RESEARCH PAPER
RESEARCH PAPER
Introduction: This paper is going to examine the impact of motivational human resource practices in the Uttar Pradesh Housing and Development (UPHDB), Lucknow, UP, India. A brief overview of the organization and its development will be presented as well as a rationale for implementation of human resource practices. The different update practices undertaken prior to implementation will be outlined, the current status of the HR practices will be detailed and the obstacles encountered will be examined using the leadership theory. In the last, suggestions for getting it implemented will be made.
Organization Overview: There are three most sought and very basic needs of people: food, cloth and shelter. To fulfill the one very basic need of the people, UPHDB was brought into life by the state assembly through an act in 1965 and it is called (in Hindi) ‘the Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam; the English translation of this is UPHDB’. UPHDB’s operational area extends to the whole of Uttar Pradesh excluding cantonment areas. Per the act, a Board to be called the Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad was established by a notification in the Gazette in April 1966. The Board shall be a body corporate, with the name aforesaid. The Board shall consist of a president, who shall ordinarily be a non-official, appointed by the State Government, and six non-official members, appointed by the State Government, of whom one shall be the mayor of a municipal corporation and two shall be members of the State Legislature, one from each House thereof. The other members are secretaries and the head of departments.
This high power board is the apex body of UPHDB to run it smoothly and to accomplish the objective. UPHDB is a nodal agency with top ranking among all housing agencies of the state. This works towards the housing solutions of the state. After independence, India has adopted a mix model of development where private and public both work together. In this light, this public sector was created by the state government to cater the need of affordable houses and one basic need of the housing sector. There are many others government housing development authorities across the state but the operational area of each is very small, limited to a small portion within a district, unlike UPHDB which works in whole UP. Initially, it focused to develop houses and residential plots. But during the course of time UPHDB has progressed with various landmarks in the field of housing. It has won national level housing competitions organized by HUDCO in the year 1976 and 1979.
Besides normal housing projects board has diversified its activities to planning, designing, construction and development of almost all types of urban development projects through out the state of Uttar Pradesh. UPHDB has planned and executed various projects for the development of health and education department. It is also handling new district headquarters projects for the revenue department with the execution of large number of schemes. It has attained capability of executing large residential colonies and townships. The UPHDB is an autonomous body and is capable to manage its activities with its own resources. Extra resources are generated with the help of loans from various financial institutions like Housing and Urban Development Corporation, Unit Trust of India, Life Insurance Corporation, banks and HDFC etc.
Broadly speaking, UPHDB is fully developed with good reputation and lived up to the expectations of the public during its 42 years of (1966 -2008) life. It enjoyed the confidence of the public and rated as one of the best organization of the state government. On one hand, UPHDB is not able to meet the demand of the public. On the other hand, private organizations are not able to sell their developed properties. This is a convincing proof that it is enjoying high reputation in public, who are the real assessor. The current recession has further fortified the position of UPHDB that it is enjoying the wide confidence of public as its demand has not gone down during the ongoing recession while private sectors has almost no demands during past two years since recession started. The growing number of project sites and increasing turnover year after year are also other examples of its success. Over the years, it has acquired keen expertise in resource mobilization for all kinds of housing and urban development projects. UPHDB can handle projects of any magnitude on turnkey basis in India and abroad. UPHDB have notified 137 cities for its activities. It has acquired 621.24 hectare of land in 78 cities where housing schemes are being developed. UPHDB has so far developed about 280,247 plots and houses of different sizes suitable to the requirement of every section of the society. This is a humble contribution of UPHDB towards society. The main feathers in the cap of UPHDB are as illustrated below:
Quality Consciousness: UPHDB is highly conscious towards quality and have developed its own quality control manual. The board has established one central laboratory and many regional testing laboratories. Besides these there are site labs with almost all schemes of the board.
Housing for the Shelter less: For these people 8,480 dwelling units have been constructed under “Aashraya Yojna” at different places. This is one primary objective for which UPHDB is created.
Housing for Middle Class: Another sector, which requires special attention, is the lower middle class. For these people UPHDB has so far constructed about 200,000 dwelling units and plans to construct/develop another 550 dwelling units in upcoming financial year.
Multi storied Commercial Arch cades and Offices: The UPHDB has constructed multi storied office buildings and commercial towers for its own and public use. It has also developed market areas and convenient shopping. Providing public facilities have also always been on Board’s priority.
Innovative Management Techniques: Recognizing the need for modern management techniques, UPHDB has adopted latest and many innovative methods and techniques; for its faster growth such as: A) Land through negotiation: Normal procedure for land acquisition is highly time consuming and problem some. UPHDB is now directly negotiating with farmers/land owners for acquiring land for urban housing programs. This method of Land Acquisition is turning to be much successful. UPHDB is also planning to acquire land on “Benefit Sharing Basis”. This innovative approach may tempt many landowners to part with their land for housing and urban development projects. It is also considering joint venture ship with private developers and organizations of repute for mass housing to meet the increased demand. B) Building Center: With a view to innovate and practice new building materials, UPHDB established its own Building Centers at 4 places in the state. New materials produced at these Centers are being used in various housing schemes of the board and other local bodies. C) Diversification: The board has diversified its activities for executing projects of bigger magnitude for other departments and agencies. At present it has many projects of Rs. 333.63 crore in hand. It includes construction of 4 to 10 storied multistoried buildings, their infrastructure. By Constructing 300 bedded hospitals, office, building for various government departments, overall development and construction of newly created district headquarters and mass group housing; UPHDB has proved that it is able to accomplish its objective.
Evolution of Human Resource Practices in UPHDB: The broad organizational chart is as depicted below:
The acts of UPHDB states that the Board shall consist of a President, who shall ordinarily be a non-official, appointed by the State Government. In the spirit of this mandate the state government appoints president sometimes political person and sometimes senior bureaucrat. This is the sweet will of the state government. It is noteworthy that whenever a non-official occupies the seat, he lacks the required expertise. The present president is a member of IAS cadre and prior to this the appointee was a political person. The act also assigns that the top management officers will be from the premium service cadre of the state. The names of the premium service cadres are: Indian Administrative Services (IAS) and Provincial Civil Services (PCS). In the compliance of the provision of the act the housing commissioner, the Additional housing commissioner cum secretary and other additional commissioners and zonal officers are posted on deputation from state administrative services. These officers are selected by a constitutional body called the Union Public Service Commission at the federal level and the State Public Service Commission at the state level. The selection and screening process is highly rigorous, tough, and flaw less. Because of this only suitable cream brains are able to qualify the exam and get selected. The finance controller is also on deputation form the state treasury and account services. He is also selected through the same exam and procedure. There is no doubt that the top brass of the organization is capable and able to run it to the desired level.
The state government appoints them on deputation and they work till its will. The State government exercises the control over the organizations though this indirect mechanism of appointing the top management officials. We say it is autonomous and independent of the government, but the ground reality is somewhat different. UPHDB works in the influence of the government.
Except above, rest workers are permanent employees of the board. They all selected at lower level in their respective functional division and by promotion they go up the ladder of hierarchy. The technical services of the board are: engineering, architect, finance and marketing.
In the engineering department the intake is of three types: candidates having the industrial training institute (ITI) certificate, diploma in engineering and degree engineering. The intake processes of all three are the same. The vacancy is advertised. The advertisement includes the number of the vacancies, technical requirements, desired experiences (in some cases) and time table of the selection process. In all, a screening test is conducted. Though this test most of the people are screened and in the second step of interview, an interview committee constituted by the housing commissioner interviewed three times the total vacancy. The interview is conducted and each member awards the number to make the process independent of each other and to avoid any malpractice. The final merit list is prepared by adding the number of the test and interview. In general, the weight of test is 80% and that of the interview is 20%. From the final merit list selection is made. After this selection process the police verification is done to know their criminal records. If any information against any candidate comes in knowledge then the candidature of that candidate is cancelled. The ITI candidates went up to executive engineer level through promotion. The diploma candidates reach to Superintending Engineer level while the degree holders reach to the highest level of the Engineer-in-Chief. The head of the engineering department is the Engineer-in-Chief. He reports to the housing commissioner through the secretary in normal course but sometimes he reports directly to the commissioner which is against the spirit of the act.
In the architect department, candidates with a degree and ITI certificate are selected through the same process as followed in the engineering department. A degree candidate reaches to the highest level of chief architect while ITI candidates get promotions up to assistant chief architect. In the finance department, the finance controller and chief account officer are taken on deputation form treasury services of the state government. Accountants are recruited as detailed above. They are promoted to different stages and finally reached to the account officer. Accountants are posted in the zonal offices under different designations as their job is to maintain property accounts of each property. In the marketing department, Estate Management Officers are recruited as per the set norm of the organizations and they get first promotion as assistant housing commissioner and then further promoted to deputy housing commissioner. The recruitments and promotions processes are the activities of the board round the year.
Case study: I joined UPHDB in June, 2008, as zonal commissioner Agra. The productivity level of this zone was not up to the desired level. The housing commissioner asked me to enhance the productivity. To bring the productivity of UPHDB to the desired level, I took help of human resource management techniques to increase the motivational level of the employees and in turn to improve their effectiveness and efficiency. To get employees motivated by using H R practices to achieve the desired level of organizational productivity, I applied some techniques of motivations. After studying the situation, I found, one main reason of de-motivations because the zonal commissioner punished the employees for the different mistakes and errors they committed during the process.
Fortunately, in the mean time sixth pay commission submitted its report and sixth pay commission report was implemented in state as assembly election was due in the coming months. The recommendations of this commission nearly doubled the basic salaries and other benefits of the employees. I thought this extrinsic reward would motivate the employees. I kept a watch to assess the motivational level and productivity. After six month of pay increase, I observed no visible change in their motivation as well as productivity. Then, I concluded that two extrinsic factors (penal actions and salary/ benefits increase) were not able to increase their motivational levels.
After six month, I took some steps (intrinsic) to motivate the employees. I assured employees that they should work without any fear of punishment. If any mistake or error would occur unintentionally, I would not take cognizance of that, hence no punishment. I inspired them to learn and use computers which would benefit them personally first and the organization second. This would increase their efficiency and decrease process mistakes, so chances of penalization would automatically reduce. Over and above, it would update their knowledge and they would become computer literate. They realized the crux of my idea and learned. I managed one computer to each office to facilitate their endeavor and to avoid any distractions.
In another strategic move, I intentionally gave each employee one challenging task. In this effort, I set the target to sell the properties which were not sold in the last 10 years in their respective jurisdictions. These properties were in dilapidated conditions and hard to sell. I told them, you all are capable and able.
You need to recognize, validate and actualize it. If any need or help would be required to accomplish this task that I would provide. I told them some techniques, suitable to their locality, how to sell in order to accomplish this challenging task. They started making efforts and efforts started paying results slowly and slowly. Within ten month almost 80% of all old properties were sold. Through this success, they were able to validate their self-efficacy and actualize their potentials.
One more fact, I brought into their knowledge that shelter is the utmost need of each family. If you would be a help in any form to anyone in getting a shelter, it would be a unique life-time incident for that person and that person would remember you all along his or her life. Moreover, I convinced them that the services, which you were providing, were highly worthy to the society and your position has a great value and impact in serving the society. They felt this fact that their jobs are highly worthy. All these intrinsic motivators/rewards worked and employees became motivated and organizational productivity enhanced to the desired level in six months. To test the ranking of intrinsic and extrinsic job characteristics offered by public sector employees will be compared. It is expected that public-sector employees valued extrinsic rewards less in comparison to intrinsic rewards. Based on this review, I can formulate my hypothesis:
Public-sector employees value intrinsic rewards more than extrinsic rewards.
Literature Review: An organization’s productivity is closely and strongly related with the style of human resource management and the size of the organization (Gooding and Wagner III, 1985, pp. 462-481). Human resources managements broadly mean how people are managed by organizations. So, human resource management is pivotal for any organization in the light of its productivity. Michael, Armstrong (2006) in his book ‘ Human Resource Management Practice’ (10th ed. 2006) has defined “ human resource management (HRM) is the strategic and coherent approach to the management of an organization's most valued assets - the people working there who individually and collectively contribute to the achievement of the objectives of the business”. The terms "human resource management" and "human resources" (HR) have largely replaced the term "personnel management" as a description of the processes involved in managing people in organizations. In simple sense, HRM means employing people, developing their resources, utilizing, maintaining and compensating their services in tune with the job and organizational requirement. While Miller (1987) suggests that HRM relates to: ".......those decisions and actions which concern the management of employees at all levels in the business and which are related to the implementation of strategies directed towards creating and sustaining competitive advantage(p. 352) ". HRM is also seen by practitioners in the field as a more innovative view of workplace management than the traditional approach. Its techniques force the managers of an enterprise to express their goals with specificity so that they can be understood and undertaken by the workforce and to provide the resources needed for them to successfully accomplish their assignments. As such, HRM techniques, when properly practiced, are expressive of the goals and operating practices of the enterprise overall.
Synonyms such as personnel management are often used in a more restricted sense to describe activities that are necessary in the recruiting of a workforce, providing its members with payroll and benefits, and administrating their work-life needs. So an actual definition of personnel management as being: “a series of activities which: first enable working people and their employing organizations to agree about the objectives and nature of their working relationship and, secondly, ensures that the agreement is fulfilled" (Torrington and Hall 1987, p. 49).
One crucial responsibility of a HR manager is to motivate employees to harness their potential optimally to accomplish the assigned task. Motivation is the activation or energization of goal-oriented behavior. The term is generally used for humans. According to various theories, motivation may be rooted in the basic need to minimize physical pain and maximize pleasure, or it may include specific needs such as eating and resting, or a desired object, hobby, goal, state of being, ideal, or it may be attributed to less-apparent reasons such as altruism, morality, or avoiding mortality. There are different motivational theories evolved in the course of motivation practices. The incentive theory of motivations says that a reward, tangible or intangible, is presented after the occurrence of an action (i.e. behavior) with the intent to cause the behavior to occur again. This is done by associating positive meaning to the behavior. A number of drive theories throw light on it. Drive theory is based on the principle that organisms are born with certain physiological needs and that a negative state of tension is created when these needs are not satisfied. When a need is satisfied, drive is reduced and the organism returns to a state of homeostasis and relaxation. According to the theory, drive tends to increase over time and operates on a feedback control system. Cognitive dissonance theory, suggested by Leon Festinger, occurs when an individual experiences some degree of discomfort resulting from an incompatibility between two cognitions.
Frederick Herberg’s two-factor theory intrinsic/extrinsic motivation concludes that certain factors in the workplace result in job satisfaction, but if absent, lead to dissatisfaction. Herberg classified motivation into intrinsic or extrinsic. Just to define, intrinsic motivation comes from rewards inherent to a task or activity itself - the enjoyment of a puzzle or the love of playing (Deci, E. 1972, p 113-120). While extrinsic motivation comes from outside of the performer. The intrinsic form of motivation has been studied by social and educational psychologists since the early 1970s. Intrinsic motivation has been explained by Fritz Heider's attribution theory, Bandura's work on self-efficacy (Bandura, A. 1997, pp. 604) and Ryan and Deci's cognitive evaluation theory. Students are likely to be intrinsically motivated if they: 1. attribute their educational results to internal factors that they can control (e.g. the amount of effort they put in), 2. Believe they can be effective agents in reaching desired goals (i.e. the results are not determined by luck), 3. Are interested in mastering a topic, rather than just rote-learning to achieve good grades. Professor Steven Reiss studies involving more than 6,000 people and has proposed a theory that finds 16 basic desires that guide nearly all human behavior (Reiss, Steven, 2004, p 179-193). The desires areas are acceptance, the need for approval; curiosity, the need to think; eating, the need for food; family, the need to raise children; honor, the need to be loyal to the traditional values of one's clan/ethnic group; idealism, the need for social justice; independence, the need for individuality; physical Activity, the need for exercise; power, the need for influence of will; romance, the need for sex; saving, the need to collect; social Contact, the need for friends (peer relationships); status, the need for social standing/importance; tranquility, the need to be safe; vengeance, the need to strike back and order, the need for organized, stable, predictable environments.
In this model, people differ in these basic desires. These basic desires represent intrinsic desires that directly motivate a person's behavior, and not aimed at indirectly satisfying other desires. People may also be motivated by non-basic desires, but in this case this does not relate to deep motivation, or only as a means to achieve other basic desires. Extrinsic motivation comes from outside of the performer. Money is the most obvious example, but coercion and threat of punishment are also common extrinsic motivations. In sports, the crowd may cheer on the performer, which may motivate him or her to do well. Trophies are also extrinsic incentives. Competition in general is extrinsic because it encourages the performer to win and beat others, not to enjoy the intrinsic rewards of the activity. Social psychological research has indicated that extrinsic rewards can lead to over justifications and a subsequent reduction in intrinsic motivation. In one study demonstrating this effect, children who expected to be (and were) rewarded with a ribbon and a gold star for drawing pictures spent less time playing with the drawing materials in subsequent observations than children who were assigned to an unexpected reward condition and to children who received no extrinsic reward (Lepper, M. R., Greene, D. & Nesbit, R. E. 1973, pp. 129-137). Frederick Herzberg’s two factor theory deals with hygiene factors (extrinsic) like job security, salary and fringe benefit that do motivate if present, but, if absent, results in demotivation. The name Hygiene factors is used because, like hygiene, the presence will not make you healthier, but absence can cause health deterioration. J. R. Hackman, and G. R. Oldham (1976, p 250-79) in their paper "Motivation through design of work". Organizational behavior and human performance listed some factors that are extrinsic from the job itself. These are company policy and administration, supervision, working conditions, interpersonal relations, company, policies, salary, and status and job security.
In the public sector, both intrinsic and extrinsic motivators are used to motivate the employees/workforce in order to enhance the productivity. Which one has greater effect is the point of discussion evaluations of this paper. David J. Houston (2000) in his paper relates that public employees are more likely to places a higher value on the intrinsic reward of work that is important and provides a feeling of accomplishment, and they are less likely to place a high value on such extrinsic rewards motivators as high income and short work exits(p 713-27). The findings of this paper support the hypothesis that intrinsic factors are more effective than extrinsic factor in public sectors. In another research in the public sector of Greek, applying survey, it is established that extrinsic rewards such as job security and salary were more effective than extrinsic rewards, like the opportunity to be creative and “make a difference” (Bradford, 2008, p. 14-16). The findings of these two papers are contrary to each other. Why do public employees desire intrinsic nonmonetary opportunities? To find out a solution of this, Leonard Bright (2009) did a research and he has demonstrated that public employees highly desire intrinsic nonmonetary opportunities. This study sought to understand why this is the case by exploring the relationships that public sector motivation has to public employees’ intrinsic nonmonetary preferences while taking into account a range of confounding variables. The findings reveal that public sector motivation (PSM) is a significant predicator of public employees’ desire for personal recognition, task meaningfulness, and professional growth, over and above the effects of several confounding variables assessed (p. 15-37).
One of the most widely discussed theories of workplace motivation is proposed by Herzberz (1959, 1966, 1976) that extrinsic factors in an employee’s job, such as working conditions and compensation level, do not actually motivate employees, and that optional levels of job commitment cannot be “ brought” by improvements in these areas. According to Herzberg, intrinsic factors, such as the challenge faced in one’s work and the amount of growth in personal abilities occasioned by one’s work are crucial in creating dedication to one’s workplace responsibilities. To test this theory, Park et al. (1988) conducted a study among the employees of US and Republic of Korea. The results are in the direction of affirming Herzberg’s theory in both countries (p 40-61). Dimitris Manolopoulos (2008) scrutinized and evaluated, using descriptive statistics and ordered probit regression model, on data from a unique questionnaire- based survey. The findings of the study show that extrinsic rewards seem to exert stronger influence on employees’ preferences than intrinsic motives (p. 1783). Another study establishes that the basic framework provided by goal theory can not only incorporate but also support the fundamental assumption of public service motivation: that the intrinsic rewards provided by the nature or function of the organization may be more important to public sector employees than-or compensate for the limited availability of performance-related extrinsic rewards (Bradley E. Wright, 2007, P54-64). It is also experienced that what is true for one country’s employees may not be true for the other countries employees. To establish correlation between two such circumstances, Michael et al. studied and found that in US and Europe government employees placed more emphasis on intrinsic variables as compared to extrinsic variables. But when they studied on Australian public employees it did not find applicable like US and Europe (Michael Jay Polonsky et al., 2002, Pg 67). Donald P Moynihan et al. (2007) in their research “the role of organizations in fostering public service motivation” offered evidence that the public service motivation strengthens employee tie with the public sector, providing a basis for loyalty, motivation, and commitment that is more effective than monetary incentives.
Analysis of the Case Study based on literature review: My hypothesis is to evaluate between two motivational models of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards; which one has a greater effect on public sector employees. In literature review, some authors infer intrinsic rewards while others infer extrinsic rewards. There is a conflicting view on this issue; however the majority is in support of intrinsic rewards. When employees were penalized in UPHDB, it did not motivate them. It acted as disincentives when their pays were deducted and promotions were delayed. These punishments demoralized them and acted as a negative incentive rather than positive one. Punishments bring down the prestige of the employees, and after a point of time they assumed that they would not get benefit and become insensitive to it. Donald P Moynihan et al. (2007) discuss organizational role to foster the tie of employee with organization based on loyalty and commitment, but in the case of UPHDB, it is the reverse. Punishment weakened the ties of employees and as a result motivation and commitment level went down. This is the reason why motivation did not work. Enhanced salary did not pay dividend in terms of motivational increase. In my assessment, it is situational. In India, it is mandatory to constitute a pay commission every ten year. On the recommendations of pay commission, federal and state governments take the decision of increasing the salary and benefits with modifications as per the need of the hour and situation demands.
After each commission there was an increase in salary. Employees don’t perceive it as any new benefit, so it does not motivate them. Employees are only concerned with what the scale of increase is. In my opinion, this is the main reason why it failed to bring results. Bradford (2008) established that increase in salary motivates employees. This is not validating the case of UPHDB under discussion. The reason may be the situation of the case. In the case of Greek public sector, employees perceived some additional benefit so they became motivated, while in my case it is perceived as routine benefit. If we evaluate in this light, then my case is in consistent with the papers’ findings. Why extrinsic motivators didn’t work is supported by the facts as discussed in the paper. Due to situational difference as Bradley E. Wright (2007) has .inferred that what is true for one country’s employees may not be true for the other countries employees? This is applicable here; it worked with one type of workforce while it is ineffective with the others. In the case of intrinsic rewards, when they realized after my discussion with them that computer knowledge would serve them first and organizational interest would be secondary, they tried their best to learn the computer. They thought of two main benefits out of this. One, they would be computer literate. Two, it would improve their efficiency. They perceived this as new personal gains. This is consistent with the concept that “does mission matters” (Bradley E. Wright, 2007). The mission of computer learning was the cause of motivation which appealed to employees.
Employees in UPHDB are not aware that their services are important and they are respected in public. When I made effort to expose this fact to them, they found themselves worthy to the society. This feeling made them motivated. Employees felt fulfilled and elated to see their position beneficial to the public. Leonard Bright (2009) demonstrated that public employees highly desire intrinsic nonmonetary opportunities. In this case, it is consistent with this finding. Salary increase, i.e. monetary benefit, did not motivate them while unselfish act (feeling of worthiness) motivated employees. Most people like challenge by virtue of their nature; provided they get the assurance that they would not be harmed in case of mistake and error. The selling of dilapidated and old properties are a difficult task. When I assigned this task, they were a bit nervous, thinking whether they would be able to meet the target or not. If not, then they would be punished. But when they took the challenge without any fear of punishment as per my assurance (a positive step) and my constant support, they started getting results. By this action, they tried to validate their capability and ability. Apart from the validation of self-efficacy, they also actualized their potential. They felt that they are able to take the challenges and possess the potential. The workplace motivation matters provided it is implemented by making the atmosphere conducive. To affirm Herzber’s theory, Park et al. (1988) conducted interviews and found that self-efficacy and self- actualization by challenging task increased commitment. In turn, commitment leads to increase in motivation. In the case of UPHDB this happened. This is also in consistent with the findings of David J. Houston (2000)
Conclusion: From the analysis in the light of the literature review, to evaluate between two motivational models of intrinsic and extrinsic, which one has a greater effect on public sector employees? It is found that most of the research conducted is supporting the case of UPHDB. While some case are there which negates the hypothesis. In conflicting situation, I evaluated the situation of negative results. On minute analysis, it is inferred that the situation in both cases are different. If conditions are different then a negative result is expected. Seeing the job conditions of public sector, the case at UPHDB is supported by the literature that intrinsic motivations a have greater effect than that of extrinsic motivations in public sectors as discussed and evaluated above. Hence my postulation is affirmed by the research papers.
Reference:
1. Richard Z. Gooding and John A. Wagner III, • Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 30, No. 4 (Dec., 1985), pp. 462-481
2. Deci, E. (1972), "Intrinsic Motivation, Extrinsic Reinforcement, and Inequity", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 22 (1): 113-120
3. Bandura, A. (1997), Self-efficacy: The exercise of control, New York: Freeman, pp. 604, ISBN 9780716726265
4. Reiss, Steven (2004), "Multifaceted nature of intrinsic motivation: The theory of 16 basic desires", Review of General Psychology 8 (3): 179-193
5. Lepper, M. R., Greene, D. & Nisbett, R. E. (1973) Undermining children's intrinsic interest with extrinsic rewards: A test of the overjustification hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 28(1), pp. 129-137.
6. J. R. Hackman, G. R. Oldham (1976). "Motivation through design of work". Organizational behaviour and human performance 16: 250–79. doi:10.1016/0030-5073(76)90016-7
7. David J. Houston (2000), “Public-Service Motivations, A Multivariate Test.” J-PART 10(2000):4:713-727
8. Bradford (2008) “Employee motivation in the Greek public sector” HRMID vol 16, Iss.3, p. 14-16
9. Leonard Bright ( 2009) “ Why do public employees desire intrinsic nonmonetary opportunities” Fall 2009; 38,3 ABI/INFORM Global
10. Park, Chunoh, Lovrich, Nicholas P, Soden, Dennis L, (1988) “Testing Herzberg’s Motivation theory in a comparative study”. Vol. 8. Iss. 3. p 40-61
11. Dimitris Manolopoulos (2008) “Work motivation in the Hellenic extended public sector: an empirical investigation.” Vol. 19, Iss. 9; pg 1738
12. Bradley E. Wright (2007) “Public service and motivations: Does mission matter.” Vol.67, Iss.1 P54-64
13. Michael Jay Polonsky, Laura shelley, Ranjit Voola ( 2002) “ An experiment of helping behavior- some evidence from Australia.” Vol. 10, Iss. 2 Pg 67
AT
Uttar Pradesh Housing and Development Board (UPHDB): A leader as a Producer
HEERA LAL
Introduction: This paper is going to examine the impact of motivational human resource practices in the Uttar Pradesh Housing and Development (UPHDB), Lucknow, UP, India. A brief overview of the organization and its development will be presented as well as a rationale for implementation of human resource practices. The different update practices undertaken prior to implementation will be outlined, the current status of the HR practices will be detailed and the obstacles encountered will be examined using the leadership theory. In the last, suggestions for getting it implemented will be made.
Organization Overview: There are three most sought and very basic needs of people: food, cloth and shelter. To fulfill the one very basic need of the people, UPHDB was brought into life by the state assembly through an act in 1965 and it is called (in Hindi) ‘the Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam; the English translation of this is UPHDB’. UPHDB’s operational area extends to the whole of Uttar Pradesh excluding cantonment areas. Per the act, a Board to be called the Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad was established by a notification in the Gazette in April 1966. The Board shall be a body corporate, with the name aforesaid. The Board shall consist of a president, who shall ordinarily be a non-official, appointed by the State Government, and six non-official members, appointed by the State Government, of whom one shall be the mayor of a municipal corporation and two shall be members of the State Legislature, one from each House thereof. The other members are secretaries and the head of departments.
This high power board is the apex body of UPHDB to run it smoothly and to accomplish the objective. UPHDB is a nodal agency with top ranking among all housing agencies of the state. This works towards the housing solutions of the state. After independence, India has adopted a mix model of development where private and public both work together. In this light, this public sector was created by the state government to cater the need of affordable houses and one basic need of the housing sector. There are many others government housing development authorities across the state but the operational area of each is very small, limited to a small portion within a district, unlike UPHDB which works in whole UP. Initially, it focused to develop houses and residential plots. But during the course of time UPHDB has progressed with various landmarks in the field of housing. It has won national level housing competitions organized by HUDCO in the year 1976 and 1979.
Besides normal housing projects board has diversified its activities to planning, designing, construction and development of almost all types of urban development projects through out the state of Uttar Pradesh. UPHDB has planned and executed various projects for the development of health and education department. It is also handling new district headquarters projects for the revenue department with the execution of large number of schemes. It has attained capability of executing large residential colonies and townships. The UPHDB is an autonomous body and is capable to manage its activities with its own resources. Extra resources are generated with the help of loans from various financial institutions like Housing and Urban Development Corporation, Unit Trust of India, Life Insurance Corporation, banks and HDFC etc.
Broadly speaking, UPHDB is fully developed with good reputation and lived up to the expectations of the public during its 42 years of (1966 -2008) life. It enjoyed the confidence of the public and rated as one of the best organization of the state government. On one hand, UPHDB is not able to meet the demand of the public. On the other hand, private organizations are not able to sell their developed properties. This is a convincing proof that it is enjoying high reputation in public, who are the real assessor. The current recession has further fortified the position of UPHDB that it is enjoying the wide confidence of public as its demand has not gone down during the ongoing recession while private sectors has almost no demands during past two years since recession started. The growing number of project sites and increasing turnover year after year are also other examples of its success. Over the years, it has acquired keen expertise in resource mobilization for all kinds of housing and urban development projects. UPHDB can handle projects of any magnitude on turnkey basis in India and abroad. UPHDB have notified 137 cities for its activities. It has acquired 621.24 hectare of land in 78 cities where housing schemes are being developed. UPHDB has so far developed about 280,247 plots and houses of different sizes suitable to the requirement of every section of the society. This is a humble contribution of UPHDB towards society. The main feathers in the cap of UPHDB are as illustrated below:
Quality Consciousness: UPHDB is highly conscious towards quality and have developed its own quality control manual. The board has established one central laboratory and many regional testing laboratories. Besides these there are site labs with almost all schemes of the board.
Housing for the Shelter less: For these people 8,480 dwelling units have been constructed under “Aashraya Yojna” at different places. This is one primary objective for which UPHDB is created.
Housing for Middle Class: Another sector, which requires special attention, is the lower middle class. For these people UPHDB has so far constructed about 200,000 dwelling units and plans to construct/develop another 550 dwelling units in upcoming financial year.
Multi storied Commercial Arch cades and Offices: The UPHDB has constructed multi storied office buildings and commercial towers for its own and public use. It has also developed market areas and convenient shopping. Providing public facilities have also always been on Board’s priority.
Innovative Management Techniques: Recognizing the need for modern management techniques, UPHDB has adopted latest and many innovative methods and techniques; for its faster growth such as: A) Land through negotiation: Normal procedure for land acquisition is highly time consuming and problem some. UPHDB is now directly negotiating with farmers/land owners for acquiring land for urban housing programs. This method of Land Acquisition is turning to be much successful. UPHDB is also planning to acquire land on “Benefit Sharing Basis”. This innovative approach may tempt many landowners to part with their land for housing and urban development projects. It is also considering joint venture ship with private developers and organizations of repute for mass housing to meet the increased demand. B) Building Center: With a view to innovate and practice new building materials, UPHDB established its own Building Centers at 4 places in the state. New materials produced at these Centers are being used in various housing schemes of the board and other local bodies. C) Diversification: The board has diversified its activities for executing projects of bigger magnitude for other departments and agencies. At present it has many projects of Rs. 333.63 crore in hand. It includes construction of 4 to 10 storied multistoried buildings, their infrastructure. By Constructing 300 bedded hospitals, office, building for various government departments, overall development and construction of newly created district headquarters and mass group housing; UPHDB has proved that it is able to accomplish its objective.
Evolution of Human Resource Practices in UPHDB: The broad organizational chart is as depicted below:
The acts of UPHDB states that the Board shall consist of a President, who shall ordinarily be a non-official, appointed by the State Government. In the spirit of this mandate the state government appoints president sometimes political person and sometimes senior bureaucrat. This is the sweet will of the state government. It is noteworthy that whenever a non-official occupies the seat, he lacks the required expertise. The present president is a member of IAS cadre and prior to this the appointee was a political person. The act also assigns that the top management officers will be from the premium service cadre of the state. The names of the premium service cadres are: Indian Administrative Services (IAS) and Provincial Civil Services (PCS). In the compliance of the provision of the act the housing commissioner, the Additional housing commissioner cum secretary and other additional commissioners and zonal officers are posted on deputation from state administrative services. These officers are selected by a constitutional body called the Union Public Service Commission at the federal level and the State Public Service Commission at the state level. The selection and screening process is highly rigorous, tough, and flaw less. Because of this only suitable cream brains are able to qualify the exam and get selected. The finance controller is also on deputation form the state treasury and account services. He is also selected through the same exam and procedure. There is no doubt that the top brass of the organization is capable and able to run it to the desired level.
The state government appoints them on deputation and they work till its will. The State government exercises the control over the organizations though this indirect mechanism of appointing the top management officials. We say it is autonomous and independent of the government, but the ground reality is somewhat different. UPHDB works in the influence of the government.
Except above, rest workers are permanent employees of the board. They all selected at lower level in their respective functional division and by promotion they go up the ladder of hierarchy. The technical services of the board are: engineering, architect, finance and marketing.
In the engineering department the intake is of three types: candidates having the industrial training institute (ITI) certificate, diploma in engineering and degree engineering. The intake processes of all three are the same. The vacancy is advertised. The advertisement includes the number of the vacancies, technical requirements, desired experiences (in some cases) and time table of the selection process. In all, a screening test is conducted. Though this test most of the people are screened and in the second step of interview, an interview committee constituted by the housing commissioner interviewed three times the total vacancy. The interview is conducted and each member awards the number to make the process independent of each other and to avoid any malpractice. The final merit list is prepared by adding the number of the test and interview. In general, the weight of test is 80% and that of the interview is 20%. From the final merit list selection is made. After this selection process the police verification is done to know their criminal records. If any information against any candidate comes in knowledge then the candidature of that candidate is cancelled. The ITI candidates went up to executive engineer level through promotion. The diploma candidates reach to Superintending Engineer level while the degree holders reach to the highest level of the Engineer-in-Chief. The head of the engineering department is the Engineer-in-Chief. He reports to the housing commissioner through the secretary in normal course but sometimes he reports directly to the commissioner which is against the spirit of the act.
In the architect department, candidates with a degree and ITI certificate are selected through the same process as followed in the engineering department. A degree candidate reaches to the highest level of chief architect while ITI candidates get promotions up to assistant chief architect. In the finance department, the finance controller and chief account officer are taken on deputation form treasury services of the state government. Accountants are recruited as detailed above. They are promoted to different stages and finally reached to the account officer. Accountants are posted in the zonal offices under different designations as their job is to maintain property accounts of each property. In the marketing department, Estate Management Officers are recruited as per the set norm of the organizations and they get first promotion as assistant housing commissioner and then further promoted to deputy housing commissioner. The recruitments and promotions processes are the activities of the board round the year.
Case study: I joined UPHDB in June, 2008, as zonal commissioner Agra. The productivity level of this zone was not up to the desired level. The housing commissioner asked me to enhance the productivity. To bring the productivity of UPHDB to the desired level, I took help of human resource management techniques to increase the motivational level of the employees and in turn to improve their effectiveness and efficiency. To get employees motivated by using H R practices to achieve the desired level of organizational productivity, I applied some techniques of motivations. After studying the situation, I found, one main reason of de-motivations because the zonal commissioner punished the employees for the different mistakes and errors they committed during the process.
Fortunately, in the mean time sixth pay commission submitted its report and sixth pay commission report was implemented in state as assembly election was due in the coming months. The recommendations of this commission nearly doubled the basic salaries and other benefits of the employees. I thought this extrinsic reward would motivate the employees. I kept a watch to assess the motivational level and productivity. After six month of pay increase, I observed no visible change in their motivation as well as productivity. Then, I concluded that two extrinsic factors (penal actions and salary/ benefits increase) were not able to increase their motivational levels.
After six month, I took some steps (intrinsic) to motivate the employees. I assured employees that they should work without any fear of punishment. If any mistake or error would occur unintentionally, I would not take cognizance of that, hence no punishment. I inspired them to learn and use computers which would benefit them personally first and the organization second. This would increase their efficiency and decrease process mistakes, so chances of penalization would automatically reduce. Over and above, it would update their knowledge and they would become computer literate. They realized the crux of my idea and learned. I managed one computer to each office to facilitate their endeavor and to avoid any distractions.
In another strategic move, I intentionally gave each employee one challenging task. In this effort, I set the target to sell the properties which were not sold in the last 10 years in their respective jurisdictions. These properties were in dilapidated conditions and hard to sell. I told them, you all are capable and able.
You need to recognize, validate and actualize it. If any need or help would be required to accomplish this task that I would provide. I told them some techniques, suitable to their locality, how to sell in order to accomplish this challenging task. They started making efforts and efforts started paying results slowly and slowly. Within ten month almost 80% of all old properties were sold. Through this success, they were able to validate their self-efficacy and actualize their potentials.
One more fact, I brought into their knowledge that shelter is the utmost need of each family. If you would be a help in any form to anyone in getting a shelter, it would be a unique life-time incident for that person and that person would remember you all along his or her life. Moreover, I convinced them that the services, which you were providing, were highly worthy to the society and your position has a great value and impact in serving the society. They felt this fact that their jobs are highly worthy. All these intrinsic motivators/rewards worked and employees became motivated and organizational productivity enhanced to the desired level in six months. To test the ranking of intrinsic and extrinsic job characteristics offered by public sector employees will be compared. It is expected that public-sector employees valued extrinsic rewards less in comparison to intrinsic rewards. Based on this review, I can formulate my hypothesis:
Public-sector employees value intrinsic rewards more than extrinsic rewards.
Literature Review: An organization’s productivity is closely and strongly related with the style of human resource management and the size of the organization (Gooding and Wagner III, 1985, pp. 462-481). Human resources managements broadly mean how people are managed by organizations. So, human resource management is pivotal for any organization in the light of its productivity. Michael, Armstrong (2006) in his book ‘ Human Resource Management Practice’ (10th ed. 2006) has defined “ human resource management (HRM) is the strategic and coherent approach to the management of an organization's most valued assets - the people working there who individually and collectively contribute to the achievement of the objectives of the business”. The terms "human resource management" and "human resources" (HR) have largely replaced the term "personnel management" as a description of the processes involved in managing people in organizations. In simple sense, HRM means employing people, developing their resources, utilizing, maintaining and compensating their services in tune with the job and organizational requirement. While Miller (1987) suggests that HRM relates to: ".......those decisions and actions which concern the management of employees at all levels in the business and which are related to the implementation of strategies directed towards creating and sustaining competitive advantage(p. 352) ". HRM is also seen by practitioners in the field as a more innovative view of workplace management than the traditional approach. Its techniques force the managers of an enterprise to express their goals with specificity so that they can be understood and undertaken by the workforce and to provide the resources needed for them to successfully accomplish their assignments. As such, HRM techniques, when properly practiced, are expressive of the goals and operating practices of the enterprise overall.
Synonyms such as personnel management are often used in a more restricted sense to describe activities that are necessary in the recruiting of a workforce, providing its members with payroll and benefits, and administrating their work-life needs. So an actual definition of personnel management as being: “a series of activities which: first enable working people and their employing organizations to agree about the objectives and nature of their working relationship and, secondly, ensures that the agreement is fulfilled" (Torrington and Hall 1987, p. 49).
One crucial responsibility of a HR manager is to motivate employees to harness their potential optimally to accomplish the assigned task. Motivation is the activation or energization of goal-oriented behavior. The term is generally used for humans. According to various theories, motivation may be rooted in the basic need to minimize physical pain and maximize pleasure, or it may include specific needs such as eating and resting, or a desired object, hobby, goal, state of being, ideal, or it may be attributed to less-apparent reasons such as altruism, morality, or avoiding mortality. There are different motivational theories evolved in the course of motivation practices. The incentive theory of motivations says that a reward, tangible or intangible, is presented after the occurrence of an action (i.e. behavior) with the intent to cause the behavior to occur again. This is done by associating positive meaning to the behavior. A number of drive theories throw light on it. Drive theory is based on the principle that organisms are born with certain physiological needs and that a negative state of tension is created when these needs are not satisfied. When a need is satisfied, drive is reduced and the organism returns to a state of homeostasis and relaxation. According to the theory, drive tends to increase over time and operates on a feedback control system. Cognitive dissonance theory, suggested by Leon Festinger, occurs when an individual experiences some degree of discomfort resulting from an incompatibility between two cognitions.
Frederick Herberg’s two-factor theory intrinsic/extrinsic motivation concludes that certain factors in the workplace result in job satisfaction, but if absent, lead to dissatisfaction. Herberg classified motivation into intrinsic or extrinsic. Just to define, intrinsic motivation comes from rewards inherent to a task or activity itself - the enjoyment of a puzzle or the love of playing (Deci, E. 1972, p 113-120). While extrinsic motivation comes from outside of the performer. The intrinsic form of motivation has been studied by social and educational psychologists since the early 1970s. Intrinsic motivation has been explained by Fritz Heider's attribution theory, Bandura's work on self-efficacy (Bandura, A. 1997, pp. 604) and Ryan and Deci's cognitive evaluation theory. Students are likely to be intrinsically motivated if they: 1. attribute their educational results to internal factors that they can control (e.g. the amount of effort they put in), 2. Believe they can be effective agents in reaching desired goals (i.e. the results are not determined by luck), 3. Are interested in mastering a topic, rather than just rote-learning to achieve good grades. Professor Steven Reiss studies involving more than 6,000 people and has proposed a theory that finds 16 basic desires that guide nearly all human behavior (Reiss, Steven, 2004, p 179-193). The desires areas are acceptance, the need for approval; curiosity, the need to think; eating, the need for food; family, the need to raise children; honor, the need to be loyal to the traditional values of one's clan/ethnic group; idealism, the need for social justice; independence, the need for individuality; physical Activity, the need for exercise; power, the need for influence of will; romance, the need for sex; saving, the need to collect; social Contact, the need for friends (peer relationships); status, the need for social standing/importance; tranquility, the need to be safe; vengeance, the need to strike back and order, the need for organized, stable, predictable environments.
In this model, people differ in these basic desires. These basic desires represent intrinsic desires that directly motivate a person's behavior, and not aimed at indirectly satisfying other desires. People may also be motivated by non-basic desires, but in this case this does not relate to deep motivation, or only as a means to achieve other basic desires. Extrinsic motivation comes from outside of the performer. Money is the most obvious example, but coercion and threat of punishment are also common extrinsic motivations. In sports, the crowd may cheer on the performer, which may motivate him or her to do well. Trophies are also extrinsic incentives. Competition in general is extrinsic because it encourages the performer to win and beat others, not to enjoy the intrinsic rewards of the activity. Social psychological research has indicated that extrinsic rewards can lead to over justifications and a subsequent reduction in intrinsic motivation. In one study demonstrating this effect, children who expected to be (and were) rewarded with a ribbon and a gold star for drawing pictures spent less time playing with the drawing materials in subsequent observations than children who were assigned to an unexpected reward condition and to children who received no extrinsic reward (Lepper, M. R., Greene, D. & Nesbit, R. E. 1973, pp. 129-137). Frederick Herzberg’s two factor theory deals with hygiene factors (extrinsic) like job security, salary and fringe benefit that do motivate if present, but, if absent, results in demotivation. The name Hygiene factors is used because, like hygiene, the presence will not make you healthier, but absence can cause health deterioration. J. R. Hackman, and G. R. Oldham (1976, p 250-79) in their paper "Motivation through design of work". Organizational behavior and human performance listed some factors that are extrinsic from the job itself. These are company policy and administration, supervision, working conditions, interpersonal relations, company, policies, salary, and status and job security.
In the public sector, both intrinsic and extrinsic motivators are used to motivate the employees/workforce in order to enhance the productivity. Which one has greater effect is the point of discussion evaluations of this paper. David J. Houston (2000) in his paper relates that public employees are more likely to places a higher value on the intrinsic reward of work that is important and provides a feeling of accomplishment, and they are less likely to place a high value on such extrinsic rewards motivators as high income and short work exits(p 713-27). The findings of this paper support the hypothesis that intrinsic factors are more effective than extrinsic factor in public sectors. In another research in the public sector of Greek, applying survey, it is established that extrinsic rewards such as job security and salary were more effective than extrinsic rewards, like the opportunity to be creative and “make a difference” (Bradford, 2008, p. 14-16). The findings of these two papers are contrary to each other. Why do public employees desire intrinsic nonmonetary opportunities? To find out a solution of this, Leonard Bright (2009) did a research and he has demonstrated that public employees highly desire intrinsic nonmonetary opportunities. This study sought to understand why this is the case by exploring the relationships that public sector motivation has to public employees’ intrinsic nonmonetary preferences while taking into account a range of confounding variables. The findings reveal that public sector motivation (PSM) is a significant predicator of public employees’ desire for personal recognition, task meaningfulness, and professional growth, over and above the effects of several confounding variables assessed (p. 15-37).
One of the most widely discussed theories of workplace motivation is proposed by Herzberz (1959, 1966, 1976) that extrinsic factors in an employee’s job, such as working conditions and compensation level, do not actually motivate employees, and that optional levels of job commitment cannot be “ brought” by improvements in these areas. According to Herzberg, intrinsic factors, such as the challenge faced in one’s work and the amount of growth in personal abilities occasioned by one’s work are crucial in creating dedication to one’s workplace responsibilities. To test this theory, Park et al. (1988) conducted a study among the employees of US and Republic of Korea. The results are in the direction of affirming Herzberg’s theory in both countries (p 40-61). Dimitris Manolopoulos (2008) scrutinized and evaluated, using descriptive statistics and ordered probit regression model, on data from a unique questionnaire- based survey. The findings of the study show that extrinsic rewards seem to exert stronger influence on employees’ preferences than intrinsic motives (p. 1783). Another study establishes that the basic framework provided by goal theory can not only incorporate but also support the fundamental assumption of public service motivation: that the intrinsic rewards provided by the nature or function of the organization may be more important to public sector employees than-or compensate for the limited availability of performance-related extrinsic rewards (Bradley E. Wright, 2007, P54-64). It is also experienced that what is true for one country’s employees may not be true for the other countries employees. To establish correlation between two such circumstances, Michael et al. studied and found that in US and Europe government employees placed more emphasis on intrinsic variables as compared to extrinsic variables. But when they studied on Australian public employees it did not find applicable like US and Europe (Michael Jay Polonsky et al., 2002, Pg 67). Donald P Moynihan et al. (2007) in their research “the role of organizations in fostering public service motivation” offered evidence that the public service motivation strengthens employee tie with the public sector, providing a basis for loyalty, motivation, and commitment that is more effective than monetary incentives.
Analysis of the Case Study based on literature review: My hypothesis is to evaluate between two motivational models of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards; which one has a greater effect on public sector employees. In literature review, some authors infer intrinsic rewards while others infer extrinsic rewards. There is a conflicting view on this issue; however the majority is in support of intrinsic rewards. When employees were penalized in UPHDB, it did not motivate them. It acted as disincentives when their pays were deducted and promotions were delayed. These punishments demoralized them and acted as a negative incentive rather than positive one. Punishments bring down the prestige of the employees, and after a point of time they assumed that they would not get benefit and become insensitive to it. Donald P Moynihan et al. (2007) discuss organizational role to foster the tie of employee with organization based on loyalty and commitment, but in the case of UPHDB, it is the reverse. Punishment weakened the ties of employees and as a result motivation and commitment level went down. This is the reason why motivation did not work. Enhanced salary did not pay dividend in terms of motivational increase. In my assessment, it is situational. In India, it is mandatory to constitute a pay commission every ten year. On the recommendations of pay commission, federal and state governments take the decision of increasing the salary and benefits with modifications as per the need of the hour and situation demands.
After each commission there was an increase in salary. Employees don’t perceive it as any new benefit, so it does not motivate them. Employees are only concerned with what the scale of increase is. In my opinion, this is the main reason why it failed to bring results. Bradford (2008) established that increase in salary motivates employees. This is not validating the case of UPHDB under discussion. The reason may be the situation of the case. In the case of Greek public sector, employees perceived some additional benefit so they became motivated, while in my case it is perceived as routine benefit. If we evaluate in this light, then my case is in consistent with the papers’ findings. Why extrinsic motivators didn’t work is supported by the facts as discussed in the paper. Due to situational difference as Bradley E. Wright (2007) has .inferred that what is true for one country’s employees may not be true for the other countries employees? This is applicable here; it worked with one type of workforce while it is ineffective with the others. In the case of intrinsic rewards, when they realized after my discussion with them that computer knowledge would serve them first and organizational interest would be secondary, they tried their best to learn the computer. They thought of two main benefits out of this. One, they would be computer literate. Two, it would improve their efficiency. They perceived this as new personal gains. This is consistent with the concept that “does mission matters” (Bradley E. Wright, 2007). The mission of computer learning was the cause of motivation which appealed to employees.
Employees in UPHDB are not aware that their services are important and they are respected in public. When I made effort to expose this fact to them, they found themselves worthy to the society. This feeling made them motivated. Employees felt fulfilled and elated to see their position beneficial to the public. Leonard Bright (2009) demonstrated that public employees highly desire intrinsic nonmonetary opportunities. In this case, it is consistent with this finding. Salary increase, i.e. monetary benefit, did not motivate them while unselfish act (feeling of worthiness) motivated employees. Most people like challenge by virtue of their nature; provided they get the assurance that they would not be harmed in case of mistake and error. The selling of dilapidated and old properties are a difficult task. When I assigned this task, they were a bit nervous, thinking whether they would be able to meet the target or not. If not, then they would be punished. But when they took the challenge without any fear of punishment as per my assurance (a positive step) and my constant support, they started getting results. By this action, they tried to validate their capability and ability. Apart from the validation of self-efficacy, they also actualized their potential. They felt that they are able to take the challenges and possess the potential. The workplace motivation matters provided it is implemented by making the atmosphere conducive. To affirm Herzber’s theory, Park et al. (1988) conducted interviews and found that self-efficacy and self- actualization by challenging task increased commitment. In turn, commitment leads to increase in motivation. In the case of UPHDB this happened. This is also in consistent with the findings of David J. Houston (2000)
Conclusion: From the analysis in the light of the literature review, to evaluate between two motivational models of intrinsic and extrinsic, which one has a greater effect on public sector employees? It is found that most of the research conducted is supporting the case of UPHDB. While some case are there which negates the hypothesis. In conflicting situation, I evaluated the situation of negative results. On minute analysis, it is inferred that the situation in both cases are different. If conditions are different then a negative result is expected. Seeing the job conditions of public sector, the case at UPHDB is supported by the literature that intrinsic motivations a have greater effect than that of extrinsic motivations in public sectors as discussed and evaluated above. Hence my postulation is affirmed by the research papers.
Reference:
1. Richard Z. Gooding and John A. Wagner III, • Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 30, No. 4 (Dec., 1985), pp. 462-481
2. Deci, E. (1972), "Intrinsic Motivation, Extrinsic Reinforcement, and Inequity", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 22 (1): 113-120
3. Bandura, A. (1997), Self-efficacy: The exercise of control, New York: Freeman, pp. 604, ISBN 9780716726265
4. Reiss, Steven (2004), "Multifaceted nature of intrinsic motivation: The theory of 16 basic desires", Review of General Psychology 8 (3): 179-193
5. Lepper, M. R., Greene, D. & Nisbett, R. E. (1973) Undermining children's intrinsic interest with extrinsic rewards: A test of the overjustification hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 28(1), pp. 129-137.
6. J. R. Hackman, G. R. Oldham (1976). "Motivation through design of work". Organizational behaviour and human performance 16: 250–79. doi:10.1016/0030-5073(76)90016-7
7. David J. Houston (2000), “Public-Service Motivations, A Multivariate Test.” J-PART 10(2000):4:713-727
8. Bradford (2008) “Employee motivation in the Greek public sector” HRMID vol 16, Iss.3, p. 14-16
9. Leonard Bright ( 2009) “ Why do public employees desire intrinsic nonmonetary opportunities” Fall 2009; 38,3 ABI/INFORM Global
10. Park, Chunoh, Lovrich, Nicholas P, Soden, Dennis L, (1988) “Testing Herzberg’s Motivation theory in a comparative study”. Vol. 8. Iss. 3. p 40-61
11. Dimitris Manolopoulos (2008) “Work motivation in the Hellenic extended public sector: an empirical investigation.” Vol. 19, Iss. 9; pg 1738
12. Bradley E. Wright (2007) “Public service and motivations: Does mission matter.” Vol.67, Iss.1 P54-64
13. Michael Jay Polonsky, Laura shelley, Ranjit Voola ( 2002) “ An experiment of helping behavior- some evidence from Australia.” Vol. 10, Iss. 2 Pg 67
No comments:
Post a Comment