Montego Bay Case Study
In the Montego Bay case study, Theresa Daley’s approach seems to base its principles of eliciting motivation on four theories of motivation. The applied theories of motivation include reinforcement theory and two-factor theory (Herzberg). The applicability of each motivational theory varies, but at least a significant number of elements from these four theories emerge in the company strategy adopted in trial at Montego Bay. In a nutshell, Daley introduces a computerized scheduling system to allocate marketing time to employees at Montego Bay (Daft, 2008). The system was intended to improve labor efficiency, schedule productive sales personnel for the busiest business times, and increase the volume of sales from web browsers. The system considers performance metrics from sales when assigning sales-time. The considered metrics include dollars per transaction, units sold and sales per hour (Daft, 2008). Based on these variables the system determines the most productive sales people, and allocates them the busiest hours of business. In essence, employees with the highest performance get a chance to even increase their sales further by being allocated the busiest hours wherein more customers visit the business. On the other hand, employees with low performance continue getting dwindling sales because they are allocated non-pick hours of business. Considering that pay is based on sales volumes, Daley’s strategy would condemn poorly performing employees because they will continue earning less, while the top performers continue earning more. The result of this strategy is that employees will strive to increase their sales, and in this elicited response lays the basis of the various theories employed in Daley’s strategy.
The reinforcement theory is based on B. F. Skinner’s research into Operant Conditioning. Operant conditioning relies on principles of reinforcement, which portray how effects of the consequences of behavior can affect the recurrence of the behavior in the future (Boundless, 2013). There are four types of operant conditioning including positive and negative reinforcements as well as extinction and punishment. Positive reinforcement increases the recurrence of behavior by rewarding the subject (Boundless, 2013). In Montego Bay case, achieving high sales can be termed as behavior rewarded by pick hour assignments that translate into higher sales and pay. Negative reinforcement includes the taking away of a negative thing to bring about positive relief (Boundless, 2013). Taking a way the stressor strengthens the behavior. The stressor in Montego Bay case is assignment to low performing hours where clients are few and sales are likely to be low and hence resulting in poor pay. In such a case, employees work hard to achieve higher sales so as to have the assignment (stressor) changed into a pick hour assignment. The possibility of this reassignment is the negative reinforcement that increases the urge to perform better. Under reinforcement theory, extinction entails the process of getting no reward when certain behavior is manifested (Boundless, 2013). In this case, the poor performance is not rewarded by pick-time assignments, and as such employees seek to end the low performing behavior so as to get a better assignment. The punishment form of operant conditioning is literarily what it sound-getting punished as a consequence of a behavior (Boundless, 2013). In the case in point, assignments to non-pick hours are a form of punishment, and employees work to increase their sales so as to avoid it. In essence, both negative and positive reinforcements strengthen behavior whereas, extinction and punishment weaken behavior, and this is evident in Daley’s computerized system.
Daley’s strategy also portrays elements of the two-factor theory (Herzberg). According to the two-factor theory, motivators and hygiene factors are the two main elements that foster motivation among staff (Miner, 2004). The theory classifies hygiene factors-not in the strict sense of the term- as any factors whose presence causes motivation, and whose absence causes dissatisfaction. This implies that employees are highly likely to work hard so as to maintain or have back the hygiene factors. Decent work conditions, pay and security are among examples of hygiene factors (Miner, 2004). In the Montego Bay case, assignment to pick hours translates into good pay, and therefore it acts as a hygiene factor that most employees at Montego Bay will work hard to achieve. The other half of the two-factor theory highlights motivators. These are factors whose presence motivates, but their absence does not cause any dissatisfaction except for the fact that their share of motivation goes missing (Miner, 2004). This element of the theory does not emerge in the Montego Bay case.
Drawing these motivational theories into perspective reveals that the employees are working hard to achieve a better assignment time, which is at pick business hours. The reason behind this motivation is that peak hours have more visiting customers, and therefore employees are highly likely to make more sales, which will translate into a higher pay for them. The hard work is thus meant to avoid being scheduled in non-pick hours, where sales are likely to be low because there are few visiting customers. However, the bottom line is that the employees are not happy because the assignment offers undue advantage to those assigned in the pick. Assignments in non-pick hours further reduce the chances of low performing employees ever rising to a better performance level. This arises from the fact that non-pick hours have few visiting potential buyers. As such, even if the low performing employees put more effort, their effort may not be realized because the low number of visiting potential buyers negates their effort. This is likely to lead to some form of desperation where low performing employees will feel condemned to perform poorly. The result will finally be low motivation and even a high employee turnover at worse.
This sad eventuality therefore calls for a change in perspective when analyzing the success of this system at the end of its trial. Daley’s conception and perspective in this strategy seems to be solely focused on sales metrics, but fails to look at other elements of the whole picture. In fact, if what Mahoney already experiences is what to go by, the system may increase sales in the end, but there will be negative impacts such as high employee dissatisfaction and a possible high turnover (Daft, 2008). The turnover may present other challenges such as high costs recruitment and occasional hitches prompted by sudden employee departure. The possible result is that, not only will poor performers leave, but the high performers may also be compelled to leave if they find that there is too much pressure in trying to maintain their top position and good assignment times. This is true based on Maslow’s hierarchy, which defines the Hierarchy of needs theory. In view of this theory, top performers will get satisfied by achieving their needs within the low levels of the hierarchy after which needs shift (Goble, 2004). Since the theory asserts that the fulfillment of base needs in the low levels leads to a shift in need to higher levels of need, the top performers needs will shift from physical needs mainly supported by pay to social, safety and esteem needs (Goble, 2004; Psichogios, 2012). This will include the urge to evade the undue pressure they get at work in order to retain their position. As such, the scheduling program may in the end achieve poor results. It is not entirely wrong to bring sales metrics into the picture, but it would be more prudent to also ensure that other factors such as employee satisfaction are included. As such, while evaluating this strategy and system at the end of its trial period, Mahoney should include employee satisfaction metrics to determine whether the system will bring about employee satisfaction. This is essential, because the system already seems to be threatening this important element of human resource. Therefore, assessment of the system should include employee satisfaction metrics.
In view of the challenges posed by the tried scheduling system, it would be prudent for Mahoney to do away with the system or at least change it to suit and factor the employee satisfaction element by eliminating the negative perception of being condemned to perform poorly. The reasons against the system include the fact that is has raised perceptions of unfairness, and it has led to negatively aggressive behavior among the employees (Daft, 2008). Notably, Mahoney had noticed that employees were now engaging in customer snatching and pushing of products that consumers did not want (Daft, 2008). This kind of pushing may gain sales, but it will be negative because customers will dissatisfied due to the feeling that they were unduly coerced into buying good that they did not need. Therefore, Mahoney will have to propose some changes to the Operations Director-Daley. The first and most important change should be altering of the system so as to ensure there was no undue advantage for some employees by allocating equal pick and non-pick hours. This would in essence eliminate the earlier motivation, but in order to ensure that the system can still bring about motivation, rewards should still be tied to sales. This will ensure that all employees feel that they have an equal opportunity to sell where the schedule will not determine their pay, but rather their sheer hard work and determination to sell.
The implementation of these changes into the new system will ensure that employees sell on a fair basis, where there will be no need to snatch customers or push goods onto customers that do not actually need them. Without such an urge employees are likely to let customers buy what they desire, and there will be very little likelihood that the consumers will in end feel dissatisfied because they will not have been coerced into buying what they did not desire. This is likely to have a positive impact on customers who will feel satisfied with their choices as well as not being embarrassed by a sales team fighting all over them for attention. The new changes to system are likely to eliminate negative aggressiveness, which is bound to increase customer discomfort around the sales team. Therefore, the change in behavior into a less aggressive approach will positively impact on customer comfort and satisfaction because their shopping experience will be devoid of any aggressive marketing where employees compete to attract their attention and push goods to increase sales even when customers show no need for the items.
References
Boundless (2013). Operant Conditioning, retrieved https://www.boundless.com/management/organizational-behavior/reinforcement-and-motivation/operant-conditioning/
Daft, L. R. (2008). The Leadership Experience, Stamford, Connecticut: Cengage Learning Publishers.
Goble, G. F. (2004). The Third Force: The Psychology of Abraham Maslow, Sarasota, FL: Maurice Bassett
Miner, B. J. (2004). Organizational Behaviour: From theory to practice. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe Publishers
Psichogios, P. (2012). 6 Major Theories of Motivation and the Implications for Employee Recognition and Engagement. Retrieved from http://www.csi-international-inc.com/experience-exchange-blog/employee-engagement-motivation.html
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]