In a book titled Organizational Behavior written by Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge, they break down the Expectancy Theory into three relationships.
1) Effort-performance relationship; which is defined as “The probability perceived by the individual that exerting a given amount of effort will lead to performance” (Robbins & Judge, 2013, p. 224).
2) Performance-reward relationship; the individual believes that by achieving a certain level of performance, it will result in a desirable outcome.
3) Reward-Personal goals relationship, the final relationship is described as an individuals desire to attain a reward for completing a specified amount of work, and how satisfactory those rewards are to the individual. The relationships that are discussed are presented as 3 separate ideas that are relatable with the Expectancy Theory. I would argue that all 3 are closely related, starting with the idea that if an individual believes that if they perform at a certain level or meet a certain quota that it will lead to a better performance. Which in turn, will result in better compensation and recognition within the company. In the situation that is given, it would be best to start with relationship one, and find a way to motivate employees and get them excited about their jobs. It is my belief that low performing employees can be classified into one of two groups, or potentially both groups. The employee is bored, not being challenged enough, and has become complacent. The employee is intimidated by a new process and is afraid, or too proud, to ask for help. Employees who fall into one of, or both, of these categories run the risk of believing that they don’t have enough in them to put forth the effort required to accomplish their goals. In this relationship, it is best to find a way to motivate employees and get them excited about their jobs. If you can get them excited and help them find some passion for what they do, performance will increase. Part of that motivation can be helping them understand that by attaining a certain level of work, they will receive a better performance review. Which brings up the second relationship. In the situation some of the regularly top producing individuals are no longer performing at optimal capacity. It seems they have figured out that they receive just as much compensation for high quality and quantity out put as the individuals who are struggling to achieve the quotas. It is hard for an individual to find motivation to complete a task when a counter part is receiving just as much, or maybe just a little less compensation for the same job. One of the other detrimental items is that the employees understand…