Motivation

Describe, comp argon and contrast one process and one pith scheme of motif. Evaluate how appropriate they are for organisations today. motive is the desire or willingness of manybody to do something. Craig C. Pinder (1998) defined take form motive as a set of internal and external forces that initiate work related demeanor and determine its form, direction, potency and duration. pauperization plays an important role in a business environment, as employee motivation is believed to improved work feat.Discussed in this essay are two types of motivation theories Content theory which tries to identify specific needs that motivate people and Process theories which is based on developing models relating needs, motives and behaviour. In this essay, I aim to asses content and process theories correspondly Abraham Maslows Hierarchy of Needs surmisal and Stacey Adams Equity Theory comparing these theories and proudlighting any assumptions, strengths, weakness, positives and nega tives individually and comparatively to be sufficient to come to a deprecative consequence as to whether these theories are suitable for organisations today.My content theory is based on Maslows Hierarchy of Needs theory, publish in 1943 by Abraham Maslow. His hypothesis was that human needs arrange themselves in hierarchies as quoted in his publication of A Theory of Human Motivation in 1943 (p. 370). In hierarchical order physiological needs which entails food, water, shelter and warmth. Safety needs refers to security, stability and freedom from fear. neighborly needs include the need for lovingness and friendships. Esteem needs refers to ego needs, recognition and respect.Finally, Self-actualisation, realisation of ones full potential becoming everything that one is capable of becoming. When one set of needs is satisfied, it ceases to be a motivating factor. Thereafter the next set of needs in the power structure order takes places, (Maslow, 1943) this continually occurs until the assumption of self-actualisation is satisfied, as Maslow stated, a satisfied need is no longer a motivator. Equity Theory, a process theory first proposed by Stacey Adams in 1963 ocuses on peoples feelings on how fairly they baffle a bun in the oven been portion outed in comparison with the treatment received by some others. It is based on exchange theory (Homans 1961) undergoing an exchange process, which involve inputs and outcomes. In Social conduct its Elementary Forms by George C. Homans he created the rule of Distributive Justice a man in exchange relation with another will expect that the recompense of each man be proportional to his costs the greater the investments, the greater the profit, (Homans 1961 p. 75).Numerous business environments present inequality, however, the acknowledgement of inequality will motivate an individual to strike or eradicate the inequality. These two theories illustrate a race in terms of how they motivate individuals by fulfill ing a need that affects them both mentally and physically for example, Maslows theory notifys you will be motivated to the next higher take of needs if the previous take aim is fulfilled satisfactorily, if this is not met, work mathematical operation will deteriorate and affect individuals mentally or physically as they cannot advance to the next direct.As well as, Adams Equity Theory Work on Walster, Berscheid and Walster, 1973 was c everyplace by Kingsley, Catherine, Park, Hee Sun and Lee, Hye Eun (2007) where they suggested mathematically, justness theory predicts that people will be uncomfortable in relationships in which their own ratio of inputs to outcomes is not equivalent to the other partys ratio of inputs to outcomes, in other words, this discomfort can lead to further enthusiasm to reach the next goal or growth input to ultimately increase outcomes to reach satisfaction and eliminate the discomfort.Further more(prenominal), research has proved that both theories o f Maslow and Adams can result in consequential behaviour if their needs are unable to be satisfied. For instance, Maslows theory states at that place are five stages of the hierarchy, considering psychological needs are most important, in having a healthy work relationship, if this is not fulfilled, individuals major power resort to criminal activities to satisfy that need in order to survive.Similarly, evidence from research highlight that thither are negative ways in which workers can redress inequality As seen in organisational behaviour and Work, Wilson, Fiona M, (2010), it highlights the ways in which individuals act negatively towards shabbiness underpayment leads to let down job performance (Prichard et al. , 1972 Lord and Hohenfeld, 1979). Another form of reaction to underpayment is disruptive, deviant behaviour, such as vandalism and theft (Hollinger and Clark, 1983). Theft might be seen as a means to replenish feelings of underpayment inequity.The Hawthrone Studies cond ucted by Elton Mayo between 1924 and 1932, showed that employees are not just motivated by the money, outcomes, but their attitudes, needs as well. Initiating the human relations approach to management and the needs and motivation of employees was the primary concentre of managers. In short, both Maslow and Adams theories can be considered Equity theories of motivation. In some way, Equity Theory may seem more relatable to organisations today globally, as equity is part of the human rights laws, as compared to Maslows theory.Maslows theory is unmasked as ethnocentric by Geert Hofstede (1984), he stated, in that location are cultural limitations in the study of this theory conducted by Haire, Ghiselli and Porter (1966) where Haire et al, cogitate the only nationality group that enjoin their need importance almost, and their need satisfaction exactly, in the Maslow order was the U. S. managers. The other nationalities showed more or little deviant patterns. Hoftsede argues that M aslows theory is based on an individualistic society seeking self-actualisation as their most important goal/need.However, in leftist societies such as kina seeking harmony or family support or job satisfaction, which are not represented in the hierarchy of needs, are seen as their necessary goals. Nevis (1983) study emphasises that Maslows Hierarchy is not relatable to Chinese gloss. His main observations were that there was a difference in the cultures in terms of belonging Individualistic society as opposed to collectivist societies seeks belonging, whereas collectivist societies basic needs only emerge after they have satisfied their need to belong.This indicates Maslows theory is not appropriate to all cultures, however, there is a predominant relationship illustrating the need for equity in business environments. Empirical support for Maslows Theory is lacking (Murcell 1976), Maslow himself admitted in 1962 my motivation theory was produce 20 years ago nobody repeated it, t ested it, or really analysed or criticized it. Lowry (1982 63). Another criticism discussed (McLeod 2007) concerning the assumption that the lower needs essential be satisfied before a mortal can achieve their full potential and self-actualise.McLeod (2007) argues that this is not always the case, and therefore the theory is falsified. Many yeasty people such as authors, musicians and artists have exhibited self-actualisation without meeting the lower needs. Van Gogh, who was poor and considered by many psychotic Rembrandt, who had no food or volume of the basic psychological needs Toulouse Lautrec, whose body tormented him were all engaged in some form of self actualisation. Perhaps the development of uniqueness and creative thinking in meeting some of the levels, in someway compensates for the lack of having the basics.It is sensible however to state that some people aim for self actualisation rase when their physiological needs or lower needs are not fully met. Moreover, M aslow defined self-actualisers as people of great accomplishment such as dignitaries and presidents. This statement makes it complex to understand the concept of self-actualisation. In fact, Muchinsky (1993) states that Maslows theory is more philosophical than empirical, which means it is complicated to test.The only way to do so is to say that all people are at divergent stages of development, and all of them are self actualisers in some form, Poston (2009). Another weakness is the arrangement of hierarchy Bellot & Tutor (1990) argue that the arrangement does not apply to organisations today and modern society. They conclude that self actualisation is a proponent need for self-confidence implying self- heed would follow only after self- actualisation, which is clearly not illustrated in the Maslows theory model.Equity Theory can be assessed into four basic propositions according to Huseman, Hatfield and Miles (1987). One of the propositions being Individuals develop their per ception of fairness by calculating a ratio of their inputs and outcomes and then comparing this to the ratios of others (Huseman, et al. , 1987). Noticeably some inputs and outcomes are intangible, in the sense that they cannot be measured or quantified such as Inputs screw, knowledge, ability, qualifications and ambition of the individual (Cory, 2006) and outcomes recognition or job security.This makes coming to a suitable conclusion for an individuals input and outcomes ratios more difficult as these concepts are intangible, meaning it is difficult to define or understand, as it is vague and abstract a concept. Another proposition suggests that as the difference in inequity increase, the tension and distress felt by individuals will increase (Huseman, et al. , 1987). However, not every person will experience equity or inequity in the same way because people have varying tolerance levels for sensitivity to perceived situations of inequity.Huseman et al. , suggest that there are th ree types of individuals on an Equity Sensitivity Spectrum Benevolent (more tolerant of under-reward), Equity Sennsitives (follow the norm of equity theory) and Entitled (prefer over-reward situations)(Huseman, et al. , 1987). In my earlier statements virtually Wilson, Fiona M, (2010) work that highlights the ways in which individuals act negatively towards inequity may be narrowed down using this spectrum, unlike the generic idea that underpayment leads to lowered job performance (Prichard et al. 1972 Lord and Hohenfeld, 1979). Using the spectrum, Benevolents, will experience distress and guilt if they are in a situation of over-reward. Equity Sensitives, will experience distress when faced with either type of inequity and Entitleds, experience distress when in an equitable or under reward situation. This structure is useful for addressing and thought equity theory and individuals behaviour. However, need slight to say this is just a broad spectrum. The Equity Sensitivity Spectru m does not ac weigh for all individual differences in preferences and behaviour.Individuals might show different equity sensitivities in different contexts (Huseman, et al. , 1987). For instance an individual might be Equity Sensitive in their relationships, favouring an equitable balance. Conversely, they might be an Entitled in business environments and are open to the idea of over-reward. Equity theory in a business environment is said to be less damaging if employees are given a voice, respect and feeling of belonging in a workplace. People feel affirmed if the procedures that are adopted treat hem with respect and dignity, making it easier to accept outcomes they do not like, Deutsch, 2000, p. 45). Skarlicki and Folger (1997) found that employees that are treated with respect are more likely to tolerate raw pay. The perception of inequity is more likely to be tolerated if employees feel comfortable, belong and are respected by their employer. This further anticipates detrime ntal behaviour an employee is likely to illustrate, if uncompensated for the inequity at work such as reciteer-productivity work.These intangible concepts such as respect help maintain or increase motivation and prevent problems that arise from under-reward. ethnic differences influence the equity theory (Fadil, Williams, Limpaphayom, and Smatt, 2005). Research shown on Eastern culture illustrate that, equality as opposed to equity was favourite(a) (Leung and Bond, 1982, 1984 Leung and Park, 1986 Mahler, Greenberg and Hayashi, 1981 as cited in Fadil et al. , 2005). Eastern cultural shows that rewards will be given out equally to all those involved in the groups performance regardless of individual inputs or in-person efforts (Fadil, et al. 2005). This is probably as a result of primary sector being the most occupied sector in these cultures. Equality as opposed to Equity is a good ideology that will benefit the equity theory significantly. The business climate today allows Maslo w and Adams theory to be applied, although to a limiting degree. Undoubtedly, both theories have shown weakness, strengths and assumptions, which I have explored widely. Today, Maslows model is relatable because people do seek to achieve psychological, safety, social and esteem needs, and to discover the realm of self-actualisation.However, as discussed, Maslows theory is a very individualistic model that does not relate globally, in collectivist societies. Thus, proving that Maslows theory may not be appropriate to business environments globally, which practice collectivism such as China. Alternatively, Adams theory is more fitting for business environments globally in the present and certainly in the future as equity is seen as a necessity of human rights. Finally, one of the difficulties in motivating workers is that they, all are ifferent and react differently to the same kind of change or action. (Haleopota, 2005) once this concept is understood, it is much easier to regard the se theories individually, monitoring the effects on an individual over short and prolonged periods of time. These theories discussed are outdated and difficult to empirically test, even though they have been published for years now. Businesses evolve over the years and structures eject as time goes along. Needless to say, some aspects of these theories are relatable today but are quickly diminishing.It is essential to remember the concept of motivation is somewhat abstract, different strategies produce different results at different times, and there is no single strategy that can produce guaranteed favourable results all the time. (Halepota, 2005). Bibliography List of references Bellott, F. K. , & Tutor, F. D. (1990). A Challenge to the Conventional Wisdom of Herzberg and Maslow Theories, Paper presented at the Nineteenth Annual Meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association. freshly Orleans, LA Berscheid, E. , Walster, G. , & Hatfield Walster, E. 1978, Equity Th eory & Research, Allyn & Bacon, Inc. Brain, C 2002, Advanced Psychology Applications, Issues & Perspectives, Nelson Thrones, Cheltenham. p 131-132. Cory, C. , 2006, Equity theory and employee motivation, Buzzle, retrieved from http//www. buzzle. com/editorials/6-24-2006-100325 Deutsch, M. , 2000, Justice and conflict, In M. Deutsch and P. T Coleman (Eds), the Handbook of conflict reply theory and practice, San Francisco Jossey- Bass Inc. Publishers. Eisenhardt, K. M. , The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14, No. 1 (Jan. , 1989), pp. 57-74Fadil, P. A. , Williams, R. J. , Limpaphayom, W. , & Smatt, C. , 2005, Equity and Equality? A Conceptual Examination of the Influence of Individualism/ communism on the Cross-cultural Application of Equity Theory, Cross Cultural Management, 12 (4), 17-36 Geare, A 1977, Wage Payment Systems, Methuen, New Zealand. P 80 Greenberg, J. , 1988, Equity and work Status a Field Experiment, Journal of utilise Psychology, 4, 606-613 Greenberg , J. , 1990, Employee Theft as a Reaction to Underpayment Inequity The Hidden Cost of pay cuts, Journal of Applied Psychology, 5, 561-563Halepota, H. A. 2005 A Motivational Theories and Their Application in Construction, Cost Engineering Vol. 47/No. 3 March, 2005, p. 14. Hallez, T. , Ball, B. , 2010, Stacey Adams Equity Theory, Your Coach, Accessed 12th November 2012, Source from http//http//www. yourcoach. be/en/employee-motivation-theories/stacey-adams-equity-theory. php Hofstede, G. , 1984, The Cultural relativity of the Quality of Life Concept, Academy of Management Review Vol. 9 issue. 3 p. 389-39 Hollinger, R. C. , & Clark, J. P. 1983, Deterrence in the workplace Perceived Certainty, Perceived Severity, and Employee Theft. Social Forces, 5, 561-568 Huseman, R. C. , Hatfield, J. D. , and Miles, E. W. , Lawler, E. 1968, Equity theory as a predictor of productivity and work quality, Psychological Bulletin, vol. 70, pp. 598-610 Maslow, A 1970, Motivation and Personality, 3rd e d. , Harper amp Row, New York. Chapter 2 p. 15-31. Huseman, R. C. , Hatfield, J. D. , Miles, E. W. , 1987, The Academy of Management Review, Vol 12(2), p. 222-234 Maslow, Abraham H. , Lowry, Richard J. 1940-, Maslow, Bertha G, Freedman, Jonathan L. , and International Study Project The journals of Abraham Maslow. Lewis Pub. Co, Lexington, Mass, 1982. McLeod, S 2007, Maslows Hierarchy of Needs, Simple Psychology, Accessed 11th November 2012, Source from http//http//www. simplypsychology. org/maslow. html Muchinsky, P. M. , 1993, Psychology applied to work An introduction to industrial and organisational psychology, 4th edition, Brooks/Cole (Pacific Grove, Calif. ), p. 584 Oleson, M. , Exploring the Relationship between Money Attitudes and Maslows Hierarchy of Needs.International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 83-92, January 2004. Pinder, C. C. 1998. Work motivation in organizational behaviour. Upper Saddle River, NJ Prentice-Hall Poston, B 2009, Maslows Hierarchy of Needs, An Exercise in Personal Explorations, Association of Surgical Technologists, p. 347-353 Pritchard, R. , 1969, Equity theory A polish up and critique, Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, vol. 4, issue 2, pp. 176-211 REDMOND, B 2009, Equity Theory,The Pennsylvania State University, PSYCH 484 Work Attitudes and Job Motivation, pp. -16 Rakowski, N 2011, Maslows Hierarchy of Needs Model the dissimilarity of the Chinese and the Western Pyramid on the Example of Purchasing Luxurious Products, GRIN Verlag. Shapiro, D. , Steers, R. M. , amp Mowday, R 2004, INTRODUCTION TO SPECIAL TOPIC FORUM THE forthcoming OF WORK MOTIVATION THEORY, The Academy of Management Review, vol. 29 issue 3, pp. 379-387 The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 12, No. 2 (Apr. , 1987), pp. 222-234 Trevino, A. Javier (2009) George C. Homans, the human group and elementary social behaviour, the encyclopedia of informal education, p. Www. infed. org/thinkers/george_homans. htm WAHBA, M. , amp BRID WELL, L. , 1976, Maslow Reconsidered A Review of Research on the Need Hierarchy Theory, ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN PERFORMANCE, vol. 15, pp. 212-240 Westerman, C. , Park, H-S. , amp lee, H-E. , 2007, A Test of equity theory in multidimensional friendships a comparison of the United States and Korea. Journal of Communication, 57, 576-598 Wilson, Fiona M (2010) Chapter 6 Motivation. Organizational behaviour and work a critical introduction, (pp. 123-142) Oxford Oxford University PressMotivationThis paper presents the findings with regards to the motivation levels of Officers in the Defense Sector under several parameters. The Indian Army serves as the ultimate instrument for maintaining the angiotensin converting enzyme and the integrity of the nation in the face of external threats and internal unrest and disturbances. Teamwork breeds comradeship which, in turn, leads to pride in belonging to a team and fosters esprit De corps. Motivation thrives on a continuing sense of purp ose and it is the Job of the operateer to instill this purpose.Skill in the techniques of lead is the foremost quality in the art of command and contributes very largely to success at all levels of war. The basic structure and motivational ethos of the armed forces in general and the Indian Army in particular, has remained grow in the colonial context. The entire priming of military motivation has been focused slightly the Zeta/ honor and martial traditions of the sub-nationality based Regiment. The pride in the Guam (substantiation) has been the primary basis of the military motivational ideology. The history and achievements of the Guam have used to inspire the older.The Indian National Army (NINA) of Subtask Chancre Bose provided a readmes model for the Indian context. It had tried to apply the German and Japanese techniques of military motivation to the Indian context with considerable success. The relation between employee motivation level (dependent variable) with the ext ent of leadership behavior, organizational culture, team spirit, ad hominem force and effect of monetary motivators (independent variables), as reflected through analysis of data by using Crossbar and Chi-square method is presented as follows 6. Extent of lead Behavior * level of Employee Motivation Table 6. Crossbar of Extent of Leadership Behavior * aim of Motivation in Defense Crossbar aim of Employee Motivation Low Medium High come Autocratic Count 23 11 0 34 % within Extent of Leadership Behavior 67. 6% 32. 4% 100. 0% Participative Count 6 64 9 79 7. 6% 81. 0% 11. 4% 100. 0% count 18 1937 Extent of Leadership Behavior Charismatic 48. 6% 51 100. 0% Total count 2993 28 one hundred fifty 19. 3% 62. 0% 18. 7% 100. 0% Table 6. 2 Chi form of Extent of Leadership Behavior * Level of Motivation Chi- full-blooded Tests Value UDF Assam. Gigs. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 94. AAA 4 . 000 Likelihood Ratio 87. 164 4 .OHO Linear-by-Linear Association 65. 070 1 . 000 N of Valid Ca ses 150 a. O cells (. 0%) have expected count less than 5. The borderline expected count is 6. 35. 124 Fig. 6. 1 Graph for Extent of Leadership Behavior * Level of Employee Motivation Table 6. 1 presents the information related to the extent of leadership behavior and level of motivation of the employees. It is evident that 81% of the employees falling in participative leadership behavior have a medium level of motivation, whereas in al other leadership behavior categories, around 41% of the employees have medium level of motivation.Autocratic leadership style and behavior has sizeable 68% respondents in low level of motivation, whereas the relative division of participative and charismatic leadership behavior is much less. Hence, it seems that as the close-control leadership behavior is increasing, the level of employee motivation is decreasing. To test this association between extent of leadership behavior and level of employee motivation, Chi Square test (Table 6. 2) has been s eed, Here, the vain hypotheses is that there is no relationship between leadership behavior and level of employee motivation.A high Chi Square value, I. E. 94. 085 confirms this relationship. Asymptotic significance value has been 0. 000, which shows that the relationship is statistically significant at 5% level of significance. Thus, the null hypotheses, stating no relationship between leadership behavior and level of employee motivation stands rejected. Hence, it may be concluded that leadership behavior plays a significant role in employee motivation. As the close control of dervish behavior increases, the level of employee motivation tends to decrease. 6. Organizational Culture * Level of Employee Motivation Table 6. 3 Crossbar of Organizational Culture * Level of Motivation Crossbar Level of Employee Less count 2429 1 54 Conducive % within Organizational Culture 44. 4% 53. 7% 1. 9% 100. 0% Moderately count 5 37 7 49 10. 2% 75. 5% 14. 3% 100. 0% count 0 27 20 47 Organizational Culture Highly 57. 4% 42. 6% 100. 0% % within 19. 3% 62. 0% 18. 7% 100. 06 Table 6. 4 Chi Square of Organizational Culture * Level of Motivation Chi-Square Tests Pearson Chi-Square 54. 60AAAikelihood Ratio 60. 297 4 .OOOHOinear-by-Linear Association 47. 912 1 . 000 a. O cells (. 0%) have expected c oumountess than 5. The minimum expected count is 8. 77. Fig. 6. 2 Graph for Organizational Culture * Level of Employee Motivation Table 6. 3 presents the information related to the organizational culture and level of motivation of the employees. It is evident that 76% of the employees falling in fairly conducive organization culture have a medium level of motivation, whereas in all other organizational culture categories, around 55% of the employees have medium level of motivation.Less conducive organizational culture has sizeable 44% respondents in low level of motivation, whereas the relative percentage of moderately and highly conducive organization culture is much less. Hence, it see ms that with more conducive organization culture, the level of employee motivation is increasing. To test this association between organizational culture and level of employee motivation, Chi Square test (Table 6. 4) has been used, Here, the null hypotheses is that there is no relationship between organizational culture and level of employee motivation.A moderately high Chi Square value, i.I. 54. 060 confirms this relationship. AsAsymptoticignificance value has been 0. 000, which shows that the relationship is statistically significant at 5% level of significance. Thus, the null hypotheses, stating no relationship between organizational culture and level of employee motivation stands rejected. Hence, it may be concluded that organizational culture plays a significant role in employee motivation. With more conducive organization culture, the level of employee motivation is increasing. 6. 3 Team tactual sensation * Table 6. CrCrossbarf Team nature * Level of Motivation LOW count 24 24 0 48 within -ream spirit 50. 0% 50. 0% 100. 0% Moderate count 5 48 5 58 % within -ream spirit 8. 6% 82. 8% 8. 6% 100. 0% count 0 21 2344 Team Spirit High % within -ream spspent7. 7% 52. 3% 100. 0% % within -ream spirit 19. 3% 62. 0% 18. 7% 100. 0% Table 6. 6 Chi Square of Team Spirit * Level of Motivation Chi-Square Tests Pearson Chi-Square 80. 60AAAikelihood Ratio 83. 585 4 . OOOHOinear-by-Linear Association 62. 774 1 . 000 a. O cells (. 0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 8. 21 . 129 Fig. 6. Graph for Team Spirit * Level of Employee Motivation Table 6. prPresentshe information related to the team spirit and level of motivation of the employees. It is evident that 83% of the employees having moderate team spirit have a medium level of motivation, whereas in all other team spirit categories, around 49% of the employees have medium level of motivation. Low team spirit has sizeable 50% respondents in low level of motivation, whereas the relative per centage of high team spirit is much less. Hence, it seems that as the team spirit is increasing, the level of employee motivation is increasing.To test this association between team piprintnd level of employee motivation, Chi Square test (Table 6. 6) has been used, Here, the null hypotheses is that there is no relationship between team spirit and level of employee motivation. A high Chi Square value, i.Ie.E80. 607 confirms this hypotheses, stating no relationship between team spirit and level of employee motivation stands rejected. Hence, it may be concluded that team spirit plays a significant role in employee motivation. As the team spirit of employee increases, the level of motivation tends to increase. 6. 4 Personal Effectiveness * Level of Employee Table 6. CrCrossbarf Personal Effectiveness * Level of Motivation CrCrossbarOW count 1260 18 % within Personal Effectiveness 66. 7% 33. 3% 100. 0% Medium count 14 564 74 18. 9% 75. 7% 5. 4% 100. 0% count 3 31 2458 Personal 5. 2% 53. 4% 41 100. 0% 19. 3% 62. 0% 18. 7% 100. 01 Table 6. 8 Chi Square of Personal Effectiveness * Level of Motivation Chi-Square Pearson Chi-Square 58. 544aAAAelihood Ratio 55. 162 4 . OOO OHOear-by-Linear Association 44. 284 1 . 000 a. 2 cells (22. 2%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 3. 36. Fig. 6. 4 Graph for Personal Effectiveness * Level of Employee Motivation Table . presPresents information related to the in the flesh(predicate) effectiveness and level of motivation of the employees. It is evident that 76% of the employees having medium personal effectiveness have a medium level of motivation, whereas in all other personal effectiveness categories, around 43% of the employees have medium level of motivation. Low personal effectiveness has sizeable 67% respondents in low level of motivation, whereas the relative percentage of high personal effectiveness is much less. Hence, it seems that as the personal effectiveness is increasing, the level f employe e motivation is increasing moderately.To test this association between personal effectiveness and level of employee motivation, Chi Square test (Table 6. 8) has been used, Here, the null hypotheses is that there is no relationship between personal effectiveness and level of employee motivation. A moderately high Chi Square value, i. eI 5E. 544 confirms this relationship. AsymAsymptoticnificance value has been 0. 000, which shows that the relationship is statistically significant at 5% level of significance. Thus, the null hypotheses, stating no relationship between personal ffeceffectiveness level of employee motivation stands rejected.Hence, it may be concluded that personal effectiveness plays a significant role in employee motivation. As the personal effectiveness of employee increases, the level of motivation tends to increase moderately. 6. 5 Effect of Financial Motivators * Level of Employee Motivation Table 6. 9 CrosCrossbarEffect of Financial Motivators * Level of Motivation CrosCrossbar count 10 27 1047 Affected % within Effect of Financial Motivators 21 57. 4% 21 100. 0% count 1966 18 103 Effect of Financial 18. 4% 64. 1% 17. 5% 100. 0% Table 6. 0 Chi Square of Effect of Financial Motivators * Level of Motivation Pearson Chi-Square . 12a AAA 736 Likelihood Ratio . 608 2 . 738 Linear-by-Linear Association . 008 1 . 929 a. O cells (. 0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 8. 77. Fig. 6. 5 Graph for Effect of Financial Motivators * Level of Employee Motivation Table 6. 9 presents the information related to the effect of financial motivators and level of motivation of the employees. It is evident that 64% of the employees affected by financial motivators have a medium level of motivation, whereas those unaffected by inanuncialivators, i. eI aEouAround of the employees have medium level of motivation.Of the employees affected as well as not affected by financial motivators, sizeable 20% respondents have low level of motivation. Hence, it seems that there is no much variation in motivation level of the employees affected by financial motivators and the ones not affected by financial motivators. To test this association between effect of financial motivators and level of employee motivation, Chi Square test (Table 6. 10) has been used, Here, the null hypotheses is that there is no elatlegislationween financial motivators and level of employee motivation.A low Chi Square value, i. eI 0E 612 confirms this non-relationship. AsymAsymptoticnificance value has been 0. 736, which shows that the relationship is statistically insignificant at 5% level of significance. Thus, the null hypotheses, stating no relationship between financial motivators and level of employee motivation stands accepted. Hence, it may be concluded that financial motivators have no significant effect on employee motivation. Hence, there is no relationship between financial motivators and level of employee motivation.