My Experience As A Customer Service Officer At KFC: Issues And Motivational Factors

Challenges Faced by a Customer Service Officer in KFC

Question:

Discuss about the Determinants of Employee Motivation.

I worked in KFC before, where my job designation was customer service officer. The organization has been quite reputed but it was quite tough for me as the management never cared about performance appreciation. My immediate supervisor, the territory manager was extremely dependant on how well the managers would behave with him and ignore the performance. I personally believe in hard work but my supervisor did not even care about the data and number. I also found that regular performance review was not done accurately by the manager and therefore, my appreciation was always ignored. This has been quite similar to some officers as well. With the course of time, I came to know how should the queries of clients be managed and the way staffs should serve customers. I used to take sessions and ensure demonstrations to my fellow staffs so that they could give their best and make customers satisfied. This even resulted in better customer response and very less client complaints. However, my appreciation was always been ignored by the supervisor.

In the corporate sector, performance evaluation, employee satisfaction, role evaluation criteria and customer satisfaction indicates organizational sustainability. However, if the employees are not given attention, the motivation is affected. Same was my problem. I was never the part of manager’s attention and therefore gradually I kept on losing interest. Some of the most important problems that I faced were lack of manager’s support, lack of performance evaluation criteria, poor job role and objective communication and manager’s incapability to understand employee need. Being the customer service officer of the store, I needed the support of manager regarding store infrastructure development so that client could have been more satisfied. However, there was no proper indication from my manager. At the time of crisis such as delay in supply and delivery, poor employee commitment and electrical issues, I hardly got any support from my manager. On the other hand, while highlighting about the performance evaluation criteria, I was never shared the top employee contribution and success factors of other officers. I felt this as a biased attitude of the manager. There was no transparency and performance evaluation was mostly done based on personal likability and intimacy. This impacted my motivation as even though I worked hard by I was never appreciated or supported.

While considering the role and objective, I must highlight that prior to working in KFC, I had very less knowledge of management and therefore my supervisor would have guided me to achieve organizational objectives, however I was never communicated the same. Finally, I never found the manager’s ability to understand an employee’s need and requirement. Fringe benefits have become quite common these days and therefore managers must understand the real cause of employee dissatisfaction. Overall I must say that motivation was my main issue, which resulted in poor performance in my last service days. I must highlight that in future, the territory manager must appreciate employee performance based on set criteria and biased attitude must be avoided so that the best can be achieved from an employee.

Impact of Performance Evaluation on Motivation

The workplace at KFC was not quite satisfactory for me. I always used to feel lack of motivation during my job at KFC. One of prime reasons for my de-motivation was lack of proper support from my senior managers. I did not get adequate support from my senior managers for handling complex situation in regards to complex situation. Such practice of the senior managers made me quite frustrated and de-motivated at the workplace.

The lack of my de-motivation can best be explained through the Expectancy Theory of Motivation. As per this theory, the behaviour of the employees results from conscious choices among the alternatives, whose main purpose is to maximize pleasure and minimize pain. The theory explored that the individual performance of the employees is dependent on their skills, knowledge, personality, abilities and experience. This theory has explained the job motivation of the employees through three variables like expectancy, instrumentality and valence.

According to Mikkelsen et al. (2017), expectancy is dependent on the belief that increased efforts will lead to increased job performance. However, the motivation for such increased job performance is dependent on rights resources and skills available for doing the job. Rahman et al. (2013) opined that right resources and skills increases the confidence level and motivation level of the employees towards enhancing their effort level for increased job performance. While considering my motivation level at KFC, I was new to the job and I needed some training for upgrading my skills level at the field of customer service department. However, I never got adequate and effective training from the organization towards upgrading my skill level. Therefore, lack of skills actually reduced my motivation towards enhancing my performance level. On the other hand, Lau, Chong and Ketvi Roopnarain (2014) opined that motivation level of the employees is highly dependent on necessary support from the supervisors towards doing complex job. Moreover, kind support from the supervisors minimizes the complexity level of the job done by the employees. In this way, the reduced complexity level actually increases the motivation level of the employees. However, I never got proper and adequate support from my supervisors for handling complex situation at customer service department. Therefore, I faced quite difficulties in handling the critical problems of the customers. In this way, the increased complexity level of the job actually decreased my motivation level at the organization.

Trépanier et al. (2015) pointed out than Instrumentality is the belief that better performance leads to valued outcome for the employees. It is the degree in which first level outcome leads to second level outcome. However, in this case, performance and motivation of the employees depends on some variables. As per Porter et al. (2016), the employees are motivated to enhance their job performance, when there is clear relationship between job performance and job outcome. Moreover, the rules and criteria for the job reward should be transparent to the employees. However, in KFC, there was no clear relationship between the job performance and reward system. Therefore, I did not feel any kind of motivation for enhancing my job motivation. On the other hand, Dobre and Ovidiu-Iliuta (2013) opined that employees are highly motivated in their workplace, when they can have enough trust on the mangers taking organizational decision or set criteria for reward system. However, in KFC, I never have had any clear relationship with the managers setting performance appraisal criteria. Therefore, I had lack of trust on them and never had trust on the performance appraisal criteria. In this way, lack of transparency in the performance appraisal process made me de-motivated in the organization.

Expectancy Theory of Motivation and its Impact on Performance

According to Gupta, Nina and Jason (2014) valence defines the importance, which the employees place upon the expected outcome. As per this theory, adequate level of effort will lead to required performance level. On the other hand, it also defines the probability that successful performance will lead to certain outcome. However, in this case, the managers of the organizations should identify the individual motivational factors of the employees. Moreover, the reward system should be based on individual motivational needs and demands. The employees are motivated to work harder, when their individual needs and demands are met in their organization. However, the managers of KFC were incapable of understanding the individual needs and demand of the employees. Therefore, they never understood my motivational factors. Therefore, they were incapable of providing me adequate motivational factors for increasing my job performance. Therefore, such practice of the managers made me de-motivated in the organization.

While considering Justice Theory of Motivation, it can be said that the employees are actually motivated through the perceived fairness of the authority’s decision making. Olafsen et al. (2015) pointed out that trust and justice impact both the motivation level and behaviours of the employees. Different dimension of justice theory defines different aspects of employee motivation. According to Facer et al. (2014), distributive justice defines the fairness of decision making outcome of the organization. Moreover, it judges the fairness with which the employees are rewarded for their contribution level in the organizational success. As per equity norms, the employees are rewarded as per the individual achievements. Therefore, the employees become satisfied through fulfilling their individual needs and demands. On the other hand, in equality norms, organizations provide rewards equally (Kaur and Avneet 2013). Moreover, every employee gets the same reward. Furthermore, as per need norms, the employees are rewarded as per what they need. While considering the workplace at KFC, I saw that the organization rewards the employees as per equity norms. Moreover, there is lack of individual performance evaluation. Therefore, I never got appreciation for my individual high level of performance. It was quite de-motivating for me that I never got individual praise for my enhanced performance.

Achim et al. (2013) pointed out that procedural justice defines the perceived fairness of decision making process. It assesses the degree to which the employers follow appropriate process towards making decisions for employees. As per this justice, the employees are motivated in their organization, when they are allowed to voice opinions in organizational decision making process. Fernet et al. (2015) stated that procedural justice avoids bias for ensuring neutral decision making in organizations. It enhances the trust level of the employees on the employers. In this way, perception of procedural justice is quite important for ensuring employee motivation and employee relation in any organization. While I was in KFC, I observed that the employers of the organization did not follow transparent criteria for performance appraisal. Moreover, the performance appraisal process was full of biasness, which actually undermined the actual performances of the talented employees. In this way, I was also never got any perfect evaluation of my performance. Therefore, I was quite de-motivated and frustrated in the organization.

Impact of Instrumentality on Job Motivation

According to Hauser and Laurentiu (2014), interpersonal justice defines the perceived fair of interpersonal relationship, which the employees receive from their employers and upper management. The employees are motivated at the workplace, when they are highly valued in their workplace. Therefore, the managers of any organization should their employees in respectful and dignified manners. The higher valued and respect will be provided to the employees, the higher their motivation level will enhance. On the other hand, Sekhar et al. (2016) opined that the employees are motivated at their workplace, when the managers use proper language and behave politely with them. Perception of interpersonal justice can have long lasting effect on the satisfaction and motivation level of the employees. It also impact on the organizational commitment of the employees. While considering the KFC, I never got any supportive behaviour from the managers in my workplace. The managers never treat the employees with dignity, which was highly de-motivating in the organization.

As per Bro et al. (2017), informational justice defines the perceived fairness of communication received by the employees from the managers. Moreover, the employees are motivated to work for their organization in loyal manner, when the managers openly and transparently communicate with them. As per justification rule, the employees should explain the decision making process and its outcome clearly and openly to the employees. Timely communication of such decision making process and its outcome to the employees will enhance their involvement level and commitment level for working hard towards implementing that organizational decision. On the other hand, Zafar et al. (2014) opined that the managers should also communicate with the employees honestly and in respectful manner. Moreover, the managers should provide clear and concise justification to the employee for any organizational decision. It will enhance the value and worth of the employees, which in turn enhance the motivation level of the employees. However, when I was in KFC, I realized that the managers of the organization were incapable of communicating with the employee transparently. The managers never thought it worthy to share any information with the employees. Therefore, I felt like undervalued at my workplace, which made me highly de-motivated.

Reference List

Achim, Ioan Moise, Larisa Dragolea, and George Balan. “The importance of employee motivation to increase organizational performance.” Annales universitatis apulensis: Series oeconomica15, no. 2 (2013): 685.

Bro, Louise Ladegaard, Lotte Bøgh Andersen, and Anne Bøllingtoft. “Low-hanging fruit: Leadership, perceived prosocial impact, and employee motivation.” International Journal of Public Administration 40, no. 9 (2017): 717-729.

Dobre, Ovidiu-Iliuta. “Employee motivation and organizational performance.” Review of Applied Socio-Economic Research 5, no. 1 (2013): 53-60.

Facer Jr, David C., Fred Galloway, Noriyuki Inoue, and Drea Zigarmi. “Creation and initial validation of the Motivation Beliefs Inventory: Measuring leaders’ beliefs about employee motivation using four motivation theories.” Journal of Business Administration Research 3, no. 1 (2014): 1.

Fernet, Claude, Sarah-Geneviève Trépanier, Stéphanie Austin, Marylène Gagné, and Jacques Forest. “Transformational leadership and optimal functioning at work: On the mediating role of employees’ perceived job characteristics and motivation.” Work & Stress 29, no. 1 (2015): 11-31.

Gupta, Nina, and Jason D. Shaw. “Employee compensation: The neglected area of HRM research.” Human Resource Management Review 24, no. 1 (2014): 1-4.

Hauser, Laurentiu. “Work motivation in organizational behavior.” Economics, Management and Financial Markets 9, no. 4 (2014): 239.

Kaur, Avneet. “Maslow’s need hierarchy theory: Applications and criticisms.” Global Journal of Management and Business Studies3, no. 10 (2013): 1061-1064.

Lau, Chong M. and Ketvi Roopnarain. “The Effects of Nonfinancial and Financial Measures on Employee Motivation to Participate in Target Setting.” The British Accounting Review 46, no. 3 (09, 2014): 228. 

Mikkelsen, Maria Falk, Christian Bøtcher Jacobsen, and Lotte Bøgh Andersen. “Managing Employee Motivation: Exploring the Connections between Managers’ Enforcement Actions, Employee Perceptions, and Employee Intrinsic Motivation.” International Public Management Journal 20, no. 2 (Apr, 2017): 183-205. 

Olafsen, Anja H., Hallgeir Halvari, Jacques Forest, and Edward L. Deci. “Show them the money? The role of pay, managerial need support, and justice in a self?determination theory model of intrinsic work motivation.” Scandinavian journal of psychology 56, no. 4 (2015): 447-457.

Porter, Tracy H., Kelly Diane Riesenmy, and Dail Fields. “Work environment and employee motivation to lead: Moderating effects of personal characteristics.” American Journal of Business 31, no. 2 (2016): 66-84.

Rahman, Mahfuzur, Dilip Kumar Mondol, and Ayub Ali. “Nexus of Employee Motivation with Hrm and Workplace Behaviour: An Assessment of the Dominant Factors.” Management Research and Practice 5, no. 4 (12, 2013): 49-57.

Sekhar, Chandra, Manoj Patwardhan, and Rohit Kumar Singh. “Prioritising the dimensions of employee motivation using analytic hierarchy process.” International Journal of Business and Emerging Markets 8, no. 1 (2016): 49-66.

Trépanier, Sarah-Geneviève, Jacques Forest, Claude Fernet, and Stéphanie Austin. “On the Psychological and Motivational Processes Linking Job Characteristics to Employee Functioning: Insights from Self-Determination Theory.” Work and Stress 29, no. 3 (2015): 286.

Zafar, Nida, Sana Ishaq, Shaista Shoukat, and Muhammad Rizwan. “Determinants of Employee Motivation and its impact on Knowledge Transfer and Job Satisfaction.” International Journal of Human Resource Studies 4, no. 3 (2014): 50.