1. Process Theories Chapter 6
Learning is the process by which a relatively enduring change in behavior occurs as a result of practice.
Social learning – we acquire much of our behavior by observation and imitation in a social context. This view of behavior is a function of both personal and environmental conditions

2. Social Learning Theory
Introduces vicarious learning (modeling), symbolism, and self-control.
Self-efficacy has three dimensions: magnitude (level of task difficulty a person believes she can attain), strength (if the magnitude is strong or weak), and generality (degree the expectation is generalized across situations).
An employee’s sense of self-efficacy influences perception, motivation, and performance. Self-efficacy judgments influence our choices of tasks, situations, and companions; how much effort we will spend; and how long we will try.

3. Gist & Mitchell, 1992 Self-Efficacy Enactive Mastery
Vicarious Experience
Verbal Persuasion
Physiological Arousal
Analysis of
Task Requirements
Attributional
Experience
Assessment of
Personal Situation
Resources/Constraints
Estimation of
Orchestration Capacity
(self-efficacy)
Consequences of
Self-Efficacy
(goal level, persistence)
Performance
Feedback

4. Gist & Mitchell, 1992 Self-Efficacy Categories of Experience (Bandura)
E.N – personal attainment
V.E. – modeling
V.P
P.A. - anxiety
The individual’s cognitive appraisal and integration of these experience ultimately determine S.E. (Bandura, 1982)
Assessment Process - INDEPENDENT
Analysis of task requirements – inferences about what it takes to perform at various levels
Attributional analysis of experience – individual’s judgments about why a particular performance level occurred. Seek answers to why things happen for mastery and curiosity. Effort, ability, luck, task difficulty
Self assessment of resources and constraints for performing task. Personal factors (anxiety, desire, effort) and situational factors (competing demands, distractions)
Assessment processes yield interpretative data in a summary level (weighted) judgment process to defines self-efficacy – which may vary across situations.
Over time, as task experience increases, S.E. becomes more routine and accurate.
Information Processing Issues
Judgments about efficacy become more routine and automatic as experience with a task increases because the individual refers to prior performance and adjusts self-efficacy accordingly.
Accuracy – based on accuracy of resources, and specific attributes that contribute to performance – predictive validity.
Feedback
Understanding of task attributes, complexity, and environment
Training and information can improve performance (behavioral, analytical, psychological)

5. Operant Conditioning
When learning occurs as a consequence of behavior. Generally, behavior is controlled by altering the consequences – reinforcement and punishment.
Behavior modification – individual learning by reinforcement. Generally, reinforce for desirable behavior – punish unwanted behavior.

6. Behavioral Self-Management
Also known as self-control. Self-control is displayed when, in the relative absence of immediate external constraints, a person engages in behavior whose previous probability has been less than that of alternatively available behaviors.
Suggests that individuals will choose behaviors that they have not chosen consistently in the past and this selection may be based on the expectation of positive outcomes in the future.

7. Expectancy Theory
Motivation is a process concerning choices among alternative forms of voluntary activity.
First level outcomes – associated with doing the job itself: productivity, turnover, quality, etc.
Second level outcomes – events (rewards and punishments) that first level outcomes are likely to produce: promotion, pay raise, termination

8. Expectancy Theory
Valence – Preference for outcomes. Positively valent when it is preferred; negatively valent when it is not preferred or avoided. Valence is applied to first and second level outcomes
Expectancy – individual’s belief concerning the likelihood or subjective probability that a particular behavior will be followed by a particular outcome. Perceived chance of some event occurring because of a behavior. Values ranging from 0 to 1.
Force – or motivation. The intent of expectancy theory is to assess the magnitude and direction of all the forces acting on the individual. The greatest force is the one likely to occur
Ability – person’s potential for doing the job

9. Expectancy Theory
Instrumentality – Perception that first-level outcomes are associated with second level outcomes. Range from –1 to +1. A negative indicates a perception that attainment of the second level is certain without the first outcome and impossible with it. A positive indicates that the first outcome is necessary and sufficient for the second outcome to occur.

10. Expectancy Theory
Valence1 = sum (Valence2 x Instrumentality) This indicates that the valence of the first level outcomes is a sum of the multiplication of the valences of the second level outcomes multiplied by their respective instrumentalities
Motivation is a function of first level outcomes valences’ multiplied by expectancy. If expectancy is low, there will be little motivation. If an outcome’s valence is 0, it will have little effect.
Performance is a multiplicative function of motivation and force

11. A General Model of Vroom’s Expectancy Theory
High Effort
Decision to
Exert Effort
Low Effort
Performance
Goal
Expectancy
“What are my chances
of reaching my
performance goal
if I work hard?”
if I slack off?”
Instrumentality
of getting various
outcomes if I achieve
my performance goal?”
Valence
“How much do I value
these outcomes?”
Outcome 3
Outcome 2
Outcome 1

12. Applying Vroom’s Expectancy Theory
Work hard for
10 hours a day
High Effort
Low Effort
Performance
Outcome 1
Outcome 2
Outcome 3
5 hours a day
Sell nine cars
a month
Sell three cars
Make $3,600 in
commission
Gain respect from
peers and recognition
from boss
Have more time to
spend with boyfriend
Make $1,200 in
Lose respect from
Get fired
(.80)
Expectancy
Valence
(1.0)
(.75)
(.60)
Instrumentality
(-.9)
(+2)
(+1)
(+.5)
(-1)
(-2)

13. Porter and Lawler’s Expectancy Model1
Value of
Reward 2
Perceived
effort - reward
probability 3
Effort 4
Abilities
and traits 5
Role
perceptions 6
Performance
(accomplishment) 8
equitable
rewards 9
Satisfaction 7A
Intrinsic 7B
Extrinsic

14. Managerial Implications of Expectancy Theory
Determine the outcomes employees value.
Identify good performance so appropriate behaviors can be rewarded.
Make sure employees can achieve targeted performance levels.
Link desired outcomes to targeted levels of performance.
Make sure changes in outcomes are large enough to motivate high effort.
Monitor the reward system for inequities.

15. Organizational Implications of Expectancy Theory
Reward people for desired performance, and do not keep pay decisions secret.
Design challenging jobs.
Tie some rewards to group accomplishments to build teamwork and encourage cooperation.
Reward managers for creating, monitoring, and maintaining expectancies, instrumentalities, and outcomes that lead to high effort and goal attainment.
Monitor employee motivation through interviews or anonymous questionnaires.
Accommodate individual differences by building flexibility into the motivation program.

16. Factors Considered When Making Equity Comparisons
Inputs
Time
Education/training
Skills
Creativity
Seniority
Loyalty to organization
Age
Personality traits
Effort expended
Personal appearance
Outcomes
Pay/bonuses
Fringe benefits
Challenging assignments
Job security
Career advancement/promotions
Status symbols
Pleasant/safe working environment
Opportunity for personal growth/ development
Recognition
Participation in important decisions

17. Negative and Positive Inequity
An Equitable Situation - Comparison in which another person’s ratio of outcomes to inputs is equal to your outcome to input ratio - Example: Self = $2 = $2 per hour vs. Other = $4 = $2 per hour hour hours
Negative Inequity - Comparison in which another person receives greater outcomes for similar inputs - Example: Self = $2 = $2 per hour vs. Other = $3 = $3 per hour hour hour
Positive Inequity - Comparison in which another person receives lesser outcomes for similar inputs - Example: Self = $3 = $3 per hour vs. Other = $2 = $2 per hour hour hour

18. Restoring Equity Change the inputs Change the outcomes
Change the referent other
Change the inputs or outputs of the referent other
Change the situation

19. Organizational Justice
Distributive Justice: The perceived fairness of how resources and rewards are distributed.
Procedural Justice: The perceived fairness of the process and procedures used to make allocation decisions.
Interactional Justice: The perceived fairness of the decision maker’s behavior in the process of decision making.

20. Practical Lessons from Equity Theory
Employee’s beliefs and attitudes affect job performance.
Managers should pay attention to employees’ perceptions of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice because they affect many different employee outcomes.
Managers benefit by allowing employees to participate in making decisions about important work outcomes.
Perceptions of fairness are increased by giving employees the opportunity to appeal decisions that affect them.

21. Practical Lessons from Equity Theory (continued)
Employees are more likely to accept change when they believe the organization is treating them fairly and equitably.
Managers can promote cooperation and teamwork among work group members by treating them equitably.
Treating employees inequitably can lead to litigation and costly court settlements.
A climate for justice is associated with positive employee outcomes.

22. attainment strategies
Goals
Goal: What an individual is trying to accomplish.
Directing
one’s attention
Regulating
one’s effort
Task
performance
Goals
motivate the
individual
by...
Increasing
one’s persistence
Encouraging the
development of goal-
attainment strategies
or action plans

23. Key Insight of Goal-SettingB
High
A = Performance of
committed person
with ability
B = Performance of
working at full
capacity
C = Performance of
person lacking
commitment
Job performance C A
Low
Easy
Moderate
Hard
Goal difficulty 18

24. Insights from Goal-Setting Research
Difficult Goals Lead to Higher Performance. - Easy goals produce low effort because the goal is too easy to achieve. - Impossible goals ultimately lead to lower performance because people begin to experience failure.
Specific Difficult Goals May or May Not Lead to Higher Performance. - Goal specificity pertains to the quantifiability of a goal. - Specific difficult goals impair performance on novel, complex tasks when employees do not have clear strategies for solving these types of problems.
Feedback Enhances The Effect of Specific, Difficult Goals. - Goals and feedback should be used together.

25. Insights from Goal-Setting Research (continued)
Participative Goals, Assigned Goals, and Self-Set Goals Are Equally Effective. - Managers should set goals by using a contingency approach. Different methods work in different situations.
Goal Commitment and Monetary Incentives Affect Goal-Setting Outcomes. - Difficult goals lead to higher performance when employees are committed to their goals. - Difficult goals lead to lower performance when employees are not committed to their goals. - Goal based incentives can lead to negative outcomes for employees in complex, interdependent jobs requiring cooperation. * Employees may not help each other. * Quality may suffer as employees pursue quantity goals. * Commitment to difficult goals may suffer.