McGregor’s Hygiene Theories X and Y

References Introduction

McGregor has developed a theory of motivation on the basis assumptions connecting to human behavior. function of motivating individuals involves certain hypothesis about human nature. Theory X and theory Y are two sets of hypotheses about the nature of people (Aina, 2014).

 

                                            Figure 04: McGregor’s Hygiene Theories X and Y

                                                           Source - (Hattangadi, 2014)

Application of Alderfer's ERG Theory to Construction Industry

According to (Kim et al., 2015), Safe working conditions is the most important physiological factor in construction industry. In relatedness needs, Relationship with colleagues and relationship with managers are not the most important factors affect to the construction workers. But in some countries like Philippine, Vietnamese relatively factor is higher importance than workers from other countries. In construction industry, high probability that the employees can regress to lower level Existence needs and satisfy through only salary and other benefits. Construction workers considered timely payment is more important than amount of pay. About the growth need the work force of the construction industry not considered about that. But professionals who were work in the industry mostly considered about growth need compare to the workforce (Kim et al., 2015. As a construction organization it is very important to balanced and focused on fulfillment of these three needs. Theory X

This is based on assumptions regarding the typical employee. This assumes individuals who dislike work and avoid it where possible, individuals who lack ambition dislike responsibility and leading, Individuals who wish security (Hattangadi, 2014). Management believes employees work is based on their own self-interest. To achieve the organization objectives managements, imply the Theory X. Managers believe employees working in this style are more interesting on rewards or punishments as motivation (Sunita, 2012).

Theory Y

Managers assume employees are internally motivated, interested with their job and work to well themselves without any direct reward. Managers consider their employees as most valuable assets to the company (Anna B Parkin, Tutesigensi and Büyükalp, 2009). Theory Y managers try to promote employee’s self-esteem, confidence, happiness, achievement, respect of others, and respect by others. To create a working environment or culture, where employees can develop their creativity is the challenge to the managers (Hattangadi, 2014).

 

Application of Theory X and Y to Construction Industry

According to the Aiyetan and Olotuah (2006), In construction industry work force (labor force) basically dislike and avoid works whenever possible. Because most labors not interested about their works, So, construction organizations have to be closely supervised with site supervisors, site engineers and implies with punishment to reach their objectives (Aina, 2014). Most labors and labor team leaders are not capable of solving problems. So, site supervisors and site engineers have to direct them. Most labors have limited intelligent potential (Aiyetan and Olotuah, 2006).  

In construction industry professionals find work as natural and developed an attitude from the works based on their experience with it. Professionals who works in projects will work voluntarily toward organizational objectives to which they committed. So, no need to imply the punishments (Aiyetan and Olotuah, 2006). Professional employees who works in construction organizations have protentional to solve the disputes resolution (Aina, 2014).

Reference

Aina, O. O. (2014) ‘Application of Motivation Theories in the Construction Industry’, 16(7), pp. 1–6.

Aiyetan, A. O. and Olotuah, A. O. (2006) ‘Impact of motivation on worker’s productivity in the Nigerian construction industry’, Association of Researchers in Construction Management, ARCOM 2006 - Procs 22nd Annual ARCOM Conference, 1(September), pp. 239–248.

Anna B Parkin, Tutesigensi, A. and Büyükalp, A. I. (2009) ‘MOTIVATION AMONG CONSTRUCTION WORKERS’.

Hattangadi, V. (2014) ‘Theory X & Theory Y’, 2(4), pp. 20–21.

Sunita, M. S. (2012) ‘EMPLOYEE ’ S MOTIVATION : THEORIES AND PERSPECTIVES’, 1(2), pp. 56–64.

 

 

Alderfer –ERG Theory

Introduction 

Alderfer’s ERG Theory is an amendment of the Maslow’s hierarchy by decreasing quantity of need types. Alderfer originated simply three levels of needs (Wiley, 2008). The ERG theory tried to improve upon Maslow's needs hierarchy by allowing more flexibility of movement between needs (Caulton, 2012).          

According to (Redmond, 2010), Needs were separated into three separate categories

 

                                                            Figure 03: ERG Theory model

                                                               (Source - Redmond 2010)

1. Existence Needs

Include all material and physiological desires. As a example food, water, air, clothing, safety, physical love and affection (Caulton, 2012).

2. Relatedness Needs

Social relationships and external esteem, relationships with others like family, friends, co-workers and employers. This also means to be recognized and feel secure as part of a group or family (Caulton, 2012).

3. Growth Needs

Internal esteem and self-actualization; these impel a person to make creative or productive effects on himself and the environment (Caulton, 2012).

 Difference between Maslow’s theory and Alderfer's ERG Theory

The main difference between Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and ERG theory is Maslow’s hierarchy of needs says the needs are met specific order. But ERG theory states met simultaneously and no specific order. The ERG Theory describes that there are variables that can affect the needs of an individual on any day or any stage (O’Connor & Yballe, 2007).

Table 02: Comparison of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and Alderfer's ERG Theory.

Maslow’s five-level hierarchy of needs	Alderfer's three category ERG model of needs
Self-actualization needs	Growth needs
Esteem needs
Belongingness and love need	Relatedness needs
Safety and security needs
Physiological needs	Existence needs

                                                 Source - (Kim et al., 2015)

Application of Alderfer's ERG Theory to Construction Industry

According to (Kim et al., 2015), Safe working conditions is the most important physiological factor in construction industry. In relatedness needs, Relationship with colleagues and relationship with managers are not the most important factors affect to the construction workers. But in some countries like Philippine, Vietnamese relatively factor is higher importance than workers from other countries. In construction industry, high probability that the employees can regress to lower level Existence needs and satisfy through only salary and other benefits. Construction workers considered timely payment is more important than amount of pay. About the growth need the work force of the construction industry not considered about that. But professionals who were work in the industry mostly considered about growth need compare to the workforce (Kim et al., 2015. As a construction organization it is very important to balanced and focused on fulfillment of these three needs.

References

Caulton, J. (2012) ‘The development and use of the theory of erg: A literature review’, Emerging Leadership Journeys, 5(1), pp. 2–8.

Kim, S. et al. (2015) ‘Cultural differences in motivation factors influencing the management of foreign laborers in the Korean construction industry’, International Journal of Project Management, 33(7), pp. 1534–1547. doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.05.002.

O'Connor, D., & Yballe, L.. (2007). Maslow Revisited: Construction a Road Map of Human Nature. Journal of Management Education, 31(6), 738-756. Retrieved January 21, 2010, from ABI/INFORM Global. (Document ID: 1392302941).

Redmond, B.F. (2010). Need Theories: What Do I Want When I Work? Work Attitudes and Motivation. The Pennsylvania State University World Campus.

Wiley, C. (2008) ‘What motivates employees according to over 40 years of survey’.

 

Vroom Expectancy Theory

Introduction

Vroom deliberates through Expectancy Theory that motivation is built according to the intentions of person’s selections plus his expectancy for attaining his goals. As per the Vroom's theory, even though staffs can have dissimilar objectives, staff will be inspired though they have faith on the constructive connection among determinations and enactment, then that hopeful actions will effect for required remuneration, that will please a vital want which is solid to create the work valuable (Mullins, 2005; Cardoso, Dominguez and Paiva, 2015).

Components of Expectancy theory

According to Lee (2007), Employees have personal goals that they wish to come through and for this course they work in organizations. Organizational rewards or work outcomes can fulfill these personal goals. So, the relationship between personal goals and organizational rewards or work outcomes is significant. To some extent organizational rewards accomplish an employee’s personal goals and how important are those rewards to the employee. Employee gives to the work outcomes, expressed the value of the employee. Organizational rewards or work outcomes are dependent on the personal performance of the employee. And also, important that the confidence of the individual employee has that performance will outcome as an achievement of organizational rewards/work outcomes. Parijat (2014) describes there are four variables for an employee that matter in motivation. These variables are:

1.  Individual effort
2. Individual performance
3. Organizational rewards/work outcomes
4.  Personal goals. 

According to the Parijat (2014), There are three relationships based on these variables:

1. Relationship between Efforts and Performance. This is known as Expectancy (E)

2. Relationship between Performance and Rewards/Work Outcomes. This is called Instrumentality (I)

3. Relationship between Rewards/Work Outcomes and Personal goals. This is known as Valence (V)

The Expectancy theory provides mechanism. Its finding out motivation through a certain sort of calculation.

                                                        Effort or motivation = E x I x V

                                                    Figure 02: Vroom Expectancy Theory

                                                                  Source – Lee (2007)

                            Video 03: Explaining about Vrooms Expectancy Theory with case study

                                                                Source - (Jiko, 2018)

Expectancy Theory for Construction Industry

In the construction projects labor force plays a critical role. So, need to increase the productivity of labor force (Jergeas and Ruwanpura, 2009). Because of that it is very important to find answers for decreasing construction project productivity in terms of labor issues, that may save money and make construction projects interested. According to Bon-Gang (2018), both man power and management issues such as motivation of works, conscripting supervisors and workers, great rate of labour turnover, nonattendance, communications difficulties, material scarcities, weather conditions, health issues, postponements of materials supply to sites, worker’s issues and strikes (such as for accidents, rejection of work by consultants, and disputes) are impact to the productivity. 

Construction workers motivational level is depending on rewards on offer for doing a good job and also construction workers believe more effect will leads to rewards. So, this theory would seem most related to the construction industry (Hewage, Ruwanpura 2006).

The expectancy theory is useful to construction managers to realize which rewards are valuable to the employees, to create instrumentality that the accomplishments of certain tasks will generate the rewards valued by the employees, and to ensure that the employees have the necessary capabilities to accomplish the given task (Yeheyis et al., 2016).

References

Bon-Gang, H. (2018) ‘Productivity Performance and Improvement of Green Construction Projects’, Performance and Improvement of Green Construction Projects, pp. 181–210. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-815483-0.00012-0.

Cardoso, P., Dominguez, C. and Paiva, A. (2015) ‘Hints to Improve Motivation in Construction Companies’, Procedia - Procedia Computer Science. Elsevier Masson SAS, 64, pp. 1200–1207. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2015.08.513.

Hewage, K.; Ruwanpura, J. Y. 2006. Carpentry workers issues and efficiencies related to construction productivity in commercial construction projects in Alberta, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 33(8): 1075–1089. http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/l06-050

Jergeas, G.; Ruwanpura, J. 2009. Why cost and schedule overruns on mega oil sands projects?, Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction 15(1): 40–43.

Jiko, A., 2018. [Online]
Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpnzW06shsM

Lee, S. (2007) ‘Vroom’s expectancy theory and the public library customer motivation model’, Library Review, 56(9), pp. 788–796. doi: 10.1108/00242530710831239.

Mullins, L. J. (2005) Management and Organisational Behaviour. 7th edn. Edinburgh Gate, Harlow: Pearson Education Limited Edinburgh. doi: MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL BEHEVIOUR

Parijat, P. (2014) ‘Motivationvroom’, International Journal of Business and Management, VII(9), pp. 1–8.

Yeheyis, M. et al. (2016) ‘Evaluating motivation of construction workers: a comparison of fuzzy rule-based model with the traditional expectancy theory’, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 22(7), pp. 862–873. doi: 10.3846/13923730.2014.914103.