Hi Ankur,
Your topic is very interesting. This involves a lot of communication with the employees,especially. Apparently, instead of taking the questionnaire and asking the employees to fill in, you can try speaking up with the sample size (n) and probe them with your questions. You will give a lot of inputs.
If in case they are not comfortable, just handover the questionnaire and ask them to fill up. I have appended a case study below. This might throw you some light on the subject.
Tackling change from the motivational point of view, the Worthit Paper Products Corporation way.
Scenario:
Employees face the threat of the unknown when consultants arrive to assess and study their performance. As the incident involves the process of successful change: gaining acceptance, coordination, and use of consultants, attitudes, and morale.
Incident:
As office manager of the Worthit Paper Products Corporation (WPP), Minnie Reems was responsible for the work of approximately 40 employees, of whom 26 were classified either as data processors or clerks. Acting under instructions from Kenny Count, the company CEO, she agreed to allow F. Taylor Group, Ltd., (FTG), external consultants, to enter his realm of responsibility and conduct “time and motion” as well as “systems-analysis” studies in an effort to improve the efficiency and output of employees.
Consultants began by studying job descriptions, making observations, and recording each minute detail of the work of data processors and file clerks. After two weeks, they indicated to Reems and her employees that they had to repeat the process to delve deeper.
The next morning, 5 employees participating in the study were absent. On the following day, 10 employees were absent. Concerned, Reems telephoned several absentees to get to the heart of the matter. Each employee had the same story to tell. Each was nervous, tense, and tired after being viewed as a "guinea pig" for several days. An employee involved in data processing told Reems that her physician suggested she ask for a leave of absence, on the basis of the carpel tunnel syndrome that plagued her.
Shortly after the telephone calls, the consultants explained to Reems that if the absenteeism continued, his team would have to drop the study and proceed to another department. He said that a valid analysis would be impossible to conduct with only 10 employees present. Realising that she would be held responsible for the failure of the systems analysis, Reems began to create and evaluate alternative strategies to rectify the problem, so that the study could continue. She could sack all those who were absent without legitimate cause, and send a clear signal that non-cooperation would not be tolerated. Or she could simply get some temporary employees in to replace them.
Even if the study was completed successfully, she was concerned about implementing procedural changes that she knew would be mandated after the study was completed. Thinking back on her prior experience as a drill sergeant in the Marines, Reems was astute enough to realise that policies declared and orders issued are not always followed by instant compliance, even in the military, and that this was not a military operation. She also realised that if the study did not spur an increase in productivity, it would not be cost effective.
Conclusion:
Analyse the incident from a motivational theory standpoint. The consultants, from FTG, not being psychologists, did not anticipate the motivational problem they created. They should have adopted the motivational theories based on need, equity, expectancy, goal setting and intrinsic motivation to provide the solution and save the day.
The most important thing FTG Consultants and Reems should have kept in mind about motivation is that they cannot motivate through threats. Motivation comes from within - employees motivate themselves. The only thing a manager like Reems can do is to create the conditions for employees to motivate themselves.
The most important thing FTG Consultants and Reems should have kept in mind about motivation is that they cannot motivate through threats. Motivation comes from within - employees motivate themselves. The only thing a manager like Reems can do is to create the conditions for employees to motivate themselves.
There are six principles of motivating others:
Positive thoughts motivate
Enjoyment motivates
Feeling important motivates
Success motivates
Personal benefits motivate
Clarity motivates These principles suggest common-sense ways for managers to use motivation. What the manager does in a particular situation will depend on his creativity. So, instead of looking for replacements, if Reems had implemented these principles the study process/result would have been more positive.
Related reading:
1.“Motivation in the Millennium”, by Forrest C., Training Journal Feature, January 2001.
2.“Theories of Motivation”, Alderfer ERG, Contemporary Theories of Motivation.
3.“Motivation to learn and develop skills”, by Goethe J. W., January 2001.
|
