It is not enough for targets of implementation to know what to do (information), they also have to want to do it (motivation)..
Law of Effect
Motivation is controlled by contingencies and consequences. Consequence is what we get and contingency is when we got it.
Intrinsic & Extrinsic Consequences
Rewards that we receive in exchange of outcome are extrinsic consequences. Whereas, intrinsic consequence is when reward itself is the outcome.
e.g. an instructor may teach for extrinsic consequence i.e. paycheck or because he finds it enjoyable which is intrinsic consequence.
It’s not contingencies and consequences that motivates people, it’s the perception of contingencies and consequences.
There are 3 key perceptions that control whether or not contingencies and consequences can influence our behavior.
Expectancies: If we think we are capable of performing well enough to be rewarded.
Instrumentalities: If you think good performance will be rewarded.
Valences: If you value the reward offered.
According to Expectancy Theory good leadership is not just about identifying right consequences (valence) and making those consequence desirable (instrumentality) but also about managing other’s perception (expectancy) about these consequences and contingencies.
Individual confidence that he is capable of rewardable performance is a critical perception that needs to be fostered by leaders.
Training and mentoring serve critical roles. They provide skills to be able to translate effort into rewardable performance and also provide opportunity to grow confidence about their ability.
These are factors that disrupt an individual’s belief that his efforts translate into rewardable performance. Working together means interdependence that means that desired consequences are a function of not only individual efforts but also efforts of others.
There is a problem with dependence on others. It is about how individuals allocate their scarce personnel resources among group and individual initiatives. Social dilemma is choice between doing what is best for individual versus what is best for group.
If there is incentive to do what is best for individual, everyone may does that and it may not create any synergy.
Problem of social dilemma is free riding. It is an individual’s willingness to hope that others will do the work so that individual can take advantage of rewards of synergy without utilizing personal resources.
It is free riding disguised as appropriately contributing. It is problematic because it may be difficult to tell if an individual is appropriately contributing or just free riding in a group.
Fear of free riding or social loafing is also a problem as an individual may not contribute because of the fear that others might free ride or socially loaf. This reduces opportunity for synergy.
Reference: Lectures by Prof. Gregory Northcraft