Porter's model of motivation. Porter-Lawler's theory of motivation: features and practical application

This model includes elements of expectancy theory and equity theory. Their model includes 5 variables: effort expended, perception, results obtained, reward, degree of satisfaction. According to this model, the results achieved depend on the efforts made by the employee, his abilities and characteristics, as well as his awareness of his role. The level of effort exerted will be determined by the value of the reward and the degree of confidence that a given level of effort will actually entail a very specific level of reward. In theory, it also establishes the relationship between reward and results, i.e. a person satisfies his needs through rewards for achieved results.

Rice. 8.3 – Porter-Lawler model

According to the model, the results achieved by an employee depend on three variables: the effort expended (3), the person’s abilities and characteristics (4), as well as his awareness of his role in the labor process (5). The level of effort expended in turn depends on the value of the reward (1) and the extent to which the person believes in the existence of a strong connection between the expenditure of effort and the possible reward (2). Achieving the required level of performance (6) may entail internal rewards (7a), such as a feeling of satisfaction from the work performed, a sense of competence and self-esteem, as well as external rewards (7b), such as praise from the manager, bonus, promotion.

The dotted line between performance and extrinsic reward means that there may be a connection between the performance of an employee and the rewards given to him. The fact is that these rewards reflect the reward opportunities determined by the manager for a given employee and the organization as a whole. The dotted line between performance and rewards perceived as fair (8) is used to show that, according to equity theory, people have their own assessment of the fairness of rewards given for certain results. Satisfaction (9) is the result of external and internal rewards, taking into account their fairness 98). Satisfaction is a measure of how valuable a reward actually is (1). This assessment will influence the person's perception of future situations.

APPLICABILITY OF THE THEORY OF JUSTICE IN PRACTICE

One of the most important conclusions of Porter and Lawler is that productive work leads to satisfaction. This is exactly the opposite of what most managers think about this. They are influenced by early theories of human relations, which believed that satisfaction leads to achievement of high results in work. In contrast, Porter and Lawler believe that a sense of accomplishment leads to satisfaction and appears to improve performance.

Major contribution to the understanding of motivation: Motivation is not a simple element in a chain of cause and effect. This model also shows how important it is to combine concepts such as effort and ability. Results, rewards, satisfaction and perception within a single interconnected system.

Flaws:

1. Precise definition reward values ​​are the main problem not only for the manager, but also for the employee himself.

2. Assessment of abilities and character traits is subjective and may not correspond to reality, which will minimize the effectiveness of the motivation model.

3. The choice of adequate remuneration is very limited for Ukrainian small and medium-sized businesses.

4. Insufficient objectivity of assessments is also typical for other elements of the model.

Theories of motivation are widely used in management practice different countries, including in Ukraine. However, their adaptation to the conditions of a particular enterprise may be essential.

Lyman Porter and Edward Lawler developed a comprehensive process theory of motivation, including elements of expectancy theory and equity theory. According to the Porter-Lawler model: the motive ends with the action of elimination motive or a need that has taken the specific form of a need for labor. However, it is known that motive as an internal urge to action is associated with and reflects external incentive influence. In the Porter-Lawler model, the connection with external motivating factors is presented only schematically. Also, the graphic part of the model is not clearly drawn up. Therefore, a manager, analyzing motivation in accordance with the Porter-Lawler model, cannot fully assess the individual’s focus on performing work with sufficient “effort” (see model below) or the effectiveness of work actions.

The model of Lyman Porter and Edward Lawler takes into account five elements that determine the process of motivation: effort expended, perception, results obtained, reward, degree of satisfaction. The motivation process according to this model (see Fig. 1) determines three factors: effort (3), ability and characteristics human (4), human awareness of his role in the labor process (5).

Fig. 1 Porter-Lawler's model of process theory of motivation

The level of effort expended depends on the value of the reward (1) and the employee's belief that the reward depends on the effort expended (2). When the given results are achieved, the employee realizes the significance of the work and approvingly evaluates this performance, that is, he internally encourages (rewards) himself for the work. He also expects external remuneration from the manager. In this case, the dotted line in the figure means that the remuneration is related to the performance of another participant in the organization, the rewards issued to him, as well as other participants who influenced the overall performance of the organization. The connection between the result and the expected fair reward (8) is indicated by a dash-dotted line.

Element (8) of the figure indicates employees’ personal assessment of remuneration fairness. The last ninth element of the figure (9) captures the elimination of needs, satisfaction. The level of need satisfaction will influence behavior in a similar situation in the future, that is, whether a person wants to go through the entire process again from beginning to end and get this pleasure, or refuse due to an insufficient level of satisfaction with the activity. satisfaction (9) is the result of external and internal rewards, taking into account their fairness (8). Satisfaction is a measure of how valuable a reward actually is (1)- This evaluation will influence a person's perception of future situations.

One of the most important conclusions of Porter and Lawler is that productive work leads to satisfaction. This is exactly the opposite of what most managers think about this. They are influenced by early theories of human relations, which believed that satisfaction leads to better performance at work or, in other words, that more satisfied workers perform better. In contrast, Porter and Lawler believe that a sense of accomplishment leads to satisfaction and improves performance.

Research supports Porter and Lawler's view that high performance is a cause of overall satisfaction, not a consequence of it. Ultimately, Porter-Lawler's theory made a major contribution to the understanding of motivation. She showed that motivation is not a simple element in the chain of cause and effect. It also shows how important it is to integrate the concepts of effort, ability, performance, rewards, satisfaction, and perception into a single, coherent theory of motivation.

It has been established that only under certain conditions does growth wages stimulates increased labor productivity. The first of these is that people should attach importance to wages great importance. The second is that people must believe that there is a clear connection between wages and productivity and that an increase in productivity will necessarily lead to an increase in wages. Obviously, it is desirable for personnel to have a connection between salary and achieved work results. Research has shown that although most managers proclaim their commitment to compensation the final result, in practice, they compensate the efforts expended by the employee in accordance with the length of service and time spent at work, and not at all according to the characteristics of the results achieved.

In order to establish the relationship between wages and the results achieved as a result of work activity, E. Lawler proposed the following explanation. Any employee's salary can be broken down into three components. One part of the salary is paid for execution job responsibilities, and everyone who performs similar duties in a given organization receives the same remuneration for this. The second part of the salary is determined by length of service and cost of living factors. All employees of the company receive this part of the salary, but its amount is automatically regulated. Finally, the payment of the third part varies for each employee, its value is determined by the results achieved by him in the previous period. A bad worker will soon see that this part of his wages is minimal, while a good worker will understand that his wages are at least as great as the first two parts combined. This third part will not, however, automatically increase. It may change from year to year depending on the results achieved by the employee in the previous year. An increase in salary can only occur in connection with a change in the scale of responsibility assigned to the employee, length of service and an increase in the cost of living. The part of the salary actually deserved and earned by a particular person can change quite sharply, so if the employee’s labor productivity falls, then the salary will also fall by reducing its variable part. The meaning of this system is primarily to link the employee’s salary with the results in the current period. Thus, productivity "involves large changes in pay." The value of any type of activity and the value of a person working in this position are two completely different things, although interrelated.

This theory is built on a combination of elements of expectancy theory and equity theory. Its essence is that the relationship between remuneration and achieved results has been introduced.

In substantive theories, it is unconditionally accepted that satisfaction leads to improved performance, and dissatisfaction reduces performance. Herzberg's model is actually a theory of job satisfaction, yet it does not address the relationship between satisfaction and performance. Vroom's theory also largely avoids analyzing this connection. Although the concept of satisfaction contributed to Vroom's concept of valence, and outcomes were associated with performance, the relationship between satisfaction and work performance was specifically addressed only in the motivation model of Porter and Lawler, who refined and expanded Vroom's model. (In their model, for example, relationships are represented diagrammatically rather than mathematically, more variables are used, and the cognitive process of perception plays a central role.)

L. Porter and E. Lawler introduced three variables that affect the amount of remuneration: effort expended, a person’s personal qualities and abilities, and awareness of his role in the labor process. Elements of expectancy theory here are manifested in the fact that the employee evaluates the reward in accordance with the effort expended and believes that this reward will be adequate for the effort expended. Elements of equity theory are manifested in the fact that people have their own judgment about the correctness or incorrectness of rewards in comparison with other employees and, accordingly, the degree of satisfaction. Hence the important conclusion that it is the results of work that are the reason for employee satisfaction, and not vice versa. According to this theory, performance should steadily increase.

Porter and Lawler start from the premise that motivation (effort or energy) does not equal satisfaction or performance. Motivation, satisfaction and performance are separate variables and interact differently than is commonly believed by Lutens, F. “Organizational Behavior.” M., “Infra-M”, 1999. p. 181

they basically correspond to the parameters of Vroom's equation. However, what is significant is Porter and Lawler's point that effort (energy or motivation) does not directly lead to increased performance. This connection is mediated by the employee’s abilities, character traits, and perception of his own role. In the Porter-Lawler model, what comes after the job is considered more important. The degree of satisfaction will be determined by the reward itself and its perception. In other words, the Porter-Lawler model assumes - and this is its most significant difference from the traditional understanding - that performance of work leads to satisfaction.

This model has been largely supported by research for many years. For example, recent field studies showed that the level of effort and its focus are very important in explaining the work performance of individual members of the Gary Blau organization. “Operationalizing Direction and Level of Effort and Testing their Relationships to Individual Job Performance,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, June 1993, pp. 152-170. Extensive research supports the importance of rewards in the relationship between job performance and satisfaction. It was specifically concluded that the relationship between satisfaction and performance is stronger when reward is linked to performance than when it is not.

Although the Porter-Lawler model is more focused on practical use, it is still very difficult to bridge the existing gap between theory and management practice. To the credit of Porter and Lawler, it should be noted that they were fully aware of the need to implement their theory and research results into practice. They recommend that practicing managers go beyond traditional job attitude assessments and try to assess variables such as the value of potential rewards, perceptions of the relationship between effort and reward, and role perceptions. These variables will certainly help managers better understand what determines effort and productivity. Paying Special attention what follows performance, Porter and Lawler recommend that organizations critically re-evaluate their reward policies. They emphasize that management must concentrate its efforts to evaluate how well the level of satisfaction corresponds to the level of job performance. These recommendations have been confirmed scientific research. However, recent research and in-depth analysis continue to point to the complex impact of cognitive processes on rewards and other organizational outcomes.

Porter and Lawler's model undoubtedly contributed huge contribution in increasing the level of understanding of the process of work motivation and the relationship between job performance and satisfaction, but has not yet had a strong impact on the actual practice of human resource management. However, expectancy models provide some guidelines that human resource managers can follow. For example, it has been suggested that the first stage (the relationship between motivation and job performance) needs to overcome the barriers listed below.

Doubts about abilities, skills, or knowledge.

The physical or practical ability to perform the job.

The dependence of a given job on other people or activities.

Uncertainty of the requirements for this job 17 .

In addition, for the final stage (the relationship between job performance and satisfaction), the following recommendations are given.

Determine what type of reward each employee values ​​most.

Determine the desired level of performance.

Make this desired level achievable.

Link rewards people value to job performance.

The last of the above points is reflected in management compensation systems in many large companies, as described in the fragment “Integrated quality management in action: Linking a manager’s remuneration to the work of his department” Kartashova L.V., Nikonova T.V., Solomanidina T.O. "Organizational behavior". M., “Infra-M”, 2001. p. 100.

IN last years theories of justice and attribution appeared, attracting the attention of many researchers. Although some authors teaching aids The theories below are classified as a separate category of “modern theories of motivation” by F. Lutens, “Organizational Behavior.” M., “Infra-M”, 1999. p. 182, in essence, these theories must be attributed to the procedural approach to the motivation of work activity.

Lymon Porter and Edward Lawler developed a comprehensive process theory of motivation that combines elements of the concepts of expectancy and justice. Her key concepts: effort expended - perception - result obtained - reward - degree of satisfaction.

According to this model, the result achieved by an employee depends on three factors: the effort expended; abilities and character traits person; awareness of one's role in the labor process. The level of effort expended depends on the value of the reward and how likely it is that the effort expended will be rewarded. Achieving the desired level of performance can lead to internal rewards (for example, a sense of self-esteem or satisfaction from the work performed) or to external rewards (praise from a manager or promotion).

The dotted line between the result achieved by the employee and the external reward in Fig. 7.26 means that there may be a gap between the first and second. Perceived as fair, it brings benefit; the employee himself evaluates the degree of fairness of the remuneration he receives for a particular result.

Satisfaction - a consequence of external and internal rewards, which are perceived as fair. This is a measure of how valuable the reward actually is. This assessment also influences the employee’s perception of future situations.

An important conclusion can be drawn from this model: productive work leads to satisfaction. But this contradicts the concept of “human relations”, which is based on the fact that satisfaction leads to high results. Porter and Lawler argue that a sense of accomplishment provides satisfaction. This conclusion is confirmed by many studies.

Causal theory of V. Weinershows that everything possible reasons successes and failures can be assessed by two parameters: localization and stability. The first characterizes whether a person sees the reason for his failures in himself or in circumstances that have developed independently of him. The second is the constancy or stability of the action of the corresponding cause.

Weiner classifies possible reasons for success and failure as follows:

• complexity of the task: external, sustainable factor success;
• diligence: an internal, variable factor of success;
• a coincidence of circumstances: an external, unstable factor of success;
• abilities: internal, stable factor of success.

R. Decharms, studying how reward affects success and motivation, came to the following conclusions:

• if a person receives a reward for something he did at will, this weakens internal incentives for appropriate activities;
• if a person does not receive a reward for uninteresting work performed only for the sake of this reward, then, on the contrary, internal motivation for it may increase.

Based on theories of motivation, various motivational models are developed.

According to rational model,To motivate people, a combination of financial rewards and punishments is used - “carrot and stick” tactics.

Rice. 7.27. Rational model

In some cases, this approach is correct, but its effect is short-term, and in other cases it can cause harm and negatively affect people's relationships.

Model of human relationships(E. Mayo) suggests that Productivity depends on job satisfaction, which is determined by internal factors- recognition, a sense of accomplishment, satisfaction of social needs.

Rice. 7.28. Motivational model of human relations

This approach does not take into account the influence of such external factor like salary. In addition, if we believe that satisfaction always leads to improved performance, we must recognize that “a satisfied (satisfied, enjoying) person is a productive (effectively working) person.” But this statement in some cases turns out to be incorrect or naive.

Self-actualization modelis based on the approach of Maslow and Herzberg and suggests that the most important need for long-term motivation is a person’s internal desire for self-realization, self-improvement, and “people exercise self-control in achieving the goals of the organization to the extent that they are involved in these goals” (McGregor) . Behavior is influenced by internal and external motivational factors, but the most important are internal ones.

Rice. 7.29.

Complex modeldescribes the complex relationships between motivation factors. The amount of effort a person puts into doing a job is influenced by:

• the value of the reward for a person (it is as important as his need is satisfied);
• waiting for the opportunity to receive the desired reward.

But effort alone is not enough to get required result additional motivation factors are required: a person’s abilities, his individual qualities - intelligence, dexterity, knowledge.

Motivation of employees is carried out in accordance with the needs of the organization and its employees, and depending on the degree of their need, which acts as pressure exerted on the organization and its members by the environment.

It is necessary to analyze the content of the requirements put forward:

• the environment in which the company operates;
• the needs of the organization (corporate and organizational development plans, human resource management);
• individual needs, which can vary greatly.

Rice. 7.30.

Some people strive for security, others crave recognition and prestige, others only care about the level of salary, and others are trying to realize themselves.

The needs of the organization and the individual depend on the surrounding work environment. Two circles of needs (organization and individual) never completely coincide, but it is the zone of their intersection that makes possible to achieve efficient work individual and the effective functioning of the enterprise. Situations are possible when the interests of the organization contradict or even harm the interests of the individual, and vice versa.

We are glad to welcome you, dear blog readers! We often raise topics of motivation, so it’s time to study one interesting theory called the Porter-Lawler model. We will look at why it is needed and what exactly its essence is.

The essence of the theory

Lyman Porter and Edward Lowell created a model that was able to make a significant contribution to the study of motivation, making many of the nuances clearer, and the use of theory in practice made it possible to achieve more effective results. Their theory includes an integrated approach to the study of motivation, and includes five variables, which, when combined into a single process, can enhance labor productivity.

So this is:

1. The effort that has been expended to achieve what is desired.
2. Assessment and perception of the situation, as well as the possible receipt of reward, in simple words– motive. By the way, you can read more about it in the article “What does it mean in modern psychology motive and what are its types?
3. The result obtained.
4. Just encouragement.
5. The level of satisfaction, both from the result, encouragement, and from the process.

Scientists have come to the conclusion that high results of human labor depend directly on 3 indicators, which are described below.

Three indicators of high work results

1. Energy. Which he spends in the process of activity, as well as the readiness to give his best to achieve the goal.

2. Personal characteristics. If you read the article, then remember that with the external type, a person is not able to bear full responsibility for his actions, as well as to show initiative and interest. Why would it be unnecessary to expect colossal success from him?

The one who gives away power external circumstances Without relying on yourself, you will not be able to move towards your dream, correctly setting priorities and forming goals and plans.

3. Skill level. That is, to what extent a person understands what is required of him and what responsibilities are assigned to him. If you remember, in the article we talked about the fact that it is extremely important for an employee to feel important in the company. Therefore, if you give him certain power and assign responsibilities that distinguish him from other employees, he will do everything to justify the trust placed in him.

Simply put, the results achieved depend on how much effort a person is willing to put in. And this readiness is formed on the basis of an understanding of what reward he will subsequently receive. And the more it is desired for him, accordingly, the faster he will begin active activity. And the fewer attempts there will be to take a break, sabotage the process, or even avoid it altogether by shifting responsibilities to another employee.

Rewards can be both internal and external. Internal - the recognition he receives from colleagues and managers, praise, a sense of self-esteem from how much work he was able to do, and satisfaction with the level of his competence. And externally - receiving a bonus, increasing wages or moving up the career ladder.

An interesting nuance is the fact that Porter and Lawler, contrary to the opinions of other scientists, stated that a person receives satisfaction as a result of the successful completion of his activities, and not as a reason and reason.

Conclusion

And that’s all for today, dear readers! Finally, I want to recommend to you about increasing motivation. It sets out comprehensive program, which can help improve your performance. Good luck and achievements to you!

The material was prepared by Alina Zhuravina.