Process Theories/Cognitive Process Theories

Process theories concentrate more on the psychological and behavioural processes behind motivation, often with no designation of important rewards and motives, and emphasise how the motivational process works (Rainey, 2009). In a similar fashion, cognitive process theories, also sometimes referred to as process theories, attempt to explain the sequence of thoughts and decisions that energise, direct and control behaviour (Srivastava, 2005; Werner & DeSimone, 2012). Werner & DeSimone (2012) identify four cognitive theories of motivation (each of which has relevance in the practice of HRD): expectancy theory, goal-setting theory, social learning theory and equity theory. A brief review of these four theories is outlined below:

2.2.3.2.1 Vroom’s Expectancy Theory: developed by Vroom (1964), this theory assumes that motivation is a process involving a conscious choice, meaning that people choose to put their effort into activities they believe they can perform and that will produce desired outcomes (Werner & DeSimone, 2012). Based on Vroom’s model, motivation depends on three cognitions (Shields, 2007):

(1) Valence refers to the value that the employee places on the potential outcome/reward (reward attractiveness). The employee is aware that increased effort will lead to increased performance.

(2) Instrumentality is the degree to which the employee believes that performing at the specified level will produce a positive outcome or reward. Increased performance is desired because it will lead directly to rewards (Hardina et al., 2006). This is partly related to the employee’s level of trust in the organisation’s

42

reward promise (perceived linkage between performance and reward), though the individual must have a preference for the rewards that are given, that is, the organisation needs to ensure that the rewards are desired by the employee (Hardina et al., 2006).

(3) Expectancy refers to the employee’s perception of the probability that a given

level of effort will lead to a certain level of performance. This has to do with the employee’s level of personal confidence about being able to perform (effort- performance linkage) (Shields, 2007).

2.2.3.2.2 Goal-Setting Theory: Developed by Locke (1968), goal setting is the process of improving individual or group job performance with formally stated objectives, aims, deadlines or quality standards (Kreitner, 2007). In Thakur, Burton, and Srivastava (2007), worker motivation is influenced by the following cognitive factors: (1) Workers are more motivated to attain specific goals than ill-defined, general goals. (2) Workers commit themselves more fully to difficult goals than to easy ones. (3) Workers will not be motivated if they do not possess the abilities needed to attain a goal. (4) Worker commitment is increased by tangible rewards, such as promotions, job titles and salary increases. (5) Worker motivation declines when performance feedback is withheld (Locke, Shaw, Saari, & Latham, 1981).

43

Figure 2.4: The Goal-Setting Theory of Motivation (with permission from Elsevier) (Source: Latham & Locke, 1979; cited by Griffin & Moorhead, 2012)

Therefore, an employee who establishes career goals is more likely to advance, especially if the goals are specific, realistic, challenging and accompanied by regular feedback on their progress towards the goals (Werner & DeSimone, 2012). According to Hardina et al. (2006), there are two underlying processes that explain the effect of goals on work motivation: goal content (the characteristics of the goal) and goal commitment (the attitude a person holds towards a goal and the determination they have to achieve it amidst setbacks or obstacles). Furthermore, employees must have a sense of ownership of the goal, a considerable level of task autonomy, confidence in their own ability to achieve the goal, and confidence in the feedback provided (Shields, 2007).

2.2.3.2.2 Social Learning/Cognitive Theory: social learning theory also known as social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1977a) highlights observational learning as the most important mechanism through which human behaviour changes (Sigelman & Rider, 2012). It also emphasises the relevance of role models’ behaviour in guiding the behaviour of others, principles that are assumed to operate in the same way throughout a person’s life, since these role models could be parents, older siblings, peers, entertainment, sports icons and so on. (Newman & Newman, 2009).

44

The process of modelling is of particular relevance to HRD, this theory suggests that, through observing behaviour and its consequences in others, individuals learn new behaviours and make decisions of their own about whether to perform a particular behaviour themselves (Werner & DeSimone, 2012). Rewards for certain actions create expectations of these outcomes, and a person’s behaviour in a given situation is increased by expected rewards and reduced by anticipated punishment (Cameron & Pierce, 2002). Also, a person’s self-efficacy or judgment of the likelihood that s/he can successfully perform a particular task will determine (1) whether behaviour will be exhibited, (2) the effort that will be spent and (3) the duration for which a person will continue to exhibit the behaviour (Werner & DeSimone, 2012). Therefore, the entire matter rests not on whether the employee accepts the goals that are set down but on whether the employee has the confidence and capacity to achieve them and has personal control over the outcomes (Shields, 2007).

2.6.3.2.4 Equity Theory: Montana and Charnov (2008) assert that the issue of equity in relation to the distribution of pay and other rewards is a major concern of managers, particularly after some inequity or unfairness has been perceived. Developed by Adams (1965), this theory argues that the degree of equity or inequity is a major input into job performance and satisfaction (Srivastava, 2005). The theory predicts that employees who believe they are being treated fairly will be motivated to continue with their present performance and behaviour, whereas those who believe they are being treated unjustly will search for ways to reduce their feelings of unfairness (Werner & DeSimone, 2012). Often, perceptions of equity/inequity are affected by two factors: (1) whether the compensation

45

received is commensurate with one’s input in terms of job effort, education, experience, and skills (2) perceived equity of pay and rewards received in comparison to those received by others.

2.2.3.2.2 Self-Determination Theory (SDT): developed by Deci and Ryan (1985), the SDT posits that motivation in human behaviour varie inherently – ranging from a high to a low level of self-determination, motivated by IM, EM or amotivation (Guay, Vallerand, & Blanchard, 2000). Based on the basic psychological needs theory (BPNT) of the SDT, an individual is driven to pursue particular goals in relation to satisfying the three basic psychological needs of autonomy, belongingness and competitiveness. A thorough discussion will be provided in the next chapter (Chapter 3) since the SDT is the main theory chosen for this study.

2.2.3.3 Non-Cognitive Process Theories:

Non-cognitive theories see behaviour as caused by environmental contingencies (Bremer, 2011). Motivation is explained as an interaction between behaviour and external events without any appeal to internal thoughts or needs (Werner & DeSimone, 2012).

2.2.3.3.1 Reinforcement Theory: rooted in behaviourism, reinforcement theory is the oldest and least complex of the non-cognitive approaches, as it is based primarily on the law of effect determined by environmental contingencies, whereby behaviour is a function of its consequences (Werner & DeSimone, 2012). This theory posits that a behaviour which results in a pleasurable outcome is likely to be repeated, whereas any behaviour resulting otherwise is likely to be avoided (Draft, 2008; Shields, 2007). Through a process of learning and reinforcement, the individual comes to perceive a link between behaviour and

46

consequence, and can be programmed to behave in desired ways (Shields, 2007). However, there are specific difficulties associated with manipulating non-cognitive variables (i.e. ethical or socio-cultural factors), as it is much harder to manipulate arousal levels or the motivation to perform at one’s maximal performance level, and not even psycho- physiological measures can overcome these difficulties (Bremer, 2011).

According to Shields (2007), reinforcement theory makes four essential points concerning its association with motivation, efforts and rewards: (1) rewards reinforce performance; (2) to reinforce a desired behaviour, rewards must follow immediately after the behaviour (positive reinforcement increases the frequency of a behaviour – Werner & DeSimone, 2012); (3) a behaviour that is not rewarded will be discontinued (extinction seeks to decrease the frequency of a behaviour by removing the consequence that is reinforcing it – Werner & DeSimone, 2012); (4) withholding rewards is a powerful means of discouraging unwanted behaviour or misbehaviour (punishment seeks to decrease the frequency of an undesirable behaviour by introducing an adverse consequence immediately after the behaviour is exhibited – Werner & DeSimone, 2012).