\'ill Verizon 10:07 AM Document (1) Q2) In detail, describe a moment in your lif
ID: 364272 • Letter: #
Question
'ill Verizon 10:07 AM Document (1) Q2) In detail, describe a moment in your life when expectancy theory explained why you were motivated. Define the theory and clearly explain how each of the relationships within the theory applied to this moment. Then pick a time in your life when you felt de-motivated and explain why/how the relationships within the theory were affected. Q3) Imagine that you and another manager disagree over how a scarce or valuable resource should be divided up between you. How would you respond to this conflict? Specifically, define each of the five conflict management strategies and explain what each approach would entail (i.e., what would each strategy look like within your specific scenario?). Be creative. Try to make each question worth 1 page thanks again q w e r t y uo p a S nm 123 space returnExplanation / Answer
Hello there,
Q2) According to expectancy theory, individual motivation to put forth more or less effort is determined by a rational calculation in which individuals evaluate their situation. According to this theory, individuals ask themselves three questions.
The first question is whether the person believes that high levels of effort will lead to outcomes of interest, such as performance or success. This perception is labeled expectancy. For example, do you believe that the effort you put forth in a class is related to performing well in that class? If you do, you are more likely to put forth effort.
The second question is the degree to which the person believes that performance is related to subsequent outcomes, such as rewards. This perception is labeled instrumentality. For example, do you believe that getting a good grade in the class is related to rewards such as getting a better job, or gaining approval from your instructor, or from your friends or parents? If you do, you are more likely to put forth effort.
Finally, individuals are also concerned about the value of the rewards awaiting them as a result of performance. The anticipated satisfaction that will result from an outcome is labeled valence. For example, do you value getting a better job, or gaining approval from your instructor, friends, or parents? If these outcomes are desirable to you, your expectancy and instrumentality is high, and you are more likely to put forth effort.
Expectancy: Can I do it? If I try harder, can I really achieve this number? Is there a link between how hard I try and whether I reach this goal or not? If you feel that you can achieve this number if you try, you have high expectancy.
Instrumentality: What is in it for me? What is going to happen if I reach 300? What are the outcomes that will follow? Are they going to give me a 10% pay raise? Am I going to be named the salesperson of the month? Am I going to receive verbal praise from my manager? If you believe that performing well is related to certain outcomes, instrumentality is high.
Valence: How do I feel about the outcomes in question? Do I feel that a 10% pay raise is desirable? Do I find being named the salesperson of the month attractive? Do I think that being praised by my manager is desirable? If your answers are yes, valence is positive. In contrast, if you find the outcomes undesirable (you definitely do not want to be named the salesperson of the month because your friends would make fun of you), valence is negative.
If our answers to all three questions are affirmative—we feel that we can do it, we will get an outcome if we do it, and we value the reward—we are more likely to be motivated to put forth more effort toward selling more combos.
The Expectancy theory includes the following parametes :
Expectancy
Instrumentality
Valence
One moment when I was motivated is as follows :
This is about the time when I was gearing up for the campus recruitment season in my final year of MBA. With my scores and communication skills, I was confident of getting placed in the companies within the first two months of campus recruitment season itself. I prepared for every company very hard, but was not placed till the second-last month of my MBA. I was highly demotivated as every individual I knew was getting job offers, except me. My parents and professors had high expectations and motivated me at every downfall. Then came a good company with a high remuneration and I wanted to grab this opportunity and leave no stone unturned to crack the interview. I first evaluated every aspect that went wrong in the previous interviews and worked very hard on them. Then I studied day and night from every source available. This job was everything I dreamed about – living close to my family, high salary, good job profile and a better lifestyle. This opportunity was like the light at the end of the tunnel and I knew my future would be secured and my parents and professors would be extremely proud of me if I cracked it. As luck would have it, I went on to pass the difficult written aptitude test, written technical test, knowledge and personal interview as well. All that motivated me for the interview was the rewards after all the struggle !
Q3) Regarding the disagreement between my manager and me about the distribution of scarce or valuable resource, I would either apply Collaborating or Compromising. I would first reason out with my manager as to how the resource is important to both of us and both have equal opportunity to use it for our benefits. If it works out, then both of us could divide the particular resource amongst ourselves. If that does not work, we need to mutually decide whose job is more important with regards to responsibility. As a manager, it is his duty to look into the concerns of his entire team and not just his alone. Being responsible and logical individuals working towards one goal – GROWTH OF ORGANIZATION – we both will decide which party ( me or Manager) is in more need of the resource.
These are how the approaches to each of the five conflict management strategies entail :
Competing:
• Assertive and uncooperative
• Pursuing your own concerns at another’s expense
• Using power to win your position (e.g., rank, economic sanctions)
• Could include “standing up for your rights” or defending a position you believe is correct
Accommodating:
• Unassertive and cooperative
• The opposite of competing
• Neglecting your own concerns in order to satisfy the concerns of another
• Could take the form of selfless generosity, obeying an order when you would prefer not to, or yielding to another’s point of view
Avoiding:
• Unassertive and uncooperative
• Pursuing neither your own concerns or those of your opponent
• Not addressing the conflict
• Could take the form of sidestepping an issue, postponing the resolution of a conflict, or withdrawing from a threatening situation
Collaboration:
• Assertive and cooperative
• The opposite of avoiding
• Attempting to jointly work toward a solution that fully satisfies the concerns of all involved
• “Digging into” an issue to identify and address the underlying concerns of all parties involved
Compromising:
• Intermediate in both assertiveness and cooperativeness; the middle ground between competing and accommodating
• Finding a mutually acceptable solution that partially satisfies both parties
• Addresses an issue more directly than avoiding, but does not explore it in as much depth as collaborating
• Could take the form of splitting the difference, exchanging concessions or seeking a quick middle-ground position
Expectancy
Instrumentality
Valence
- Make sure employees have proper skills, abilities, and knowledge
- Ensure that the environment facilitates performance
- Provide encouragement to make people believe that their effort makes a difference
- Reward employee performance
- Inform people in advance about the rewards
- Try to eliminate non-performance influence over rewards
- Find rewards that are desirable to employees
- Make sure that the rewards are viewed as fair
- Give employees choice over rewards
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.