Money as a Motivator in Agribusiness Organization - Agribusiness Education and Research International

Money as a motivator

Importance of Money as a Motivator in Agribusiness Organization works a lot for employee productivity. There’s a debate about whether or not money is a motivator. On this topic, the Critics Arc break. Many individuals contend that the conventional incentive technique of carrot and stick still works today. The carrot was cash and in the form of physical, financial, or social punishment, the slick was taken. For a variety of reasons, money is important to staff. Money is a reward for achievement and is a way to give people the joy of achievement. It is a measure of achievement. An individual work because without capital, he or she has wanted that can not be satisfied. The belief has been that if large financial incentives are put before them, individuals will work harder and generate more.

There is social meaning to money and it gives status and strength. In addition, money serves as a motivator for improper and illegal conduct. Consequently, money is used to empower individuals.

Classical leadership theorists and academics such as Taylor, Pollock, have tended to position money high on the motivator scale. Employees are seen as economic people who are only driven by money. They believed that everyone’s primary motive was an economic benefit. To encourage high performance by employees and executives, they developed incentive programs. Taylor and his colleagues think the employees are idle and aimless. They also assumed that the money received by workers was more important than the essence of the workforce. Hence, if they were paying enough, individuals might be required to do some kind of work. By paying good salaries, the task was to get them to the factory. The use of an incentive pay scheme was proposed by them. Money, if it meets at least three conditions, is a motivator.

a) Money is more important for individuals who fulfill their monetary requirements. Money is an urgent way to achieve a basic standard of living, to purchase goods and services. So money has the economic worth of a human being. Others can never do that thing.

(b) It is also true that money is used in most forms of organizations as a way of recruiting and retaining skilled people. This is why companies within their business make their wages and salaries competitive. Organizations also take greater care to ensure that the same compensation is provided to individuals on similar employment since individuals typically measure their compensation in terms of what their equals earn.

Katz and Khan (1976) suggest that the money compensation must be seen as fair and equal by the majority of organizational members, including those who would never demand extra income. This is clarified clearly by J. Stacy Adams (1983) on the principle of motivation equity.

c) The cash shall be received as specifically linked to the additional output demanded and shall be received immediately upon completion.

d) It is almost definitely true that money will only be motivated if the prospective payment is high compared to the income of an individual. But the amount of cash they want varies between workers. An additional taka ten thousand, for instance, will not inspire an executive who earns taka two lakh annually. This is why, to encourage the recipient, salary raises or incentives should be substantial enough. In Bangladeshi businesses, the annual wage rises are so poor that the recipient is hardly inspired by .it. They will discourage workers from becoming frustrated and looking for another career.

On the other hand, as a motivator, behavioral scientists such as Elton Mayo and his associates argued against money. They praised the fact that enhanced physical infrastructure or increased economic benefits were not adequate motivators to increase productivity. In addition to economic influences, they strongly stressed psychological & social variables.

There are, after all, many non-financial rewards, like:

Happiness of workers
Motivation for Morale
Interpersonal experiences
Efficient oversight
Group dynamics could boost productivity

The human behavior approach often denoted that people are the key to productivity and do not guarantee good job results, mainly technology, work rules, and standards. Success actually relies on driven and trained individuals who are committed to organizational performance.

Eventually, the approach to human relations instructed managers to make workers feel important and encourage them to perform routine tasks with a bit of self-control and self-direction.

This does not imply that economic factors or working conditions are less important for productivity improvement. These studies showed that not only a workplace but also a social atmosphere in which employees communicate with each other is an office or a factory. In short, personal and social processes have played a major role in influencing the attitudes and actions of workers. This gave rise to the ‘social gentleman’ idea.

It is evident from the motivational theories that there is no instinctive or fundamental need for capital. Money is an extrinsic reward in nature rather than an intrinsic one. To the degree that it can meet understood needs, money becomes essential. Research suggests that money is capable of meeting the requirements of physiology, stability, and esteem. If these criteria are fulfilled by other means, then the money is considered to have lower instrumental value and is not especially helpful in encouraging success or any other behavior.

There is some evidence that by assuming that workers put a high value on monetary incentives, companies will experience problems. Performance is not always enhanced by pay docs. The improved output would not benefit from rises in pay. For many individuals, personal satisfaction with a job well done is a strong motivator. Economic incentives will not provide a mentally stable person with all the rewards needed.

However, in fact, money can be motivating, but not to exclude other variables, including the work itself. Such as:

Motivation through work design, job enlargement, job enrichment, and motivation through the involvement of employees.

In general individual success is defined by three things: motivation (the desire to do the job) (the willingness to do the job) and opportunity (the content and knowledge resources required to do the job). The manager may provide training or replace the worker if an employee lacks ability. The manager should build a positive environment to encourage higher output if there is an environmental issue. A worker must be given the chance to produce organizational results. If the problem is motivation, the job is more complicated for the manager.

#agro_research_international

Contact:

If you have any questions, thoughts, or suggestions, please contact us or join our social media networks.

Email us: [email protected], [email protected]

Feel free to comment:

Your email address will not be shared with anyone.