For this paper I interviewed Kennedi Collins currently an Free Essay Example

For this paper, I interviewed Kennedi Collins, currently an assistant manager at Rue 21. She recently graduated from Northwest University with a degree in Psychology, focusing on marriage and family counseling. Though she is a fairly new manager at Rue 21, I felt her experience transitioning into a new role could provide insight from both a managerial position and a team member position.

How can a manager ensure their employees stay motivated? With workers valuing different rewards and needs as vital to them, it’s as important as ever for a manager to balance the motivation of multiple team members.

When optimal motivation is maintained, employee efficiency, satisfaction and commitment will improve. This improvement will increase performance and help the company thrive.

For someone to achieve optimal performance at work, there are three determinants that must be prioritized. Williams states that performance is made up of motivation, ability, and situational constraints. Motivation is the amount of energy or effort a worker puts into his work, ability is the worker’s ability to do the job correctly and efficiently, and situational constraints are factors out of an employee’s control such as policy or resources.

While all three elements make up equal pieces of performance, I am going to be discussing motivation.

In Kennedi’s experience, motivation was the most frequent reason for poor performance [1]. Many companies strive to provide adequate resources and training for their employees, setting up programs to ensure each worker is versed in the systems and tactics used by the company. Though there are different approaches to training, most employees will be able to utilize the resources and policies provided without many issues.

However, what motivates an employee varies greatly from person to person.

Ms. Collins provided me with an example of two employees that were hired together. Both had similar sales backgrounds and exceptional people skills. One immediately became a standout, consistently hitting sales goals and pushing the store to develop higher sales targets. The other exhibited the same skills and charisma, but never pushed for anything over the minimum sales required. After looking into the situation, Kennedi discovered the rewards offered for meeting the sales goals greatly interested the first worker but not the second [2].

Rue 21 uses a reward system with their sales. Employees are rewarded with GEM (going the extra mile) cards for exceeding sales goals. Each day an employee significantly exceeds sales goals, they are given a GEM card; after collecting five cards, they are given ten percent off store items [3]. The second worker, however, wasn’t interested in the discount on clothing. After some discussion, the reward was changed to ten percent off store items or a ten-dollar gift card to a store/ restaurant of choice.

The rewards provided are a great example of extrinsic rewards, awards that are tangible and visible to others. They are used to motivate workers by recognizing outstanding performance. By adjusting the rewards offered to better fit the second employee, sales increased and competition between the two employees blossomed.

In addition to the updated rewards, the GEM cards are also mixed together, and a drawing is held at the end of each month. The managers each chip in and buy a prize for the winner. Not only does this add custom rewards tailored to the winner’s taste, but it also provides the managers a chance to show additional appreciation by paying for a prize out of pocket.

In the textbook, we’re told that the expectancy theory states that people will be motivated to the extent to which they believe that their efforts will lead to good performance, that good performance will be rewarded, and that they will be offered attractive rewards. The theory is comprised of three factors: valence, expectancy, and instrumentality. Using the previous example provided by Kennedi, when the second worker failed to be motivated by a store discount, the attractiveness (valence) of the prize wasn’t great enough. By allowing employees to choose their own rewards, the valence of the rewards increased. As long as the employees believe their effort will result in a better performance (expectancy), they will be able to collect rewards.

After thinking over the reward system at Rue 21, I believe they could improve on the final factor, instrumentality. This factor is the perceived relationship between performance and rewards. If a worker believes they can receive greater rewards, their performance will increase. I would recommend a scaling tier system. Employees could aim for higher sales in order to receive better prizes instead of receiving a single GEM card per day. This would eliminate potential mental sales caps and increase motivation.

An important aspect of motivation mentioned by Williams is the necessity to satisfy needs. Though there are numerous theories that cover a wide variety of needs, we can simplify it down to two basic categories: lower-order needs and higher-order needs. Lower-order needs covers the requirement of safety, food, water and other things necessary to survive. Higher-order needs consists of belongingness, accomplishments and achievements. As long as someone has a lower-order need that needs met, it will maintain priority over higher-order needs.

While going over the rewards system, Kennedi told me about an old system that the store used to run on. It used weekly hours as a reward and motivation to makes sales. The employees with the most sales each week was awarded the highest number of hours the next week, while the lowest sellers’ hours were cut. In theory, this system should work, using the workers’ lower-order needs as a prize to maximize sales. In reality, it was questionably immoral and created a lot of issues for the store and employees [5]. If someone had a bad week of sales or had to take sick days, they were punished the following week with less hours. Less hours resulted in less time at the store to sell, forcing them into an unfair cycle.

The way this system was designed was meant to act as positive reinforcement, rewarding exceptional sales goals; however, the flawed system functioned more like avoiding negative reinforcement, trying to make sales to avoid losing hours. As a result, employees became frustrated and relations with management were strained. This discouragement, combined with the subsequent strain, can cause employees to feel unwelcome and prevent them from reaching their higher-order needs.

If management can eliminate the need to fulfill lower-order needs, team members can focus on accomplishing more gratifying ones like belongingness and self-achievement. One of the questions I asked Kennedi was if her company incorporated a sense of belonging in the stores like a lot of other companies use. Rue 21 touts the “Rue Family,” a structure that is used to help each employee feel accepted [4]. Using store events, employee recognition, and individual empowerment, each person is given an equal opportunity to thrive and grow in the company. Members of the Rue Family have the ability to make positive impacts on the company by working hard and being rewarded with promotions, bonuses and corporate acknowledgement.

In order to grow and develop as employees, though, feedback needs to be gathered from and provided to each person. Using the reinforcement theory in our text, feedback can be effectively handled using five elements: identify, measure, analyze, intervene, and evaluate. Management should identify critical, performance-related behaviors, measure how often these behaviors occur, analyze the causes and consequences of them, intervene using positive and negative reinforcement, and evaluate the changes after completing the first four steps.

At Rue 21, feedback is collected using three separate methods: managerial assessment, anonymous peer review, and customer surveys [7]. Each week, managers compile feedback gathered from these methods into a team member’s own private file. This provides a chance for management to evaluate individual weaknesses and strengths on a weekly basis. Each new week is an opportunity to help the employees grow, and it ensures good performance is never overlooked.

Motivating employees can be challenging and rewarding; there is never a single solution that works for every person. It is up to management to communicate with their employees to get to know their needs, desires and ambitions. They must provide a stimulating and worthwhile environment that is fair for everyone and allows for growth. Also, manager’s must be willing to accept change and adapt to their worker’s needs without sacrificing policy or corporate ambitions. When motivation in a workplace is balanced and optimized, productivity will prosper, and the store will succeed.