided into an “Outward Scale” (recognition) and a “Compensation
Scale” and intrinsic motivation is subdivided into an “Enjoyment Scale” and a “Challenge Scale.” Using
an adaptation of the WPI designed to apply to sales jobs, Miao, Lund, and Evans (2009) found decreases
in one intrinsic motive (challenge motivation) and one extrinsic motive (compensation motivation)
across career stages (not age per se). It would seem to be in the interest of organizations to determine
whether managers and co-workers of older workers understand age-related changes in work motivation
or if these persons tend to hold negative age stereotypes that are contrary to reality.

Comparisons of self-rated motives with ratings of older workers in general could potentially yield
additional insight into the extent of age stereotypes. While, as noted above, some studies have found that
older persons generally view themselves more positively than they view “typical” older persons, there is
also evidence that older persons’ self-perceptions are influenced in the direction of negative age
stereotypes (Bennett & Gaines, 2010; Pinquart, 2002; Rothermund & Brandtstädter, 2003). Some
persons may internalize stereotypes such that they come to believe that because they are old, they must
fit the stereotype (Bennett & Gaines, 2010). Personality differences may determine the direction in
which and the extent to which an older person’s self-perception is influenced by negative age stereotypes
(Rothermund & Brandtstädter, 2003). In a longitudinal study of persons 54 and older, respondents had
more positive views of themselves than the “typical old person” (Rothermund & Brandtstädter, 2003).
While they held strong negative age stereotypes, as they got older most evaluated the typical old person
less negatively. The authors interpreted this to be reflective of externalization, i.e., respondents’
favorable views of themselves positively impacted their stereotypes of similar-aged persons. In another
study respondents’ (age 60 and older) self-perceptions improved after receipt of negative information
about competence in old age. This was interpreted as supporting Resilience (Comparison) Theory, the
notion that one’s self-concept improves when one encounters evidence that he/she is superior to
somewhat similar persons (Pinquart, 2002). In other words, the assumption is that we evaluate ourselves
relative to what we consider normal for our age group. If our perception of normal becomes more
negative, we will then look better to ourselves.

This study assesses the prevalence of negative age stereotypes regarding four specific work-related
motives (two intrinsic and two extrinsic motives) and endeavors to ascertain perceptions of older
workers’ motives as a function of respondent age. Respondents’ self-ratings and perceptions of older
workers’ motives will be compared across a broad range of respondent ages. The inclusion of self-
perception measures will facilitate the distinction of any true age-related motivational changes from
those that are only assumed.

98 Journal of Organizational Psychology vol. 14(1) 2014

Hypotheses

Since the majority of studies reviewed, including one using the WPI, have found motivation for

compensation to decline with age (e.g., Kanfer & Ackerman, 2004; Miao et al., 2009), we expected to
obtain the same result.

Hypothesis 1. It was predicted that the compensation motive would be negatively related
to respondent age.

Since the majority of studies reviewed, including one using the WPI, have found motivation for

challenging work to decline with age (e.g., Kooij et al., 2008; Miao et al., 2009), we expected to obtain
the same result.

Hypothesis 2. It was predicted that the challenge motive would be negatively related to
respondent age.

Based on past research discussed above which found older persons viewed “the typical older person”

more positively with respect to a wide variety of attributes than did younger persons, we expected to find
perceptions of older workers’ work-motivation levels would be positively related to respondent age.

Hypothesis 3. It was predicted that older respondents would have more favorable views
of older workers’ challenge, task enjoyment, recognition, and compensation motives
than younger respondents would have of them.

We expected that age stereotypes would be pervasive among all age groups. Therefore, we expected

that employed persons of all ages would have a self-concept such that they would consider themselves as
more motivated than the typical older worker. However, it was expected that the difference would be
greater for younger workers than for older ones.

Hypothesis 4. It was predicted that respondents of all ages would perceive themselves as
superior to older workers with respect to all extrinsic and intrinsic motives measured.

Hypothesis 5. It was predicted that respondent age would moderate the relationship
between self-ratings and older worker ratings such that the magnitude of the difference
would be negatively associated with respondent age.

Overall, the hypotheses reflect the expectation that age stereotypes for recognition and task

enjoyment motivation are more likely than for compensation and challenge motivation. This is the case
since the former two motives are not expected to actually decrease with age, but respondents are
expected to perceive all motives as doing so. It was also expected that younger respondents would
exhibit stereotypes to a greater extent than would older respondents.

METHOD

Respondents

Surveys were mailed to 1050 business school alumni of Salisbury University. The addressees
included thirty randomly selected graduates from each of the years 1975 through 2009. Thirty-nine
surveys were returned as undeliverable. 241 completed surveys were returned, yielding a return rate of
23.8% of those surveys assumed to have been delivered. 239 surveys were usable. This sample included
142 males, 96 females, and one transgendered/transsexual respondent. Among the 236 respondents
answering the birth-date item, the range of ages was 24 through 70 years, the median respondent age was
42.5 years.

Journal of Organizational Psychology vol. 14(1) 2014 99

Materials and Procedure
Thirteen demographic questions were followed by a survey consisting of 52 items. The items

relevant to this report were 24 items comprising two different shortened versions (12 items each) of the
WPI adapted from Miao and Evans (2007) and modified to apply to all jobs, not just sales jobs. The two
versions each consisted of four 3-item scales measuring perceived challenge, task enjoyment,
compensation, and recognition motivation. One version elicited self-ratings, while the other set prompted
respondents to rate older workers with respect to the same characteristics. Items were modified, for each
rating task, such that each item in the first set contained the word “I” (e.g., “I am strongly motivated by
the money I can earn through my job” and “I enjoy trying to solve complex problems”), while the phrase
“older workers” appeared in the corresponding positions of the second set (e.g., “Older workers are
strongly motivated by the money they can earn through their job” and “Older workers enjoy trying to
solve complex problems”).

Participants were asked to rate the degree to which they agreed or disagreed with each statement on
a 7-point Likert scale (strongly agree to strongly disagree). Although order effects are generally small in
research comparing self- and group- ratings, self-ratings always preceded the ratings of older workers in
order to prevent any possible stereotype effects on self-ratings that might occur if the self-ratings were
done following the older worker ratings (Rothermund & Brandtstädter, 2003).

RESULTS

Scale Reliabilities

All 8 scales used (4 rating one’s self and 4 rating older workers) yielded reliability coefficients
(Cronbach’s alpha) exceeding the commonly accepted standard of .70 (Hair, Anderson, Tatham, &
Black, 1998). The Cronbach alphas, means, standard deviations, and bivariate correlations of the self-
rating scales and the older worker scales are presented in Table 1.

TABLE 1
SCALE RELIABILITIES, MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATIONS, AND BIVARIATE

CORRELATIONS: SELF-RATINGS, OLDER WORKER RATINGS,
AND DEMOGRAPHICS

Correlations

Cronbach’s
Variable α M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1. Gendera 1.60 .50
2. Formal education 6.31 .49 .00
3. Positionb .54 .50 .14* -.03
4. Age 42.43 11.18 .09 .02 .23‡
5. Challenge-Sc .91 5.72 1.15 .12 .05 .08 -.10
6. Task enjoyment-S .82 5.34 1.22 -.21† .01 -.10 -.01 .28‡
7. Compensation-S .79 5.17 1.24 .13* .03 .03 -.27‡ .30‡ .24‡
8. Recognition-S .81 4.78 1.39 -.08 -.07 -.07 -.16* .16* .31‡ .51‡
9. Challenge-OWd .92 4.25 1.30 .05 .06 .06 .31‡ .24‡ .16* .07 -.09
10. Task enjoyment-OW .82 4.93 1.21 -.11 -.05 .03 .26‡ .15* .47‡ .16* .15* .39‡
11. Compensation-OW .81 4.50 1.19 -.11 -.04 -.02 -.08 .11 .19† .36‡ .24‡ .27‡ .27‡
12. Recognition-OW .87 4.25 1.27 -.04 -.13* .02 .06 .03 .19† .22‡ .45‡ .21† .39‡ .54‡
____________________________________________________________________________________________

aFemale = 1, Male = 2
bManager = 1, Non-manager = 0
cSelf
dOlder Workers
*p < .05, †p < .01, ‡p < .001 n = 239

100 Journal of Organizational Psychology vol. 14(1) 2014

Self-Ratings
Regression analyses included three variables for control purposes. One control variable was gender.

Several studies have found small differences in the direction of males holding slightly stronger age
stereotypes than females (e.g., Bodner, Bergman, & Cohen-Fridel, 2012; Chiu, Chan, Snape, & Redman,
2001; Kalavar, 2001; Rupp, Vodanovich, & Credé, 2005), although under some conditions gender and
ageism have been found to be unrelated (Lin, Bryant, & Boldero, 2011). Formal education level was also
controlled since it is likely that age and formal education are significantly related due either to
differences in time available for educational achievements or to societal changes over time. Position
(manager or non-manager) was controlled because some studies have shown this variable to be
associated with the likelihood of age stereotyping (e.g., Chiu et al., 2001; Kirchner & Dunnette, 1954).
Age, the independent variable and only continuous variable included in the regression analyses, was
centered in order to reduce the likelihood of multicollinearity.

Both types of self-rated extrinsic motivation decreased as respondent age increased. Neither type of
intrinsic motivation varied with respondent age. Therefore, Hypothesis 1, which predicted that
compensation motivation would be negatively related to respondent age, was supported and Hypothesis
2, that challenge motivation would be negatively related to respondent age, was not. The regression
results for self-rated intrinsic and extrinsic motivation appear in Table 2.

TABLE 2
REGRESSION ANALYSES WITH STANDARDIZED BETA COEFFICIENTS AND

VARIANCE ACCOUNTED FOR (R2): SELF-REPORTED MOTIVES

Dependent variable

Challenge
orientation

Task
enjoyment

Compensation
orientation

Recognition
orientation

Gendera .11 -.19† .14* -.06
Formal education .04 .00 .03 -.08
Positionb .09 -.10 .07 -.02
Age -.12 .03 -.30‡ -.15*

R2 .03 .05 .10 .04
aFemale = 1, Male = 2
bManager = 1, Non-manager = 0
*p < .05, †p < .01, ‡p < .001; n = 234

Perceptions of Older Workers

On all measures, older respondents rated older workers as high as or higher than did younger
respondents. As the age of the respondent increased, both types of intrinsic motivation were perceived as
higher for older workers. Perceived older worker extrinsic motivation did not vary with respondent age.
Therefore, Hypothesis 3, that older respondents would have more favorable views of older workers’
motivation than would younger ones, was partially supported. The regression results for perceived older-
worker motivation are in Table 3.

Self-Ratings vs. Perceptions of Older Workers

For each of the four motive types the general linear model (GLM) technique (Norusis, 2012) was
used to compare the respondents’ self-ratings to their perceptions of older workers and to determine
whether respondent age moderated the relationships. Self-rated challenge motivation (M = 5.71, SD =
1.15) exceeded older worker challenge motivation ratings (M = 4.25, SD = 1.30, f[1, 234] = 246.58, p < .001). The interaction of rating type and respondent age was significant (f[1, 234] = 29.74, p < .001). As shown in Table 1, self-rated challenge motivation did not correlate with respondent age, but the

Journal of Organizational Psychology vol. 14(1) 2014 101

perceived challenge motivation of older workers increased with respondent age. Therefore, the
difference between self-ratings and older worker ratings was negatively related to respondent age.

TABLE 3
REGRESSION ANALYSES WITH STANDARDIZED BETA COEFFICIENTS AND

VARIANCE ACCOUNTED FOR (R2): RESPONDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF
OLDER WORKERS’ MOTIVES

Dependent variable

Challenge
orientation
Task
enjoyment
Compensation
orientation
Recognition
orientation

Gendera .00 -.13* -.12 -.08
Formal education .04 -.06 -.06 -.15*
Positionb .00 -.04 .02 .02
Age .31‡ .28‡ -.07 .07

R2 .10 .09 .02 .03
aFemale = 1, Male = 2
bManager = 1, Non-manager = 0
*p < .05, †p < .01, ‡p < .001; n = 234

Self-rated task enjoyment motivation (M = 5.33, SD = 1.22) exceeded older worker task enjoyment
motivation ratings (M = 4.92, SD = 1.20, f[1, 234] = 26.80, p < .001). The interaction of rating type and respondent age was significant (f[1, 234] = 16.99, p < .001). Self-rated task enjoyment motivation did not correlate with respondent age, but perceived older worker task enjoyment motivation increased with respondent age (see Table 1). Therefore, the difference between self-ratings and older worker ratings was negatively related to respondent age.

Self-rated compensation motivation (M = 5.17, SD = 1.23) exceeded older worker compensation
motivation ratings (M = 4.51, SD = 1.18, f[1, 234] = 56.02, p < .001). The interaction of rating type and respondent age was significant (f[1, 234] = 7.17, p < .01). As shown in Table 1, self-rated compensation motivation was negatively related to respondent age, but the perceived compensation motivation of older workers did not correlate with respondent age. Therefore, the difference between self-ratings and older worker ratings was negatively related to respondent age.

Self-rated recognition motivation (M = 4.79, SD = 1.38) exceeded perceived older worker
recognition motivation (M = 4.25, SD = 1.28, f[1, 234] = 37.16, p < .001). The interaction of rating type and respondent age was significant (f[1, 234] = 11.37, p < .001). As shown in Table 1, self-rated recognition motivation was negatively related to respondent age, but perceived older worker recognition motivation and respondent age were not correlated. Therefore, the difference between self-ratings and older worker ratings was negatively related to respondent age.

The significant main effects of the rating type variable upon all four motivational variables provide
some support for Hypothesis 4, that respondents would perceive themselves as superior to older workers.
Hypothesis 5, that the magnitude of the difference would be negatively associated with respondent age,
was also supported, as indicated by the nature of the four interactions of rating type with respondent age.

Paired t-tests compared the younger (under 50 years of age) and older respondents’ self-ratings to
their perceptions of older workers. Kooij et al. (2008) noted that in studies of labor market participation,
ages 50 or 55 are typically considered the boundary between younger and older workers. In the present
study, 50 was chosen since it yielded twice the older respondent sample size that 55 did. (The results
were virtually the same regardless of which age cut-off used.) As shown in Table 4, younger respondents
rated themselves higher on all four dimensions than they rated older workers. On the other hand, while
older respondents rated themselves higher than they rated older workers on the challenge and
compensation motivation dimensions, the differences with respect to task enjoyment motivation and

102 Journal of Organizational Psychology vol. 14(1) 2014

recognition orientation were not significant. Therefore, Hypothesis 4, that respondents of all ages would
perceive themselves as superior to older workers, was only partially supported.

TABLE 4
PAIRED t-TESTS: RESPONDENTS’ SELF-RATINGS

VERSUS PERCEPTIONS OF OLDER WORKERS
___________________________________________________________________________
Age group Self-ratings Older worker ratings
Dimension Mean SD Mean SD df t
___________________________________________________________________________
Younger (under 50) respondents
Challenge orientation 5.77 1.14 4.02 1.26 161 13.92‡
Task enjoyment 5.31 1.21 4.76 1.18 161 5.18‡
Compensation orientation 5.33 1.17 4.57 1.17 161 6.76‡
Recognition orientation 4.93 1.33 4.18 1.24 161 6.51‡

Older (50 and over) respondents
Challenge orientation 5.58 1.15 4.73 1.26 73 6.55‡
Task enjoyment 5.35 1.27 5.26 1.17 73 .85
Compensation orientation 4.81 1.29 4.39 1.21 73 3.12†
Recognition orientation 4.49 1.46 4.41 1.34 73 .64
___________________________________________________________________________
*p < .05, †p < .01, ‡p < .001 DISCUSSION Theoretical Implications

This study is consistent with others in that the attractiveness of the extrinsic rewards investigated
was negatively related to age (Kanfer & Ackerman, 2004). These findings support the Life Span Theory
of Control assumption that aging is accompanied by a decrease in desire to seek rewards that are
externally controlled (Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995) and also, the Socioemotional Selectivity Theory
view that older persons shift their orientations away from rewards involving delayed gratification
(Carstensen et al., 1999; Lang & Carstensen, 2002). However, the predicted increased emphasis upon
internally controlled and immediately available rewards among older workers was not observed, as
intrinsic motivation did not vary with age.

The study demonstrates that some negative age stereotypes continue to persist among workers of all
ages. We found that younger respondents generally held more negative views of older workers than did
older respondents, as on all measures the younger respondents rated older workers as low as or lower
than did older respondents. These findings are consistent with both Social Identity Theory, which
contends that people evaluate their in-groups positively in order to maintain positive self-images (Kite et
al., 2005) and the concept of externalization, i.e., respondents’ favorable views of themselves impact
their stereotypes of similar-aged persons positively (Rothermund & Brandtstädter, 2003). Nonetheless,
older respondents also appeared to exhibit some negative age stereotyping. Overall, the respondents
appeared to have particularly strong negative age stereotypes regarding older workers’ motivation for
challenging work, at least relative to the other motives studied. Both the younger and older respondent
groups perceived themselves as being more challenge oriented than “typical” older workers. This
occurred despite the fact that self-reported challenge orientation did not decline significantly with age.
The discrepancy between the current study and those that found a decline in challenge motivation with
age (Kanfer & Ackerman, 2004) may be due to our sample being highly educated (college graduates),
and therefore, possibly higher than average in achievement motivation. Younger, but not older,

Journal of Organizational Psychology vol. 14(1) 2014 103

respondents also exhibited age stereotypes with respect to task enjoyment motivation by rating older
workers lower than they rated themselves.

As expected, the compensation motive was negatively related to respondent age. Therefore, the
perception by the younger respondents that older workers’ compensation motivation is lower than their
own has a basis in fact. Interpretation of the older respondents’ views would seem to depend on whether
the older respondents perceived themselves to be older workers. If they perceived themselves to be
younger than older workers, the older respondents also would be justified in rating themselves higher.
However, if they perceived themselves to be old, they exhibited a stereotypical view of their own
contemporaries’ compensation motivation.

As was the case with compensation motivation, younger respondents seem justified in perceiving
their own recognition motivation as greater than that of older workers, since self-reported recognition
motivation also was negatively related to age. Older respondents, however, did not perceive their own
recognition motivation to differ from that of older workers. If they viewed themselves as old, older
respondents were correct in this assessment. If they perceived themselves as younger than older workers,
they actually judged older workers more favorably with respect to motivation for recognition, relative to
themselves, than they should have.

As noted above, older respondents generally viewed older workers less negatively than did younger
respondents. However, older respondents certainly did not see themselves as identical in motivation to
the “typical” older worker. As purported by Resilience Theory (Pinquart, 2002), they may have seen
themselves as superior to their contemporaries in some ways, perhaps as a result of past comparisons of
themselves with others. On the other hand, they may not feel they are as old as the “typical” older
worker. Alternatively, older workers may believe they are exceptional relative to their contemporaries in
some ways, but not in others.

Implications for Practice

The negative stereotypes of older workers were striking, especially with regard to challenge
motivation. This poses potential concerns for organizations and older persons who work in them.
Stereotypes can influence the way managers and younger workers treat their older colleagues (Hassell &
Perrewe, 1993; Mauer et al., 2008). Managerial attitudes toward older workers will inevitably affect
work-related practices such as hiring, promotion, and training opportunities. Rosen and Jerdee (1976a)
suggested that older workers may lose work motivation due to perceiving managerial bias. Stereotypes,
therefore, can be seen as resulting in self-fulfilling prophesies (Livingston, 1969) or the internalization of
stereotypes (Bennett & Gaines, 2010). Also, people’s fear of being judged on the basis of a negative
stereotype (stereotype threat) can lead to anxiety, which may affect performance (Steele & Aronson,
1995).

We suggest that organizational policies and practices must meet the challenges associated with an
aging workforce. Allport’s (1954) Contact Hypothesis proposed that increased exposure to stereotyped
persons would lessen stereotyping. Although some studies have obtained supporting evidence (e.g.,
Stoker, Van der Velde, & Lammers, 2012), findings are generally not encouraging with respect to the
likelihood that age stereotypes will change through normal daily encounters with older individuals (Chiu
et al., 2001; Henkens, 2005; Hewstone & Brown, 1986). It should not be surprising that beliefs do not
always change even when evidence seems to warrant it (Weber & Crocker, 1983). Research
demonstrates that people can easily justify the belief that evidence against a negative stereotype does not
disconfirm it (Kunda & Oleson, 1995). Furthermore, Loretto, Duncan, and White (2000) concluded that
even though enlightened attitudes regarding age and employment issues were found among business
students, the attitudes will likely become more negative if they later work in discriminating
organizational cultures. Our findings, along with previous research, suggest two distinct but interrelated
steps must be taken by organizations to adapt successfully to the realities of an aging workforce.

104 Journal of Organizational Psychology vol. 14(1) 2014

Dispel Negative Age Stereotypes
Negative age stereotypes are deeply embedded within the cultures of most organizations. We expect

that these stereotypes will inevitably result in discriminatory treatment of older workers in a wide range
of organizational domains, including hiring, promotion, work assignments, and developmental
opportunities. As Taylor and Walker’s (1998) findings suggest, in order for disadvantageous
employment practices to be changed, negative age stereotypes held by managers need to first be
overcome. Sterns and Miklos (1995) concluded that sensitizing managers to aging and work issues is as
important as changing organizational systems.

Although our study confirmed the widespread belief that some motives of older workers decline with
age, intrinsic motivation did not change. Therefore, we argue that older workers are differently motivated
rather than less motivated. Appropriate treatment of older workers is likely to be enhanced through
organizational strategies that incorporate an understanding of the patterns of adult development. Adults
experience stages of life dominated by differing life tasks and priorities (Erikson, 1950). For example, in
midlife and beyond, generativity (concern for sustaining and guiding the present and succeeding
generations) becomes a more powerful motivator (Erikson, 1950, 1964). Understanding the differences
in motivation between older and younger employees will better prepare organizations to accommodate
their workforce through effective policies and practices. Consequently, we suggest that organizations
develop a required managerial training process on psychosocial development, with a particular focus on
the impact on workers as they age.

Various methods may be effective in dispelling negative age stereotypes. For example, sensitivity to
the needs of older workers may be further enhanced if training programs include role playing (Tausch &
Hewstone, 2010). Redesigning job responsibilities, for example by providing opportunities for serving as
mentors, could be beneficial both to organizations as well as to older workers. Job responsibilities that
include mentoring will likely not only increase motivation, but also provide opportunities for older
workers to transfer their knowledge and skills to younger persons. Mentoring can also serve to expose
younger workers to older workers and, perhaps, reduce stereotyping. Although increased contact with
older workers does not eliminate all stereotypes (Chiu et al., 2001; Henkens, 2005), it may result in
younger workers having more positive attitudes regarding older workers’ productivity (Henkens, 2005).

Create a Supportive Climate for Older Workers

Changing embedded attitudes is a necessary step toward effectively employing older workers, but
this step alone is insufficient to ultimately change behavior toward older workers. Also required is a
systematic review and adaptation of organizational policies and practices to incorporate consideration of
the age-specific needs of workers. While many of the policies and practices of organizations regarding
older workers are designed to avoid age discrimination lawsuits, policies must be designed to proactively
provide for the needs of an aging workforce. Strategies already being effectively utilized to
accommodate working mothers and others may also be viable for an aging workforce. Such policies
include flexible schedules, compressed workweeks, and job sharing. Older workers who may want to
continue working, but on a more restricted basis, may benefit from a phased retirement strategy with
which retirement is a gradual transition rather than an abrupt end to one’s job. Most of these concepts are
not new, but need to be utilized in a focused strategy for accommodating the unique needs of older
workers.

Maurer et al. (2002) suggested that a continuous development orientation on the part of older
workers is enhanced when supervisors and co-workers provide a supportive learning environment. There
is empirical evidence that the perceived support from managers and co-workers positively influences
employee participation in development activities (Maurer & Tarulli, 1994). To strengthen the
development motives of older workers, Kooij et al. (2008) advocated that managers should ensure that
older workers have jobs in which they can achieve a sense of accomplishment. We believe our suggested
actions will reduce the risk of loss of older workers, while at the same time maximizing older worker
productivity while they continue to work. In short, we suggest that by addressing the physical and

Journal of Organizational Psychology vol. 14(1) 2014 105

psychosocial needs of aging workers, organizations can more effectively retain, motivate, and utilize
them.

Limitations

One limitation of the current study is that no attempt was made to define “older worker.” Rather,
respondents responded to their own perception of what constitutes an older worker. While our approach
has the advantage that all respondents expressed their attitudes toward hypothetical workers that they
actually consider old, future research might consider assessing respondents’ stereotypes of various given
ages. Such research may help to determine the ages at which respondents perceive age to become a
performance-related factor.

An additional limitation is that the sample was taken only of alumni from one university business
school. Also, while the respondents work in a wide range of organizations and job categories, they are
above average in educational achievement and are concentrated primarily in professional positions. It
may be that highly educated professional workers have different expectations of performance for older
workers than do workers with different educational backgrounds or workers in non-professional
occupations.

Additional types of extrinsic and intrinsic motives should be studied. Although neither intrinsic
motive included in the present study varied with respondent age and both were subject to some age
stereotyping, others such as the motive for generativity have been previously been found to increase with
age (Lang & Carstensen, 2002; McAdams, de St. Aubin, & Logan, 1993) and may elicit positive age
stereotypes. It would be of interest to determine the extent to which younger workers recognize
generativity motivation in older workers. One reason is that the success of older persons as leaders is
affected by their level of generativity (Zacher, Rosing, Henning, & Frese, 2011). It seems likely that
younger persons recognizing generativity motivation in leaders influences leader success.

Finally, future studies may focus on employees in specific organizations and compare different types
of organizations. Organizational culture has a powerful influence on employee perceptions and
behaviors. The study of employees in a single organization may more clearly assess organizational
culture’s impact on older workers. Also, researchers and human resource professionals should
collaborate to study the impact of specific organizational policies and practices on older worker
motivation, job performance, and retention.

Conclusion

Given the aging of the workforce, organizational leaders and researchers need to be concerned about
the impact of aging on work-related factors such as motivation and job performance. Organizations may
be reluctant to utilize and develop older workers if they believe such persons are unmotivated, resistant
to accepting challenges, and lacking in up-to-date skills. It is not that older workers are typically
unmotivated, but rather, extrinsic rewards become less effective as workers age. Therefore, organizations
must rely more on intrinsic rewards to bring out the best in older workers. Negative age stereotypes are
likely to lead to discriminatory practices and dysfunctional relationships among co-workers resulting in
the underutilization of older workers’ skills and experience. Intervention attempts to reduce age
stereotypes must be directed at workers of all ages, not just younger ones.

REFERENCES

Allport, G. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Amabile, T. M., Hill, K. G., Hennessey, B. A., & Tighe, E. M. (1994). The Work Preference Inventory:

Assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 66(5), 950-967.

Bennett, T., & Gaines, J. (2010). Believing what you hear: The impact of aging stereotypes upon the old.
Educational Gerontology, 36, 435-445.

106 Journal of Organizational Psychology vol. 14(1) 2014

Bodner, E., Bergman, Y. S., & Cohen-Fridel, S. (2012). Different dimensions of ageist attitudes among
men and women: A multigenerational perspective. International Psychogeriatrics, 24(6), 895-
901.

Brosi, G., & Kleiner, B. H. (1999). Is age a handicap in finding employment? Equal Opportunities
International, 18(5-6), 100-104.

Calo, T. J., Patterson, M. M., & Decker, W. H. (2013). Employee perceptions of older workers’
motivation in business, academia, and government. International Journal of Business and Social
Science, 4(2), 1-10.

Carstensen, L. L., Isaacowitz, D. M., & Charles, S. T. (1999). Taking time seriously: A theory of
socioemotional selectivity. American Psychologist, 54(3), 165-181.

Chiu, W. C. K., Chan, A. W., Snape, E., & Redman, T. (2001). Age stereotypes and discriminatory
attitudes towards older workers: An East-West comparison. Human Relations, 54(5), 629-661.

Cuddy, A. J. C., & Fiske, S. T. (2002). Doddering but dear: Process, content, and function in
stereotyping of older persons. In T. D. Nelson (Ed.), Ageism: Stereotyping and prejudice against
older persons (pp. 3-26). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Cuddy, A. J. C., Norton, M. I., & Fiske, S. T. (2005). This old stereotype: The pervasiveness and
persistence of the elderly stereotype. Journal of Social Sciences, 61(2), 265-283.

Dendinger, V. M., Adams, G. A., & Jacobson, J. D. (2005). Reasons for working and their relationship
to retirement attitudes, job satisfaction and occupational self-efficacy of bridge employees.
International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 61(1), 21-35.

Erikson, E. H. (1950). Childhood and society. New York, NY: Norton.
Erikson, E. H. (1964). Insight and responsibility. New York, NY: Norton.
Feldman, D. C., & Turnley, W. H. (1995). Factors influencing intentions to retire: An empirical test of

theoretical propositions. Management Research News, 18(6-7), 28-45.
Finkelstein, L. M., Higgins, K. D., & Clancy, M. (2000). Justifications for ratings of old and young job

applicants: An exploratory content analysis. Experimental Aging Research, 26(3), 263-283.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.).

Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Hassell, B. L., & Perrewe, P. L. (1993). An examination of the relationship between older workers’

perceptions of age discrimination and employee psychological state. Journal of Managerial
Issues, 5(1), 109-120.

Heckhausen, J., & Schulz, R. (1995). A life-span theory of control. Psychological Review, 102(2), 284-
304.

Henkens, K. (2005). Stereotyping older workers and retirement: The managers’ point of view. Canadian
Journal on Aging, 24(4), 353-366.

Hewstone, M., & Brown, R. J. (1986). Contact is not enough: An intergroup perspective on the “contact
hypothesis”. In M. Hewstone & R. J. Brown (Eds.), Contact and conflict in intergroup
encounters (pp. 1-44). Oxford, England: Blackwell.

Higgs, P., Mein, G., Ferrie, J., Hyde, M., & Nazroo, J. (2003). Pathways to early retirement: Structure
and agency in decision-making among British civil servants. Ageing & Society, 23, 761-778.

Kalavar, J. M. (2001). Examining ageism: Do male and female college students differ? Educational
Gerontology, 27(6), 507-513.

Kalleberg, A. L., & Loscocco, K. A. (1983). Aging, values, and rewards: Explaining age differences in
job satisfaction. American Sociological Review, 48(1), 78-90.

Kanfer, R., & Ackerman, P. L. (2004). Aging, adult development, and work motivation. Academy of
Management Review, 29(3), 440-458.

Kirchner W., & Dunnette, M. (1954). Attitudes toward older workers. Personnel Psychology, 7, 257-
265.

Kite, M. E., Deaux, K., & Miele, M. (1991). Stereotypes of young and old: Does age outweigh gender?
Psychology and Aging, 6(1), 19-27.

Journal of Organizational Psychology vol. 14(1) 2014 107

Kite, M. E., Stockdale, G. M., Whitley, B. E., Jr., & Johnson, B. T. (2005). Attitudes toward younger
and older adults: An updated meta-analytic review. Journal of Social Issues, 61, 241-266.

Kluge, A., & Krings, F. (2008). Attitudes toward older workers and human resource practices. Swiss
Journal of Psychology, 67(1), 61-64.

Kooij, D., de Lange, A., Jansen, P., & Dikkers, J. (2008). Older workers’ motivation to continue to work:
Five meanings of age: A conceptual review. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23(4), 364-394.

Kooij, D., de Lange, A., Jansen, P., Kanfer, R., & Dikkers, J. (2011). Age and work-related motives:
Results of a meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(2), 197-225.

Kunda, Z., & Oleson, K. C. (1995). Maintaining stereotypes in the face of disconfirmation: Constructing
grounds for subtyping deviants. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 565-579.

Lang, F. R., & Carstensen, L. L. (2002). Time counts: Future time perspective, goals, and social
relationships. Psychology and Aging, 17(1), 125-139.

Lawrence, B. S. (1988). New wrinkles in the theory of age: Demography, norms, and performance
ratings. Academy of Management Journal, 31(2), 309-337.

Lin, X., Bryant, C., & Boldero, J. (2011). Measures for assessing student attitudes toward older people.
Educational Gerontology, 37, 12-26.

Linz, S. J. (2004). Motivating Russian workers: Analysis of gender and age differences. Journal of
Socio-Economics, 33, 261-289.

Livingston, J. S. (1969). Pygmalion in management. Harvard Business Review, 47(4), 81-89.
Loi, J. L. P., & Shultz, K. S. (2007). Why older adults seek employment: Differing motivations among

subgroups. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 26(3), 274-289.
Lord, R. L. (2002). Traditional motivation theories and older engineers. Engineering Management

Journal, 14(3), 3-7.
Loretto, W., Duncan, D., & White, P. J. (2000). Ageism and employment: Controversies, ambiguities

and younger people’s perceptions. Ageism and Society, 20, 279-302.
Lyon, P., & Pollard, D. (1997). Perceptions of the older employee: Is anything really changing?

Personnel Review, 26(4), 245-250.
Maurer, T. J., Barbeite, F. G., Weiss, E. M., & Lippstreu, M. (2008). New measures of stereotypical

beliefs about older workers’ ability and desire for development: Exploration among employees
age 40 and over. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23(4), 395-418.

Maurer, T. J., & Tarulli, B. A. (1994). Investigation of perceived environment, perceived outcome, and
person variables in relation to voluntary development activity by employees. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 79(1), 3-14.

McAdams, D. P., & de St. Aubin, E. (1992). A theory of generativity and its assessment through self-
report, behavioral acts, and narrative themes in autobiography. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 62(6), 1003-1015.

McAdams, D. P., de St. Aubin, E., & Logan, R. L. (1993). Generativity among young, midlife, and older
adults. Psychology and Aging, 8, 221-230.

McEvoy, G. M., & Cascio, W. F. (1989). Cumulative evidence of the relationship between employee age
and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(1), 11-17.

McGregor, J., & Gray, L. (2002). Stereotypes and older workers: The New Zealand experience. Social
Policy Journal of New Zealand, 18, 163-177.

Metcalf, H., & Thompson, M. (1990). Older workers: Employers’ attitudes and practices (Report No.
194). Brighton, England: Institute of Manpower Studies.

Miao, C. F., & Evans, K. R. (2007). The impact of salesperson motivation on role perceptions and job
performance – A cognitive and affective perspective. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales
Management, 27(1), 89-101.

Miao, C. F., Lund, D. J., & Evans, K. R. (2009). Reexamining the influence of career stages on
salesperson motivation: A cognitive and affective perspective. Journal of Personal Selling &
Sales Management, 29(3), 243-255.

108 Journal of Organizational Psychology vol. 14(1) 2014

Myers, K. K., & Sadaghiani, K. (2010). Millennials in the workplace: A communication perspective on
millennials’ organizational relationships and performance. Journal of Business and Psychology,
25(2), 225-238.

Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2010). The relationships of age with job attitudes: A meta-analysis.
Personnel Psychology, 63(3), 677-718.

Norusis, M. J. (2012). IBM SPSS statistics 19 statistical procedures companion. Upper Saddle-River,
N.J: Prentice Hall, Inc.

Paynter, J. L. (2004). The motivational profiles of teachers: Teachers’ preferences for extrinsic, intrinsic,
and moral motivators. Dissertation Abstracts International, 65, 1327A.

Pienta, A. M., & Hayward, M. D. (2002). Who expects to continue working after age 62? The retirement
plans of couples. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 57B(4), S199-S208.

Pinquart, M. (2002). Good news about the effects of bad old-age stereotypes. Experimental Aging
Research, 28, 317-336.

Posthuma, R. A., & Campion, M. A. (2009). Age stereotypes in the workplace: Common stereotypes,
moderators, and future research directions. Journal of Management, 35(1), 158-188.

Purcell, P. J. (2009). Older workers: Employment and retirement trends. Journal of Deferred
Compensation, 14(2), 85-102.

Rhodes, S. R. (1983). Age-related differences in work attitudes and behavior: A review and conceptual
analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 93(2), 328-367.

Rosen, B., & Jerdee, T. H. (1976a). The influence of age stereotypes on managerial decisions. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 61(4), 428-432.

Rosen, B., & Jerdee, T. H. (1976b). The nature of job-related age stereotypes. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 61(2), 180-183.

Rosen, B., & Jerdee, T. H. (1977). Too old or not too old. Harvard Business Review, 55(6), 97-106.
Rothermund, K., & Brandtstädter, J. (2003). Age stereotypes and self-views in later life: Evaluating rival

assumptions. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 27, 549-554.
Rupp, D. E., Vodanovich, S. J., & Credé, M. (2005). The multidimensional nature of ageism: Construct

validity and group differences. The Journal of Social Psychology, 145, 335-362.
Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African

Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 797-811.
Sterns, H. L., & Miklos, S. M. (1995). The aging worker in a changing environment: Organizational and

individual issues. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 47, 248-268.
Stoker, J. I., Van der Velde, M., & Lammers, J. (2012). Factors relating to managerial stereotypes: The

role of gender of the employee and the manager and management gender ratio. Journal of
Business and Psychology, 27(1), 31-42.

Tausch, N., & Hewstone, M. (2010). Social dominance orientation attenuates stereotype change in the
face of disconfirming information. Social Psychology, 41(3), 169-176.

Taylor, P., & Walker, A. (1998). Employers and older workers: Attitudes and employment practices.
Ageing & Society, 18, 641-658.

Vrugt, A., & Schabracq, M. (1996). Stereotypes with respect to elderly employees: The contribution of
attribute information and representativeness. Journal of Community & Applied Social
Psychology, 6(4), 287-292.

Weber, R., & Crocker, J. (1983). Cognitive processes in the revision of stereotypic beliefs. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 961-977.

Wentura, D., & Brandtstädter, J. (2003). Age stereotypes in younger and older women: Analyses of
accommodative shifts with a sentence-priming task. Experimental Psychology, 50(1), 16-26.

Wood, G., Wilkinson, A., & Harcourt, M. (2008). Age discrimination and working life: perspectives and
contestations – A review of the contemporary literature. International Journal of Management
Reviews, 10(4), 425-442.

Journal of Organizational Psychology vol. 14(1) 2014 109

Zacher, H., Rosing, K., Henning, T., & Frese, M. (2011). Establishing the next generation at work:
leader generativity as a moderator of the relationships between leader age, leader-member
exchange, and leadership success. Psychology and Aging, 26(1), 241-252.

110 Journal of Organizational Psychology vol. 14(1) 2014

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without
permission.

European Online Journal of Natural and Social Sciences 2015; www.european-science.com

Vol.4, No.1 Special Issue on New Dimensions in Economics, Accounting and Management
ISSN 1805-3602

The Study of the Relationship between Employees’ Empowerment and
Organizational Agility: A Case Study in Azarab Industrial Company

Alireza Horabadi Farahani, Freidoon Salimi*

Department of Management, Malayer branch, Islamic Azad University, Malayer, Iran
*E-mail: freidoon.salimy@yahoo.com

Abstract
With the advent of a new era of business which brings about changes as a need and main

character, agile manufacturing system as an advanced production systems or production Paradigm
guarantees the success and continuity of production systems. On the other hand, empowering
employees makes the organizations show faster and more convenient responses in the competitive
environment. This study was done with the aim to investigate the relationship between employees’
empowerment and organizational agility in Azarab Industries Company. This study is functional in
terms of its objective and it is descriptive – analytical in terms of its method. The managers,
professionals and industry personnel of Azarab were the statistical population of the study and 329
persons were chosen as the samples by using simple random sampling method. In order to measure
organizational agility Espaydezer standard questionnaire (2007) in the book “Improving
performance measurement” was used, and to measure the empowerment capacity, standard
questionnaire of the empowerment based on four-factor model (Melhem, 2004) was based.
Descriptive statistics (frequency distribution tables, frequency percentage) and inferential statistics
(the Kolmogorov – Smirnov test to study the normality of the variables, Pearson correlation
coefficient, and multiple regression analysis tests) were used to analyze data. The results indicated
that the organization was relatively agile but, the empowerment of employees of AzarAb Industries
Company was lower than the average. Pearson correlation test results showed there was a significant
relationship between employees’ empowerment of AzarAb Industries Company and organizational
agility. And the results of regression analysis test confirmed that the components of “knowledge”,
“trust”, “motivation”, and “communication” had in order the greatest impact on organizational
agility.

Keywords: employees’ empowerment, organizational agility, Performance Improvement,
AzarAb Industries Company.

Introduction
Since human resources are the most valuable factor of production and most important asset

and a major source of competitive advantage and create the fundamental capacity of any
organizations, are considered as one of the most efficient ways to achieve the organizations’
competitive advantages. Today’s business world is extremely dynamic, growing and changing and
competitors are applying new ways to improve the efficiency of their production and sale every day.
If an organization fails to coordinate itself with the turbulent environment will be disappeared. One
of the new tools to compete in today’s business world is to make organization agile to respond the
changes in the environment quickly. In this context, it seems that the organization has helped to
empower employees to be agile.

Statement of the problem
Nowadays, the organizations, in the form of dynamic environment processes, run into

changes and have had to be compatible with the environmental factors. Technology has changed the
work and organizations. With a look at the social trends in recent decades, it can be concluded that

Openly accessible at http://www.european-science.com 1067

http://www.european-science.com/

Special Issue on New Dimensions in Economics, Accounting and Management

organizations must be compatible with the changes that may happen in the future. If an organization
wants to be active and wants to guarantee its survival, it needs to be compatible with the changes
that occur in the future (Lacan, 2007). Today’s business environment is changing dramatically. Two
major pressures straining the organizations include: the products importation speed to the markets
and competitors’ imitation of the products. The Organizations that refuse to join the competition will
be omitted from the markets (Malakzadeh, 2009). With increasing the changes in the business
environment and its competitive environment getting more complicated, organizations need the
production system to respond all customers’ needs. Customers always want products that more
applications and variety and would like to obtain them as fast as possible (Carlson & Yau, 2008).
Today’s organizations are working in an environment whose rapid changes make them adopt
adaptation strategies. In fact, the problem of how organizations can succeed in a dynamic and
unpredictable environment is a subject known to be a major challenge in today’s world. Although
various solutions such as on time production, reengineering, virtual organizations and networks have
been introduced, but the most popular solution is organizational agility. In such an environment,
agility has become an important with more influences on the organization performance
(Ravichandran, 2007). Agile manufacturing guarantees organizations’ survival and progress in a
competitive environment characterized by changes and uncertainty which reacts quickly and
effectively to the markets being changed according to customer requirements. Since human
resources are the most important assets of the organizations, the more quality the assets have leads
to the greater possibility of success, survival and promotion. Thus, it should be tried to improve the
quality of human resources, because that would benefit the organization and its staff. Skilled and
strong workforces are one of the main indices of the superiority of one organization over the other
ones. One of the most effective ways to achieve a competitive advantage in the current situation is to
make organization’s staff more efficient. Integration in human resources development programs
requires the development of employee empowerment in which the human resources management
plays a key role in integrating and combining these programs to provide a suitable model for
empowering employees. The need to foster employees with self- management ability leads to
empowering the human resources as a new paradigm which attracted the management experts’ point
of view. Cobourg believed that both managers and employees will benefit from the advantages of
empowerment. Empowerment by fostering a sense of self- sufficiency and autonomy provides
employees the opportunity to improve their skills and abilities and leads to the effectiveness of the
organization (Cobourg, 1999). Empowering human resources is an effective tool based on the
attitude of changing management, so that with its application, organizations can take long and rapid
steps towards development and growth. Since human resources are the center of organizational
development, to achieve an acceptable level of organization the promotion of human resources
levels should be considered and it can be done through some strategies such as: promoting
meritocracy system, career development system, job enrichment system, sharing system,
rehabilitation staffing system, system of rationality behavior and creating a philosophical mentality.
Involving the employees and strengthening them are new techniques to liberate the talents and
capabilities of the staff in organizations. Todays, the advantages organizations have over each others
are not in applying new technologies but lies in employees’ high esteem and their commitment to
organizational goals. Organizations must adapt themselves to different situations and learn new
ways to pass through various stages. In this case, they need to identify the cases in making effective
and tough working environments. In new organizations, staffs are responsible not only for the task,
but also to improve the performance of the organizations. They actively work together to increase
the organization productivity performance.

Openly accessible at http://www.european-science.com 1068

http://www.european-science.com/

Alireza Horabadi Farahani, Freidoon Salimi

Conceptual Model

Figure 1: Conceptual Model of employees’ empowerment (Sourse: Melhem, 2004)
Operational model of the study

Figure 2: Operational model of the study (source: (Author))

Research purposes
The main purpose: to investigate the relationship between employees’ empowerment and

organizational agility in AzarAb Industries Company.
Secondary purposes: to study the relationship between each component of the employees’

empowerment (knowledge and skills, communication, trust and motivation) with organizational
agility in AzarAb Industries Company.

Hypothesis
Main hypothesis:
• There is a significant relationship between the employees’ empowerment and

organizational agility in AzarAb Industries Company.
Secondary hypotheses:

1. There is a significant relationship between the employees’ knowledge and skills and
organizational agility in AzarAb Industries Company.

2. There is a significant relationship between the employees’ communication and
organizational agility in AzarAb Industries Company.

3. There is a significant relationship between the employees’ motivation and organizational
agility in AzarAb Industries Company.

4. There is a significant relationship between the employees’ trust and organizational agility in
AzarAb Industries Company.

Knowledge and Skills

Communications

Motivation

Trust

Employees’ empowerment

Knowledge and Skills

Communications
Motivation
Trust

Employees’ empowerment Organizational agility

Openly accessible at http://www.european-science.com 1069

http://www.european-science.com/

Special Issue on New Dimensions in Economics, Accounting and Management

Empowerment and its components
First definitions of empowerment were presented by Conger and Kanugo in 1988. They

believed the origins of the concept of empowerment, control and power, should be taken into
consideration and analyzed in order to consider the concept of empowerment in management
contexts. From their perspective, as the power and control are used in different contexts in two
ways, empowerment should be studied as a motivation and communication factor (Bowen &
Lawler, 1992).

Knowledge and skills: new era of knowledge as a necessary component of economy have
caused great changes in the business environment. According to Lank (1997) knowledge and its
effects on the individuals’ skills is the organization’s greatest asset to create values. Since the
business environment is not limited to national boundaries, most companies, whether large or small,
do some important parts of their activities outside of their native country (Eslayk, 1999).

Communication: the existence of organizations depends on communication and each director
usually spends most of their time for communication. In order to create harmony between material
elements and human resources of organization as an effective and efficient network, good
communication is necessary, because without communication, the activities of the organizations will
be stopped. In fact, the effective management depends on effective communication
(Www.ghadeer.org).

Trust: Formation of trust in organizations is considered as the requirements of success in
today’s business environment. The role of HR managers in shaping the culture and behavior based
on mutual trust is effective and important. So, knowing how human resource management practices
and policies influence the development of mutual trust culture in the organization is very important
(Doaei, et al, 2008).

Motivation: employees’ motivation is supposed to be a means for achieving the objectives of
any virtual organizations about which managers, senior managers and executives think. Directors’
Continuous activities are to obtain the organizations objectives which is possible through staffs’
motivation (Mohammadi, 2009).

Organizational agility
Agility is the ability to successfully manufacture and sell a wide range of products with low

cost, high quality, short time delay and a variety of categories which creates values for specific and
multiple customers through mass production based on customer demands (Lau and Wong, 2001).
Agility is the ability to respond effectively to events that are rapidly changing and unexpected (Subb
& Nohm, 2001). Sometimes, agility improves the organizations’ abilities to supply high quality
products and services therefore changes into an important factor for the organizations’ effectiveness.
Of course, it possibly seems to be integrating the processes, organization members, and also features
with advanced technologies (Shahabi, 2006).

The importance of the need to empower employees in the organizations
Human resources constitute the real wealth of an organization. There is a direct relationship

between human capital and productivity in organizations. One of the main concerns of successful
businesses in the world is educated and skilled human capital which is able to change the
organization to which they belong. A successful organization composed of people with the
organizational culture, common ideas and goals give their experiences and knowledge to the
management of the organization with the love through the flexible system of teamwork, to increase
the organization progress. So everyone in the organization feels ownership towards the job they do.
Using the potential of human resources is a major advantage for any organizations. In the individual
productivity, organizations apply the individual’s talents and potential abilities to develop the

Openly accessible at http://www.european-science.com 1070

http://www.european-science.com/

Alireza Horabadi Farahani, Freidoon Salimi

organizations. Therefore, effective management of these valuable resources is necessary to achieve
the purpose of the organization. In this context, growth, progress, prosperity, and promoting
employees’ empowerment have been taken into the considerations of the scholars and experts in
human resources management in recent years.

Review of literature
The only study done in this field was to investigate the relationship between IT acceptance

and organizational agility from the executives’ perspective in manufacturing organizations in
Malaysia in 2004. The results indicated that there was a positive relationship between the adoption
of information technology and the ability of companies to become an agile competitor. Dimitryad
Zokoeed (2004) conducted extensive research to recognize the amount of efficacy of empowering
employees’ structures in Greece. The effects of knowledge features (gender, age and job
experience), personal characteristics (control center), occupational factors (the management),
organizational characteristics (size) and underlying variables for psychological empowerment, from
a sample of 156 employees were analyzed to take the data needed to study. Their findings in the
field of the empowerment factors are divided into the four factors identified as follows:

• Personal factors include personal characteristics;
• Their psychological variables;
• Business factors or roles;
• Underlying factors.
Ebrahimian (2011) investigated the organizational agility and found traditional organizations

cannot meet their customers’ needs and quickly respond the environmental changes so that their
survival is impossible. Also, studies on various sources have shown that learning organizations and
virtual organizations are among the organizations that due to having the characteristics of agile
organizations can adapt themselves to their environment better and faster so they can remain
competitive in this way.

Heydari (2013) studied the multiple relationships between organizational learning,
organizational agility features, organizational excellent empowerment based on the views of faculty
members of Isfahan public universities. The findings indicated that there was a positive and
significant relationship between organizational learning, organizational agility features, and
organizational excellent empowerment (p=0.05). There was also a positive and significant
relationship between organizational agility features, and organizational excellent empowerment
(p=0.05). The results of the regression analysis confirmed that there were multiple relationships
between organizational learning aspects, organizational agility features, and organizational excellent
empowerment.

Methodology
This study is functional in terms of its objective (type of research) and it is descriptive –

correlation in terms of its method. This study was done in 2014 to investigate the relationship
between the employees’ empowerment and organizational agility in AzarAb Industries Company of
Arak. The statistical population of the current study consisted of 2200 individuals including Senior
and middle executive, experts and the employees of AzarAb Industries Company chosen randomly
as the sample. The table of Morgan was used to determine the sample size. With the sample more
than or equal to 327 the reliability level is 0.99. Therefore, to be able to obtain data for this sample
size, this questionnaire was distributed more than its number and finally 329 completed
questionnaires were returned to the researcher.

Openly accessible at http://www.european-science.com 1071

http://www.european-science.com/

Special Issue on New Dimensions in Economics, Accounting and Management

The variables
In the present study empowering employees was the independent variable whose components

are: knowledge and skills, communication, motivation, trust while organizational agility was
dependent variable.

Research tools
• employee empowerment questionnaire
• organizational agility questionnaire
In order to study the relationship between organizational agility and employees’

empowerment a pack of standard questionnaire was used; in order to measure the empowerment
capacity, standard questionnaire of the empowerment based on four-factor model (Melhem, 2004)
was used and Likert attitude range with 5 degrees too low, low , medium , high and very high were
used.

Table 1: Employee empowerment questionnaire with separation of variables
component Question No. Number of Questions
Knowledge and Skills 1-7 7
Communications 8-13 6
Motivation 14-18 5
Trust 19-24 6

In order to measure the organizational agility according to the nature of the research, it
seemed to apply 30-item questionnaire method as an appropriate research methodology. In order to
achieve the research goals, “Improving performance measurement” questionnaire published for the
first time in America in 2007 by Espaydezer, the founder of Managers Association of America. In
order to measure organizational agility standard questionnaire based on Likert attitude range with 5
degrees too low, low, medium, high and very high were used.

Table 2: Organizational agility questionnaire
component Question No. Number of Questions
organizational agility 1-30 30

Results and conclusion
The main hypothesis testing
H0: There is not a significant relationship between the employees’ empowerment and

organizational agility in AzarAb Industries Company. Pearson correlation test results (Table 3)
suggests that there is a significant relationship between the employees’ empowerment and
organizational agility in AzarAb Industries Company around 7%0 (sig= 0.000, r= 0.696) indicating
high and direct correlation. In other words, the significance level is less than 0.01, so the null
hypothesis is rejected and the opposite hypothesis is confirmed. In the first hypothesis, it was said
there is a significant relationship between the employees’ empowerment and organizational agility
in AzarAb Industries Company. Pearson correlation test was used to test the hypothesis. According
to the results, in confidence level of %99 the null hypothesis of non- correlation between employee
empowerment and organizational agility is rejected and hypothesis one that shows a direct and
significant relationship between the two variables is confirmed. In other words, the higher the level
of employees’ empowerment is the greater organizational agility will be. The results of analyzing
the data of this study were identified and analyzed based on indices and factors enabling
organizations to achieve agility in the food and dairy industry by Jvanmardi (1389).

Openly accessible at http://www.european-science.com 1072

http://www.european-science.com/

Alireza Horabadi Farahani, Freidoon Salimi

Table 3: the results of Pearson correlation test of employees’ empowerment on organizational
agility in AzarAb Industries Company

The first secondary hypothesis testing
H0: There is not a significant relationship between knowledge and skills and organizational

agility in AzarAb Industries Company. Correlation test results (Table 4) suggests that there is a
significant relationship between knowledge and skills and organizational agility in AzarAb
Industries Company around %68 (sig= 0.000, r= 0.682) indicating high and direct correlation. In
other words, the significance level is less than 0.01, so the null hypothesis is rejected and the
opposite hypothesis is confirmed. In the first hypothesis, it was said there is a significant
relationship between knowledge and skills and organizational agility in AzarAb Industries
Company. Pearson correlation test was used to test the hypothesis. According to table 4, the
significance level of Pearson correlation test is more than %1 so in confidence level of %99 the null
hypothesis of non- correlation between knowledge and skills and organizational agility is rejected
and the opposite hypothesis that shows a direct and significant relationship between the two
variables is confirmed.

Table 4: the results of Pearson correlation test of knowledge and skills on organizational
agility in AzarAb Industries Company

The second secondary hypothesis testing
H0: There is not a significant relationship between communications and organizational

agility in AzarAb Industries Company. Correlation test results (Table 5) suggests that there is a
significant relationship between communications and organizational agility in AzarAb Industries
Company around %55 (sig= 0.000, r= 0.546) indicating a pretty high correlation. In other words, the
significance level is less than 0.01, so the null hypothesis is rejected and the opposite hypothesis is
confirmed. In the second hypothesis, it was said there is a significant relationship between
communications and organizational agility in AzarAb Industries Company. Pearson correlation test
was used to test the hypothesis. According to table 5, the significance level of Pearson correlation
test is more than %1 so in confidence level of %99 the null hypothesis of non-correlation between
communications and organizational agility is rejected and the opposite hypothesis that shows a
direct and significant relationship between the two variables is confirmed.

Table 5: the results of Pearson correlation test of communications on organizational agility in
AzarAb Industries Company

The third secondary hypothesis testing
H0: There is not a significant relationship between motivation and organizational agility in

AzarAb Industries Company. Correlation test results (Table 6) suggests that there is a significant
relationship between motivation and organizational agility in AzarAb Industries Company around

Table explanation organizational agility
Employees’ empowerment The correlation coefficient 0.696

Significant level. 0.000

Table explanation organizational agility
knowledge and skills The correlation coefficient 0.682

Significant level. 0.000

Table explanation organizational agility
communications The correlation coefficient 0.546

Significant level. 0.000

Openly accessible at http://www.european-science.com 1073

http://www.european-science.com/

Special Issue on New Dimensions in Economics, Accounting and Management

%59 (sig= 0.000, r= 0.595) indicating a direct and high correlation. In other words, the significance
level is less than 0.01, so the null hypothesis is rejected and the opposite hypothesis is confirmed. In
the third hypothesis, it was said there is a significant relationship between motivation and
organizational agility in AzarAb Industries Company. Pearson correlation test was used to test the
hypothesis. According to table 6, the significance level of Pearson correlation test is more than %1
so in confidence level of %99 the null hypothesis of non-correlation between motivation and
organizational agility is rejected and the opposite hypothesis that shows a direct and significant
relationship between the two variables is confirmed.

Table 6: the results of Pearson correlation test of motivation on organizational agility in
AzarAb Industries Company

The fourth secondary hypothesis testing
H0: There is not a significant relationship between trust and organizational agility in AzarAb

Industries Company. Correlation test results (Table 7) suggests that there is a significant relationship
between trust and organizational agility in AzarAb Industries Company around %58 (sig= 0.000, r=
0.587) indicating a direct and high correlation. In other words, the significance level is less than
0.01, so the null hypothesis is rejected and the opposite hypothesis is confirmed. In the fourth
hypothesis, it was said there is a significant relationship between trust and organizational agility in
AzarAb Industries Company. Pearson correlation test was used to test the hypothesis. According to
table 7, the significance level of Pearson correlation test is more than %1 so in confidence level of
%99 the null hypothesis of non-correlation between trust and organizational agility is rejected and
the opposite hypothesis that shows a direct and significant relationship between the two variables is
confirmed.

Table 7: the results of Pearson correlation test of trust on organizational agility in AzarAb
Industries Company

Suggestions derived from the hypotheses, other applications suggestions and research
suggestions for future investigators were offered in this section. Empowerment is a collection of
personal beliefs and perceptions of job and organizational environment. Managers need to
understand or consider the staffs’ beliefs and perceptions from the organizational environment and
the image they have from the organization and provide the necessary conditions for the four
dimensions of employees’ empowerment. According to the results, the variable knowledge and
skills has the largest and most powerful relationship with organizational agility so due to its high
importance the managers need to regard the promotion of knowledge indices in developing
strategies and programs and consider the following actions:

The more knowledge in the field of jobs and responsibility leads to better control over issues
surrounding the employees and resulting in doing tasks seriously and his and his accountability to
the problems and completing tasks will be improved. It is recommended to take the following
measures in order to raise the level of knowledge and skills:

Organizations are dependent on the communications and each director usually spends most
of their time on communications. Good communication skills are essential to establish harmony

Table explanation organizational agility
Motivation The correlation coefficient 0.595

Significant level. 0.000

Table explanation organizational agility
Trust The correlation coefficient 0.587

Significant level. 0.000

Openly accessible at http://www.european-science.com 1074

http://www.european-science.com/

Alireza Horabadi Farahani, Freidoon Salimi

between human and material elements of organizations such as a network of efficient and effective
work because, without establishing communications, activities get stopped. Since motivation is the
primary and most basic needs to do activities, managers should try to have the most motivated staff.
It is recommended that supervisors and administrators encourage employees to express their
opinions. If they introduce new designs at work, they should be encouraged. Particular atmosphere
should be created so that employees can express their creativities.

References
Blanchard, K. H., Carlos, J. P., & Randloph, A. (2003) Empowerment take more than one minute.

San Francisco: Barret-Koehler.
Bowen, D. E., & Lawler III, Edward E. (1992) The empowerment of service workers: What, why,

how, and when. Sloan Management Review, 33(3), 31-39.. Retrieved from http://
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10118526

Carlson, J., Yao, A. (2008) Simulating an agile, synchronized manufacturing system-Int. J.
Production Economics, 112, 714–722.

Conger,J.A & Kanungo,R.N. (1985) The empowerment process: Integrating theory and practice.
Academy of management Review, 13 (3), 471- 482.

Doaei, H., Farahi, M., Homayunirad, M., (2009). The role of employees’ powerment in enhancing
mutual trust between employees and managers. Journal of Change Management, pp. 9-30.

Ebrahimian, Y., & Jelodar, M., (2011). Organizational agility, speed of accountability, and
flexibility. Journal of Police Human Development, 39, 13- 34.

Heydari, M., (2013). Investigating the multiple relationships between organizational learning,
organizational agility features, organizational excellent empowerment based on the views of
faculty members of Isfahan public universities. Isfahan University, Faculty of Psychology
and Educational Sciences, PhD thesis.

Javanmardi, M. Zanjirchi, S.M., Karbasian, M., Khabushani, A. (2011). Identifying effective factors
on improving passive defense. Journal of Sciences and RBF and increasing the agility of
organizations with neural network approach, passive defense technology, 2 (2), 71-82.

Koberg, C., Boss, R., Senjem, J., & Goodman, E. (1999) Antecedents and outcomes of
empowerment: Empirical evidence from the health care industry. Group & Organization
management, pp 71-91.

Laukkanen, P., Sainio, L.-M., & Jauhiainen, T. (2007) Appropriability regime for radical and
incremental innovations. R&D .

Melhem, Y. (2004) The Antecedents of Customer Contact Employment Empowerm .Employee
Relation, 26(1), pp 72-93

Mohammadi, H. (2009). The role of empowering human resources in Administrative system of Iran.
Third Conference on Human Resources Empowerment.

Ravichandran T. (2007) IT Competencies, Innovation Capacity and Organizational Agility:
Performance Impact and the Moderating Effects of Environmenta l Characteristics- Lally
School of to CIST, INFORMS.

Shahabi, B., (2006). Human aspect of organizational agility. Journal of Tadbir, 175.

Openly accessible at http://www.european-science.com 1075

http://www.european-science.com/

239

Economics, Management, and Financial Markets
Volume 9(4), 2014, pp. 239–246, ISSN 1842-3191

WORK MOTIVATION IN ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

LAURENŢIU HAUSER

Laurentiuhauser@gmail.com
Bucharest University of Economic Studies

ABSTRACT. In today’s society and economy employees are well educated and
relatively well off. This fact strongly influences the mechanisms of motivation.
Therefore, today’s managers have to use a large variety of motivational instruments.
This text presents the most important mechanisms of motivation and their role at the
modern workplace.
JEL codes: J28

Keywords: motivation; employee satisfaction; employee performance

1. Introduction

“Human Capital goes where it’s welcome and stays where it’s well treated.”
Walter B. Wriston) (Walter 1919-2005, former CEO of Citybank/Citicorp)

The market economy of a country is constantly moving and is subject to
ongoing processes of change. The organizations, in turn, are forced to
keep pace with these changes in order to remain competitive.

At the same time, the increasing life standard largely influences human
behavior, and underlies all processes conducted in major organizations.
Globalization, declining birth rates in developed countries and other factors
force managers to focus on the actual process of motivating their employees,
which has become indispensable in achieving management performance.
Motivation leads to self-realization of employees as a way of his or her
optimal development and personal fulfillment.

In early 2009, the Gallup Institute published a study on the motivation of
German companies. This study is the result of a survey on a total of 1,900
employees. The survey was conducted in the months November and
December 2008.

These are the results of the Gallup Study: Approximately 90% of
employees surveyed do not consider themselves as owing anything to their

240

employer and the work at their workplace is strictly limited to following and
performing the tasks defined by the management. Only 13% of workers do
their duty diligently and identify with the company, 67% of staff are strictly
limited to performing their necessary duties and avoid further efforts and
voluntary activities.

5% of all employees were found to be completely demotivated. Worrying
is the fact that up to date these results have remained stable, with a negative
impact on business. The main cause of employee motivation is desolate
situation of their management, explained by the lack of professional
competence of employees in positions of responsibility. This lack of
qualification leads to inappropriate use of the work potential of employees
and promoting their professional skills, a situation that leads to a clear result:
DEMOTIVATION OF EMPLOYEES.

Given that the success of an organization depends largely on human
capital and its motivating factors, there is a need for an actual analysis on
both motivating factors applied in most developed countries, and on the
possibility of taking them into the motivation system of employees in
Romania while taking into account the cultural specificities of the country.

2. Definitions and Basic Theories

In the Explanatory Dictionary of the Romanian Language (DEX 1998: 656)
these “keywords” are described as follows:

Table 1. Motivating & Motivation & Motive

Motivating is the “action of motivation and its outcome”
Motivation is “all grounds or reasons (conscious or not) that cause
someone to perform a particular action or to tend to achieve certain
goals”
Motive is defined as “cause, reason for an action; impulse that causes or
determines an action”

The increasing higher level of education of employees requires a behavior
and training of managers to match it. Therefore, they must be able to manage
and motivate employees, make them meet the requirements in terms of
qualification and professional experience, attitude towards work and
particularly high socio-cultural skills. But managers have not only the task of
motivating employees in order to achieve the objectives set by the
organization, but also of motivating employees in achieving their personal
goals.

Therefore, in the future career and income will play a major role. It is
important for the employee to understand the meaning of the work activity,

241

to identify itself with it, to perform their activity with passion, this being the
guarantee for success. Passion can be defined as the founding element of
commitment and performance.

An important role is the symbiosis of three processes: recruitment,
training and employees’ keeping processes. Motivation of employees plays a
key role in all these processes.

“Motivation is what energizes, directs and sustains a behavior” (Steers
and Porter, 1991: 116); it is “a set of decisions and actions that determine the
organization’s stakeholders to contribute directly and indirectly to achieve
higher overall functionality and performance, based on the correlation of
their interests in the approach and the achievement of the objectives of the
organization and its subsystems” (Nicolescu and Verboncu, 2008: 291).

Motivation is also targeting the energy and enthusiasm of people on a
specific objective. It has not only the role of determining people to work, but
has also the property to determine them to perform their work as well, which
requires optimum exploitation of physical and intellectual resources of
employees.

Motivation can be seen as a source of positive energy influencing
people’s lives, whether at their workplace or in their private life.

Craig C. Pinder defines work motivation as being “a set of energetic
forces that originate both within as well as beyond an individual’s being, to
initiate work-related behavior, and to determine its form direction intensity
and duration.” (Pinder, 2008: 11)

This definition is one of the most widely accepted definitions.

3. Human Motivation and Motivation at Work

Between these terms there is a general acceptance of their synonymy:

Human Motivation = Motivation at work
Motivation is characterized by three factors:

• necessities – as an impulse, energizing the employees’ activities;
• current objectives and situations defined by the organization’s goals;
• trends – emotional relationships and attitudes formed by various aspects
of the environment and by the person him/herself.

4. Types of Motivation

Nicolescu and Verboncu (2008) have divided the types of motivation in their
analysis into four pairs thereby showing the contrast between them:

242

Table 2 Types of Motivations
TYPES OF MOTIVATION:

POSITIVE – NEGATIVE
INTRINSIC – EXTRINSIC
COGNITIVE – AFFECTIVE
ECONOMIC – MORAL SPIRITUAL

4.1 Positive and negative motivation

4.1.1 Positive motivation aims to increase efforts and direct contribution
of employees in order to achieve the organization’s objectives, aiming to
amplify their satisfaction; positive results mean:
• increase of employees’ income;
• increase of morale and status of employees according to their
expectations;
• individual development of employees;
• creating an organizational environment proper to work performance.

4.1.2 Negative motivation aims to increase the efforts and contributions
of employees for achieving the objectives. Its tools are elimination,
reduction or threatening with reduction of satisfaction in the process of
their work, in the event of failure to achieve tasks and objectives. These
instruments of motivation frequently generate decreases of income,
morale, status etc. of employees in relation to their expectations.

4.2 Intrinsic motivation (internal, direct, and individual) and extrinsic
motivation (external or indirect)

In a study of the determinants of job satisfaction in 1959, the researchers
Herzberg, Mausner, and Snyderman have defined two types of work
motivation:

Table 3. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation

4.2.1 Intrinsic motivation (internal, direct, and individual) and extrinsic
motivation (external, indirect, and organizational)

Intrinsic motivation (internal, direct, and individual) is the motivation in
which the person pursues a strictly cognitive activity (or even more) actions
taken being of personal type. Examples of intrinsic motivators:
• ambition, pleasure, desire for power, etc.

Intrinsic motivation internal direct individual
Extrinsic motivation external indirect organizational

243

4.2.2 Extrinsic motivation (external, indirect, and organizational) consists
in determining the employee to make efforts in order to obtain results
generating formal and informal, economic and moral-spiritual reactions of
the organization, which will produce satisfaction to the employee. This form
causes the employee to work under the influence of external factors.

Examples of extrinsic motivators:
• prestige, notoriety, fame, remuneration, status, etc.
In turn, extrinsic motivators (or rewards) can be divided into artificial
motivators with direct costs and or natural motivators (without direct costs):

Table 4 Extrinsic motivators: artificial and natural
Extrinsic motivators

artificial (with direct costs): natural (without direct costs)
Music
Salary increases based on merit
Refreshments
Pleasantly furnished offices
Sharing of profit
Cash bonuses
Etc.

Feedback
Questions about own opinions
Compliments
Congratulations
Special tasks
Recognition
Smiles
Etc.

4.3 Cognitive and affective motivation

4.3.1 Cognitive motivation is focused on meeting the needs of individual
intellectual environment of employees, a tool that gives them the possibility
to control that environment with means such as knowledge, learning,
innovation, activity performed, etc.

4.3.2 Affective motivation is focused on meeting personal sentimental
needs of employees within the organization and is aimed at the emotional,
strictly human side of the employee.

4.4 Economic and moral-spiritual motivation

4.4.1 Economic motivation is based on economic motivational factors that
influence directly the economic expectations and aspirations of employees.

4.4.2 Moral-spiritual motivation is based on motivational factors of moral
and spiritual nature, primarily aimed at the behavior, attitudes, and system of
values of the employees.

244

5. Relationship between Motivation, Satisfaction and Performance in
Work

5.1 Relationship between motivation and satisfaction

One of the common definitions in the literature is that of Locke (1976):

“Job satisfaction is a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting
from the appraisal of one’s job or job experiences.” (Fischer, 2006, p.13)

Analyzing this definition, we find an emotional component of attitudes
regarding work or job.

Mielu Zlate (2009) claimed in his Basics of Psychology the following:
• state of job satisfaction / dissatisfaction is an indicator of motivation
(state of satisfaction being in this case an equivalent with motivation
achievement, by fulfillment of the proposed activity, and dissatisfaction
representing the failure of motivation);
• from the pair motivation and satisfaction results the phenomenon of dual
causality: cause and effect (motivation representing the cause and
satisfaction, the result or the final condition);
• motivation and satisfaction are related to job performance, their activity
having an influence, either positive or negative.

5.2 Relationship between motivation and job performance

Job performance can be defined as a state of competitiveness, which has
reached a level of efficiency and optimal productivity.

Performance is based on the following markers:
• economic markers – represented by the factors of profitability and
competitiveness;
• legal markers – represented by factors related to legal compliance and
solvency;
• organizational markers – focused on competence and efficiency factors;
on consistency;
• social markers – which are based on involvement, staff satisfaction,
potential development, quality of life or work, etc.

Concerning the relationship between motivation and job performance, we
know that the two phenomena, of sub-motivation and of supra-motivation,
can be derived depending on employee motivation; motivation can be
excessive and intensive, or, on the contrary, very low or even nonexistent.

6. Main Theories and Practices of Motivation

Psychologists widely studied human motivation, the result being a variety of
numerous theories about what motivates people. Almost all these theories

245

and practices originate from psychological approaches in the nineteenth and
twentieth centuries.

These theories and practices are very useful to managers, helping them
to understand motivation in conceptual terms. At the same time it helps them
to apply the instruments of motivation, combining them according to the
needs of the organization and the needs of employees. Using tools of
motivation is essential for the satisfaction of the employees’ needs and for
the efficient and successful achievement of tasks at their workplace.

Thus, in the process of motivating employees, managers need to focus on
issues such as satisfaction, setting objectives, expectations, performance,
feedback, fairness, commitment.

Here is a scheme of the main theories of motivation:

Figure 1. Theories of Motivations

Source: Author

246

7. Conclusion

Motivating employees is a process of great importance. Unfortunately not all
managers really understand (or do not consider this issue important to be
properly concerned with) the concepts, the principles and the mechanisms of
employees’ motivation. Managers can improve their own rate of success on
the job offering extrinsic rewards (external, indirect, and organizational) that
lead to intrinsic motivation (internal, direct, and individual) of employees
and thus to achievement of desired performance and objectives.

“Motivation is the art of getting people to do what you want them to do
because they want to do it.” Dwight D. Eisenhower (1890-1969, former
president of United States of America)

REFERENCES

Fischer, L. (2006), Arbeitszufriedenheit, Emotion und Identifikation. Goettingen:

Hogrefe: 13.
Nicolescu, O., and I. Verboncu (2008), Managementul resurselor umane

(Management of Human Resources), Bucharest: University Publishing House:
291.

Nicolescu, O., and I. Verboncu (2008), Fundamentele managementului organizației
(Basics of Organization Management). Bucharest: University.

Pinder, C. C. (2008), Work Motivation in Organizational Behavior. New York:
Psychology Press: 11.

Steers, R. M., and L. W. Porter (1991), Motivation and Work Behaviour
(Management). McGraw-Hill Inc.: 116.

Zlate, M. (2009), Basics of Psychology. Bucharest: Polirom: 128.
*** DEX (1998), Dicționarul explicativ al limbii române (Explanatory Dictionary

of the Romanian Language). Bucharest (second edition): 656.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without
permission.